Squigger's way - Painting horses
The Insane Ranter
>
[snip]
>
> Vital note - DO NOT ASSEMBLE THE HORSE BEFORE PAINTING. This is a
> stupid
> thing to do, as you are unable to reach various parts of the model
> properly,
> if at all. I don't care what any "experts" claim, you cannot paint a
> multi-part miniature if it is already assembled. I know through
> experience
> with second hand Bretonnians. Trust me on this.
>
[snip]
YOu mean that you can't paint assembled skeletons or assembled space
marines?????? Since i already painted them I guess i'm ok huh?
Brian Hubbard
Vital note - DO NOT ASSEMBLE THE HORSE BEFORE PAINTING. This is a
stupid thing to do, as you are unable to reach various parts of the model
properly, if at all. I don't care what any "experts" claim, you cannot
paint a multi-part miniature if it is already assembled. I know through
experience with second hand Bretonnians. Trust me on this.
----->Sorry, but you're wrong. You certainly CAN paint the Bretonnian
horses after they're assembled, and quite well. I'd recommend not basing
them till after they're painted, though. Try this: prime the assembled and
prepped figure; paint the horse's belly and legs working through the
"runners" that fit into the base; paint the underside of the caparison next;
do any black-lining underneath; now you can mount the horse onto the base
and paint the rest, and at worst you may have to touch up the underside
later.
squigger
Had trouble painting your horses? Can't see how others get it right?
The
shading eludes you? Sick of seeing wonderfully shaded models when yours
are
just drab lumps of plastic with a single coat of paint?
Try this...
Vital note - DO NOT ASSEMBLE THE HORSE BEFORE PAINTING. This is a
stupid
thing to do, as you are unable to reach various parts of the model
properly,
if at all. I don't care what any "experts" claim, you cannot paint a
multi-part miniature if it is already assembled. I know through
experience
with second hand Bretonnians. Trust me on this.
First, undercoat your horse white. This horse will be a light brown,
and so
I will use bubonic brown for most of it. I am relating the painting of
an
elf steed because they have the most detail and least obscured parts, so
if
your horse doesn't have all the bits mentioned, don't worry (chaos
steeds,
for example, don't have visible manes, and Bretonnian warhorses have
very
little detail at all).
Once you have a roughly white horse (the undercost isn't supposed to
give a
uniform white look - if it is like that, then you've done it too much
like
a normal coat of paint), find all the indented lines around the muscles
and
and joints. Some of the joints will simply be raised knobs, like the
knees.
Into these indentations (and around the knobbly bits), paint a line of a
slightly darker paint than the main one (in this case use snakebite
leather).
Don't worry if it's messy, you'll be painting over most of this later.
This
step includes painting the deeper parts of the tail, mane, and ankle
hair,
as well as inside the ears and nostrils and around the eye.
Once this darker paint has dried, you start with the lighter paint.
This
stage must be done very carefully. You can be relatively careless with
large
undetailed areas like the rump, but for the legs you must take all the
care
you can. Paint from the centre of the blank areas outwards, until you
reach
a dark line around a joint or in a hollow. Allow your light paint to
meet and
then cover the edge of the dark paint. In some places (around joints)
you
will want to leave only a thin line of darker paint, and in others
(between
the legs and the body) a thicker line will work best. Making a mistake
here
is not good, because you will have to re-do that dark line and then use
the
light paint there again. This is because there is (oddly, I think) a
visible
and somewhat ugly difference between a dark line of paint covered on the
sides
by a lighter paint and a dark line of paint over a light colour. It's
also
easier to get the width of the line right by painting over the dark bit.
Next, drybrush the mane, tail, and ankle hair. For those who don't know
what
this means:
Get an old brush, one with lots of bristles, but has lost its point (you
may
even want to guillotine a brush to get a nice flat end). Dip the first
couple
of millimetres into your chosen paint. Wipe this paint off the brush
onto
whatever is handy (except the miniature ;). When only a patchy streak
appears, the brush is ready. Wipe the brush over whatever raised area
you
are painting. A small amount of paint will be deposited. This is the
idea.
Do this several times until you think that there is enough paint on the
model.
After practice, you may be able to do this with more paint on the brush.
This does take time.
