One thing I've started to experiment with and have a lot of success with is dipping my models. Going with Orks and getting a horde ready for tournament play, this has been critical to me not only getting the force painted, but painted and looking good enough to get me the decent painting score I need to place tourney wise.

And while a lot of people I've shown my work to locally have been interested in the results and I've gotten a lot of "WOW's" when showing the before and after pics of "Pre-Dip, Dipped, and then Dipped+Matte Spray Finish", I've gotten some hostility from some people as well.

Some people really look down on the technique from what I can tell, and I've noticed it in some of the "dipping" threads I've researched online when working out how to actually go about doing it for my own models.

I joked with a friend of mine about this and we came up with the idea that "Dipping is like Power Gaming for Painting". It gets you a set of models that "look really good" but don't exactly require a whole lot of skill or time to achieve the result. I know for me, this is appealing since I primarily like to play, and while "painting" is enjoyable at some level, "painting an entire army" really isn't for me. Especially when I want to get something done in time to use at an event.

I was wondering if other people got the same kind of vibes from certain people on the topic.

Yeah, normally I'd say 'screw them' but as an example of Lemmingville....some twit dipped all his grots, put a light on a leman russ, and got two awards for painting at LA.

I'd laugh, but it was pathetic.

Recognizing a no-skill paintjob is one thing, rewarding it is another.

I understand why highly skilled and dedicated competition painters would be against dipping if it lets armies win competitions without the effort. OTOH who cares if it just lets the army look good quickly? I am surprised that a dipped army would win over really well done properly painted armies.

I've noticed people dissing dipping here and there too. It's dumb. I have a dipped tomb kings army. Well, mostly dipped. I painted the bigger stuff and characters normally... but there was no way I was gonna paint all those skeletons by hand because it woulda been hella tedious. Dipping allowed me to get really great looking infantry in a lot less time. I still put a lot of time into painting the different colored areas pre-dip and working on the bases and all that stuff.

For me personally I don't care how someone paints, if an army looks good, it looks good, and that's that. I'd glady vote for a dipped army at a tourney if it looks better than the rest. If they guy had no painting skills, even his dipped stuff would still look like crap. So, who cares if the guy took a shortcut.. if his stuff still looks nicer than yours, paint better next time :p

I don't think anything I've dipped is capable of winning anything. Here's what I've gotten results wise from my test Slugga Boy which was taken "as-is" from being one of the first models I ever painted years ago, to after the dip, and then after getting a matte finish:

Pre-Dipped + Dipped Example
Dipped after Matte Finish

That said, they look pretty damn good, especially from 5 feet away when playing.

I dunno, one thing I think that I can understand people being a little pissy about is that having a dipped army can nab you a decent painting score at a tournament, which is pretty substantial in terms of placing, where as others with a normal "not so well painted" army will suffer, but the guy who dipped is getting ahead without putting in a lot of effort or isn't even more skilled.

Though to be honest, if the idea is about making sure nice armies show up to a tournament, isn't dipping a way for people, like me, who aren't so good at painting to at least show up and not get blasted because I can't paint well?

Stelek:

Yeah, normally I'd say 'screw them' but as an example of Lemmingville....some twit dipped all his grots, put a light on a leman russ, and got two awards for painting at LA.

I agree that it shouldn't get him an award, but I'm not sure why it makes him a twit. What's wrong with dipping grots and putting a light on a Russ? The fault lies with the organiser for giving the award, not the player for doing it.

I did a search in the painting forum, but came up empty. What is dipping exactly?

tegeus-Cromis wrote:Stelek:

Yeah, normally I'd say 'screw them' but as an example of Lemmingville....some twit dipped all his grots, put a light on a leman russ, and got two awards for painting at LA.

I agree that it shouldn't get him an award, but I'm not sure why it makes him a twit. What's wrong with dipping grots and putting a light on a Russ? The fault lies with the organiser for giving the award, not the player for doing it.

To be fair, why shouldn't he get an award?

If his entry looks better than the rest entered in the competition, does it matter what techniques he used to get the thing to look as good as it did? Yes I can understand the notion that you want to reward hard work, but at the same time it does come down to how good a mini looks as the point of the competition.

Vodoo Boyz: The before and after pics are absolutely amazing. Its astounding what a huge difference dipping makes to an otherwise lacklustre (but perfectly acceptable gaming standard) miniature. The dip really makes the details pop. While I think there may be sour grapes from the traditional painters, IMHO, the GW paint score is a way of rewarding modellers for building and bringing finished and good looking armies... since everyone agrees playing the primed horde sucks. So in this vein, I certainly think a dipped army qualifies. I think that those who complain should find another way to catch the judge's attention.

The end result is all that matters. Dipping is no different than drybrushing, inking, using decals, airbrushing, or hell even just using a brush at all. We are given a task: take little plastic things and make them look good. You aren't going to get there without using a lot of specialized tools and techniques, and drawing a line in the sand at any point and saying "Anything beyond this is lame!" is delusional.

A friend and I dipped our LotR armies (4 of them - we loaned two to friends) and 2000 points of Space Wolves (except the vehicles) for Adepticon last year and they turned out really good. If you do it right (and we learned that hitting the high points with some thinner worked well, and I think this year we're going to try thinning the stain before dipping to see what it does), it looks great. It's really not much different than hitting the model with a black ink all over. Also, you can go back over the dip and add highlights if you want, and it can work well. It's a technique available to everyone, no one should look down on it. It'd be like a Golden Daemon winner who paints on their highlights (in multiple layers, with glazes, and taking 10 hours a fig) looking down on someone using inks and drybrushes. It's a technique, and if done right, can look great, and if done poorly, can look horrible.

I never did go back and add decals to my space wolves, but if I do that, they'll stand up well to anyone's army. Not a winning army, but a solid tabletop quality. Maybe highlight the termies and heroes to help them stand out more.

For the last post, "dipping" consists of painting the base colors on a model, then dipping them in wood stain (usually minwax walnut or their black). The stain runs into the crevices for shading, but since it's pretty thick (or viscous) compared to inks, it behaves a little different. Generally, you flick the excess off by shaking the model, and using thinner to clean off big flat surfaces (like SM shoulder pads and the top of termies) tends to help.

Anyone who's been painting for a few months should be able to recognize a dipped fig. It does not come anywhere near a nicely blended/highlighted fig so if a fig wins with dipping either everyone else's paintjob sucked or the judge was an idiot.

