FIVE steps to painting a BEAUTIFUL ARMY
slaughterkin
out looking like CRAP (reminiscing about old SNL skit here)
this is of course all IMHO, but I have seen a lot that makes me a firm
believer in the following words.
There are several steps to constructing a well painted army that looks good
as a force on the battlefield, as opposed to individual inspection of models
at 2 inches or less.
Sadly many strategies that create beautiful individual pieces seem to have
an opposite effect when viewed as a collection of 50-100 models. This is
also true when models are viewed under normal lighting conditions that
humans are used to operating in, as opposed to display lighting conditions.
The steps below I believe are true for both situations but more true for
constructing a spectacular force. I would like to believe that talanted
painters dont need to read the guidelines below, but some people never seem
to catch on to step #2.
Certain steps need to be modified depending on what armies are being
painted, or the number of models in the army/unit, but all steps offer some
valuable advice and direction.
If anyone has anything to add, or strongly disagrees, I would love to hear
your opinions.
1) PLAN to paint a colour scheme. Do not deviate from this scheme!
All armies should consist of 3 colours. Secondary colours such as, but not
limited to, white grey black bone or any metallic do not count against this,
but
if prominently displayed should count against the three.
Remember: 2 colours is boring, 4 colours is a mess. Dont believe me? Go
look at entire armies in pictures and see if Its true.
Exceptions- this is more true in WHFB than in W40K: certain models demand
deviation from the set pattern. For instance deamons or Dragons or any
unusual creature which obviously would not share the same colour patterns as
the rest of the army. In this case, set up a new set of 3 colours for it
and do not deviate from that for all similar models in the army. This is
the case with my Tyranid weaponry. All of my tyranid weaponry has its own
set of 3 colours or variations that I must follow, apart from the colours
the creatures have.
WARNING-- Avoid metallics. For all the beginners out there, metallics look
like CRAP. Use them sparingly, if at all. Metallics are good for
highlighting, thats about it. NEVER "paint" anything a metallic colour.
2) Bright models are Beautiful. Dark models are Ugly.
HIGHLIGHT HIGHLIGHT HIGHLIGHT. Highlighting is the most important thing in
building a beautiful looking army. Whatever colours you choose to put on
your armies, highlight them with even lighter versions. I cant stress this
enough. Dont stop at dark blue highlighted with blue, go to light blue and
then even lighter blue. Do this for every color on every model.. no
exceptions. Mix white into EVERYTHING.
The most stunning army Ive ever seen in battle was painted by a friend of
mine who now works for GW. It was a goblin army. Normally tons of goblins
are nothing special to look at, but he had boldly highlighted each goblins
face, body, weapon and mount. Whats more he did it with a variety of bold
colours and repeated the highlighting
consistently throughout the army. I can now say the best painted army I
have ever seen was a goblin army.
ON THE OTHER HAND, dark models, no matter HOW WELL PAINTED under normal
light look drab and plain, if not just ugly. YES this means YOU. So
highlight! Then highlight AGAIN!!!
3) Abstraction is Beautiful. Realism is Ugly
Do not paint every detail on the model!!!!!!!!!
This may seem totally contrary to what one might expect. But it is true.
Every color variation you put on a model can be seen at a distance. What
seemed like a good idea in painting a belt sack and dagger a variety of
colours at 2 inches away, looks like utter CRAP from 4 feet away. All you
see are blotches of colour because the detail is lost at that distance.
Certain models in the GW line are overloaded with detail. Stick to the
three main colours, and slight deviation into the neutral colours stated
above. (And you should repeat the same neutral colours too)
Just as important.. Dont fall into the trap of painting everything
realistically. Realism is ugly. Dont believe me? look around! When was
the last time you were standing in surroundings or clothes that were so
beautiful that they should have been in a painting?
DO NOT paint every weapon shaft brown and every axehead silver. Do not
paint every belt and shoe tan. Use Vibrant colours.. Look at Anime for
example. Why
do so many characters have blue or green hair, instead of brown or black?
I had a mummy unit that was straight grey and white for the wrappings.. but
for the axes and maces, I painted the shafts turquoise blue, (with highlight
of course) and the metal blades of the axes and balls of the maces were a
reddish brown with light bronze highlighting. Also crowns, armor bits or
other knick knacks were also painted reddish brown, but with gold
highlights. Came out looking very nice.
My friend with the goblins painted all his wooden shafts red. Why? because
red is the complement of green, and it looked good in contrast. Why was the
wood red? Who Cares.
I have another friend, a very good painter who philosophy is to paint every
single detail of a model, and to always paint it realistic colours. From 2
inches away his models look perfect, if not a little boring. From 3-4 feet
they look TERRIBLE. In fact I never even pick up any of his models unless
he specifically points out one. I hate when he asks me if I like it cuz I
know he just spent the last 3 hours painting it, so I lie to him. I just
never have the desire to look at his models because they are all dark and
all so many details done with varying colours. Eech.
4) Do what you just did 10 times more
If you cant do it 20 more times, dont even start. Figure out quick ways to
get the right colour on a model. Can a model be drybrushed? then put a
darker shade on it then drybrush to the lighter correct shade (dont forget
to give strong highlights!) then ink any parts that need it, lay down any
flat colours and highlight. Dont forget that the first level of
highlighting will be the color the model actually appears to be for flat
colours, while the second highlighting will just appear to be highlighting.
I personally do each step on ALL the models in
a unit before I go to the next stage.. (normally I do one model as an
example, then copy that) If you dont feel you can reliably copy a scheme
consistently throughtout the entire army, settle for a less complex scheme.
Often the less complex schemes look better anyway.
Nothing looks worse than having 5 character models blacklined and
highlighted and then the rest of the army just primary coloured. Instead of
showing how well you painted those five, it shows how little work you did on
the other 100.
5) Base and Flock all models. Then Highlight the bases!!!
Dont complain! Just do it!
My friends Goblin army was completely blacklined, boldly highlighted with
vibrant colours, and completely based and flocked with highlighting applied
to the base AND flock. Did I mention this was the best army I had ever
seen?
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Kurt
Cyrus comeback tour, slaughterkin said _____________...
>2) Bright models are Beautiful. Dark models are Ugly.
>HIGHLIGHT HIGHLIGHT HIGHLIGHT.
Only if you like the idiot cartoon look that GW are now trying to push. If
you look at the older figs, they are a hell of a lot better than the new
jolly looking stuff coming out. Goblins still look best when painted like
they should be, nasty and dirty.
--
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
Richard Lobinske
>out looking like CRAP (reminiscing about old SNL skit here)
>this is of course all IMHO, but I have seen a lot that makes me a firm
>believer in the following words.
>
I would definitely say opinion is right. What looks 'good' and 'right' varies
immensely between people and single rules sets rarely apply. There is no 'one
true way' to paint figures.
SNIP
>1) PLAN to paint a colour scheme. Do not deviate from this scheme!
>All armies should consist of 3 colours. Secondary colours such as, but not
>limited to, white grey black bone or any metallic do not count against this,
>but
>if prominently displayed should count against the three.
>Remember: 2 colours is boring, 4 colours is a mess. Dont believe me? Go
>look at entire armies in pictures and see if Its true.
Agree with staying with a color pattern within an army for consistancy, but a
hard and fast 3 color rule does not apply if done properly. If you are using a
range of colors on one figure, make sure that the colors go together well and
make sense (my eldar use five colors; metallic blue, metallic red, white, black
and steel and get consistant complements when on the table).
SNIP
>WARNING-- Avoid metallics. For all the beginners out there, metallics look
>like CRAP. Use them sparingly, if at all. Metallics are good for
>highlighting, thats about it. NEVER "paint" anything a metallic colour.
>
Disagree, however, many acrylic metallic colors are of very poor quality and
this may have generated your bias. Metallics require careful shading and
highlighting, but are not that difficult to use overall. I have a large number
of empire and DOW with a variety of metals for armor.
>2) Bright models are Beautiful. Dark models are Ugly.
Well, you said it was opinion.
>Highlighting is the most important thing in
>building a beautiful looking army. Whatever colours you choose to put on
>your armies, highlight them with even lighter versions. I cant stress this
>enough. Dont stop at dark blue highlighted with blue, go to light blue and
>then even lighter blue. Do this for every color on every model.. no
>exceptions. Mix white into EVERYTHING.
