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.

Im seeing it pop up more and more on miniatures and although I do REALLY like it and the first time I ever seen the effect it blew my mind



I just cant help looking at terminators etc with so much glow that it looks out of place, by this I mean in real life terms if eye lenses glowed enough to light up the head, shoulders, chest, and base not ever a GM humans eyes could see through the glare lol...... or is it just me being picky? POLL time!

I feel it can be way over done and over airbrushed.

same here, it does add some amazing depth etc but i think its a case of "less is more", just a hint that there's light radiating from things instead of it dominating a model. Curious to see other peoples opinion on it so please keep voting, looking like the Yes category is winning so far,

I think it depends. On dioramas like the one you posted, OSL is done rather well and adds a lot to the model/scene. On single models like Terminators (as you pointed out), people tend to exaggerate the OSL and it does become overwhelming to the point of detracting from the rest of the model.

I wouldn't necessarily say OSL effects are being over done as a whole, just on some models.

Overall I think it’s overdone. A lot of pieces look like someone just leaned a little to hard on the airbrush, and paint got everywhere.

But for every dozen plasma cannons that looks like they just failed a Gets Hot! roll, there is some sublime flickering torchlight that is just jaw-droppingly awesome.

Agreeing with the less-is-more here. It's always something minor, like the flickering torch that Nevelon mentioned, or a subtle glow from a candle, that gives the "this is real" feeling.

theres nothing wrong with using an airbrush to do it... even on a space marines lens's, not that i have tried it on there but I think the key would be super thin/weak paint and very slowly building it up with a fine needle instead of a .5 needle and lime green straight from the bottle in a 1 shot wonder splat that covers the whole bloody helmet.
I think I need to do a little playing tomorrow if I get a chance...........

I think it's possible to overdo it on a model by model basis. Some stuff simply does not need OSL. For example, SM eyes, in my opinion, really wouldn't give off the glow that you often see unless someone was holding a mirror in front of their face or if the material of the eye socket was paper thin and the inner light shone through.

Then again, if used on plasmaguns/torches/glowy magic orbs ect, it can really add to the composition of a model and change the whole tone of the piece. Especially for dioramas and the like (and that example in the OP is still a great piece even now, despite being a few years old) it can set the mood better than just about any other technique.

I think it's possible to overdo it on a model by model basis. Some stuff simply does not need OSL. For example, SM eyes, in my opinion, really wouldn't give off the glow that you often see unless someone was holding a mirror in front of their face oe if the material of the eye socket was paper thin and the inner light shone through.

Then again, if used on plasmaguns/torches/glowy magic orbs ect, it can really add to the composition of a model and change the whole tone of the piece.

very well put

I think OSL works best when it is used sparingly. Lighting up every lens, plasmagun, power weapon, etc., is used just a bit too much. Besides, the usual purpose of OSL is to represent the light given off by a certain part of the model. But I think some people paint it like that is the only source of light shining on the model. Holding a torch in my hand would light me up pretty well in the dark, but would have very little visible effect if I'm standing outside in the noonday sun.

I get the impression that I am more negative towards OSL than most people. In my opinion models like http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-0Z8fC_MIc8c/UTZIaEgCxXI/AAAAAAAAExc/GR7PujKmVLk/s640/NecronRust07.JPG is too much and just looks like someone is overly fond of their airbrush imo.
But models like the one Jeff200sx posted is alot better. Also something like this http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ctVnFeAId-E/TsxCPBILkrI/AAAAAAAA5XU/SOrZ7-kXl1c/s1600/m2060023a_Blog221111_3_XL.jpg is something I'm ok with.

OSL? Too much, in either sense. Whether I saw half as many people using OSL or all its users applying it with half the intensity, I'd consider the painting world improved.

ickz wrote:I get the impression that I am more negative towards OSL than most people. In my opinion models like http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-0Z8fC_MIc8c/UTZIaEgCxXI/AAAAAAAAExc/GR7PujKmVLk/s640/NecronRust07.JPG is too much and just looks like someone is overly fond of their airbrush imo.
But models like the one Jeff200sx posted is alot better. Also something like this http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ctVnFeAId-E/TsxCPBILkrI/AAAAAAAA5XU/SOrZ7-kXl1c/s1600/m2060023a_Blog221111_3_XL.jpg is something I'm ok with.

I still don't like the second necron one. He's highlighting with the same colors as the rest of the OSL light, even though they aren't facing the source of the light. It reminds me too much of that one Ripside sometime back when it first came out where every edge was starkly edge-highlighted in blue and white...

oadie wrote:OSL? Too much, in either sense. Whether I saw half as many people using OSL or all its users applying it with half the intensity, I'd consider the painting world improved.