Dipping ROX!

LONG LIVE THE DIP!

stonefox wrote:Anyone who's been painting for a few months should be able to recognize a dipped fig. It does not come anywhere near a nicely blended/highlighted fig so if a fig wins with dipping either everyone else's paintjob sucked or the judge was an idiot.

Maybe an individual figure. But, quantity has an appeal all its own. 150 dipped boyz like Voodoo's would look amazing as an army, even if none of them, on their own, would win awards. What's going to look better as an army, 150 dipped boyz, or six carnifexes and two tyrants that were hand painted?

Orock wrote:I did a search in the painting forum, but came up empty. What is dipping exactly?

I too would like to know. I'm guessing that it involves painting very basic collors on the model and then dipping them in black ink (or similar watered down black paint), but that's just a guess based on the name and the pictures Voodoo put up.

Orock wrote:I did a search in the painting forum, but came up empty. What is dipping exactly?

Dipping is when you apply a stained varnish to a figure that you have done a basic paint job on. It runs into the crevices and creates automatic shading.

See a nice tutorial and discussion about dipping here...

http://fanaticus.org/DBA/guides/Painting/paintingstains.html

Uhhhh. The point of painting the figs is to make them look good. If dipping makes the figs look good, then more power to ya.

Honestly, there are some armies that dipping really works well with some armies. LATD, nurgle, Orks and Tyranids really look great dipped.

ender502

Let's face it, a dipped single figure is never going to win a Golden Demon award but if dipping allows players to play with good looking armies quickly and easily what is the harm of it?

Painting prizes get given to armies that the owner bought painted. Isn't that a similar kind of short cut?

ender502 wrote:Uhhhh. The point of painting the figs is to make them look good. If dipping makes the figs look good, then more power to ya.

Honestly, there are some armies that dipping really works well with some armies. LATD, nurgle, Orks and Tyranids really look great dipped.

ender502

I knew I shouldn't have played Tau! But yeah they look great since they have crevices. The thing is dipping in that case is not much different than putting on several washes, which is another no-brainer method. Dipping doesn't really work on large flat surfaces anyway so it's not like anyone really gets away with anything aside from saving some time with washes.

tegeus-Cromis wrote:Stelek:

Yeah, normally I'd say 'screw them' but as an example of Lemmingville....some twit dipped all his grots, put a light on a leman russ, and got two awards for painting at LA.

I agree that it shouldn't get him an award, but I'm not sure why it makes him a twit. What's wrong with dipping grots and putting a light on a Russ? The fault lies with the organiser for giving the award, not the player for doing it.

Well, one was rewarded by the players...

*rolls eyes*

Getting two awards and being so skippy about his awesome paint job on a bunch of grots...which wasn't awesome under the dip, is what makes him a silly twit.

Voodoo Boyz

Don't stop dipping! That miniature looks like a real work or art, and you know what...it is! When and who decided that dipping is a short cut?!? Short cut to what?

People need to wake up, calling dipping a short cut is like calling someone a lazy ass for using a JCB when they "should" be using a shovel....

Dipping is a technique, just like drybrushing, just like inking, just like NMM....its a technique! nothing more, nothing less. If another artist wants to run you down cause you use dipping, call him a cheater for using a paint brush.....cause the real challenge is to use a felt tip pen!

Wow, I hadn't realized that dipping could get nice results like that Voodoo. I was really worried about starting an ork army for fear of hitting that balance between "looks good/shoot me" I try to achieve when painting, but I will definitely be trying the dip with some boyz when the time comes! Would you be so kind as to PM me what your technique and product was?

I have my nids and lizard orks all planned for dipping.

I wish it worked well on my other mass of not-done figs. lol

I remember there was a ton of venom aimed at a painting studio when they were accused of dipping models instead of layering them, IIRC. In the end, there seems to be a certain distaste among some gamers of "passing" dipped models as layered.


As a wash and dry-brusher myself, I really don't care one way or the other. I prefer to paint in squad sized units, so I hand wash my models, but I can see how the dip would rock hard for assembly line painting.

Time does not equal quality. Hand made amish hardwood furniture isn't better or more valuable because they spent more time than IKEA when making a chair; it's better because it's looks better, lasts longer, and is stronger.

If a dipped model looks better than a layered model, than the layer painter needs to shape up. And yes, I know dipped armies have won best painted. I've been to dozens of tournaments, and while i've never seen a badly painted army win best painted, I've seen judges (and players) base their decisions on novelty, conversion, color choice, neatness, etc. Sometimes, a dipped horde just is more visually dramatic than a painstakingly layerd and black lined Grey Knights army.

Miniwax Polyshades Antique Walnut is what I'm using for the next test and is what I'm using for all the rest of the Boyz. I used another brand I was able to get a small can of for the test model posted. The Miniwax is available in a bigger can and is recommended by most people I saw do tutorials.

Basically go to your local hardware shop (Lowes, Home Depot, Mom & Pop, whatever), and look for a Single Step Stain + Polyurethane. They come in a ton of colors from blacks, reds, to classic style wood browns and a ton of shades in between.

Process? Paint Ork model to the standard seen in my first linked pic. Dip Ork to feet in stain. Quickly remove Ork, hold upside down in deep box with the lid mostly closed and shake the thing like hell.

Wearing gloves is recommended, as is doing it in a ventilated area. I kept a small brush with water nearby to get some of the dip off of any major areas I saw it that I didn't want it that wouldn't come off with the shaking. I didn't have to do that for this guy, but it was recommended in all the tutorials I read.

For the matte finish the spray you use is crucial. Many finish sprays will yellow, or at least some will. Testors is a brand I know doesn't yellow. I couldn't find any but I found a spray bottle that explicitly said "Non Yellowing" on the front at the local craft store. I think it was Krylon, but I'm not 100% sure.

Bout the biggest thing I can tell you is find a stain + poly that you think you'll like the color of in there for highlights and then buy a small amount and test. Also test your finish on a single model first to see if you like it. Always test first before doing batches.

I've still got a while to go before I do my dipping in a big batch. I may look into gluing dowels on the bottom of the bases to maybe use a drill to spin the dip off the models quickly, at least that's what Rafi over on the Waaagh did for some of his stuff. I can imagine dipping 100+ models will eventually make my arm sore as hell from shaking them all off.