Mostly agree, highlighting is important, but the degree you highlight is a
matter of personal taste, and also depends upon the base color, some need more
highlighting than others.
>3) Abstraction is Beautiful. Realism is Ugly
>Do not paint every detail on the model!!!!!!!!!
>This may seem totally contrary to what one might expect. But it is true.
>Every color variation you put on a model can be seen at a distance. What
>seemed like a good idea in painting a belt sack and dagger a variety of
>colours at 2 inches away, looks like utter CRAP from 4 feet away. All you
>see are blotches of colour because the detail is lost at that distance.
Paint details with an eye toward natural appearences, don't ignore them, but
don't overdo it either (detailed eyes on 25-28 mm figs are a peeve of mine).
Again, use colors that complement each other, often using more neutral versions
of the desired colors helps immensely.
>Just as important.. Dont fall into the trap of painting everything
>realistically. Realism is ugly. Dont believe me? look around! When was
>the last time you were standing in surroundings or clothes that were so
>beautiful that they should have been in a painting?
>DO NOT paint every weapon shaft brown and every axehead silver. Do not
>paint every belt and shoe tan.
Very strongly disagree, I like my figures done with an eye toward the natural
appearence, it can be done well, look at the long history of historical
miniatures.
>Use Vibrant colours.. Look at Anime for
>example.
Again, this is a personal style preference and your opinion. I personally
don't care for doing my figures like a 3-D cartoon character. However, if that
is what you like, please proceed. Remember, the important thing is to paint
the models to please YOU.
SNIP
>I personally do each step on ALL the models in
>a unit before I go to the next stage.. (normally I do one model as an
>example, then copy that)
Very good, using an assembly line approach can very dramatically improve
painting efficiency.
>5) Base and Flock all models. Then Highlight the bases!!!
I would say, use finished bases to your preference. Do something to cover the
tab and slot, and don't leave it black. Amount of detail used on bases is
again a personal preference, I use epoxy putty to fill in the slot, plus put a
layer over the tab and then sculpt the putty irregularly over the base, then
paint OD green. Gives a good base effect without attracting attention away
from the model.
My advice it to practice and experiment. Always be willing to try new ways of
doing things, a technique may not work now, but may be just the thing in some
future project. Paint to please your eye and recognize that everyone has a
different opinion on what figures should look like.
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
John Hwang
> Or more aptly named, skip any of these five steps and your army will
> come out looking like CRAP (reminiscing about old SNL skit here)
> this is of course all IMHO, but I have seen a lot that makes me a
> firm believer in the following words.
>
> There are several steps to constructing a well painted army that
> looks good as a force on the battlefield, as opposed to individual
> inspection of models at 2 inches or less.
Agree!
> Sadly many strategies that create beautiful individual pieces seem to
> have an opposite effect when viewed as a collection of 50-100
> models. This is also true when models are viewed under normal
> lighting conditions that humans are used to operating in, as opposed
> to display lighting conditions.
Agree again!
> The steps below I believe are true for both situations but more true
> for constructing a spectacular force. I would like to believe that
> talanted painters dont need to read the guidelines below, but some
> people never seem to catch on to step #2.
> Certain steps need to be modified depending on what armies are being
> painted, or the number of models in the army/unit, but all steps
> offer some valuable advice and direction.
> If anyone has anything to add, or strongly disagrees, I would love to
> hear your opinions.
OK.
> 1) PLAN to paint a colour scheme. Do not deviate from this scheme!
> All armies should consist of 3 colours. Secondary colours such as,
> but not limited to, white grey black bone or any metallic do not
> count against this, but if prominently displayed should count
> against the three.
How does "camoflague" count?
> Remember: 2 colours is boring, 4 colours is a mess. Dont believe
> me? Go look at entire armies in pictures and see if Its true.
I dunno. 2 colours is OK for "serious" military types of armies.
> Exceptions- this is more true in WHFB than in W40K: certain models
> demand deviation from the set pattern. For instance deamons or
> Dragons or any unusual creature which obviously would not share the
> same colour patterns as the rest of the army. In this case, set up a
> new set of 3 colours for it and do not deviate from that for all
> similar models in the army.
I assume this holds in 40k for "stealth" units like Scouts and Rangers,
and may hold to a lesser extent for "elite" units.
> This is the case with my Tyranid weaponry. All of my tyranid
> weaponry has its own set of 3 colours or variations that I must
> follow, apart from the colours the creatures have.
So your Tyranids are 3 colours for the monsters, 3 for the weapons?
> WARNING-- Avoid metallics. For all the beginners out there,
> metallics look like CRAP. Use them sparingly, if at all. Metallics
> are good for highlighting, thats about it. NEVER "paint" anything a
> metallic colour.
Disagree strongly. This depends very much on the model design.
Smooth, subtle shapes can take metallic paint very easily.
V2 Eldar can be done in this way, basic color in Silver, with accent
colors *inked* or *washed* over it. Note however, that the *entire*
model must be done metallic, and the entire model must take washes (if
nothing else, then a very thin black). Large portions of flat color
will ruin the metallic effect.
The other interesting option which I find is for mostly cloth/robed
armies. These can be done in a Black-to-White highlight and inked or
washed with Color to tone.
> 2) Bright models are Beautiful. Dark models are Ugly.
Absolutely and totally wrong! Bright models are Toylike. Dark models
are Serious.
> HIGHLIGHT HIGHLIGHT HIGHLIGHT. Highlighting is the most important
> thing in building a beautiful looking army. Whatever colours you
> choose to put on your armies, highlight them with even lighter
> versions. I cant stress this enough. Dont stop at dark blue
> highlighted with blue, go to light blue and then even lighter blue.
> Do this for every color on every model.. no exceptions. Mix white
> into EVERYTHING.
Disagree. Not everything needs or likes extreme highlights. Again, I
refer to the V2 Eldar. Only the robed Farseers and Warlocks benefit
from this type of treatment; the Aspects don't need it.
> The most stunning army Ive ever seen in battle was painted by a
> friend of mine who now works for GW. It was a goblin army. Normally
> tons of goblins are nothing special to look at, but he had boldly
> highlighted each goblins face, body, weapon and mount. Whats more he
> did it with a variety of bold colours and repeated the highlighting
> consistently throughout the army. I can now say the best painted
> army I have ever seen was a goblin army.
Of course, consistency wins.
> ON THE OTHER HAND, dark models, no matter HOW WELL PAINTED under
> normal light look drab and plain, if not just ugly. YES this means
> YOU. So highlight! Then highlight AGAIN!!!
Disagree. I'm painting my latest batch of Eldar in off-Black, off-
White, with Crimson, White, Silver, and Steel accents. It's coming
along beautifully.
> 3) Abstraction is Beautiful. Realism is Ugly
> Do not paint every detail on the model!!!!!!!!!
> This may seem totally contrary to what one might expect. But it is
> true. Every color variation you put on a model can be seen at a
> distance. What seemed like a good idea in painting a belt sack and
> dagger a variety of colours at 2 inches away, looks like utter CRAP
> from 4 feet away. All you see are blotches of colour because the
> detail is lost at that distance.
Which again, is why it's important to control the number and variety of
colors. It's again important to match accent colors to the base
colors.
> Certain models in the GW line are overloaded with detail. Stick to
> the three main colours, and slight deviation into the neutral colours
> stated above. (And you should repeat the same neutral colours too)
Again, it depends on the approach taken. If your accent colors are
relatively neutral and complementary, then it's perfectly fine (indeed,
necessary) to catch all of the detail.
> Just as important.. Dont fall into the trap of painting everything
> realistically. Realism is ugly. Dont believe me? look around!
> When was the last time you were standing in surroundings or clothes
> that were so beautiful that they should have been in a painting?
Maybe you need better clothes?
> DO NOT paint every weapon shaft brown and every axehead silver. Do
> not paint every belt and shoe tan. Use Vibrant colours.. Look at
> Anime for example. Why do so many characters have blue or green
> hair, instead of brown or black?
Because the artist isn't good enough at differentiating characters by
faces and bodies. And a lot of anime is targeted to little kids who
have a lot of time keeping track of "the character with the green
hair".
For reference, watch Patlabor. All of the hair is brown or black.
> I had a mummy unit that was straight grey and white for the
> wrappings.. but for the axes and maces, I painted the shafts
> turquoise blue, (with highlight of course) and the metal blades of
> the axes and balls of the maces were a reddish brown with light
> bronze highlighting. Also crowns, armor bits or
> other knick knacks were also painted reddish brown, but with gold
> highlights. Came out looking very nice.
