Is army painter really fair? What are your thoughts? I think its not.

I assume you mean dips or washes.

2 things for me:

1. It's a hell of a lot better than playing against an unpainted army.

2. I don't view it as a "finishing" technique for my own armies. I understand it's purpose, but to me it's just another tool in my arsenal. I still highlight after doing a wash, and I don't wash every model. It depends on the situation.

It's not cheating if that's what you are getting at. It's just a different path towards the same goal, a painted model.

I think i speak for all the viewers not commenters when i say, what do you mean by this?

is it not fair to spray all of your models to paint them?

please elaborate.

I have painted a whole army using the Base coat, pick out the details, dip meathod. I did not use army painter but the philosophy and the technique are the same. I have to say that i have had a lot of people approach me and say how awsome my army looked. when i told them it was dipped they got upset. Why.

I think it is upsetting to people when they see that my army looks as good or better than theirs and it took less than 10% of the time. I even feel that way when i look at my other armies. Why on earth was i so stupid that i went about painting them the old fashioned way instead of just using the army painter/dip meathod.

Now i dont stress on how armies get painted. Plan ahead. Plan to use the dip, washes, base coat the models so you have to do a minimum of painting to finish them, etc. If you are happy with the end result then do it.

Dark Angels Champ-Master wrote:Is army painter really fair? What are your thoughts? I think its not.

I think you need to explain what you mean. How isa range of painting products 'fair' or 'unfair'...?

insaniak wrote:I think you need to explain what you mean. How isa range of painting products 'fair' or 'unfair'...?

If the poor farmers who grow tins of Army Painter are being paid a fair wage I suppose... though I have never seen a fair trade logo on any of their products so I guess it is unfair Army Painter...

SilverMK2 wrote:

If the poor farmers who grow tins of Army Painter are being paid a fair wage I suppose... though I have never seen a fair trade logo on any of their products so I guess it is unfair Army Painter...

Quote of the day

Excuse my ignorance but whats army painter? I did a quick google and all i could find was the brand Army Painter. Is it the whole company you have a problem with or a product in particular?

To a point I really can understand Dark Angels - When I started out painting, I took a long time with each mini and still only had subpar results - then I saw pics of a tyranid force, which had been dipped - and they looked sooo much better than my first figures. So, in a way, I felt kinda cheated, that with all the time and effort spent, other people took the "easy" route and had better results than me.

Nowadays my skills have progressed to a point where I know, that with a little elbow grease I can achieve better results with painting, than other people can with dipping.

But I do think that dipping has its place in the community. Not everyone is a master painter and some guys just want to get a painted army on the table and play. Especially when playing a hordes army like tyranids or skaven.

Just my two cents :-),


IK-Painter


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Brother Azul wrote:Excuse my ignorance but whats army painter? I did a quick google and all i could find was the brand Army Painter. Is it the whole company you have a problem with or a product in particular?

I think he refers to the Quickshade brand of Army Painter. Just watch the vid Alexandra made ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dXKD1zHpE7w ) about the product for better understanding :-).

Cheers,


IK-Painter

@OP: Care to elaborate how a painting technique can be "not fair"? As long as I think about it, I simply can´t wrap my mind around the concept. Even if it would allow for Golden Demon level paintjobs, techniques march on. I doubt anyone ever asked if drybrushing or washes are "not fair", so why would be dipping?

I don´t dip, by the way. I prefer a more controled approach with washing/highlighting.

Are you 12 or something?

"It's not fair" is a line only uttered by kids.

Calling dipping unfair is very snobby when you consider that most painters will only have the time and ability to gain passable to moderate skill in the work they pull off on their armies.

Factor into that the people who just want an army that looks decent on the table and can't spend more time than they have on an individual mini.

I don't class myself as anything more than an average painter (as my gallery no doubt attests), but I know how to use washes to add depth to a mini and this seems to me to be nothing more than an extreme extension of that technique and something that I would consider using myself.