Delephont wrote:Voodoo Boyz

Don't stop dipping! That miniature looks like a real work or art, and you know what...it is! When and who decided that dipping is a short cut?!? Short cut to what?

People need to wake up, calling dipping a short cut is like calling someone a lazy ass for using a JCB when they "should" be using a shovel....

Dipping is a technique, just like drybrushing, just like inking, just like NMM....its a technique! nothing more, nothing less. If another artist wants to run you down cause you use dipping, call him a cheater for using a paint brush.....cause the real challenge is to use a felt tip pen!

Totaly agree with you. Dip is just a common hobby product like a ink or paint, just name it! Just ignore people that says dip is cheeting...

what I did for my tomb kings is I sprayed them with white primer, then bleached bone spray (dunno if they still make that though). Then I painted plain ole shining gold, silver and red parts where needed. I also did the bases with spackle instead of regular flock to get a cracked earth kind of look, so I had to wait for that to dry, then seal it with some white glue, then paint it.. then I dipped the whole model and shook it off.. so that I could hold onto the base as I shook it. When i did the horsemen, I did the horses normal and the riders separately, I glued their crotches to the tops of long stemmed flying bases, then when it was all dry I popped em off the base and glued them to the horse, the little spot that was glued isn't visible because that's where you glue it to the horse. I think I used the same stain color too. And the testors flat varnish worked real well too.

Dipping, especially the paint-on dip technique (same idea, but you brush on your dip, rather than dip and swing to get excess off), is not all that removed from the 'sludge wash' technique used by the Brushthralls to weather 'jacks or scale modelers. If such techniques can be used for weathering 1/35 scale tanks or 1/72 scale aircraft and win awards, why not gaming figures? Looks good is looks good.

Oh come on, Stelek. Even if he did use a shortcut, his army looked good enough (which, as people have pointed out, is what really matters) to be considered the best by both the organiser and the players. Unless by "being skippy" you're talking about a seriously asinine level of bragging (*cough*) I think he's entitled to be proud of his achievement.

Nah it was the winning two awards and him grinning like a cheshire cat that was silly.

So the player himself did not actually do anything to deserve being called a twit other than being happy he won the award(s)? Why insult him, then? I am sure (well actually, I'm not sure, but I do hope) you wouldn't react that way if Voodoo Boyz announced that he'd won something for his dipped minis and was happy about it, and I don't see why this person in your example should be denied the same courtesy simply because he isn't around on this forum to call you on it.

Stelek wrote:Nah it was the winning two awards and him grinning like a cheshire cat that was silly.

I thought winning an award was supposed to be a good thing you could be proud of.

I wonder what AT43 pre-painted look like dipped.

Please. Everyone knows that the paint job is not l33t unless you start with
three primary colors and mix everything from there.

Any figure can be dipped.

I've dipped Tau, Imperial Fists, Orks (ADEPTICON 2006 and 2007!), World Eaters, and a random assortment of other stuff, including some Hordes Orboros.

It's all about intelligent color selection, and painting in the lines.

I've been dipping mine in cheese, but it hasn't helped. I thought playing with a cheesy army



...I can't do it. I thought I could, but I just can't.

So how do you play a beardy army?

All kidding aside, if I were to lose a painting competition to an army that had been dipped, I would probably be a little hostile too. But then, I have a high opinion of my ability.

That said, there are two armies at my FLGS that were dipped, one 'nid, the other Death Guard. Painted by the same guy, no surprises that the basic colors are green, bone, and red on both armies. They look great. I have no problems with them on the tabletop or in the display case. In fact, both of those armies have an overall cohesiveness that I just can't match when I paint each figure individually, and I probably wouldn't feel too bad if I lost a painting competition to either one. But then, I know the painter, and I know he can also paint well without dipping.

malfred wrote:So how do you play a beardy army?

Alas, my goatee is too small to allow me to play a beardy army, and likely to remain so.

fellblade wrote:

malfred wrote:So how do you play a beardy army?

Alas, my goatee is too small to allow me to play a beardy army, and likely to remain so.

Oh, that's quitter talk!

tegeus-Cromis wrote:Unless by "being skippy" you're talking about a seriously asinine level of bragging (*cough*) I think he's entitled to be proud of his achievement.

Think it went over his head...

I dont think the issue is just with dipping, but shortcuts in general that look good.

I have seen a necron army painted by an assistant DA in Great falls MT that used colour changing metallic paint that continues to win awards to this day, even though he put an evenings worth of air brushing on his 2000 point army. The effect is great, the effort was less than minimal. It makes dipping look like an arduous project.

In third edition I had a saim hann army painted with crackle paint. It looked pretty good. I was even accused of cheating. I thought it was quite ingenious even if I did say so myself, and thought the ingenuity of using a crackle paint product to achieve the effect to be something to be admired, n0t something to be hated.

When its all said and done, effort doesnt always = quality. I have seen people spend many many hours on a model that dont hold a candle against a dipped model. Its easy to see the animosity when you spend so much time on a model, only for someone who painted his entire army in ten minutes to win a coveted award.

Who cares? The more painted models on the table, the better. The little extra effort of dipping should be awarded as opposed to seeing bland three color base coat armies.

Hellfury wrote:
Who cares? The more painted models on the table, the better. The little extra effort of dipping should be awarded as opposed to seeing bland three color base coat armies.

obviously the angry masses care. God forbid someone else win their divinely adjudicated tournament prizes.

Tournament Greed > Everything Else.

Obviously these people need to learn to 'paint for fun and not to win'. This is why we need painting comp, so people have to paint their models in the most asinine way possible all in the name of fun.

[/sarcasm]

If you can't deal with the fact that a dipped army looks better than what you painted, the problem lies with *you*, not the guy who dipped his army.

Anything that gets people painted at all, and then painted faster is a good thing.

I wonder if people who are against dipping are also against using decals for shields and emblems.

FYI, being silly is my forte.

I think any painted army on the field is awesome. I have played in GT's where it was not compulsory to even have a painted army!!(Bris 2007). I think if you hate dipping, you are jealous of an easy, smooth fix. After seeing the apparent diff. between dipping and not dipping, I am keen to dip!

PS. If it was not for Dakka....I would never even known about it! Thanks to all for the info!(Yak/Lego) for the site.

If the awards are an issue, take it up with the RS who Made 'da call over your slowly, intricate, layered army!