I don't doubt it. But your mummies are only 2 colours, which you state
is boring.
> My friend with the goblins painted all his wooden shafts red. Why?
> because red is the complement of green, and it looked good in
> contrast. Why was the wood red? Who Cares.
OK.
> I have another friend, a very good painter who philosophy is to paint
> every single detail of a model, and to always paint it realistic
> colours. From 2 inches away his models look perfect, if not a little
> boring. From 3-4 feet they look TERRIBLE. In fact I never even pick
> up any of his models unless he specifically points out one. I hate
> when he asks me if I like it cuz I know he just spent the last 3
> hours painting it, so I lie to him. I just never have the desire
> to look at his models because they are all dark and
> all so many details done with varying colours. Eech.
I assume these are Warhammer, again. Does anybody you know paint 40k?
> 4) Do what you just did 10 times more If you cant do it 20 more
> times, dont even start. Figure out quick ways to get the right
> colour on a model. Can a model be drybrushed? then put a darker
> shade on it then drybrush to the lighter correct shade (dont forget
> to give strong highlights!) then ink any parts that need it, lay
> down any flat colours and highlight.
I just paint the same model a few times until I get what I want. Then
I strip it down and repaint it with the rest of the army,
> Dont forget that the first level of highlighting will be the color
> the model actually appears to be for flat colours, while the second
> highlighting will just appear to be highlighting. I personally do
> each step on ALL the models in a unit before I go to the next
> stage.. (normally I do one model as an example, then copy that)
OK.
> If you dont feel you can reliably copy a scheme consistently
> throughtout the entire army, settle for a less complex scheme.
> Often the less complex schemes look better anyway.
> Nothing looks worse than having 5 character models blacklined and
> highlighted and then the rest of the army just primary coloured.
> Instead of showing how well you painted those five, it shows how
> little work you did on the other 100.
OK.
> 5) Base and Flock all models. Then Highlight the bases!!!
> Dont complain! Just do it!
Yeah, eventually, I'll get around to this bit. As soon as I see a
system of basing that I like. I can tell you that the Goblin Green
base with generic flock looks terrible. Which is why there's zero
chance of me ruining my models that way.
> My friends Goblin army was completely blacklined, boldly highlighted
> with vibrant colours, and completely based and flocked with
> highlighting applied to the base AND flock. Did I mention this was
> the best army I had ever seen?
OK. And my question again is whether you've seen any 40k armies at all?
--
--- John Hwang "J_H...@my-deja.com"
\-|-/
| A.K.D. F.E.M.C.
| Horned Blood Cross Terror LED Speed Jagd Destiny
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Myrmidon Who?
was sent to the cited author.]
In article <38aa3...@goliath2.newsfeeds.com>,
slaugh...@email.msn.com says...
> Or more aptly named, skip any of these five steps and your army will come
> out looking like CRAP (reminiscing about old SNL skit here)
> this is of course all IMHO, but I have seen a lot that makes me a firm
> believer in the following words.
>
> There are several steps to constructing a well painted army that looks good
> as a force on the battlefield, as opposed to individual inspection of models
> at 2 inches or less.
> Sadly many strategies that create beautiful individual pieces seem to have
> an opposite effect when viewed as a collection of 50-100 models. This is
> also true when models are viewed under normal lighting conditions that
> humans are used to operating in, as opposed to display lighting conditions.
Good point! Know thy lighting. Most painters (minis or fine
arts) show an appalling lack of knowledge about light. This is after all
what you are working with! Doh! Here are some helpful pointers. First
of all, light intensity has a lot to do with color. Most people think of
sun light as being yellow. It is NOT. Sunlight is in the blue-white
spectrum because it comes from a high intensity source - the
fission/fusion reaction at the heart of the sun. Normal low wattage
incandescent lighting is in the yellow range. That's why some many
people look yellowish or greenish in photos taken indoors without a flash
- especially at night or during the winter. Photographic lamps are
expensive for that reason, they're high intensity lights - like 500 watts
instead of the normal 75 watt bulbs. They also require ceramic holders
with cooling fans to keep them from melting. Now you know why I hated
school pictures, you damn near got a sunburn and dehydration while
waiting for the fool behind the camera to quite futzing around and shoot
the photo. Ideally one would want to paint where there is plenty of
natural light, or where there is high intensity light, (photography lamps
are $80 for the ceramic stand, $5-10 per bulb, and hot as hell) so I
recommend halogen lamps as a decent stand in for natural light. After
that would be florescent lighting, and last would be standard
incandescent lighting. Painters have to deal with the fact that the
color of the floor, walls and ceiling which are reflecting light will
also influence how the paint looks there as opposed to a different
location. I don't recommend using a spot light/direct light to paint
under either, use a muted or reflected light, like off a white ceiling or
a piece of white matt board. In the end there's only so much a painter
can do to determine how the figure will look in a give light condition.
I try to paint my figures under natural light or with the room light by a
halogen lamp stand.
> The steps below I believe are true for both situations but more true for
> constructing a spectacular force. I would like to believe that talanted
> painters dont need to read the guidelines below, but some people never seem
> to catch on to step #2.
> Certain steps need to be modified depending on what armies are being
> painted, or the number of models in the army/unit, but all steps offer some
> valuable advice and direction.
> If anyone has anything to add, or strongly disagrees, I would love to hear
> your opinions.
Overall you make some nice points, but you generalize a lot.
>
> 1) PLAN to paint a colour scheme. Do not deviate from this scheme!
Planning is EXTREMELY IMPORTANT. However, don't be afraid to
deviate from a plan if your planned colors aren't working out. Try a
variation of your original set, or a whole new set and repaint the ones
that didn't work out the first time. Also, don't be afraid to vary a few
in a unit (especially WHFB) where units often were equipped with homemade
uniforms that had a good bit of variation. Imperial Guard is another one
that comes to mind for variation.
> All armies should consist of 3 colours. Secondary colours such as, but not
> limited to, white grey black bone or any metallic do not count against this,
> but
> if prominently displayed should count against the three.
> Remember: 2 colours is boring, 4 colours is a mess. Dont believe me? Go
> look at entire armies in pictures and see if Its true.
I have seen plenty of well painted single color units and armies.
If you want a few examples, try the 3rd Ed. Marine Codex on page 23 & 24.
The single color "Revilers" (all Bluish Gray) and the "Rampagers" (all
Red) are just 2 examples of well painted and attractive figures that
already break your rules.
> Exceptions- this is more true in WHFB than in W40K: certain models demand
> deviation from the set pattern. For instance deamons or Dragons or any
> unusual creature which obviously would not share the same colour patterns as
> the rest of the army. In this case, set up a new set of 3 colours for it
> and do not deviate from that for all similar models in the army. This is
> the case with my Tyranid weaponry. All of my tyranid weaponry has its own
> set of 3 colours or variations that I must follow, apart from the colours
> the creatures have.
> WARNING-- Avoid metallics. For all the beginners out there, metallics look
> like CRAP. Use them sparingly, if at all. Metallics are good for
> highlighting, thats about it. NEVER "paint" anything a metallic colour.
Never? Again, a generalization, and not a good one. You would
have been much better off with the "Use them sparingly, if at all" as
your ending statement. (WHFB) - I've seen some great units of Chaos
warriors & Chaos Knights done in mostly metallics with rust and bright
detailing. Again, it depends on the subject matter and your treatment of
the paint and the detail, not on the paint itself.
>
> 2) Bright models are Beautiful. Dark models are Ugly.
> HIGHLIGHT HIGHLIGHT HIGHLIGHT. Highlighting is the most important thing in
> building a beautiful looking army. Whatever colours you choose to put on
> your armies, highlight them with even lighter versions. I cant stress this
> enough. Dont stop at dark blue highlighted with blue, go to light blue and
> then even lighter blue. Do this for every color on every model.. no
> exceptions. Mix white into EVERYTHING.
Ugh! Awful advice! Just so you don't think I'm trying to be an
ass about this, please understand my background in miniatures and
painting. I've been collecting and painting minis since I was 10 and I
passed 10 more than 2 decades ago. I also have a Bachelors of Fine Arts
degree with a duel major in Drawing and Painting. I got started in Fine
Arts due to my love of mini painting - I well over 1000 old Dungeons &
Dragons figs by various makers, and that isn't counting the 1000 - 2000
pt Marine, I.G., Chaos, and Tyranid 40K armies I have as well.