After the drybrushing, paint the saddle and whatever barding and tackle
there
may be. In my case with the elf steed, I will use snakebite leather
again
(keep your palette small and simple - oddly enough, fewer paints will
give a
better result than more). Paint the hooves black, grey, or off-white
(with a
light brown horse you can choose all three - note that you never have
white
hooves on a dark horse, or black hooves on a light horse).
At this point you can base the horse and mount the rider, and it will be
good enough for battle. Don't worry about the fact that the horse
doesn't
look very good from up close - sit it on your table, then move at least
one
foot away. From here the dark lines are simply very good shading, and
don't
stand out as oddly different paint at all.
If you want to go further...
You can drybrush the edge of any raised hooves with a highlight, put
lines
between any teeth by using a wash and then repainting them white, add
socks
by painting the leg(s) a lighter colour (usually white, and if you do
this
you ought to plan to do it from the start and use a separate darker
paint for
the affected area), give the horse some head markings (a white spot or
stripe
down the nose, or a coloured muzzle), highlight the coat, or fill in
the
eyes. I usually just add an occasional sock and / or head marking, and
maybe the eyes (they tend to be black or dark brown).
If you want a particularly striking horse, use a different two colours
for
the mane and tail - not too different, perhaps just a shade or two
lighter,
very rarely darker (it doesn't work too well).
You might like to have a speckled horse - get your drybrush, put a
little
paint on it, wipe it, and instead of brushing, stab at the model. The
bristles ought to spread a little, giving you a round, patchy spot. If
you
like you could turn the brush whilst painting, to give a wider and more
solid spot.
Patchy horses can look good, if done well, but are difficult. Paint
your horse
as above, then, using a shade up or down, paint a small, irregular
splotch on
the rump. Cover about half of the rump. If you cover any hollows,
re-do your
shading, adjusting the shades to suit. If you put your splotch in the
centre
of the rump, put one on the other side going down the leg. Don't try to
make
the patches symmetrical. Put one or two other patches on the horse, not
too
large, but don't go overboard. If you're not sure if you've done
enough,
leave it underdone.
Don't ask how to paint a decent black horse - after several chaos
steeds, I
still can't get it right. If you know, tell me!
If you have any extra ideas, please send them to me - and if you think
it
won't work, try it before you tell me. You don't need to have great
ability
to us this method - that's why I use it. I have no artistic ability,
but I
enjoy painting miniatures, and want them to look good. So any idiot
with
several thumbs can do it. It won't win you any competitions, but it
does
look good. From a distance. In a certain light...
--
squigger
To email me, remove ANTISPAM from my email address
Richard Lobinske
>stupid
>thing to do, as you are unable to reach various parts of the model
>properly,
>if at all. I don't care what any "experts" claim, you cannot paint a
>multi-part miniature if it is already assembled. I know through
>experience
>with second hand Bretonnians. Trust me on this.
I disagree with this, assembling after painting (especially with the GW
horses), can leave some very ugly joints. Assemble, then clean and putty the
joints until smooth. Do not base the horse yet, this will allow easy access to
the undersides that are otherwise hard to reach.
<Large amount of snippage of an undercoat and glaze technique>
>(keep your palette small and simple - oddly enough, fewer paints will
>give a
>better result than more).
Good advice, I generally suggest mixing shades and highlights from the base
color to provide more visual consistancy.
>Paint the hooves black, grey, or off-white
>(with a
>light brown horse you can choose all three - note that you never have
>white
>hooves on a dark horse, or black hooves on a light horse).
Historically, you would see hooves following the lower legs, chestnuts (most
browns) a dark yellow/tan, bays (brown with black mane, tail and stockings),
dark grey, and greys and horses with white stockings, tan.
>Don't ask how to paint a decent black horse - after several chaos
>steeds, I
>still can't get it right. If you know, tell me!
Start with a very dark grey (very slightly brown) base coat, then apply flat
black as shading to the shadow areas (using your prefered technique, washes,
blending or underpainting), then highlight with a slightly lighter shade of
grey by blending or drybrush (this is easy to overdo). Since blacks are
actually very dark bays, use a different dark grey for the hooves.
For a very good description of painting horses, try Shepard Paine's "Building
and Painting Scale Figures", Kalmbach Books, Scale Modeling Handbook 13. You
may have to dig around a bit, the last I checked, it was out of print.