IMHO anyway. Insaniak....don't kill me.

Same for you Waaaaaagh!

Brisbane is a small town.........

Hellfury wrote:I dont think the issue is just with dipping, but shortcuts in general that look good.

I have seen a necron army painted by an assistant DA in Great falls MT that used colour changing metallic paint that continues to win awards to this day, even though he put an evenings worth of air brushing on his 2000 point army. The effect is great, the effort was less than minimal. It makes dipping look like an arduous project.

In third edition I had a saim hann army painted with crackle paint. It looked pretty good. I was even accused of cheating. I thought it was quite ingenious even if I did say so myself, and thought the ingenuity of using a crackle paint product to achieve the effect to be something to be admired, n0t something to be hated.

When its all said and done, effort doesnt always = quality. I have seen people spend many many hours on a model that dont hold a candle against a dipped model. Its easy to see the animosity when you spend so much time on a model, only for someone who painted his entire army in ten minutes to win a coveted award.

Who cares? The more painted models on the table, the better. The little extra effort of dipping should be awarded as opposed to seeing bland three color base coat armies.

I think this is part of it, certainly any "shortcut that looks good" will get a bit of ire from some people.

As I think about it, I think another about it is that it really can be a "gamers method" of painting quickly. That's what it is for me, a quick and easy way that gets me a nice looking army. In fact part of what's driving my choice of army in Fantasy is the notion of it being easy to paint and then dip to get something done quickly so I can spend more time playing than having to "worry about painting it all".

It kind of takes away "the hobby" portion where you have to spend a lot of time and effort in "assembling and painting" before you can do any serious "gaming" or at least gaming at a tournament. I know that for me personally, I'm so gung ho on dipping because it's going to let me take an Ork army to tournaments that will look good and thus if I can play well enough with it I don't have to worry about getting tanked by my painting score.

I don't have any problem with dipping. You can get some nice effects with it, but there's a "ceiling" for it, too. Ultimately, a well-layered army will look better than a well-dipped one. If a dipped army wins an award at a tournament, it's not the dippee's fault the other armies weren't up to snuff. And really, it's not like a dipped miniature is ever going to win a Golden Daemon. I guess I don't see the big deal.

malfred wrote:So how do you play a beardy army?

That's where you have an army of Tom Cruise miniature. Each one comes with a "wife" miniature.

Sorry, couldn't resist.

ender502

Warning: Rant follows.
The whole thing strikes me as one long "that's not fair!" from some people. It's just silly. Someone found a method of painting that looks really good. Either use it, surpass it, or bow out of the competition if you can't compete. Don't sit there and cry that they are doing it wrong, when all that matters is the final result.
Painting is merely the means to the end, not the end itself. The end is having a good looking army on the table. If you insist on doing things the hard way, that's up to you, but considering no one uses oil paint and makes their own brushes because that's the way "real painters do it", they need to quite whining and consider how they are going to add dipping to their painting repetoir.
Hell, if I discovered that pissing on my army gave them crazy highlights and lovely shading, you can bet the tub would be filled with minis, I would be drinking lots of water, and my wife would be wondering why the bathroom smelled funny.

John, go for it. The bottom line is:

1. it'll get it done fast
2. and this is the big one, it's probably going to look better than if you painted it the traditional way.

That's not a slight, just the truth. So what do you want, 150 models that look darn good buy are dipped, or 150 that don't look as good but are hand painted?

And here's a technical question: can you highlight them after they're dipped and sealed? For example, could you highlight up the blue if you wanted to?

Oh no question I'm doing it, I couldn't care less if people bitch about it, heck it's an encouragement to making sure that it looks really good when I'm done the job.

And no slight taken, you've seen my work and I've seen yours, I suck at painting. The reason I'm so excited about dipping is because it lets my models look good.

I thought about highlighting the models a bit after dipping. You're essentially painting on dried polyurethane at that point, so I have no idea how well it'll hold up. I do know that no matter what you will have to spray that with a matte finish.

I think the Boyz would look a ton better with a highlight of goblin green over the dipped skin, but again that's more work and to be honest about my skills it's more of an opportunity to screw it up. You've seen how I paint, it takes forever for me to just "stay in the lines".

Voodoo Boyz wrote:Oh no question I'm doing it, I couldn't care less if people bitch about it, heck it's an encouragement to making sure that it looks really good when I'm done the job.

And no slight taken, you've seen my work and I've seen yours, I suck at painting. The reason I'm so excited about dipping is because it lets my models look good.

I thought about highlighting the models a bit after dipping. You're essentially painting on dried polyurethane at that point, so I have no idea how well it'll hold up. I do know that no matter what you will have to spray that with a matte finish.

I think the Boyz would look a ton better with a highlight of goblin green over the dipped skin, but again that's more work and to be honest about my skills it's more of an opportunity to screw it up. You've seen how I paint, it takes forever for me to just "stay in the lines".

Try a single quick dry-brush highlight on your flat colour before the dipping.

I would suggest experimenting with a quick dry-brush highlight after dipping and then a matte finish. The highlight could be easily overwhelmed by the dip, and the matte should protect your paint job.

Voodoo Boyz wrote:Oh no question I'm doing it, I couldn't care less if people bitch about it, heck it's an encouragement to making sure that it looks really good when I'm done the job.

And no slight taken, you've seen my work and I've seen yours, I suck at painting. The reason I'm so excited about dipping is because it lets my models look good.

I thought about highlighting the models a bit after dipping. You're essentially painting on dried polyurethane at that point, so I have no idea how well it'll hold up. I do know that no matter what you will have to spray that with a matte finish.

I think the Boyz would look a ton better with a highlight of goblin green over the dipped skin, but again that's more work and to be honest about my skills it's more of an opportunity to screw it up. You've seen how I paint, it takes forever for me to just "stay in the lines".

That being said, I think its time for you to take your avatar warboss, dip him, and repost him as your avatar!

Hear hear! I want to see how those highlights hold up!

BRING IN THE DIP!

What exactly is a highlight going to do on the undipped models? You guys can see what my previous paint job looked like. Taking bleach bone or a lighter green and going over the goblin green on them just a tiny bit? I dunno if I even want to, however what I probably will do is test dip the Warboss. He's sadly not going to see much use in the new dex, so he may move over to my cubicle to stand guard over my computer while I'm not here.