First a bit about color and paint. The color in paint is reflected light
(and yes, this is important, as there's a huge difference in reflected
light as opposed to emitted light!) The chroma or intensity of a color
is dependant on the type of pigment particles and the density or amount
of pigment in the paint medium. The ONLY WAY to increase chroma or
brightness in paint (because it is reflected light) is to increase the
amount of pigment to medium mixture or to use a brighter pigment. When
you add white to a color, you lighten it, but that is NOT the same as
brightening it. If you add a small amount of white to a dark blue, you
will make a lighter shade of that blue, but not a brighter blue. When
you add white to any paint, you simply make a MORE PASTEL shade of that
original color. Buy yourself a bright cadmium yellow, and a medium
cadmium yellow, and a tube of white paint all from the same range. Add a
bunch of white to that medium cadmium yellow and mix it together
completely, and then lay some of the bright cadmium yellow next to your
mix. I can guarantee that you will see a HUGE difference in intensity
between the pure "bright" cadmium yellow and the stuff you mixed with
white. No contest. Another common example is when you add a lot of
white to blue - you get a pastel sky blue, not bright blue.
Simply adding white to colors for highlighting is a very poor way to do
it! It works in some cases, but there are a lot more effective ways of
highlighting (see below).
Next is optics and the human eye! The human eye estimates distance of
objects and depth of field based on 2 types of information. The first is
value scale - the difference between the lightest light, and the darkest
dark. The other is chroma or intensity of the colors of an object.
Psychology also plays a part in human vision. In general, the number of
values from light to dark visible in an object increases as the viewer
and object become closer together. If you have a long hallway at home,
throw a towel on the floor. If you have decent light of any type, you
will see more values in the folds of the cloth the closer you get. Next
is chroma - the eye tends to perceive colors with more intensity the
closer they are to the eye. Something like a building for example that
looks bright close up tends to fade and look "washed out" over distance
due to the effects of our atmosphere. This is also referred to as "Hot
and cold colors". People tend to think of red for example as hot, and
blue as cold, but this isn't always the case. There are hot and cold
reds and blues - rose matter red is a warm red while alizarin crimson is
a cold red, and ultra marine is a warm blue while navy blue is a cold
blue color. Thus the brain & eyes tend to use the following scheme -
lots of values/brightness/hot color = closer, and low number of values,
or dull faded chroma/cold color = more distant. The brain also tends to
assign more importance to objects of greater value range or higher color
intensity.
The third factor is color pull and light mixing. Light, whether emitted
or reflected is mixed by the human eye. To give an example - the primary
colors of paint (reflected light) are red, blue, and yellow. But in your
television set the colors of the light emitting phosphor are red, GREEN,
& blue. In paint there is no way to mix yellow, but in the emitted
light, there is no yellow pigment. Hmmm, so how does this work? Well,
when your eye is viewing the red and green dots on a television screen
both light up together side by side at the same time from a distance,
your eye mixes the colors (please note that on the light wave length
scale - yellow is between red and green in wave length the eye takes the
average of the two) and the viewer perceives yellow. But if you get very
close and look at a yellow car (for example)on your television screen you
will see nothing but a pattern of red and green dots. The eye and the
brain do a lot of color mixing and estimating. The second part is the
"push & pull" effect colors have on one another. To see this, take a
piece of neutral gray paper. Take a 3 inch square of blue paper, and a
like sized square of orange paper. Cut a one inch square hole in the
center of each. Place the blue square on the neutral gray paper and
stare at the small square of gray in the center of the blue. In a short
period of time, the gray in the center will start to look orangish. Do
the same with the orange square, and the center will start to look bluish
after a bit. You eye does odd things with color as the cones and rods
start to get tired it pushes other nearby colors towards the
complimentary color to that which is the dominate color in the area
viewed. By placing complimentary colors such as red & green, orange and
blue, or yellow and purple, side by side each makes the other look
brighter or more intense because of the push pull effect.
> The most stunning army Ive ever seen in battle was painted by a friend of
> mine who now works for GW. It was a goblin army. Normally tons of goblins
> are nothing special to look at, but he had boldly highlighted each goblins
> face, body, weapon and mount. Whats more he did it with a variety of bold
> colours and repeated the highlighting
> consistently throughout the army. I can now say the best painted army I
> have ever seen was a goblin army.
Well, that contradicts what you said earlier about "use white with
everything" to highlight. I can virtually guarantee that if they were
"boldly highlighted" that the painter didn't just add white to the color.
Again, look at some of the stuff in the Marine codex. The "Sons of
Medusa" chapter Marine is green with a white helmet on page 22. But
please note - the highlights are done in a bright yellow-green to stand
out, not white. (Look at the edging on the shoulder pads, etc.)
> ON THE OTHER HAND, dark models, no matter HOW WELL PAINTED under normal
> light look drab and plain, if not just ugly. YES this means YOU. So
> highlight! Then highlight AGAIN!!!
Not true of necessity, and not true in fact. There are examples
to numerous to list that show the error of this line of reasoning. Look
around the web. There are some great "Ugly & Dark" Chaos armies that
stand out on the table top, dark or no, because the painter knew the
above color and optical theories and used them to full advantage.
>
> 3) Abstraction is Beautiful. Realism is Ugly
> Do not paint every detail on the model!!!!!!!!!
> This may seem totally contrary to what one might expect. But it is true.
> Every color variation you put on a model can be seen at a distance. What
> seemed like a good idea in painting a belt sack and dagger a variety of
> colours at 2 inches away, looks like utter CRAP from 4 feet away. All you
> see are blotches of colour because the detail is lost at that distance.
> Certain models in the GW line are overloaded with detail. Stick to the
> three main colours, and slight deviation into the neutral colours stated
> above. (And you should repeat the same neutral colours too)
This started out well and went astray. You could have given a
simple example of the "to much detail is bad" idea and made the point
better - but the stuff about Abstraction verse realism is utter crap.
First of all, all painting (and most 2 dimensional Art) is Abstraction!
No matter how realistic a painting I do of an apple, I can't eat the
painting and get the nourishment of an apple from it. If I take a
photograph of an apple that's visually exact in every detail, I still
can't eat it and gain the nourishment of an apple. Bottom line, all art
is abstraction - it's not the real thing itself that the art is speaking
of, but rather a representation of it or in other words an "abstraction"
of the real thing itself. (Sorry if I rant a bit here, but I'm sick to
death of hearing twits at college - the so called educated type - argue
about abstraction verse realism. All static visual arts {ie drawing,
painting, and some sculpture} are dead things! They are ALL ABSTRACTIONS
of real things. The only life and emotion they have are those given to
them by the viewer.)
> Just as important.. Dont fall into the trap of painting everything
> realistically. Realism is ugly. Dont believe me? look around! When was
> the last time you were standing in surroundings or clothes that were so
> beautiful that they should have been in a painting?
I take it you don't get out to Art museums much, or study a lot of
art history? It's loaded with examples of both places and objects that
sparked the artist's imagination to the point of HAVING to do an image or
work, because the idea won't stop bugging the artist. I have a huge
collection of art books with literally thousands of still lifes of house
hold items that the artist captured in such a way as to give you a sense
of the person who's objects the artist painted without ever showing you
the person. All your statement says is that you personally have never
seen something ordinary in an extraordinary way. Again, you make
personal statements into generalizations and apply them to everybody.
Not good. Here's an "I" statement. I have a painting in my home that
attracts a lot of attention. It's a black field with white patches on
it. It has a lot that attracts and keeps the eye interested. It usually
takes the viewers a while to figure out that the white patches are
actually a skewed number 4. The painting was done from an old black
jersey type shirt with a large iron-on transfer of the number 4 on the
back. After years of wear and repeated washings, the iron-on transfer
cracked and many parts peeled away leaving a very interesting pattern,
but if you look at all the shapes you can still recognize the number 4.
Funny how those ordinary things can provoke some amazing works of art.
Now is it abstract, or is it realism? After all, it is a faithful
representation of the white patches from the back of a black jerseyy.
> DO NOT paint every weapon shaft brown and every axehead silver.
