|
An Angry Bug posted:On that note, what's a good thinner to use? The terminology of this poo poo is confusing. Why does paint thinner destroy paint instead of thin it? 60 water, 15 blending/retarder medium, and 25 acrylic flow release is a good start. Add more retarder fluid and less water as you start blending. If by destroy you mean lose its water adhesion, then yes that's what it does. It makes it easier to apply paint when they don't form puddles everywhere. It's more runny and easier (and harder) to apply so it's like painting with water colors. E: if you meant brand I use golden additives which should be at any craft/arts store and Liquitex slow-dri retarder at any arts store. Chill la Chill fucked around with this message at 18:13 on Nov 21, 2014 |
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 17:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 23:06 |
|
|
JcDent posted:I'd say their biggest problem is a very "Go-Bots" feeling they give. Like they're a cheap Chinese knock-off that a parent buys their child because they don't have money for the real deal. Disappointing for all parties involved. I like them. They look like they're designed to get shot at, rather than having a ribcage with holes in it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 18:04
|
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:60 water, 15 blending/retarder medium, and 25 acrylic flow release is a good start. Add more retarder fluid and less water as you start blending. If by destroy you mean lose its water adhesion, then yes that's what it does. It makes it easier to apply paint when they don't form puddles everywhere. It's more runny and easier (and harder) to apply so it's like painting with water colors. Wow that's complicated. Haven't even painted my first miniature yet, largely because every single time I'm about to start there's apparently some new step with the paint in the bottle not actually being a finished product or the primer not liking the weather or the kits including accessories that the models aren't actually allowed to use. Next I'll have to praise the freaking machine spirit in the brushes before every brush stroke. The barrier to entry in this hobby is really irritating.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 18:13
|
|
|
JcDent posted:I'd say their biggest problem is a very "Go-Bots" feeling they give. Like they're a cheap Chinese knock-off that a parent buys their child because they don't have money for the real deal. Disappointing for all parties involved. Well considering that all of 40k is a cheap knockoff of something else anyway, these terminator knockoff knockoffs look really cool. It's also why tau that are made to look like gun dams are even more funny and ridiculous.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 18:15
|
|
|
JcDent posted:I'd say their biggest problem is a very "Go-Bots" feeling they give. Like they're a cheap Chinese knock-off that a parent buys their child because they don't have money for the real deal. Disappointing for all parties involved. I think a good chunk of that feeling is the matt non-metallic paint scheme though. They'd look a lot better in brass or steel.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 18:19
|
|
|
An Angry Bug posted:Wow that's complicated. Haven't even painted my first miniature yet, largely because every single time I'm about to start there's apparently some new step with the paint in the bottle not actually being a finished product or the primer not liking the weather or the kits including accessories that the models aren't actually allowed to use. Next I'll have to praise the freaking machine spirit in the brushes before every brush stroke. The barrier to entry in this hobby is really irritating. Just paint, dude. I sucked at painting at first too and I'm getting back to where I left off before my long hiatus. But, I'm continually seeing faults with my technique cuz I'm now trying to blend Picasso style with these new minis and it's much harder on a large vehicle without an airbrush - though an airbrush does lose a lot of that painting "gritty" feel that makes a Picasso a Picasso. I painted for competitions way back and would like to do so again. So, the feel of the paint mix is huge to me - you probably won't even notice any difference in mixes until a year or two in the future. Brush helps a lot here but you won't need to worry about bellies and springiness until you get a feel for what you enjoy. I just bought some close out W&N707s that the nice lady at the art store let me try out. It doesn't have the spring and feels limp compared to my trusted 7s but they were only $4 each after the huge discount. They're gonna be for base coats and large blends (size 0 and 1) so I don't feel too bad about it. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 18:25
|
|
|