Tonight I'll test dip another model with different colors to it and using the Miniwax dip and let it dry, we'll see how it holds up.

Sounds like a trip to dysartes is in order!

http://www.dysartes.com/model/painting/Dipping1.php

Highlight before the dip and the dip will then draw the two colors together while still keeping them separate. Almost looks blended depending on the colors. Dipping after highlight can also look good, but it requires the whole fig being sealed again, unless of course you like the half satin, half matte look. Sometimes you want them to stay a little satiny, sometimes matte looks good. My dipped orks have all been matted, while my Tau and Worldeaters are not.

www.pbase.com/whitedragon

This is a gallery of my adepticon team. Not all the models are dipped, but the majority are, by 3 different people, and 1 guy painting straight up. Add dullcoate and voila!

Voodoo Boyz wrote:What exactly is a highlight going to do on the undipped models? You guys can see what my previous paint job looked like. Taking bleach bone or a lighter green and going over the goblin green on them just a tiny bit? I dunno if I even want to, however what I probably will do is test dip the Warboss. He's sadly not going to see much use in the new dex, so he may move over to my cubicle to stand guard over my computer while I'm not here.

Tonight I'll test dip another model with different colors to it and using the Miniwax dip and let it dry, we'll see how it holds up.

You need to do the drybrush highlight fairly light compared to the base colour. After dipping, you should end up with three shades and a degree of gradation between them. I think you should highlight before dipping, Ebon thought after, you can experiment with both.

Mind you, the basic dipped model looks pretty damn good anyway. If you are really going for speed and volume, just base colour and dip.


On the main topic, I have never heard of dip envy in the Ancients and Historicals world. Either the players don't care or I need to get out more.

I am planning to "paint dip" all my 6mm Napoleonics.

"Hi my name is Rhys, and I dip my mini's !!"

Seriously though, I have been 'selective dipping' my figures for years, but I use standard GW inks mixed with ard coat & water, it just widens the pallette a little.

It recently took me 3 weeks to paint 40, 40K orks using the dipping technique, and then adding a bit of a highlight at the end. I would never have painted this many figures without dipping.

I say dip away - its a technique, so use it

BTW - I am a fairly decent painter ! I won a Silver Demon at the UK GD 2006 !! - and I do not see it as cheating

Cheers,

What exactly is a highlight going to do on the undipped models?

Another method is to basecoat the figures black, then go over the whole thing with a drybrush of light grey or white. Use a big brush, it doesn't matter. Then paint your base colors on as usual. Then dip. The white drybrush will (obviously) produce highlights through the base coat.

Though this may all be moot if you're using Foundation Paints. They may cover so well they wash out the difference between the black and white base coats. I haven't tried them yet.

I usually basecoat black, and then drybrush white over the top. This makes the details pop. In the past, I have then glazed the figure with inks or thin oils, and gotten some very interesting, and often beautiful effects.

That won't work with foundation paints, though, they cover extremely well.

I just picked up some dip, and tried it on my minis, but I am not seeing the detail pop.

All I could find was minwax polyshade # 340 antique walnut satin, did I just waste my money on something that isnt suited for this purpose? Or does it take a days drying to get the detail?

Does it matter if the models are metal or plastic? Tried one on one of my plastic tau, seems to give a bit better shading then my older metal models.

Oh, don't misunderstand me- the white drybrush over the black primer is what makes the details pop. The contrast really helps these old eyes see the fine details. Once I have done that, then I go ahead with the basecoats and washes and layers and highlights.

Dipping won't make the details pop, but it is a quick way to get shading into the recesses on a figure. Since the stain tends to collect in the crevices, they get darker, and the high areas of the model look lighter. You can see a lot more detail on the figure once it is shaded, far more than you can see when simple base coats are applied. Of course, at the same time, dipping is going to mute the colors of everything on the figure.

I don't think it matters whether the model is metal or plastic, so much as whether the detail is high-relief or low-relief. I can't advise you on the drying time... maybe you need to sling off more of the stain?

If you are interested in mass production, I've found a cordless drill to be great instead of shaking off the mini by hand. First superglue a nail to the bottom of the base of each mini. Put that in your keyless chuck, dip the mini. Then hold the mini upside down in a box or other spatter-proof container and spin the excess dip off. By ork #60 your hand will be thanking you, plus I find I get less pooling and more consistency.

You guys are getting waaaaaay off topic, what with all this talk of dipping techniques. More bitching about people who dip their armies please.

Orock wrote:I just picked up some dip, and tried it on my minis, but I am not seeing the detail pop.

All I could find was minwax polyshade # 340 antique walnut satin, did I just waste my money on something that isnt suited for this purpose? Or does it take a days drying to get the detail?

Does it matter if the models are metal or plastic? Tried one on one of my plastic tau, seems to give a bit better shading then my older metal models.

The exact stain does not matter. The final appearance is decided by various factors; the thickness of the varnish, the colours in the base coat, and the detailing on the model.

The thicker the varnish the more dulled down the whole model will be. Brighter paint jobs have the opposite effect. A model with a lot of crevices and folds will dip up better than one with a lot of flat surfaces.

Dip works very well for WW2 figures who have naturally dull colours. It does not work so well for Ultramarines.

You should leave the varnish for a whole day to dry thoroughly since in the crevices it can be quite thick compared to a normal layer of paint.

Like any painting technique you need to practice to get the best out of it. Read the tutorials from Fanaticus (linked above) and try various dipping, spinning and painting on techniques until you find out what works for you.

First of all, some dipping tips.

1) YOU MUST GET A GOOD SOLID COAT OF PAINT ON. The skorne model a few posts back has black showing through the red. It is imperative that you get a consistant, even coat of whatever you are painting.

2) SOLID BLACK AND WHITE DO NOT DIP WELL. Black just looks like smily black, and white gets stained brown, and looks like smiley used toilet paper. If you want to dip white, use bleached bone and then highlight back up after the dip goes on.

3) Most stain is brown, so colors that look good with a brown ink wash will look awesome with dip. Meaning, earthtones, greys, greens, reds, yellows, oranges, browns, etc etc. And gold looks great! Blues, whites, purples, etc look CRAPPY when dipped.

4) Use BRIGHT versions of the colors you are using. For example, if you want red, use blood red, not scab red. Also, try not to put colors next to each other that are close to the same shade, or very light. For example, don't paint bleached bone pants with khommando khaki leather. After you did, the separation will be less apparent, and it won't look that good. For all my stuff I want brown, I've found that GW Bestial Brown dips the best.