This is simply a case of "to much detail is bad" and has NOTHING
to do with the amount of "realism" that the painted mini has. Here's a
simple example. If I have a page of text, and I highlight a single
sentence or paragraph, it stands out. However, if I highlight the entire
page - nothing stands out. It all has equal emphasis. This goes right
back to the discussion earlier about the brain lending emphasis or
importance to objects with more value range and greater color intensity.
If you want something to stand out, emphasize a few details, not the
entire area. The same is true with minis. If you want them to stand out
from their surroundings, give them a greater range of values and brighter
colors than your terrain. A good example of the "to much detail"
>Do not
> paint every belt and shoe tan. Use Vibrant colours.. Look at Anime for
> example. Why
> do so many characters have blue or green hair, instead of brown or black?
To be honest, the reason for the differences in hair color in
anime characters has a lot more to do with psychology than with visual
appeal. If you notice, Japanese comics and anime are often way ahead of
their American counterparts in terms of visual psychology. If you look
at just black & white comics, you'll note that the villains often have
highly detail faces while the hero's and main character's face are often
very general and stylized. This is done purposely to allow the viewer to
more easily fantasize and more their own face into that of the main
character. It makes for a stronger identification with the main
character and their emotions. If you look at color anime, for example
the Robotech/Macross series, you'll note a similar approach. Rick Hunter
and Lisa Hayes, two of the main characters have normal human hair colors
(so do all the other main human characters in fact.) While some of the
subplots have human and alien characters with blue & green hair - like
Max and Muria. If you want a great look at this check out the following
book: "Understanding Comics" by Scott McCloud. It has tons of detail and
insight on visual arts and psychology in comics. I highly recommend it
to anyone interested in any of those subjects.
> I had a mummy unit that was straight grey and white for the wrappings.. but
> for the axes and maces, I painted the shafts turquoise blue, (with highlight
> of course) and the metal blades of the axes and balls of the maces were a
> reddish brown with light bronze highlighting. Also crowns, armor bits or
> other knick knacks were also painted reddish brown, but with gold
> highlights. Came out looking very nice.
Congratulations, you have just broke your own 3 color rule and
pointed out that a unit with a lot of variation in value even if it's the
same color can look good, and that by conservative use of bright chroma
colors for highlights and emphasis (Note - not white highlights) that the
unit came out looking good.
> My friend with the goblins painted all his wooden shafts red. Why? because
> red is the complement of green, and it looked good in contrast. Why was the
> wood red? Who Cares.
Again, while this follows with color theory just fine, it doesn't
follow your "mix white with everything" suggestion.
> I have another friend, a very good painter who philosophy is to paint every
> single detail of a model, and to always paint it realistic colours. From 2
> inches away his models look perfect, if not a little boring. From 3-4 feet
> they look TERRIBLE. In fact I never even pick up any of his models unless
> he specifically points out one. I hate when he asks me if I like it cuz I
> know he just spent the last 3 hours painting it, so I lie to him. I just
> never have the desire to look at his models because they are all dark and
> all so many details done with varying colours. Eech.
Understandable. Like I said - if you emphasize everything,
nothing stands out. For an on-line example, New Wave Hobby recently
posted a "Legion of the Damned" army for 40K. It was nicely done, but
the owner went from emphasis to overkill on his converting and painting.
He used putty to model flames, and bones on a variety of figures and
vehicles. Unfortunately he put way to much detail by way of flames and
bones (particularly the bones) on every figure. Nothing stands out above
the rest, and with all the detail, there isn't any place for the eye to
stop and admire. This generally results in the eye getting tired and the
brain loosing interest rather quickly.
http://www.newwave.org/GWtourney/featureminchicago/josephorteza/index.htm
l
>
> 4) Do what you just did 10 times more
> If you cant do it 20 more times, dont even start. Figure out quick ways to
> get the right colour on a model. Can a model be drybrushed? then put a
> darker shade on it then drybrush to the lighter correct shade (dont forget
> to give strong highlights!) then ink any parts that need it, lay down any
>flat colours and highlight. Don't forget that the first level of
>highlighting will be the color the model actually appears to be for flat
>colours, while the second highlighting will just appear to be
>highlighting.
>I personally do each step on ALL the models in a
>unit before I go to the next stage.. (normally I do one model as an
>example, then copy that) If you dont feel you can reliably copy a
>scheme
>consistently throughtout the entire army, settle for a less complex
>scheme.
>Often the less complex schemes look better anyway.
>Nothing looks worse than having 5 character models blacklined and
>highlighted and then the rest of the army just primary coloured.
>Instead of
>showing how well you painted those five, it shows how little work you
>did on
>the other 100.
Basically you make some fine points, but you miss a few as well.
Depth perception is based on (again) value range and color intensity. It
doesn't take much effort to create units with a fair amount of value
range and colors ranging from neutral to bright. By doing so you make
the otherwise shallow looking detail on a small mini look a lot more 3
dimensional. You're working with an optical illusion based on the
psychology of the human brain/eye combo. You contradict yourself several
times from your "use white with everything" for highlighting stance in
the course of your article. Ideally one will start out with a strategy
based on using a wide range of values and varying color intensity to
create an appealing overall effect. You can achieve this in a variety of
ways, the methods you list are rather very limited. I agree that the
beginner should use the KISS (Keep it simple student!) method to start
with, but painting in such a limited formulaic manor will never improve
beyond a basic level of proficiency. I don't argue the fact that the 3
color rule is a good one, but don't be limited by it. The problem with
many beginners in hobby or fine arts painting is that they NEVER learn
the basic rules in the first place. You have to master the rules before
you can go beyond them in original ways.
If someone is going to use the 3 color rule (and it is a good
strategy to use) just remember the psychology of color too. For example,
if I want my command unit to be in keeping with the rest of my army, but
still the visual centerpiece, I can do it without excessive use of white
for highlighting, or excessive amounts of detail. If my main units are
painted medium ultramarine blue, medium cadmium yellow, and white, then I
can paint my command unit bright ultramarine blue, bright cadmium yellow,
and white. It will still fit with the rest of my army, require no more
or less values or detailing than other units, but by virtue of it's
higher chroma value still have visual emphasis.
In short, your process determines your outcome. If you use a good
strategy, decent paints and tools, and you have even moderate painting
skills, your army will come out looking very nice. Its determining a
good painting strategy that's really the difficult part (that and knowing
how color and the eye work together.)
>
>5) Base and Flock all models. Then Highlight the bases!!!
>Dont complain! Just do it!
>My friends Goblin army was completely blacklined, boldly highlighted
>with
>vibrant colours, and completely based and flocked with highlighting
>applied
>to the base AND flock. Did I mention this was the best army I had ever
>seen?
Yea, bases are an important overall part of the figure, and can
make or break an otherwise great paint job. It does sound like you're
assuming that we all use the glue some sand onto the base and paint it
method of basing. Your highlighting suggests are appropriate in that
case, but I for one use regular flocking and static grass, and I don't
paint it. It blends in fine with my table, which is what it's meant to
do.
Overall, it's a nice post, but you generalize to much in parts (including
some inaccurate generalizations) and leave out a lot of important
details. Hope this helps with the painting. I do like your points that
minis with a good range of values, a good (and simple is good) color
strategy (I can't emphasis enough here planning and forethought before
you start painting) and careful use of detail for emphasis make an
ordinary army into an EXTRAORDINARY ARMY! No plan of action every
survives contact with the enemy completely intact, but beyond a shadow of
a doubt, those that plan well succeed far far more often than those that
plan little or not at all.
Later,
Myrmidon - the occasionally long winded.
David Gausebeck
>arts) show an appalling lack of knowledge about light. This is after all
>what you are working with! Doh! Here are some helpful pointers. First
>of all, light intensity has a lot to do with color. Most people think of
>sun light as being yellow. It is NOT. Sunlight is in the blue-white
>spectrum because it comes from a high intensity source - the
>fission/fusion reaction at the heart of the sun. Normal low wattage
>incandescent lighting is in the yellow range. That's why some many
>people look yellowish or greenish in photos taken indoors without a flash
>- especially at night or during the winter. Photographic lamps are
>expensive for that reason, they're high intensity lights - like 500 watts
>instead of the normal 75 watt bulbs. They also require ceramic holders
>with cooling fans to keep them from melting. Now you know why I hated
>school pictures, you damn near got a sunburn and dehydration while
>waiting for the fool behind the camera to quite futzing around and shoot
>the photo. Ideally one would want to paint where there is plenty of
>natural light, or where there is high intensity light, (photography lamps
>are $80 for the ceramic stand, $5-10 per bulb, and hot as hell) so I
>recommend halogen lamps as a decent stand in for natural light. After
>that would be florescent lighting, and last would be standard
>incandescent lighting.
better yet, use a digital camera with white balance settings. Mine
can be set for sunlight/flash, overcast, flourescent(red),
fluorescent(blue), and incandescent. It's much easier than setting up
your own photography studio and gives pretty good results. It also
lets you take pictures conveniently in places like game shops, where
you can't control the lighting.