Death before dishonor,
Nothing before coffee
Shameless website Plug: Military Life on Saipan, 1944-1945
http://members.aol.com/RLobinske/Saipan.html
This is a cookie-free website
Big Al
squigger <squi...@angelfire.ANTISPAM.com> wrote in article
<3856D9C6...@angelfire.ANTISPAM.com>...
> squigger's way to paint horses
Wow, I thought you were dead.
--
Big Al
The Doctor is in.
One of the Twin Pasty-Fleshed Daemons of Pestilence
and Nauseous Abomination
"And Bristol!"
Kurt does get a token mention in this .sig file
Kurt
what the big red button does...
>
>
old school Aussies back though. Wonder where Ryan "N*zi H*ll Sm*rf" Arndt
went to...
--
K *Kill the nospam to reply*
You mis-spelled "M45T3R H4X0R."
-- RGMW outtake
Angulion
<< Vital note - DO NOT ASSEMBLE THE HORSE BEFORE PAINTING. This is a stupid
thing to do, as you are unable to reach various parts of the model properly, if
at all. I don't care what any "experts" claim, you cannot paint a multi-part
miniature if it is already assembled.>>
Ummm, no. I manage to paint the entire model, inside of caparison/barding and
all, without trouble, and it turns out damn good. Assembling beforehand also
cuts down on touching up the model, since if you've painted it first, you may
gunk up the paint job on the various pieces with fingerprints or excess
adhesive or whatever as you handle and glue them together, not to mention the
fact that you'll probably have to paint over the joins between pieces anyway.
John L. Martin
squigger <squi...@angelfire.ANTISPAM.com> wrote in message
news:3856D9C6...@angelfire.ANTISPAM.com...
> squigger's way to paint horses
>
> stupid
> thing to do, as you are unable to reach various parts of the model
> properly,
> if at all. I don't care what any "experts" claim, you cannot paint a
> multi-part miniature if it is already assembled. I know through
> experience
> with second hand Bretonnians. Trust me on this.
painting long enough and won enough contests to be somewhat of an authority.
Admittedly tho.. there is never just one right way to do it.
Assemble the horse including head and tail. I then glue the horse to the
base so that I can use the base as a hand hold without touching the
miniature. Assemble the knight and paint him separately.
>
> Don't ask how to paint a decent black horse - after several chaos
> steeds, I
> still can't get it right. If you know, tell me!
I'm not trying to be funny but paint it black! Then drybrush the black with
a dark gray (I use the Ral Parth color Dark Gray). Any gray color akin to
Panzer Gray should work. That's it... one black horse done!
Good luck and remember... any painted army looks better than an unpainted
one!
--
John
E-mail: jlma...@nconnect.net
URL: http://www.nconnect.net/~jlmartin
ICQ: 9738000
"And they had over them a king, an angel of this abyss; his name is
Abaddon."
Rev. 9:11
Little Al
>stupid
>thing to do, as you are unable to reach various parts of the model
>properly,
>if at all. I don't care what any "experts" claim, you cannot paint a
>multi-part miniature if it is already assembled. I know through
>experience
>with second hand Bretonnians. Trust me on this.
Bullshit. You have to paint a horse assembled, or you can't get the
paint scheme right, or colour continuity. I have a fucking fantastically
painted horse that took next to no time to paint and looks great, and it
was assembled, I know this because I was playing when you were in
nappies (Americans, think Diapers).
Little Al
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Boycott Inisfail!!"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
StPF member
Events Co-ordinator for Adeptus Eurasia:
http://www.40k.org/adeptus_eurasia
To join the Epic 40,000 e-group, send a blank message to:
e40k-list...@egroups.com
squigger
>
> The last thing heard on the black box of Egyptair 990 was Big Al asking
> what the big red button does...
> >squigger <squi...@angelfire.ANTISPAM.com> wrote in article
> ><3856D9C6...@angelfire.ANTISPAM.com>...
> >
Evidently not... I am surprised that anyone recalls me.
> >
> I just thought he got the shits with us and left. Good to see one of the
> old school Aussies back though. Wonder where Ryan "N*zi H*ll Sm*rf" Arndt
> went to...