An Angry Bug posted:Wow that's complicated. Haven't even painted my first miniature yet, largely because every single time I'm about to start there's apparently some new step with the paint in the bottle not actually being a finished product or the primer not liking the weather or the kits including accessories that the models aren't actually allowed to use. Next I'll have to praise the freaking machine spirit in the brushes before every brush stroke. The barrier to entry in this hobby is really irritating. Just paint, man. It's fine.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 18:31
|
|
|
gently caress it, expect a direct contribution to the thread later tonight.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 18:31
|
|
|
That's the spirit.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 18:33
|
|
|
Improbable Lobster posted:I posted the Fatcrons and Mantis Marine more because they look really goofy rather than because of any technical issues. I'd field an army paintes up to either standard (hell, they're both better than many of my models) but I don't think I'd use either conversion. Those are eth standard for goofy conversions? Both looked idfferent and interesting as hell. The fatcrons looked to be going more for the bulky robot look than the skeleton look, which IMO looks superior. But I'd also love to see someone try to a different kind of dynasty (say Greek, Han, or Persian vs. Egyptian) which would almost require some crazy conversions. The Mantis stuff with winged jump packs also looks awesome, but I am much more willing to sacrifice practical for cool looking-- the setting for any of these games is bizarre anyway, so you might as well ham it up and just do things that are zany. Hell, the other robot conversion you posted looks like a good starting point. I must have broken taste or something.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 18:35
|
|
|
An Angry Bug posted:gently caress it, expect a direct contribution to the thread later tonight. I've never used anything other than water, and while my models aren't competition standard I like to think they're pretty decent. All you need to start painting is the model, some paints, a jar of water and one or two decent brushes, plus something to mix on (I've used everything from an old tile to plastic food container lids) and a bit of tissue to dry your brush on. All this stuff with special thinners and ever-wet palettes and such is to help people who are in the top 5% of painters to get into the top 1% and beyond. It's certainly nicer, but if you've never painted before you probably won't even notice the difference. Fatkraken fucked around with this message at 19:01 on Nov 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 18:55
|
|
|
An Angry Bug posted:gently caress it, expect a direct contribution to the thread later tonight. Please make a scrunt. The lowly scrunt is the best first model almost all of us have missed out on, don't miss out on it yourself!
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 19:04
|
|
|
An Angry Bug posted:Wow that's complicated. Haven't even painted my first miniature yet, largely because every single time I'm about to start there's apparently some new step with the paint in the bottle not actually being a finished product or the primer not liking the weather or the kits including accessories that the models aren't actually allowed to use. Next I'll have to praise the freaking machine spirit in the brushes before every brush stroke. The barrier to entry in this hobby is really irritating. I wouldn't be too discourage by this. I think those are airbrush suggestions. They end being complicated and technical because airbrushes are complicated and technical. If you're a brush painter (like I am) you just need to get your brush wet with water before you use GW paints, and maybe the Vallejo model line. You have to really work to get the heavy coverage some kids do, which is why it's so crazy that it still happens. Get started and post some stuff and you can probably get some comments for easy improvements. Not using flow control means your highlights will be a bit more obvious and sudden, but honestly for anyone ever moderately above average it isn't important.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 19:34
|
|
|
Thinning your paints can be as simple as leaving your brush wet and mixing it in on your pallet. If you have any clamshell-packed miniatures that came with foam (like Warmachine comes in), you're 90% of the way to having a wet pallet. Cut a square of baking paper to fit, wet the foam, and squish it into the blister with the baking paper.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 19:37
|
|
|
Fatkraken posted:I've never used anything other than water, and while my models aren't competition standard I like to think they're pretty decent. All you need to start painting is the model, some paints, a jar of water and one or two decent brushes, plus something to mix on (I've used everything from an old tile to plastic food container lids) and a bit of tissue to dry your brush on. At this level, I'd even screw decent brushes. I still just use a cheapy brush set from Micheal's ($5 for 4 small sabol brushes- 0, 3/0, 5/0, and 10/0) and while the wear out faster, they're fine for use until they do. Brushes at $5 or more each just aren't worth it if you aren't a painting ninja. rkajdi fucked around with this message at 19:40 on Nov 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 19:38