-Dave
Big Al
slaughterkin <slaugh...@email.msn.com> wrote in article
<38aa3...@goliath2.newsfeeds.com>...
> Or more aptly named, skip any of these five steps and your army
will come
> out looking like CRAP
All right, that'll do me!
--
Big Al
The Doctor is in.
Email: chan...@cenobite.com
Reality is a crutch for people who can't
handle drugs.
"For those dates that really should have
ended an hour ago - NAGASH brand condoms.
NAGASH - for when bad ideas turn ugly."
- Tom Beliech 13/02
"And Bristol!"
Big Al
Myrmidon Who? <myrmidon@-diespammersdie-bright.net> wrote in article
<MPG.1314da831...@news.bright.net>...
> [This followup was posted to rec.games.miniatures.warhammer and a
copy
> was sent to the cited author.]
Nnnnngghhh, you BASTARD!! I hate it when people do that...
Tom Leete
steve wrote:
> Richard Lobinske <rlob...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:20000216191600...@ng-co1.aol.com...
> > >Yeah, eventually, I'll get around to this bit. As soon as I see a
> > >system of basing that I like. I can tell you that the Goblin Green
> > >base with generic flock looks terrible. Which is why there's zero
> > >chance of me ruining my models that way.
> >
> > Goblin green is a rather bright green that doesn't look like natural turf.
> I
> > prefer to use Olive Drab (or choose another more neutral green) as the
> base
> > color. Check out Woodland Scenics (hobby or model railroad shops)
> materials,
> > they have a wide range of flock sizes and colors that may be of help. I
> also
> > like to seal the tab into the base with epoxy putty and sculpt uneven
> ground on
> > the top of the base and blend the feet to the "ground" level.
> >
> try applebarrel leaf green
I use a dark brown... that way the bare spots look like muddy ground, the flock
is
(in general) darker, and the base really becomes secondary to the figure.
Tom
steve
> >system of basing that I like. I can tell you that the Goblin Green
> >base with generic flock looks terrible. Which is why there's zero
> >chance of me ruining my models that way.
>
I
> prefer to use Olive Drab (or choose another more neutral green) as the
base
> color. Check out Woodland Scenics (hobby or model railroad shops)
materials,
> they have a wide range of flock sizes and colors that may be of help. I
also
> like to seal the tab into the base with epoxy putty and sculpt uneven
ground on
> the top of the base and blend the feet to the "ground" level.
>
try applebarrel leaf green
RT Maitreya
Again, John, damn fine statements, all.
> > 5) Base and Flock all models. Then Highlight the bases!!!
> > Dont complain! Just do it!
>
> Yeah, eventually, I'll get around to this bit. As soon as I see a
> system of basing that I like. I can tell you that the Goblin Green
> base with generic flock looks terrible. Which is why there's zero
> chance of me ruining my models that way.
Bingo on this one for me. I spend way too much
time trying to paint the goddamn things, I'm
certainly not going to ruin the bases by jumping
headlong into a scheme that doesn't work. For
now they are painted and unfilled. When a unit
or army is done, ALL the bases will be done at
the same time for consistency.
RTM
--
-Rogue Trader Maitreya-
Registrant of the Legio Mutanis
Master Statistician and Academic, RGMWML
http://mems.cwru.edu/~dan/personal/wh40k.html
Newsgroup) 40k3+++, MoW++, ClanWar++, PaintFigs++, DupeFigs+, RTC+
Codex:SM) PCwDred++, L&PinTacs++, MLinDev++, HArm++, Smoke++, HQretinu+
Codex:DE) Raiders+++, Wyches++, WarpBsts++, 10DEw2DL++, Pun&Hlm&Drugs+
Std. Missions) MinUnit+++, Transport+++, Troops++, FastAtt+, Elites-, Heros--
**Recidete, plebes! Gero rem Imperialem!**
Richard Lobinske
>will come
>> out looking like CRAP
Maybe we could add something to the Mini-FAQ:
Figure painting is an art with many different styles, methods, opinions and
preferences, please do not grace us with your "One True Way to Paint Minis".
Odds are, you will see a lot of disagreement on this, and not all of it will be
pleasant.
Richard Lobinske
>system of basing that I like. I can tell you that the Goblin Green
>base with generic flock looks terrible. Which is why there's zero
>chance of me ruining my models that way.
Goblin green is a rather bright green that doesn't look like natural turf. I
prefer to use Olive Drab (or choose another more neutral green) as the base
color. Check out Woodland Scenics (hobby or model railroad shops) materials,
they have a wide range of flock sizes and colors that may be of help. I also
like to seal the tab into the base with epoxy putty and sculpt uneven ground on
the top of the base and blend the feet to the "ground" level.
Death before dishonor,
Richard Lobinske
>Please realize I am not trying to write a textbook directed
>to science majors or professional artists.
>Im just trying to help out people who have never had these statements
>strongly presented to them.
>
>Also understand Im competing with a lot of other posts for attention and so
>try to present things quickly and to the point.
>If you would, Id be interested in what your "[x] fast and easy steps to a
>better painted army" would be.
Your overbearing tone and "I am going to tell you the true way" attitude
detracted quite a bit from your advice, and a lot of people outright disagreed
with parts (especially about metallics). If your post did not have so much "my
way is the only way" implication, it probably would have gone over better.
Personally, I don't like getting people started with bad habits just because it
has quick results. One bad habit is this idea of a bunch of stylistic rules,
they are helpful at best for only a short time and hinder you in the long run.
Play, experiment, fuck up....LEARN. Pick up material for historical games,
military models, model trains, garage kits or cars. All of these are a source
of lots of great ideas that can be transfered to a persons model/painting
databank. I like to try one new technique or idea with each group of figures I
paint, just to see how it works.
Actually, I have some rules, but they are strictly technical:
1. Clean your brushes well and often.
2. Use clean water to rinse and thin.
3. Use a clean rag for cleanup.
4. Clean your brushes again, this time use soap and water.
My best advice to getting an army painted fast is to learn to use short time
periods to work. Got five minutes while your coffee brews, work on figures,
ten minutes while waiting to use the bathroom, paint some more.
Myrmidon Who?
says...
>
>
> Myrmidon Who? <myrmidon@-diespammersdie-bright.net> wrote in article
> <MPG.1314da831...@news.bright.net>...
>
> copy
> > was sent to the cited author.]
>
>
>
>
(Sorry, couldn't resist. It's not everyday someone can tweak Alister's
nippels and live to tell about out it.)
Still smirking,
Myrmidon
RT Maitreya
> > Absolutely and totally wrong! Bright models are Toylike.
> and uhh.. shhhhhh.. ((((they are toys))))
Heh heh heh . . .
That's the comeback of the day.
Pokey the Whimsical Syringe
>
> >Yeah, eventually, I'll get around to this bit. As soon as I see a
> >system of basing that I like. I can tell you that the Goblin Green
> >base with generic flock looks terrible. Which is why there's zero
> >chance of me ruining my models that way.
>
> prefer to use Olive Drab (or choose another more neutral green) as the base
> color. Check out Woodland Scenics (hobby or model railroad shops) materials,
> they have a wide range of flock sizes and colors that may be of help. I also
> like to seal the tab into the base with epoxy putty and sculpt uneven ground on
> the top of the base and blend the feet to the "ground" level.
>
What I do to my bases is, first off, leave the *sides* of the bases untouched
by paint. Just black plastic. This sorta defines the base as being a base, and
in most cases makes people neglect that there's a base there. Then, on top of
the base, I put flock painted Dark Angels green, highlighted with a light brown
for a parched look with some large-grain flock to add irregular rocks, and then
some static grass in patches over that. I also drybrush the grass to make it
look weathered. Looks sick!
--
---------------------------------------------------------------
The only thing I hate more than getting up in the morning
to go to school, is getting up in the morning to go to school
and being kicked in the stomach 18 times by a U.S. Marine.