>
> --
> K *Kill the nospam to reply*
I did. I became thoroughly sick of the signal to noise ratio being
somewhere like 1 to 100, thoroughly sick of quite a number of people
to be found on the list, and found a MUCH better forum, the Direwolf
mailing list, now to be found on Egroups. Where idiots are kicked
off, and the signal to noise ration is roughly 1 to nothing.
I am not back, I'm just posting what I've written since leaving (plus
the four articles I posted just before leaving). Anyone who wants
to is welcome to join the mailing list. Go to egroups and search for
Warhammer, or see the instructions on my web page.
Kurt
<385ABFAD...@angelfire.ANTISPAM.com>:
>>
>> >Wow, I thought you were dead.
>
>Evidently not... I am surprised that anyone recalls me.
>
>> >
>> I just thought he got the shits with us and left. Good to see one of
>> the old school Aussies back though. Wonder where Ryan "N*zi H*ll
>> Sm*rf" Arndt went to...
>>
>
>I did. I became thoroughly sick of the signal to noise ratio being
>somewhere like 1 to 100, thoroughly sick of quite a number of people
>to be found on the list, and found a MUCH better forum, the Direwolf
>mailing list, now to be found on Egroups. Where idiots are kicked
>off, and the signal to noise ration is roughly 1 to nothing.
>
Nothing much has changed, and as far as I can tell, it's probably always
been like this.
>I am not back, I'm just posting what I've written since leaving (plus
>the four articles I posted just before leaving). Anyone who wants
>to is welcome to join the mailing list. Go to egroups and search for
>Warhammer, or see the instructions on my web page.
>
Urgh. One of the things I like about rgmw is that I'm only interested in a
small amount of GW discussion at a time, so the mailing lists are too full
on for my tastes. Plus I get bored real fast with the recurring threads
like "What should I give my Chaplain?", or whatever. Maybe if there's a
digest I'll get that.
--
K *Kill the nospam to reply*
Crocodile hunter???
A great deal of people on this NG are stupid kids who think they have
the world figured out. The rest are stupid adults who think they have
the world figured out . . .
-- RGMW outtake
squigger
>
> Over 1500 people saw squi...@angelfire.ANTISPAM.com (squigger) say
> <385ABFAD...@angelfire.ANTISPAM.com>:
> >Kurt wrote:
> >>
> >> >Wow, I thought you were dead.
> >
> >Evidently not... I am surprised that anyone recalls me.
> >
> Well, you were a big part of the whole tag thing, IIRC.
Oh yes, so I was. But as that never really took off, I thought it had
been pretty much forgotten...
> >> >
> >> I just thought he got the shits with us and left. Good to see one of
> >> the old school Aussies back though. Wonder where Ryan "N*zi H*ll
> >> Sm*rf" Arndt went to...
> >>
> >
> >I did. I became thoroughly sick of the signal to noise ratio being
> >somewhere like 1 to 100, thoroughly sick of quite a number of people
> >to be found on the list, and found a MUCH better forum, the Direwolf
> >mailing list, now to be found on Egroups. Where idiots are kicked
> >off, and the signal to noise ration is roughly 1 to nothing.
> >
> Nothing much has changed, and as far as I can tell, it's probably always
> been like this.
Sort of. I was on the newsgroup for something like 3 years. When I
started, there was more signal. It degenerated as time went by. Come
up with your own theory :)
>
> >I am not back, I'm just posting what I've written since leaving (plus
> >the four articles I posted just before leaving). Anyone who wants
> >to is welcome to join the mailing list. Go to egroups and search for
> >Warhammer, or see the instructions on my web page.
> >
> Urgh. One of the things I like about rgmw is that I'm only interested in a
> small amount of GW discussion at a time, so the mailing lists are too full
> on for my tastes. Plus I get bored real fast with the recurring threads
> like "What should I give my Chaplain?", or whatever. Maybe if there's a
> digest I'll get that.
There is. Plus, as it's email, you can take all the time you like over
things (which generally means that responses are more thought out there
than here).
Kurt
>> >> >Wow, I thought you were dead.
>> >
>> >Evidently not... I am surprised that anyone recalls me.
>> >
>> Well, you were a big part of the whole tag thing, IIRC.
>
>Oh yes, so I was. But as that never really took off, I thought it had
>been pretty much forgotten...