5) The stain most people use is MINWAX POLYSHADES - ANTIQUE WALNUT SATIN. This gives a very even medium brown look that is not too dark or too light.

6) MAKE SURE YOU STIR THE DIP BEFORE YOU USE IT! If you just crack open the can, after it has sat a while, the urethane tries to separate out of the stain, and the pigment all goes to the bottom. This always results in a poor dipping situation. I always stir the can very gently for about a minute before I start dipping.

7) For easy dipping, the idea solution is a "dip stick". For regular sized models, I glue a straw into a paint pot cap, and then glue the base of the model down on that. You can then dip the entire figure in, and then hold it UPSIDE DOWN over a trashcan (with a new liner preferably) and "spin" the stick between your hands like you are trying to make a fire. This is alot easier then "flicking", and all the excess will just go in the trash can, making for very little mess. For larger models, you would probably need a wooden dowell rod and a screw for good dippage!

These are just some of the things I have learned while dipping my models. I hope this helps somebody.

I don't really get the hostility towards dipping. Do people get hostile about spray primering/basecoating? Basically the same type of shortcut... If it makes the army look good, who cares about what technique was used. I don't think dipping is a technique that will ever win anyone a GD (the effect just isn't nearly good enough) but it can make for a nice looking army to play against. I've never dipped any models although I have seen and like the mass effects of the technique.

As for Stelek, who was so put out about a dipped grot force winning two awards... Well it sounds like a whole vine of sour grapes to me... If the judges thought his visual effect was better than others (or yours) then that's the way it goes.

mauleed wrote:
And here's a technical question: can you highlight them after they're dipped and sealed? For example, could you highlight up the blue if you wanted to?

Absolutely. You can't just dip them though-- Dull Kote is required to get the paint to adhere right. That's my "dipping" methodology (besides that I paint the stuff on rather than dipping)

I echo whitedragon. Don't flick your models, spin them. I glue a dowel to the base with superglue and roll it between my hands. I've also heard of people rigging up dremels to do this.

I dipped my Dark Eldar for two reasons: 1) I'm a slow, not very good painter (my hands tend to shake). 2) I don't really like the models. Now I have a nearly fully painted 1850 army that actually looks pretty good on the table.

BTW, I also dipped my vehicles, but I thinned the dip and used a large brush to paint the dip on. I've gotten lots of compliments and I was able to paint A LOT faster.

Now I'm thinking of dipping my wood elves...

Ozymandias, King of Kings

One more thing. You can highlight before the dip. It actually does a nice job of blending between the highlights and the base color. Otherwise, highlight after the matte spray.

Ozymandias, King of Kings

I've never dipped, personally. I've played people who do, and while I can see that it is a time saver - I don't think they look as nice as something that was treated by hand.

With that said, I don't think that the point is to make them look like Golden Demon winners, but instead to get a solid look quickly. I'm not hostile towards it... just indifferent.

Dane of War wrote:I've never dipped, personally. I've played people who do, and while I can see that it is a time saver - I don't think they look as nice as something that was treated by hand.

With that said, I don't think that the point is to make them look like Golden Demon winners, but instead to get a solid look quickly. I'm not hostile towards it... just indifferent.

That is a most sensible reply.

Dipping comes from historicals where armies are often a lot bigger than 40K. Most ancients armies contain over 100 up to 300 figures and being mounted on movement stands do not show up so individually. Dipping works even better on smaller figures like 10mm or 6mm where there is less detail to paint and usually more figures too.

This is just such a funny topic... how elitist do people really need to be with this hobby?

... "So, you actually used glue that was not made by your own hand huh??? LAME."

Fact is... I LOVE playing painted army vs. painted army... period.

NOTE: I have dipped chaos, orks, eldar, skaven and now Necrons... However, after some thought most recently I did not dip the warriors and hand painted them so to bring out the details better. Decision making is key.

I have WON several Best Painted awards with both dipped and non dipped armies. I do what is most flattering and most efficient for any given model. I think that should be taken into account on all occations. WHY would anyone give 150 clan rats 4 layers of highlighting and inks... no one cares nor can see them. If people need to do that to sleep at night, its their problem.

I don't care about winning something, but I want something that "looks good".

After talking about some dipping recently at the shop, a friend then told me "you will never stop hearing gak from me about this". He's a pretty good painter and a good player, all around nice guy, but he seems to get pretty annoyed at the topic once he heard about it.

Something about taking shortcuts, and never getting as good as I can be by taking said shortcuts.

I don't think I ever pointed out that I don't really enjoy painting all that much, but then that'd probably spark a whole nother round of "Dude WTF is wrong with you."

The broad hobby of tabletop wargaming overlaps with military modelling. At one end of the spectrum are highly skilled modellers and painters who never play a game, at the other end are players who are quite happy with boardgames and pre-painted miniatures.

The tension in the middle of the spectrum is increased by GW's committment to paint scoring as part of the total scoring for tournaments. This committment is unusual in historical wargaming where the paint scoring is separate to the game scoring. However it fits with GW's concept of GW being "the hobby".

Not in the UK anymore.... the six best painted at the Heats get a automatic place at the final. No painting scores, sportsmanship scores or composition scores. Of course, there are penalties... WFB Heat 3 was chock full of penalties IIRC....

Before that you only ever got standard scores for painting - 3 colours, based, hightlighted, detailed. Pretty much everyone got full marks. Kind of preferred that method, as there have been some pretty grotty armies turning up in the last two seasons.

All I can say is this thread has convinced me to try dipping.

mauleed wrote:All I can say is this thread has convinced me to try dipping.

I've already started testing for mass production. Doing the whole "glue a wooden dowel to the base and use a drill to spin the dip off" test last night worked well enough. Stuck the dowel/model into some styrofoam to dry last night, looks like that's the process I want to use.

Also the Miniwax dip seems a bit weak to me. I'm liking the darker stuff I used earlier for the test model shown. It really makes the Orks look good.

I plan on trying to speed paint an Ogre army in a weekend or a week after XMas. Spray, paint, dip. I figure I'll make a blog/log out of the project. I'm sure the comments I get from that at the shop will be pretty funny. Dipped Ogres, the ultimate in Lazy Gaming.