-Pokey the Whimsical Syringe
---------------------------------------------------------------
Tom Leete
> > > 2) Bright models are Beautiful. Dark models are Ugly.
> >
> > Absolutely and totally wrong! Bright models are Toylike. Dark models
> > are Serious.
> people's attention usually.
Depends on whether people actually bother to look, or if they're just wanding
about in a daze until that shock of green hair focuses their attention for a
few
seconds...
>
> and uhh.. shhhhhh.. ((((they are toys))))
Doesn't mean I want my toys to look like a bunch of clowns...
Tom
Blank Dave
> > not paint every belt and shoe tan. Use Vibrant colours.. Look at
> > Anime for example. Why do so many characters have blue or green
> > hair, instead of brown or black?
>
> Because the artist isn't good enough at differentiating characters by
> faces and bodies. And a lot of anime is targeted to little kids who
> have a lot of time keeping track of "the character with the green
> hair".
>
> For reference, watch Patlabor. All of the hair is brown or black.
I'm planning on commenting on that else where.
> > 4) Do what you just did 10 times more If you cant do it 20 more
> > times, dont even start. Figure out quick ways to get the right
> > colour on a model. Can a model be drybrushed? then put a darker
> > shade on it then drybrush to the lighter correct shade (dont forget
> > to give strong highlights!) then ink any parts that need it, lay
> > down any flat colours and highlight.
>
> I just paint the same model a few times until I get what I want. Then
> I strip it down and repaint it with the rest of the army,
Hey, I'm not the only one to work that way!
--
Blank Dave
Keep the gene pool clean: Kill an idiot!
Usenet is like a herd of performing elephants with diarrhoea ...
Massive, difficult to re-direct, awe-inspiring, entertaining, and a source
of mind-boggling amounts of excrement, when you least expect it.
Gene Spafford
Blank Dave
> arts) show an appalling lack of knowledge about light. This is after all
> what you are working with! Doh! Here are some helpful pointers. First
> of all, light intensity has a lot to do with color. Most people think of
> sun light as being yellow. It is NOT. Sunlight is in the blue-white
> spectrum because it comes from a high intensity source - the
> fission/fusion reaction at the heart of the sun. Normal low wattage
> incandescent lighting is in the yellow range. That's why some many
> people look yellowish or greenish in photos taken indoors without a flash
> - especially at night or during the winter. Photographic lamps are
> expensive for that reason, they're high intensity lights - like 500 watts
> instead of the normal 75 watt bulbs. They also require ceramic holders
> with cooling fans to keep them from melting. Now you know why I hated
> school pictures, you damn near got a sunburn and dehydration while
> waiting for the fool behind the camera to quite futzing around and shoot
> the photo. Ideally one would want to paint where there is plenty of
> natural light, or where there is high intensity light, (photography lamps
> are $80 for the ceramic stand, $5-10 per bulb, and hot as hell) so I
> recommend halogen lamps as a decent stand in for natural light. After
> that would be florescent lighting, and last would be standard
> incandescent lighting.
I've found grow lights give off a rather pleasent white light, despite them
being blue in colour.
> >Do not
> > paint every belt and shoe tan. Use Vibrant colours.. Look at Anime for
> > example. Why
> > do so many characters have blue or green hair, instead of brown or
black?
Many anime/manga related materials aren't like the above. Final Fantasy 7
and 8, the lightest/wildest hair colour is yellow/blonde, no greens, blues,
or bright oranges. As Hwang pointed out Patlabour had natural hair colours,
as did the likes of Akira, and several of the Gundam series (yes, some
characters did have funny hair colours, but they were more of the
exception).
Again as Hwang pointed out, and I'm about to be much more blunt, many of the
artists are crap becauae they have a very generic character design, and if
they didn't use easy charactistics, like hair colour or method of dress,
they would look all alike. Take artists like Shirow and Adam Warren, both
artists I like very much, but all their characters look alike, because they
don't use they don't vary their character design (ever notice their main
characters always look alike, despite being different characters?). Rumiko
Takehashi (sp?) is another prime example, if it weren't for the various hair
styles all of her characters from Ranma would look like. This is applicable
to the likes of Ben Dunn, and Go Nagai ( to a lesser degree because he uses
a wider "palette" of designs).
I think Hwang's comments on making it easier to keep track of characters is
also applicable. Thinking back to series more intended for younger viewers
this is quite viable. In fact Pokemon is a decent example, in that
characters appear repeatedly in the same roll in various locations for the
ease of identifying who does what. Mind you, much to my horror, Digimon
breaks that mold. While many shows for older viewers seem to use that
concept less, like Evangelion (<<barf>>). Off the top of my head, the only
character with a unusual hair colour was Rei, and it would have looked
crappy if her hair was white also, like it should have been.
> To be honest, the reason for the differences in hair color in
> anime characters has a lot more to do with psychology than with visual
> appeal.
See my thoughts on that above.
>If you notice, Japanese comics and anime are often way ahead of
> their American counterparts in terms of visual psychology. If you look
> at just black & white comics, you'll note that the villains often have
> highly detail faces while the hero's and main character's face are often
> very general and stylized. This is done purposely to allow the viewer to
> more easily fantasize and more their own face into that of the main
> character. It makes for a stronger identification with the main
> character and their emotions.
Actually Jeff Woods (I believe) hit it on the head, for me at least, in an
editorial in Rabblerousers (I think it was). In it, Jeff pointed out how
most anime/manga character's head proportions are similar to those of an
infant's. Humans are rather preprogrammed to like babies, and manga artists
work off of that. At first I couldn't believe it, until I dug out Hogarth's
book on drawing heads, and he (jeff) was right. Like a baby, manga
characters, namely heros and cute girls, have large eyes, a smalll nose and
mouth, and often a rather pronounced forehead. To further run with that,
note how most villain's facial details are actually closer to those of an
adult's. Case in point, the villain's eyes are almost always proportionally
smaller than those of the hero (cases can alway be made to contradict that,
like Devilman). This can really be seen in the "cute/innocent girl" types,
like Nene from BubbleGum Crisis, or the Sailor Scouts, when compared to
evil/older characters such as Sylvia.
>If you want a great look at this check out the following
> book: "Understanding Comics" by Scott McCloud. It has tons of detail and
> insight on visual arts and psychology in comics. I highly recommend it
> to anyone interested in any of those subjects.
Yes, it's a great read. Didn't he, or wasn't he supposed to, do a second
book?
Big Al
Myrmidon Who? <myrmidon@-diespammersdie-bright.net> wrote in article
<MPG.1315c272b...@news.bright.net>...
> In article <01bf78ca$fe0aa2a0$209701d5@default>,
fa...@hyperbooks.com
> says...
> >
> >
> > Myrmidon Who? <myrmidon@-diespammersdie-bright.net> wrote in
article
> > <MPG.1314da831...@news.bright.net>...
> >
> > > [This followup was posted to rec.games.miniatures.warhammer and
a
> > copy
> > > was sent to the cited author.]
> >
> > Nnnnngghhh, you BASTARD!! I hate it when people do that...
> >
> >
> >
> You fancy me, don't you? :)
Luckily, I have an email autoresponder to punish mischievous kiddies
like you, should you try to send duplicate emails of your newsgroup
posts. Any mail sent to fa...@hyperbooks.com not only never reaches
me, it elicits an automatic and rather rude response. And for
someone who posts under myrmidon@-diespammersdie-bright.net, I'd have
though you'd be amongst the first people to realise that usenet
duplicates in your email is FUCKING ANNOYING.
--
Big Al, doesn't care anymore because he has an autoresponder, nyaaah
nyaaah
Blank Dave
> >
> > Absolutely and totally wrong! Bright models are Toylike. Dark models
> > are Serious.
draw
> people's attention usually.
But I personally like my figures to look like they should get up and start
stomping around. Something that many of the darker figures look more like
doing that the brightly coloured ones do.
"He's looking at me!!"
John Hwang
> > > > 2) Bright models are Beautiful. Dark models are Ugly.
> > >
> > > Absolutely and totally wrong! Bright models are Toylike. Dark
> > > models are Serious.
> >
Indeed. Too bad you didn't make this note right off the bat.
> > but dark models (and dark armies) do not draw people's attention
> > usually.
>
> Depends on whether people actually bother to look, or if they're just
> wanding about in a daze until that shock of green hair focuses their
> attention for a few seconds...