>
>> >I did. I became thoroughly sick of the signal to noise ratio being
>> >somewhere like 1 to 100, thoroughly sick of quite a number of people
>> >to be found on the list, and found a MUCH better forum, the Direwolf
>> >mailing list, now to be found on Egroups. Where idiots are kicked
>> >off, and the signal to noise ration is roughly 1 to nothing.
>> >
>> Nothing much has changed, and as far as I can tell, it's probably
>> always been like this.
>
>Sort of. I was on the newsgroup for something like 3 years. When I
>started, there was more signal. It degenerated as time went by. Come
>up with your own theory :)
>
I have, it's the "Every day is September" theory, modified from AFW.
>> Urgh. One of the things I like about rgmw is that I'm only interested
>> in a small amount of GW discussion at a time, so the mailing lists are
>> too full on for my tastes. Plus I get bored real fast with the
>> recurring threads like "What should I give my Chaplain?", or whatever.
>> Maybe if there's a digest I'll get that.
>
>There is. Plus, as it's email, you can take all the time you like over
>things (which generally means that responses are more thought out there
>than here).
>
Hmm, if I find myself with a surplus of time I might subscribe to the
digest then.
Thomas Stober
> > >I am not back, I'm just posting what I've written since leaving (plus
> > >the four articles I posted just before leaving). Anyone who wants
> > >to is welcome to join the mailing list. Go to egroups and search for
> > >Warhammer, or see the instructions on my web page.
> > >
> > Urgh. One of the things I like about rgmw is that I'm only interested in a
> > small amount of GW discussion at a time, so the mailing lists are too full
> > on for my tastes. Plus I get bored real fast with the recurring threads
> > like "What should I give my Chaplain?", or whatever. Maybe if there's a
> > digest I'll get that.
>
> There is. Plus, as it's email, you can take all the time you like over
> things (which generally means that responses are more thought out there
> than here).
Huh? Why on earth do you have more time to write your contribution to a
mailing list than to a NG?
--
Thomas says 'Never noticed the countdown here..'
Peter Cowderoy/PSYCHO
>Thomas Stober wrote:
>>
>> squigger wrote:
>>
>> > There is. Plus, as it's email, you can take all the time you like over
>> > things (which generally means that responses are more thought out there
>> > than here).
>>
>> Huh? Why on earth do you have more time to write your contribution to a
>> mailing list than to a NG?
>
>want. You can
>even take the time to look through actual rulebooks for your answers...
>Here, you just fire off a reply.
It may just be the fact I'm going through a proxy server, but from where I'm
sitting the only differences are who I'm addressing to and the volume of
incoming. I can't remember if I'd posted anything at all when you were still
here (I was certainly lurking), but it's nice to see some of the old guard
about :-)
--------------------------------------------------
psy...@nthfen.demon.co.uk
'In Ankh-Morpork even the shit have a street to itself...
Truly, this is a land of opportunity' - Detritus, Men at Arms
squigger
>
> squigger wrote:
>
> > > >the four articles I posted just before leaving). Anyone who wants
> > > >to is welcome to join the mailing list. Go to egroups and search for
> > > >Warhammer, or see the instructions on my web page.
> > > >
> > > Urgh. One of the things I like about rgmw is that I'm only interested in a
> > > small amount of GW discussion at a time, so the mailing lists are too full
> > > on for my tastes. Plus I get bored real fast with the recurring threads
> > > like "What should I give my Chaplain?", or whatever. Maybe if there's a
> > > digest I'll get that.
> >
> > things (which generally means that responses are more thought out there
> > than here).
>
> Huh? Why on earth do you have more time to write your contribution to a
> mailing list than to a NG?
Because you can deal with EVERYTHING offline, and take as long as you
want. You can
even take the time to look through actual rulebooks for your answers...
Here, you just fire off a reply.
>
> --
> Thomas says 'Never noticed the countdown here..'
--
Thomas Stober
> > Huh? Why on earth do you have more time to write your contribution to a
> > mailing list than to a NG?
>
> Because you can deal with EVERYTHING offline, and take as long as you
> want. You can even take the time to look through actual rulebooks for your answers...
> Here, you just fire off a reply.
According to your headers you are using Netscape. With it you can
download the headers and the bodies of the NG posts. You do this by
File->Offline->Synchronize.
There you can select the NGs you want to read offline.