|
|
|
Pyrolocutus posted:With 40k, I get that there might be a holdover effect, but it seems like it really seems to limit creative stuff people could do, and makes some of the new kits a little strange. Maybe instead of going with the base size = size profile, they could have a couple of iterations of size profiles and then just note which size profile a model is, in their rules? That would imply GW gives a poo poo about their actual game. As for thinning your paints, just put some paint on your palette and use the blunt end of your brush to pick up a drop of water and mix it in the paint. Not a viking fucked around with this message at 19:43 on Nov 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 19:40
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:I also think the figures you're showing are smaller scale here. Think 10-15mm, vs. "heroic" 28mm (closer to 32mm) that's used in GW or Privateer stuff. A lot of the techniques used on bigger figures don't work as well on smaller stuff. I'll also say that dipping came in from the historical side IME-- I'd seen and used it there on stuff well before it became en vogue for alt figures. The move towards 28mm wargames has improved painting dramatically in ancients, and you now see much nicer armies. Nopes, the second one (the unit) are Irregular 28mm. The first one is even worse, it's a Tradition of London pre-pained mini, which means 54mm scale! So very flat and ugly IMHO. But there's also insane talent, and some painters can get amazing results with 6mm, 10mm and 15mm. Personaly, I believe that one of the biggest boosts for "average" level historical gamers is the gradual influx of ex-GW gamers who started with Warhammer in the 90's and have started with historicals the last 10-15 years or so, bringing a lot of talent and a new attitude towards painting. But yes, I agree that painting in general has increased enormously since the Internet became a common thing. All these tutorials and forums have spread painting advice (again, it's a skill more than a talent), and the things that was winning Golden Daemons in the very early 90's are more or less table-top quality today. It's amazing. The stuff I started out painting in the 90's would easily qualify for this thread.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 19:48
|
|
|
lilljonas posted:Nopes, the second one (the unit) are Irregular 28mm. The first one is even worse, it's a Tradition of London pre-pained mini, which means 54mm scale! So very flat and ugly IMHO. But there's also insane talent, and some painters can get amazing results with 6mm, 10mm and 15mm. Those are 28mm? Then yeah, that's pretty average to poor. On 15s it's look pretty good, which is part of why I assumed they were that. I also agree on the transfer of GW players helping painting. It also seemed to co-incide with the move towards 25/28mm in historicals (i.e. WAB) at least on the east coast. There are still lots of not great figures in the larger scales, but even just dipping and highlighting can make those figures nice enough looking for the tabletop. quote:But yes, I agree that painting in general has increased enormously since the Internet became a common thing. All these tutorials and forums have spread painting advice (again, it's a skill more than a talent), and the things that was winning Golden Daemons in the very early 90's are more or less table-top quality today. It's amazing. The stuff I started out painting in the 90's would easily qualify for this thread. To me it's rather depressing, since it's basically taken the skill to the point where we have people's first figs getting put online and laughed at. We're saying you have to reach GD levels from the 90s to not be considered deficient, which is still IMO unrealistic. I still am a very basic painter (dipping + 1-2 highlights, some modest conversions. Looks good on the table but photographs horribly) by the standard put out here, but when I go to the FLGS I commonly see almost all the armies having markedly worse painting than this. The internet has expanded the top end of the painting spectrum, but I wouldn't say it's done anything for the bottom. In fact, it's created an "internet male" style of commentary where anythign that's actually average gets an upturned nose. I'm as guilty of this as anyone else, but I'm trying to improve. We need the avaerage player to keep doing his thing, because that's what keeps the hobby afloat.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 20:05
|
|
|
Thanks for all the encouraging words, guys. rkajdi said it better than I could. moths posted:If you have any clamshell-packed miniatures that came with foam (like Warmachine comes in), you're 90% of the way to having a wet pallet. Cut a square of baking paper to fit, wet the foam, and squish it into the blister with the baking paper. Chill la Chill posted:Please make a scrunt. The lowly scrunt is the best first model almost all of us have missed out on, don't miss out on it yourself! 