Thank you. I'd rather have a little bit of good attention than a lot
of fingers pointing, hushed snickering and giggling, and people
whispering "isn't that the tackiest [or gaudiest or most embarrasing]
thing you've *ever* seen?". Now I have the balls to call them like I
see them, and if I think it looks like a joke, I'm going to say
something -- what, exactly, depends on how I'm feeling at the moment.
Some of us are going for a bit of subtlety in the army, and if that
subtltety is lost on the vast majority of viewers, we don't care.
We're not painting for their appreciation. We're painting for our own
satisfaction.
> > and uhh.. shhhhhh.. ((((they are toys))))
>
> Doesn't mean I want my toys to look like a bunch of clowns...
Exactly.
And how come his original post (to which you're replying) doesn't
appear on my news server? Strange.
John Hwang
A couple minor notes.
> > > Do not paint every belt and shoe tan. Use Vibrant colours..
> > > Look at Anime for example. Why do so many characters have blue
> > > or green hair, instead of brown or black?
>
> Many anime/manga related materials aren't like the above. Final
> Fantasy 7 and 8, the lightest/wildest hair colour is yellow/blonde,
> no greens, blues, or bright oranges. As Hwang pointed out Patlabour
> had natural hair colours, as did the likes of Akira, and several of
> the Gundam series (yes, some characters did have funny hair colours,
> but they were more of the exception).
"Serious", "adult" fare. Since we're including manga, I'd also
reference Santuary and Crying Freeman, and my favorite: Five Star
Stories.
> Again as Hwang pointed out, and I'm about to be much more blunt, many
> of the artists are crap becauae they have a very generic character
> design, and if they didn't use easy charactistics, like hair colour
> or method of dress, they would look all alike. Take artists like
> Shirow and Adam Warren, both artists I like very much, but all their
> characters look alike, because they don't use they don't vary their
> character design (ever notice their main characters always look
> alike, despite being different characters?).
I assume you're meaning *within* a manga. That is: there are 3-4
characters with the same build and facial features in a particular
story.
> Rumiko Takehashi (sp?)
Takahashi.
> is another prime example, if it weren't for the various hair
> styles all of her characters from Ranma would look like. This is
> applicable to the likes of Ben Dunn, and Go Nagai ( to a lesser
> degree because he uses a wider "palette" of designs).
To be honest, I have yet to see a US "manga" worthy of the name. The
artists are trying to be "cute" with the characters, but it's clear
that they're just copying someone else's style. But that doesn't
matter because their basic technique is lacking. And without the
fundamental technique, it's impossible to project style.
Can I do better? Hell yes. I've been drawing for decades now, and I
*know* what I'm doing.
> I think Hwang's comments on making it easier to keep track of
> characters is also applicable. Thinking back to series more intended
> for younger viewers this is quite viable. In fact Pokemon is a
> decent example, in that characters appear repeatedly in the same roll
> in various locations for the ease of identifying who does what. Mind
> you, much to my horror, Digimon breaks that mold. While many shows
> for older viewers seem to use that concept less, like Evangelion
> (<<barf>>). Off the top of my head, the only character with a
> unusual hair colour was Rei, and it would have looked
> crappy if her hair was white also, like it should have been.
OTOH, as we eventually find out, Rei isn't a normal human, so the
unusual hair makes sense.
> > If you notice, Japanese comics and anime are often way ahead of
> > their American counterparts in terms of visual psychology. If you
> > look at just black & white comics, you'll note that the villains
> > often have highly detail faces while the hero's and main
> > character's face are often very general and stylized.
OK. *Now* is the time to bring up Sanctuary and Crying Freeman as a
counter-example.
> > This is done purposely to allow the viewer to more easily
> > fantasize and more their own face into that of the main
> > character. It makes for a stronger identification with the main
> > character and their emotions.
I consider it a "crutch". For a good artist, this is unnecessary.
> Actually Jeff Woods (I believe) hit it on the head, for me at least,
> in an editorial in Rabblerousers (I think it was). In it, Jeff
> pointed out how most anime/manga character's head proportions are
> similar to those of an infant's. Humans are rather preprogrammed to
> like babies, and manga artists work off of that. At first I couldn't
> believe it, until I dug out Hogarth's book on drawing heads, and he
> (jeff) was right. Like a baby, manga characters, namely heros and
> cute girls, have large eyes, a small nose and mouth, and often a
> rather pronounced forehead. To further run with that, note how most
> villain's facial details are actually closer to those of an
> adult's. Case in point, the villain's eyes are almost always
> proportionally smaller than those of the hero (cases can alway be
> made to contradict that, like Devilman). This can really be seen in
> the "cute/innocent girl" types, like Nene from BubbleGum Crisis, or
> the Sailor Scouts, when compared to evil/older characters such as
> Sylvia.
Yes and no. There are few reasons for the facial stylings as mentioned
above. The first is "cute", as discussed above. The second is of a
practical bent. A lot of these comics are serialized in relatively
small format paper. A totally realistic style means that it becomes
very hard to draw facial expressions accurately due to the small space
available. The last has to do with traditional performance masks and
dolls, both of which use these types of stylings to some extent.
een2...@my-deja.com
rlob...@aol.com (Richard Lobinske) wrote:
> >Yeah, eventually, I'll get around to this bit. As soon as I see a
> >system of basing that I like. I can tell you that the Goblin Green
> >base with generic flock looks terrible. Which is why there's zero
> >chance of me ruining my models that way.
>
turf. I
> prefer to use Olive Drab (or choose another more neutral green) as
the base
> color. Check out Woodland Scenics (hobby or model railroad shops)
materials,
> they have a wide range of flock sizes and colors that may be of
help. I also
> like to seal the tab into the base with epoxy putty and sculpt uneven
ground on
> the top of the base and blend the feet to the "ground" level.
Just thought I'd share my basing technique:
1) (optional) Put glue on base in 'splodges' and glue on small pieces
of gravel. I normally use (unused!) cat litter. Dunno if that's a
universal descriptor, but it's the stuff cats do their business in. :)
2) Glue and sand rest of base. And allow to dry.
3) Paint with thinned down black.
4) Drybrush dark brown, further drybrush on larger 'rocks' with
bleached bone. Optionally drybrush other areas goblin green/ bilious.
5) I then generally use static flock again applied with PVA glue in
'clumps'. I like to mask the sharp edges of the bases with 'grass'
hanging over a little, if you see what I mean.
6) Paint edge of base green.
General advice: Light coloured bases usually work best to make a figure
stand out. (This applies to gaming surfaces as well IMO).
With regard to the more general advice about painting armies, I would
paint a 'unit' to look good together, but I like to have variation in
my units. I must admit I tend toward the brighter side when painting
miniatures, but that's just my style (I used to do some painting for GW
a long long time ago!).
All IMO. First time I've posted in ages and ages (and ages).
Regards,
John.
PS: Anyone else from Derby/Nottingham, UK about?
PPS: Excuse potentially dodgy formatting as I'm posting from deja.com
for the first time, and I've no idea how it'll turn out! :)
Richard Lobinske
>you paint faster and batter, but some people are just better at taking it
>slow. I paint rather quickly i find, compared to the people directly around
>me at least, but these people have no worse paint jobs than mine have. It
>works for different people. one of my friends will paint for about 30
>minutes a night and not get much done, but does it good. I sat down with my
>black coach, put on some music and started painting. 5 hours (this is why i
>say how fast is fast, this is fast and effective for my area but may not be
>around others) later the model is finished and ready for use.
>
Of course, time will vary with your base speed of painting. My suggestion is
aimed more at the "I can't find the time" type of arguement, but I find it does
help to get things done. Often I can't find a continuous half hour or hour to
paint, but I can often get in painting time every day by using these small
time periods. Planning also helps, knowing what colors you will be using, and
in what order. For my personal speed, I just finished a unit of 16 DOW
Ricco's Republican Guard in a week (didn't try to keep track of number of
hours).
La Grief
This i ca relate to, although i do get extrodinary amounts of time, even
with upcoming GCSE'S, it is always quicker to know how to paint the model,
colours in what order. I spent about an hour finding the right combination
to paint my ghouls in. now it shouldn't take me more than 3 to 4 hours to
paint the final 8.
--
-Lee
More mature than most regulars most of the time...at 15 years old...
http://www.blackrat999.freeserve.co.uk/lee/warhammer/warhammer.htm
ICQ#:30319689