Such hate.

I actually voted that OSL is not done enough for the same reason everyone here thinks it's over-done. The airbrush OSL is the culprit. When someone sprays a light color centered on the source, it usually makes no sense. Light coming from a plasma gun is not going to cast light on the top and sides of the gun, for the same reason headlights don't illuminate the grill of the car. Airbrushes don't accomplish this look with just a quick spray. I think most people who attempt OSL don't give it the attention it deserves and that's what I think it's not done enough.

Think about it this way: you could paint a sword with a flat grey and technically that's NMM. It would be terrible, but it would be NMM, just like a quick airbrush spray is a poorly executed OSL technique. The difference is that people are much more used to silver shiny swords than glowing lenses and plasma guns, so a poorly executed sword is more noticeable than a poorly executed OSL. I think artists complain about this problem when it comes to drawing hands.

If the people who slack when doing OSL sat down and said "O.K. I'm going to think about how this would look, and I'm going to figure out where the glow would hit" then we'd see some beautiful results.

TL;DR OSL isn't over-done, just incorrectly done. People should be encouraged to treat OSL as a difficult technique that requires time and has no easy-way-out.

Most OSL is overdone to me. If it is realistic looking...sweet. If not, it looks awkward. And WTF is with OSL on eye lenses? They would not glow...

 troa wrote:
And WTF is with OSL on eye lenses? They would not glow...

Official 40k art says otherwise:

I dislike OSL in almost all the instances I see it; primarily because most of those instances are on individual, 'normal' sized miniatures.

Personally I think it fits mostly on big models and, like you've got there, set-pieces. I dislike it when you've got plasma guns, terminate eyes, and staves on normal 28 mm guys which are casting a ton of light around.

EDIT: I also feel like a big problem is that people do it on the wrong surfaces. As mentioned, a head-light does not illuminate the front of your vehicle. In some cases people shouldn't do OSL simply because there's no place to feasibly put it.. But they do it anyway.

Tydil wrote:. Light coming from a plasma gun is not going to cast light on the top and sides of the gun, for the same reason headlights don't illuminate the grill of the car. Airbrushes don't accomplish this look with just a quick spray. I think most people who attempt OSL don't give it the attention it deserves and that's what I think it's not done enough.

morganfreeman wrote:As mentioned, a head-light does not illuminate the front of your vehicle.

Have either of you questioned why that's the case? Or looked at the headlight for a car? The bulbs are mounted in concave mirrors which focus the light as a directional beam. If you assume the entire coil of plasma or stave head is emitting light, then it's no different to a long incandescent or fluorescent light tube - lots of ambient light spray all over the place. In which case, yes, you can expect some spill onto the sides and top of the plasma gun. Even more so if it's an Iron Hands, Iron Warrior, someone in steely/reflective metal armour, because that light then bounces off their armour back onto the gun. Yay physics.

 Enigwolf wrote:

Tydil wrote:. Light coming from a plasma gun is not going to cast light on the top and sides of the gun, for the same reason headlights don't illuminate the grill of the car. Airbrushes don't accomplish this look with just a quick spray. I think most people who attempt OSL don't give it the attention it deserves and that's what I think it's not done enough.

morganfreeman wrote:As mentioned, a head-light does not illuminate the front of your vehicle.

Have either of you questioned why that's the case? Or looked at the headlight for a car? The bulbs are mounted in concave mirrors which focus the light as a directional beam. If you assume the entire coil of plasma or stave head is emitting light, then it's no different to a long incandescent or fluorescent light tube - lots of ambient light spray all over the place. In which case, yes, you can expect some spill onto the sides and top of the plasma gun. Even more so if it's an Iron Hands, Iron Warrior, someone in steely/reflective metal armour, because that light then bounces off their armour back onto the gun. Yay physics.

The "grill" section in the middle of a plasma gun is indented. It's not -horribly- so, but it is 'deeper' in than the rest of the gun. Despite that, this glow is commonly seen spreading all across the gun (and often times onto the hand holding the weapon) despite that being nonsensical. This bugs me a lot; not so much the light glare you'll get from the head.

\

 Yonan wrote:

 troa wrote:
And WTF is with OSL on eye lenses? They would not glow...

Official 40k art says otherwise:

Spoiler:

Painting the lenses to glow is fine, it's when that glow spreads onto the helmet directly next to the eye; the lens is indented, the glow would not spill out like that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 morganfreeman wrote:


The "grill" section in the middle of a plasma gun is indented. It's not -horribly- so, but it is 'deeper' in than the rest of the gun. Despite that, this glow is commonly seen spreading all across the gun (and often times onto the hand holding the weapon) despite that being nonsensical. This bugs me a lot; not so much the light glare you'll get from the head.