Whereas I plan on getting you to invite me over to test it out with your rig.

mauleed wrote:Whereas I plan on getting you to invite me over to test it out with your rig.

Mrs. Voodoo works Saturday night (after 5) if you wanted to come over, just give me a call or PM when your free.

EDIT: Sunday looks free too, she's going to a play that I miraculously didn't have to go to.

The whole argument is stupid, much like the argument about wether Non-Metallic Metal Painting is superior to painting with metallic paints.

I've been pretty impressed with dipping for some time, and use a variation of it for orks I painted a while ago (just slop on a heavy brown wash in this case, pulling wash off the highlight areas where appropriate).

The dipped models really sing when, after the dip, a little more care is taken with them by adding details and highlights. It disrupts the speed inherent in the technique, but makes them look that much better.

GrimTeef wrote:The whole argument is stupid, much like the argument about wether Non-Metallic Metal Painting is superior to painting with metallic paints.

I've been pretty impressed with dipping for some time, and use a variation of it for orks I painted a while ago (just slop on a heavy brown wash in this case, pulling wash off the highlight areas where appropriate).

The dipped models really sing when, after the dip, a little more care is taken with them by adding details and highlights. It disrupts the speed inherent in the technique, but makes them look that much better.

Sure the argument is stupid, I don't think you'll find anyone who's bothered to post in the thread about it who will say otherwise.

That doesn't change the fact that I've found a lot of people who either get pissy about the idea or start yelling about shortcuts, laziness, and the like.

Plus the idea that you'd do it with a tournament army also seems to really get people in a tizzy. As many here can attest, getting a good paint score is crucial to winning a tournament. And people seem to hate the idea that people who don't like or aren't good at painting can easily get a good painting score. That's doubly true if the complainers in question also really don't like the army list that "the dipper" is running too.

Voodoo Boyz wrote:

That doesn't change the fact that I've found a lot of people who either get pissy about the idea or start yelling about shortcuts, laziness, and the like.

Nice when people are jealous about your paint job...isnt it?

Deadshane1 wrote:

Voodoo Boyz wrote:

That doesn't change the fact that I've found a lot of people who either get pissy about the idea or start yelling about shortcuts, laziness, and the like.

Nice when people are jealous about your paint job...isnt it?

I don't think it was jealousy, I think it was him being pretty annoyed at the idea of it being done quickly, with little painting skill required, and that it got results. He was also sure that "it looked like crap", because I didn't have my test model on me at the time.

Also the fact that whenever we discuss it at the shop (usually around the painting counter where I'm painting the base colors on a model), invariably there are newer people around there who obviously aren't very good at painting who hear this and quickly pipe up their interest and ask for all the details on how to do it.

So it's not just that I'm doing it, but that the idea is spreading too.

I'm fairly amazed by the results Voodoo posted...

It's really pretty amazing the final result, but also how totally lame the starting point is. It basically takes a model I would feel embarassed to field, and turns it into a model I'm somewhat envious of.

I think my Orks look a bit better, I spent time slaving over each one, painting muscle striations on, etc. etc. but at the end of the day, it's fairly heartbreaking just how similar they look to that dip job.

And, honestly, my Orks are basically just overcomplicated dip jobs in the end anyway. I painted careful highlighting over each section of them, then applied a wash/glaze (if you call a dip that, it becomes legitimate) over each section, with carefully colored inks. End result: not much better (if at all) than just dipping.

I'm definitely going to try this out. I think it could produce some amazing Plague Marines.

Also, for the record, dipping isn't the total no brainer some suggest. It's certainly not a high end skill, but doing anything right takes time and practice. Getting the color on the dip right, getting the consistency right, it's not at ALL idiot proof. That said, once you've got it, you've got it, and then it is fairly idiot proof.

At least that's my impression, having "dipped" many times in the form of using a big brush loaded with wash to coat a model down.

But, as I said, seeing the results, I will have to try the actual products and techniques Voodoo recommends. The results are simply stunning.

Edit: One thing occurs to me that I'd like the veteran dippers to weigh in on... My dad used to tie a lot of fishing flies, and in some cases they'd have epoxy components to them that would sag or run if left sitting in one position for too long. The solution he came up with, was a large foam disc mounted on a slow turning electric motor. The flies could be mounted on the disc via their hook, and would slowly revolve around with the disc, perhaps one rotation every 30 seconds, preventing the epoxy from every settling in any one direction. Could this be useful when combined with the emerging field of dipping technology?

Phryxis wrote:I'm fairly amazed by the results Voodoo posted...

It's really pretty amazing the final result, but also how totally lame the starting point is. It basically takes a model I would feel embarassed to field

You mean the models that I painted and played with for what, 4 years now?

I told you people that I'm a terrible painter, though admittedly those were literally the first figs I ever did.

I do appreciate the kind words, and to be honest all this is hoping to do is get my models looking good, better than if I tried to do this normally and in less time.

I don't disagree at all that this takes its own skillset. You learn a LOT by just doing it and experimenting. But the trick is once you get going and organized it can save you a ton of time, and in my case, it'll get you better looking mini's than if you did it yourself.

And BTW, if people have questions or problems with dipping, or want to see more pics, I put up a thread here in Painting & Modeling.

The only people who are hostile towards dippers are other equally bad painters who feel they have a moral obligation to learn the techniques of highlighting by drybrushing or blending etc. It's funny, but what's even more funny is that the dippers seem to think their models look somehow great simply because their painted models looked absolutely horrifying. Most dipped models are on the second stage of painting. Base colours have been painted and shaded. The model still lacks all highlights, definition and detail. That's why they will never score high on any competitive painting score system.

I'd like to add that I still rather play against models that have clean base colours and a dipped shade than against models highlighted by people who simply can't paint. To noone's surprise the best dipped models come from people who can paint but want to finish an army over a weekend. The best results are gained by painting a couple highlights with stronger than usual colours on the model before dipping it, and by dipping I mean painting the dip on the model with a brush.

Most dipped models are on the second stage of painting.

I can't entirely agree with that...

I'd like to see a really good pic of a dipped model. Everything I've seen online gives an impression of a great finished look, but the pics aren't clear enough to really know how the model looks.

For example, Voodoo's shots aren't the clearest, but they're decent. What I see there looks very good, and when a model looks very good, I'd call it "finished." But, perhaps if I held the model in my hand, and could look very closely, it'd not be so impressive.