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 20:12
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:At this level, I'd even screw decent brushes. I still just use a cheapy brush set from Micheal's ($5 for 4 small sabol brushes- 0, 3/0, 5/0, and 10/0) and while the wear out faster, they're fine for use until they do. Brushes at $5 or more each just aren't worth it if you aren't a painting ninja. I did this in the past and still do this. Heck, I just bought one of those $4 packs of brushes you can get in the crafts section of most big retail stores. I do tend to burn thru 'em, but then I just spend another $4 or $5 and get some more.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 20:58
|
|
|
Sydney Bottocks posted:I did this in the past and still do this. Heck, I just bought one of those $4 packs of brushes you can get in the crafts section of most big retail stores. I do tend to burn thru 'em, but then I just spend another $4 or $5 and get some more. Right up there with the 10 for $2 crappy watercolor brushes I use for dipping. You don't need to feel bad about tossing a brush away after 2 uses when you're not even paying a quarter for one.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 21:10
|
|
|
Somewhere, a Wood Elf sheds a single tear.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 21:35
|
|
|
An Angry Bug posted:Somewhere, a Wood Elf sheds a single tear. It's only wasteful if the bristles aren't already as hard as the handle. Dipping ruins brushes quickly, which is why you use the cheapest and shittiest brushes possible. EDIT: I almost want to start up a real noob painting thread, where there's a serious emphasis on feedback and easy ways to improve your painting. Not sure that would go over well, since it's effectively a "hugbox" where you try to get people up to the internet painting par. But when you have a painting thread where you say the minimal supply buy-in is $25 with fairly nice stuff (for a novice) I can't help but think we should do something directly for the "my first marine" crowd. rkajdi fucked around with this message at 22:00 on Nov 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 21:43
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:Brushes at $5 or more each just aren't worth it if you aren't a painting ninja. This isn't true at all. I'm not a very good painter and even I can tell there's a dramatic difference in quality between a W&N 7 series and a cheapo brush. Obviously you don't wanna use an expensive brush for dipping or something that'll wear it out super quickly but it's totally worth getting one or two nice brushes for general painting. They're a lot nicer to use and they'll last forever if you take good care of them. Same with wet palettes. They're super, super handy quality of life improving deals. Nobody needs one but they make painting a lot easier, especially if you like to stop in the middle of a project. my kinda ape fucked around with this message at 22:03 on Nov 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 21:58
|
|
|
ghetto wormhole posted:This isn't true at all. I'm not a very good painter and even I can tell there's a dramatic difference in quality between a W&N 7 series and a cheapo brush. Obviously you don't wanna use an expensive brush for dipping or something that'll wear it out super quickly but it's totally worth getting one or two nice brushes for general painting. They're a lot nicer to use and they'll last forever if you take good care of them. Series 7 is expensive as hell. though. You should be steering starters towards the $1.25 brushes, not the $15+ ones like Series 7. The 7s don't keep you within the lines any better that the 4 for $5 pack brushes do.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 22:05
|
|
|
I use "expensive" brushes for just about everything other than most basecoats and of course drybrushing. And drybrushing brushes tend to be my worn out "expensive" brushes.rkajdi posted:Series 7 is expensive as hell. though. You should be steering starters towards the $1.25 brushes, not the $15+ ones like Series 7. The 7s don't keep you within the lines any better that the 4 for $5 pack brushes do. Well, they do, in that they don't fray so easily, so you don't get crazy wild lines. Plus if you spend $15 on a brush, you're going to be nice and careful.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 22:10
|
|
|
You can get S7s for $5-10 on sale pretty often and as long as you clean them they're gonna last a long time, unlike cheapo brushes which are gonna wear out quickly no matter what. A good tool isn't ever gonna make you better at something but a bad one can definitely hold you back or make things harder for you. Unless they're unsure if they're gonna stick with painting then there's really no good reason not to make the small investment in a good brush or two.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 22:32
|
|
|
There is a surprising amount of inspiration going on in this unspiration thread.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 01:53
|
|
|
Paper Kaiju posted:There is a surprising amount of inspiration going on in this unspiration thread. The "un" in unspiration around here is less "augh I quit painting forever!" and more "I shall RISE ABOVE THIS CRAP!" I got really stoked to paint and assemble and convert after the Kingdom Death stuff, because I wanted to prove I was better than that horseshit.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 02:00
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:EDIT: I almost want to start up a real noob painting thread, where there's a serious emphasis on feedback and easy ways to improve your painting. Not sure that would go over well, since it's effectively a "hugbox" where you try to get people up to the internet painting par. But when you have a painting thread where you say the minimal supply buy-in is $25 with fairly nice stuff (for a novice) I can't help but think we should do something directly for the "my first marine" crowd. I do think that is a good idea, but I wonder if that won't just be kind of redundant with the Miniature Megathread and/or stepping on its toes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 02:03
|
|
|