--
Thomas says 'Dismissed. Next question?'
squigger
Theoretically, yes. Have you any idea of how long it will take to
download 400+ headers and bodies? Plus most of it is completely
irrelevant to me - I am interested in Warhammer alone. Add to this the
fact that most don't do that anyway...
La Grief
Um, seeming i do it frequently, between 7 and 10 minutes, sometimes as long
as 15 when there are big posts and jerks posting in HTML
--
-Lee
--Proud wearer of the Holy Green Hat with the number 12 sown in it--
"Looks too normal for this NG" - Robert Williams
Founding member/chairman/treasurer/secretary-Grammar Nazi League
Disbelievers Association (GNLDA)
"Come here - I want to talk to you up close." - 'Rose Madder' Stephen King
http://www.blackrat999.freeserve.co.uk/lee/warhammer/warhammer2.htm for
1000X768 users
http://www.blackrat999.freeserve.co.uk/lee/warhammer/warhammer.htm for
800X600 users
ICQ#:30319689
"A murder sentance is for life, not just 'til Christmas"
Thomas Stober
> > According to your headers you are using Netscape. With it you can
> > download the headers and the bodies of the NG posts. You do this by
> > File->Offline->Synchronize.
> > There you can select the NGs you want to read offline.
> >
> > --
> > Thomas says 'Dismissed. Next question?'
>
> Theoretically, yes. Have you any idea of how long it will take to
> download 400+ headers and bodies?
About two minutes?
--
Thomas says nothing more you would be interested in...
La Grief
Thomas Stober <thst...@fh-konstanz.de> wrote in message
news:385FE20C...@fh-konstanz.de...
| squigger wrote:
|
| > > According to your headers you are using Netscape. With it you can
| > > download the headers and the bodies of the NG posts. You do this by
| > > File->Offline->Synchronize.
| > > There you can select the NGs you want to read offline.
| > >
| > > --
| > > Thomas says 'Dismissed. Next question?'
| >
| > Theoretically, yes. Have you any idea of how long it will take to
| > download 400+ headers and bodies?
|
| About two minutes?
between 7 and 10!
squigger
>
> squigger <squi...@angelfire.ANTISPAM.com> wrote in message
> news:385EA9F0...@angelfire.ANTISPAM.com...
> | Thomas Stober wrote:
> | >
> | > squigger wrote:
> | >
> | > > > Huh? Why on earth do you have more time to write your contribution
> to a
> | > > > mailing list than to a NG?
> | > >
> | > > Because you can deal with EVERYTHING offline, and take as long as you
> | > > want. You can even take the time to look through actual rulebooks for
> your answers...
> | > > Here, you just fire off a reply.
> | >
> | > download the headers and the bodies of the NG posts. You do this by
> | > File->Offline->Synchronize.
> | > There you can select the NGs you want to read offline.
> | >
> | > --
> | > Thomas says 'Dismissed. Next question?'
> |
> | Theoretically, yes. Have you any idea of how long it will take to
> | irrelevant to me - I am interested in Warhammer alone. Add to this the
> | fact that most don't do that anyway...
>
> Um, seeming i do it frequently, between 7 and 10 minutes, sometimes as long
> as 15 when there are big posts and jerks posting in HTML
Well, I can't afford that long. Downloading my email has never taken
more than 4 minutes. And, as I said before, no rubbish.
La Grief
I didn't mean it as a harsh thing, just trying to point out that it was that
long. I agree you might not be able to afford it...
Thomas Stober
> | > Theoretically, yes. Have you any idea of how long it will take to
> | > download 400+ headers and bodies?
> |
> | About two minutes?
>
> between 7 and 10!
Get a new newsserver! If you have to wait more than 3 mins, your ISP is
stealing your money...
--
Thomas says 'REPORT them! REPORT them!'
La Grief
| La Grief wrote:
|
|
| > | > Theoretically, yes. Have you any idea of how long it will take to
| > | > download 400+ headers and bodies?
| > |
| > | About two minutes?
| >
| > between 7 and 10!
|
| Get a new newsserver! If you have to wait more than 3 mins, your ISP is
| stealing your money...
Thats 400+ headers and bodies, I normally never download anymore than 160
(got rid of all the 40k tagged threads) so its not so long.
gask...@my-deja.com
> --
> Thomas says 'REPORT them! REPORT them!'
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.