Washing, highlighting and drybrushing are all ways of "cheating" to create an effect, why is using this product to get a large number of table quality minis unfair?

lol, "unfair"? Is this a serious thread or are we being trolled?

No, of course it's not. Why the hell would you think that?

Washing, highlighting and drybrushing are all ways of "cheating" to create an effect, why is using this product to get a large number of table quality minis unfair?

Oh, don't forget airbrushing. That's so unfair, I think everyone's tanks should be covered in thick paint with ugly brush strokes like mine are.

I've seen some discussions in various places around the web and the 'unfair' bit seems to boil down to one of the following things:

1. A spot of jealousy - Some other guy painted his entire army to a better standard than me in 10% of the time using less resources/effort

2. Elitism - It's a modelling and painting hobby. Look at the painstaking methods some of the older/more experienced/generally better modellers/painters use and how long they spend on one model. Then an Army Painter dude comes along who has done x10 the amount of models they have in a lot less time using comparatively basic techniques and they don't look half bad. If you were to place both lots of models side by side, you would be able to tell the difference in quality if you'd been painting for any lenght of time, but anyone at novice painting level or less will ask how both were painted and I garuntee you that of those who pay attention, a big chunk will want to follow the army painter method. Think about how that makes an experience painter feel? They came in to the hobby the hard way and are advocates of traditional and maybe some of the more modern painting methods and then newbies to the hobby barge in with Army Painter and start showing people up. That would be a tad upsetting I think

3. Little understanding of the technique - It does, from the outside looking in, seem a bit too good to be true. A little like when you speak to your first Red Shirt and they tell you that painting those ultramarines to the standard they are in the cabinet is easy peasy and if you pop down on day 'x' they will show you how to do it and you are left more than a little dissappointed by the results..."How the hell can such a basic painting method be used to paint an army in such a short time to such a good standard. I bet there's a step or technique I'm not seeing here..."

Disclaimer - This is my opinion, based on lots of lurking on a myraid of other forums and after a tonne of conversations with other modellers (Lots of them grumpy old gits) and I do not assume that everyone falls in to one category or another.


I could just be spewing gak though...

Yes, dipping is clearly overpowered and cheesy and should be banned from tournaments

Nothing is unfair or cheating when it comes painting.

There are only skill level, time involved and results.

Do I care that someone spent 10% of the time with the same or better results then me? No, I want to know how they did it.

Some people can't paint and dipping, as far as I can see how it's done, as a finishing method yields better results for them. Then there are skilled painters who use dipping with awesome results. THEN you have races *cough*tyrnaid*cough* that lend themselves better to the technique.

And in the end, a painted army is a lot better then a not painted army.

It is only unfair if you use it in a speed painting competition where it is explicitly against the rules of the competition.

Other than that, it is as 'fair' as any other method.

Why be jealous or upset at how another person gets their army painted? Frankly that seems juvinile to me.

Jake

This is hilarious! Do people really feel this way? A guy in another thread the other day was going off about how using an airbrush was "cheating" lol.

That's like saying I cheated because I took my car to work and you rode your bike. There's nothing unfair about it, it's simply a different method.
Someone must have self confidence issues to care so much about how someone else painted their army....

Fair? unfair? This must be a joke.... How can any form of modeling or painting be fair or not.. I dont get it...

I just want to point out that my earlier post was based on what I had seen in other places when people saw this technique as unfair.

I'm all for the method personally, I just don't use it.

Ummmmm. Unfair? What?


It's PAINT. To be honest, if i knew how to do it and had the equipment i would have sprayed/dipped my entire necron army.

To say that a method of painting is unfair because it's nto how you did is.....ridiculous.

To each his own. yes they dipped and painte masses of medoel a lot faster than you, but by doign that they may have sacrifice some fo the finer quality and detaisl that can be achieved any painstakingly paintign each model in a more "traditional" way.

As has been said. No method is the "right" one. For identical horde armies (nids, skaven...adn necron warriors IMHO)) dipping can be an abdolute god-send. more more ornate or detaisl heavy armies (GK or BA for example) dippign will case you to lose a lot of details and your armie coudl even look worse because of it.