One thing that is not in question, is the massive improvement the dipped model is over the simple basecoat job.

All that said, there are many models where dipping won't get you very far. Probably the great majority, in fact.

Any model that works well "dirty" or "natural" looking, like an Ork, Tyranid or Kroot, I think you can get truly great results with dipping. Something that rivals a skilled painter using advanced techniques in terms of final product.

But, High Elves? Empire or Brettonians? Pretty much any model that needs to look clean, crisp and to show nice hard edges between colors, ths technique will fall pretty flat. I think it'll serve the painter well as a partial technique, for example dipped chainmail, with a nice clean tabard over it, but clean paint jobs demand more.

My Blood Angels, for example, I basecoated red, applied an all over wash (essentially a brushed on dip), then layered/feathered several shades of red and orange over this. In this case, the dip really was just the second stage of painting.

>>But, perhaps if I held the model in my hand, and could look very closely, it'd not be so impressive.

Dipping isn't meant to make models stand up to close-range scrutiny. It's meant to get whole armies looking good on the table quickly.

In some way the Golden Demon raises the bar too high. Most players do not have the time or skill to paint whole armies to anything like that kind of level.

I don't dip, but I do inkwash everything (the result looks similar) I don't see the problem unless it's just jealousy. I'm planning an Ork army in the new year as a counterpoint to my Crimson Fist force and I'll be trying dipping for them.
My old necron army was sprayed with boltgun metal spray and airbrushed with a black/green ink mix. people got very sniffy about it.
I don't see the problem. I have a Job and a life. There is only so many hours I can devote to painting.

Phryxis wrote:

Most dipped models are on the second stage of painting.

I can't entirely agree with that...

I'd like to see a really good pic of a dipped model. Everything I've seen online gives an impression of a great finished look, but the pics aren't clear enough to really know how the model looks.

For example, Voodoo's shots aren't the clearest, but they're decent. What I see there looks very good, and when a model looks very good, I'd call it "finished." But, perhaps if I held the model in my hand, and could look very closely, it'd not be so impressive.

One thing that is not in question, is the massive improvement the dipped model is over the simple basecoat job.

All that said, there are many models where dipping won't get you very far. Probably the great majority, in fact.

Any model that works well "dirty" or "natural" looking, like an Ork, Tyranid or Kroot, I think you can get truly great results with dipping. Something that rivals a skilled painter using advanced techniques in terms of final product.

But, High Elves? Empire or Brettonians? Pretty much any model that needs to look clean, crisp and to show nice hard edges between colors, ths technique will fall pretty flat. I think it'll serve the painter well as a partial technique, for example dipped chainmail, with a nice clean tabard over it, but clean paint jobs demand more.

My Blood Angels, for example, I basecoated red, applied an all over wash (essentially a brushed on dip), then layered/feathered several shades of red and orange over this. In this case, the dip really was just the second stage of painting.

I just updated my thread here with shots of the now Matte finished Dwarf and 2 Shoota Boyz. I took the pics on Macro mode, no flash, with plenty of lighting and a sill camera so it's about as detailed and clear as I can get it.

Personally, I think the pictures make them look worse than they are if anything, since when I hold them about a foot away it looks pretty good, even better on the table while playing.

Oh and you're 100% right on only certain armies/models being dip-able. I've decided I'm going to ink and highlight my Dwarfs, one to be able to learn how to do it and two because it'll look better. Dwarfs are supposed to be clean, at least in my vision of the army, and I don't want the dip look on my guys.

The Orks came out great dipped, and I'm betting the Ogres I'm going to do after XMas probably will too.

To address what Killcrazy is saying, the whole point of this exercise is to get my armies looking better than they would normally. I'm not a good painter, and once I "paint an army" I start to like doing it less and less because of the grind. I don't want to win a Golden Demon, I don't want to win best painted. The goal here is to say, take my army from a 15/30 in painting (what I got in Baltimore GD with my Marines) to say a 20/30 or a little better with my Dipped Orks.

For the coming Ogres, it's to get the army done and "looking good" in a long weekend. I don't want to win something with it, but I want it painted and I want it to look better than my other stuff and I don't want to spend a lot of time painting it.

If you're going to ink your dwarves you might want to try making a wash. I did this for my chaos army and it's working really well. I took a few dark colors that I will use for shading, like black and I use dark flesh for bone and gold. Anyway find an old empty paint pot or buy the cheapy 50 cent ones at art stores and mix up about 30-40% paint, and the rest a 50/50 mix of water and matte medium. You can buy the medium at art stores where they have the acrylic paints. It's cheap. You might need to play with the ratios and add more water or less paint depending on how light or opaque you want the wash to be

Anyway, you end up with really thin paint and when you paint it on your model the medium helps it stick into the cracks and stay there, in the end you get a dipped looking result, but without the super-shine and you can also have a lot more control and you can shade it whatever color you want. Then when that's dry you can do some quick & easy drybrushing for highlights here and there. It's actually pretty simple once you get the hang of it. Not as fast as dipping, but I'm starting to like the results better.

If you have access to them, the vallejo paints are real good for making washes, since they're in dropper bottles it will be easier to measure and be less messy

Anyway find an old empty paint pot or buy the cheapy 50 cent ones at art stores and mix up about 30-40% paint, and the rest a 50/50 mix of water and matte medium.

All good tips, but perhaps the biggest one of all, would be to mix a LOT of your custom wash.

Not only does wash tend to get used up fast, but it also tends to be a mix, not just of colors but of mediums, water, etc. It's important to keep the color consistant, but it's equally important to keep the dilution consistent.

As a result, I'd recommend getting a large bottle for your wash mix. A normal GW paint pot might be ok, but in that case, fill it all the way up. You want something you can slap right on the model and not have to tune in color or dilution.

Over time it might dry out a bit, so you may have to water it back down, but in general the key is to keep that to a minimum.

The point to all this is to avoid fussing with the wash later on, when you're on the 2nd, 3rd, 4th unit. This fussing is time consuming and you'll probably never get it 100% right anyway.

At some point these washes will be necessary, as the dipping stuff doesn't seem to come in all the colors one might want.

My main interest in trying out dipping is to see how the consistency of the dipping stuff effects things. It seems to have a set of properties that lend well to the dipping process. If the viscosity, opacity, etc can be recreated in normal water based paints, that'd be a great advantage.