Distorting the proportions of head, limbs and body, the size of hands and feet are manipulations which could be understood as a stylistic choice but some common proportional anomalies just seem to be misunderstandings. Of these the most common seems to be the forearm.
The bones of the forearm, the radius and the ulna are shorter, I repeat SHORTER than the bone of the upper arm, the humerus, There is some natural variation in how much shorter but they are always shorter in humans without deformity. This is obviously not always true of miniature figures. Why?
I’ve heard the theory it’s an effect of distorting the size of the hands. I’m inclined to discount this as it seems to occur even when the hands show little or no distortion. My view is it’s more likely a misapprehension of the way the elbow works and how this confuses the perception of the arm in different positions.
I could spend a lot of time describing the way the elbow joint slides around the end of the humerus but a picture really is worth a thousand words, (fig 1).
I think the main source of confusion is the way the joint opens and rolls when fully extended. It is important to understand the point of the elbow is not the pivot.
On another subject, here is a proposal I made over on ‘The Miniatures Page’ for a system to compare the size of figures from pictures online using standardized silhouettes on a grid, the advantages of this system are:
It is cheap, once the silhouettes are set up and easily distributed to manufacturers and reviewers.
It does not require any point or standard of measurement e.g. ankles to the kneecaps or ears to navel.
It allows the heft as well as the height to be compared.
It uses reality as a standard for comparison (the silhouette in the example is from a Muybridge photo) so no arguments about who’s style to use as a standard.
If manufacturers don’t want to use the standard or try to manipulate it, reviewers can correct the deficiency.