\

This, too.

OSl doesn't necessarily represent being on the surface itself, but being the visible haze from the viewers perspective, like this:



Since we can't paint the air, I think it's a suitable way to represent it. Though, LEDs are nice too : )

However there is also of course this way which doesn't use the hazing effect, but a nice subdued effect on realistic surfaces only.


edit: Space Marine is now on my to-play list again ; p

I think for sci-fi/fantasy models, it's quite alright, as it adds a bit of fun to the paint job. It usually fits the theme, as you don't have to be all realistic, and can emphasise that 'super raygun' or 'powerful magicks' part.

I agree that it's the 'new NMM' and can be a bit overdone at times, but that's up to the individual painter.

 Yonan wrote:
OSl doesn't necessarily represent being on the surface itself, but being the visible haze from the viewers perspective, like this:



Since we can't paint the air, I think it's a suitable way to represent it. Though, LEDs are nice too : )

However there is also of course this way which doesn't use the hazing effect, but a nice subdued effect on realistic surfaces only.


edit: Space Marine is now on my to-play list again ; p

This. The "haze" effect essentially lends itself to looking like the rest of the pgun is also hued in blue.

It's used too much in some cases... I've seen knights with normal power cables randomly glowing.

But, while its a nice effect it's nicest when used subtly or use suitably for the model itself. Some might make sense and seem eerie to have a stronger OSL effect to them to show whatever it is may be faintly glowing in what would otherwise be pitch darkness but the rest of the model should sort of reflect that. Others it will look better faint and sort of blended into the rest of whatever the model is doing.

Lenses shouldn't really be glowing but in some cases can look nice doing it, those however should be subtle and not like having searchlights.

As an effect I like it, I think it lifts the whole mini and looks brilliant if done right and by "right" I mean fairly subtle and not washing out the rest of the figure with a big out of place haze. a lot of what I'm seeing these days to me just looks to much and from the poll it appears most people agree. We cant paint a glowing haze in the air and I do believe a certain artistic licence is ok when it comes to this but we need to stay kinda close to the boundary of physics otherwise it will just look wrong.
Good discussion thread
How about a few pics of what is the best looking ones you see about?
My pick would be that first pic I posted, its been done better since but that was the first time I seen it and I thought it was amazing and different.

It can be overdone as much as any other style, technique, or tool. I'd have to judge it on a case by case basis. I use a little OSL, and I'd hardly say I overdo it at all:

I think people over do OSL on table top miniatures. Dioramas it can look really good, it just looks out of place on table top miniatures, for multiple reasons....

1. A diorama you can control the lighting across the whole scene to make the OSL look properly placed, a table top model you can only control the lighting on the model.

2. In broad day light, glow effects are rather negligible. People typically don't take this in to account when painting OSL. We view models in good light, where glow effects would not really appear. To make OSL look good, models have to be painted as if they were not in broad daylight, this is actually quite hard to do. Even in the context of a diorama it's hard to achieve, in the context of a table top miniature, it's impossible unless you make an entire game board that is night-fighting themed.

3. Haze effects are dependent on the angle you view a model and have a volumetric feel to them, OSL can do neither of those things, so if you're using OSL as a haze effect, it will look wrong (at least in my opinion).

 oadie wrote:
OSL? Too much, in either sense. Whether I saw half as many people using OSL or all its users applying it with half the intensity, I'd consider the painting world improved.

Agreed. The example in the first post is a diorama (which means that the OSL affects not just the models, but the surroundings) and is also in darkness (which means that the OSL would be readily apparent).

When you plop down a model with OSL on the board, neither one of those conditions occurs. The model is illuminated by the light source, but nothing else on the table is, so it looks garish and fake. The model might be painted as if it is dark (but usually isn't), but the table isn't. So it looks garish and fake.

At the very least, OSL effects should be either on models which are painted as being in darkened areas (so the rest of the model is of darker, subdued colors) or should be painted on things which are illuminating a dark area of the model, or are a spot illumination.

If I walk outside during the day with a flashlight, it doesn't light up my whole body. You might see a spot of brightness, but not full-body OSL.

I understand that people are trying to take a technique from the diorama and apply it to individual models, but there needs to be some recognition of the limitations of doing that.

Yeah, the technique is overdone but it seems to be on the downswing now. It was getting way too garishly used a year or two ago as took the place of "way over(ab)used painting technique" spot from NMM which had it clinched for a few years.

I have to agree. Sometimes in some cases it is way overdone when it's not needed. Sometimes it's done completely wrong. I think the best thing you can do IMHO is do it in lower rate you can always add to it as you go. However to much makes it look a little unrealistic (almost comic book like). In some cases based on the painter/ artist it may work.