Slimnoid posted:I do think that is a good idea, but I wonder if that won't just be kind of redundant with the Miniature Megathread and/or stepping on its toes. I sort of see the mini megathread as something for people who already know a bit about what they are doing. I think it would be nice to just have something that was a boot camp to get people from "I know nothing" to competent with the least amount of pain possible. The stuff An Angry Bug was saying about the main megathread being a bit overwhelming to people just starting out made a lot of sense to me. The way I see it, having a setup like this: Noob Thread: "What's a mold line" -> Actual Average Main Thread: Actual Average -> Internet Average (i.e. pretty drat good) and beyond Keeps the main thread from being filled up with stuff that experienced painters know (color scheme, partial assembly, ect.) while also helping to remove some of the intimidation that has come with the "internet male"-ification of online painting standards.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 02:34
|
|
|
Huh, good point.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 02:46
|
|
|
Eh, nobody in the painting thread is gonna jump on you for not being a good painter or for asking beginner questions. At the very worst you'll have people tell you what you can do to improve. I must've asked a hundred questions when I was starting out and everyone in that thread was super helpful. I donno what internet maleification is but at least two of the best painters on SA are women IIRC.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 03:05
|
|
|
Slimnoid posted:Huh, good point. Yeah, and I'll fully admit to a different and possible selfish goal. I'd rather have a shop full of 4-6/10 painted armies I than against than a few 8-10/10 pieces of internet painting porn while still having to play against bare plastic or 2-3/10 forces. Luckily I have all next week off work, so within a few days I hope to get a starter post done. Hopefully with some pictures for the rkajdi method of getting armies painted quickly and decently (i.e. dip the poo poo out of it and choose a good color scheme)
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 03:12
|
|
|
ghetto wormhole posted:Eh, nobody in the painting thread is gonna jump on you for not being a good painter or for asking beginner questions. At the very worst you'll have people tell you what you can do to improve. I must've asked a hundred questions when I was starting out and everyone in that thread was super helpful. It's not someone getting jumped on, it's drinking from the firehose. When you're starting out, the best advice isn't all this wet pallet or thinned paint stuff, it's more getting a good color scheme that you can pound out for the 100-200 figures in your army, and getting enough technical know-how to allow for it to look good on the tabletop. I envision the noob thread as a way to get people from zero to competently done army in as short a time with the minimal amount of pain possible. Internet maleification is the idea that there's this rising standard, to the point that you can act like an internet male (i.e. she has a mole, would not date) about figures that would have been fine a few years ago. I remain unconvinced that the actual median of painting has improved much if at all, but the upper end has opened way up, to the point that basic 90s painting is now regarded as too crappy to ever actually use on the table. Net result I've seen is a lot more unpainted armies, and a lot of "Does devlin mud count as a color?" three color tournie armies. To the point that I've been to recent moderately-sized (20-30 person) events where I've done 2nd or 3rd painting with a dipped army. And not because it's great, but because so few people even get to the point of having a fully painted WFB army, much less one that's competently painted (no primer showing)
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 03:55
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:It's not someone getting jumped on, it's drinking from the firehose. When you're starting out, the best advice isn't all this wet pallet or thinned paint stuff, it's more getting a good color scheme that you can pound out for the 100-200 figures in your army, and getting enough technical know-how to allow for it to look good on the tabletop. I envision the noob thread as a way to get people from zero to competently done army in as short a time with the minimal amount of pain possible. I do like the idea of a newbie painting thread though, I'm a pretty decent painter and even I get a little daunted by the megathread.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 04:10
|
|
|
less words more titty gnomes please
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 04:17
|
|
|
HiveCommander posted:I don't know how people can tolerate only playing with a so-close-to-zero-effort 3 colour army, it ain't hard to have a bit of pride with stuff! I've played a laundry list of games and the closest I came to painted was a primed army. I play because I find miniature games more enjoyable than card games. I'd be okay with prepainted and plastic if those games were as fun as the ones that require assembly.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 04:21
|
|
|
Please consider posting at least one image a page, thanks in advance. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 04:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 23:06 |
|
|
HiveCommander posted:I don't know how people can tolerate only playing with a so-close-to-zero-effort 3 colour army, it ain't hard to have a bit of pride with stuff! Ditto on the unpainted poo poo. Playing unpainted is like playing a video game without textures (that has happened a few times in the past). I don't like painting and I'm not good at it (yet?), but God-drat do I not want to play with unpainted minis. Painting might be an rear end to get into ("trimmed mold lines, basecoated, painted... what, highlights? Dry brushing? Is shading the same thing as washing? The hell is blending? What kind of sorcery is this?") and full of nasty surprises (so I wanted to paint some guys black...), but it's still better than the all plastic show. Watched a Japanese 40K club play a few weeks ago. The Japanese, of course, have their stuff painted. The foreigners... all white Tau (one missing head...and arms) and an Eldar force that's clearly using non GW minis (judging by the color). Wasn't too pretty. EDIT: that ork basilisk reminds me of the time I sprayed my Chimera Mica Red. That was a surprise. JcDent fucked around with this message at 04:24 on Nov 22, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 04:22
|
|
