Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Please , before we see anymore side by side comparisons , prime them both.

Why? because metal reflects light which defuses the edges ( well thats why its shinny... )

Resin doesnt reflect light , just like plastic. Thats why even plastic looks nicely shaded and detailed under light, not to mention resin.

So in future, please prime both before saying metal is inferior.

Thank you :3

maowwwww

Small technicalities here:

If resin (and plastic) did NOT reflect light, you wouldn't be able to SEE them at all, as the vast majority of what we see is because of an objects tendency to reflect at least some portion of the light that hits them.

It's quite possible to take pictures of shiny metal objects and resin objects and not have ANY of the details come out crappily. These photographic techniques do seem to be beyond the majority of gamers, though, regardless of how good the camera.

Besides, how can you tell the difference if both are primed?

All you'd be able to tell is how well they take the primer.

chromedog wrote:Besides, how can you tell the difference if both are primed?

That's the point, to show the differences when they both have the same surface colour. The poster can say "The one on the left is metal, the one on the right is Finecost", and then look at the differences.

Wasn't that clear?

chromedog wrote:Small technicalities here:

If resin (and plastic) did NOT reflect light, you wouldn't be able to SEE them at all, as the vast majority of what we see is because of an objects tendency to reflect at least some portion of the light that hits them.

It's quite possible to take pictures of shiny metal objects and resin objects and not have ANY of the details come out crappily. These photographic techniques do seem to be beyond the majority of gamers, though, regardless of how good the camera.

Besides, how can you tell the difference if both are primed?

All you'd be able to tell is how well they take the primer.

Waaaaaaa hmm................

The law of reflection says that for specular reflection the angle at which the wave is incident on the surface equals the angle at which it is reflected. Mirrors exhibit specular reflection.
Reflection of light is either specular (mirror-like) or diffuse (retaining the energy, but losing the image) depending on the nature of the interface. Furthermore, if the interface is between a dielectric and a conductor, the phase of the reflected wave is retained, otherwise if the interface is between two dielectrics, the phase may be retained or inverted, depending on the indices of refraction

A mirror provides the most common model for specular light reflection, and typically consists of a glass sheet with a metallic coating where the reflection actually occurs. Reflection is enhanced in metals by suppression of wave propagation beyond their skin depths. Reflection also occurs at the surface of transparent media, such as water or glass.

When light strikes the surface of a (non-metallic) material it bounces off in all directions due to multiple reflections by the microscopic irregularities inside the material (e.g. the grain boundaries of a polycrystalline material, or the cell or fiber boundaries of an organic material) and by its surface, if it is rough. Thus, an 'image' is not formed. This is called diffuse reflection. The exact form of the reflection depends on the structure of the material. One common model for diffuse reflection is Lambertian reflectance, in which the light is reflected with equal luminance (in photometry) or radiance (in radiometry) in all directions, as defined by Lambert's cosine law.

The light sent to our eyes by most of the objects we see is due to diffuse reflection from their surface, so that this is our primary mechanism of physical observation.[1]

meow

H.B.M.C apparently according to Chromedog it was not clear, surely thats the only reason he would post such a comment lol

I am very lucky I have 3 large apocalypse scale armies that do not reflect light and are therefore invisible to the naked eye. Luckily my friends take my word for what I have out on the board and when they measure I am correct when I say they are not in range. I have won A LOT of games with these armies

Wow. I think chromedog just got physics'ed.

Good man Lunahound, DOWN WITH THE UNCONSTRUCTIVE HATERS!!!!!

Hooray for wikipedia.

LunaHound has won the internet again!

lukewild1982 wrote:Good man Lunahound, DOWN WITH THE UNCONSTRUCTIVE HATERS!!!!!

Im not hating , or loving. I just want to be actually fair by giving both the materials a fair chance.

naked Metal will always look less detailed because how it reflects the light. By giving them both a coat , we can fairly see how the "details"
look when they both reflect the same amount of light ( considering if both the coating have same thickness )

chromedog wrote:Small technicalities here:

If resin (and plastic) did NOT reflect light, you wouldn't be able to SEE them at all, as the vast majority of what we see is because of an objects tendency to reflect at least some portion of the light that hits them.

It's quite possible to take pictures of shiny metal objects and resin objects and not have ANY of the details come out crappily. These photographic techniques do seem to be beyond the majority of gamers, though, regardless of how good the camera.

Besides, how can you tell the difference if both are primed?

All you'd be able to tell is how well they take the primer.

That was obtuse, even for you chromedog...

LunaHound wrote:

lukewild1982 wrote:Good man Lunahound, DOWN WITH THE UNCONSTRUCTIVE HATERS!!!!!

Im not hating , or loving. I just want to be actually fair by giving both the materials a fair chance.

naked Metal will always look less detailed because how it reflects the light. By giving them both a coat , we can fairly see how the "details"
look when they both reflect the same amount of light ( considering if both the coating have same thickness )

I did not mean your a Hater, i meant chromedog. People who put out a sensible thought and are put down in some pathetic attempt at superiority. I get what you were trying to say

No, im 100% sure its just a misunderstanding.

Chromedog is a mensch.

Hes a nice guy and a good dakkite and on my friends list 0.o