For my IW i use the one model at a time approach, and get moderate results. if i ever do a horde army, you can bet your ass i'll be looking for the right shade of spray paint.

What if you dipped, and then painted over it to achieve better than tabletop quality results? Will that be unfair?

I agree with the consensus, fair isn't the right right term. I don't get upset by dippers because i feel i can create a better result through painting.

I do feel a stab of jealousy when i see well done airbrushing though simply because i don't have the budget for one. I don't whine about it because i know its just that, jealousy.

Same thing really.

I don't see the issue with dipping and what not. It's the persons own technique that they want to use...

What the problem is?

Dark Angels Champ-Master wrote:Is army painter really fair? What are your thoughts? I think its not.

Painting isn't a competition, nor part of the game itself. Army painter is a tool as are all paints, tools, brushes, pigments, paint markers, etc., etc.

If the end result is a fig that the owner likes, then the road taken to get there is irrelevant.

Thus your question is illogical.

Not to mention it sort of smacks of elitism...

As long as the miniature is on the table and painted, how it got there doesn't bother me. Would I use that method for all of my armies? Heck no, however for certain armies, it works wonders.

Are Citadel washes cheating? In some ways, Devlan Mud does almost the exact same thing as army painter for the middle tone, and badab black for the dark tone.

Anything is better than the gray/metal horde that I see across the table from me all too often.

I also happen to think that dipping, done correctly, can look really nice.

I'm not jealous. If I wanted to buy quick shade or a primer I could do that quite right now. And in fact Dave_Salmon, I paint my models nicely for my age if you check my gallery.
-Thanks

Dark Angels Champ-Master wrote:I'm not jealous. If I wanted to buy quick shade or a primer I could do that quite right now. And in fact Dave_Salmon, I paint my models nicely for my age if you check my gallery.
-Thanks

I guess the jealousy i was referring to was more aimed at the efficiency not the result.

I didn't mean my comment to sound as egotistical as it may have come off.

I think that dipping is an excellent resources for players. I am an older player and I just started dipping my models. for my tabletop paints, who cares? I just want them to look decent not win contests.

"cheating" to me would only be paying someone else to paint for you, and claiming the work as your own. otherwise all is fair in love and warhammer.

just dipping the models is not really enough though, there are better techniques for them to turn out better. its an excellent method, but its not a complete paint job IMHO.

Kroothawk wrote:Yes, dipping is clearly overpowered and cheesy and should be banned from tournaments

I loled. ZOMG nerf dipping!

Why be upset? I hate playing against an army that isn't painted, I'd rather something look painted than nothing at all.

Dark Angels Champ-Master wrote:I'm not jealous. If I wanted to buy quick shade or a primer I could do that quite right now. And in fact Dave_Salmon, I paint my models nicely for my age if you check my gallery.
-Thanks

If you aren't jealous, why did you make a thread slandering it?

On topic: I think that Quickshade is a great product that helps sub-par painters like me put a decent looking army on the table. (army painter: you can send me a lifetime supply for my endorsement)

I'm all for it if it encourages players to field a painted army on the battlefield, and judging by how many have mentioned unpainted armies it seems like it is a worldwide problem. I don't use the army painter stuff simply because I don't trust it to do what I want(pool in the right places) so I'll stick to citadel washes controlled by my brush. But if it (army painter) encourages people to finally paint their armies, then please by all means DO SO! It will make for a more impressive battlefield!

nope, I wouldn't do it because I find that it does make the process of the model a little "too easy" and takes some of the fun out of it but I have nothing against it, I would gladly paint against a painted army rather than an unpainted army

Wow. the opinion on dakka is as fickle as anywhere else. just a few months ago lots of posts on a similar topic were rants against dipping. Ahh reaon sets in.
So good that you have come around dakka. I myself like faceing any army that is not either grey plasitc or primer.

Dark Angels Champ-Master wrote:Is army painter really fair? What are your thoughts? I think its not.

It's not fair people can paint there armies with a selection of sprays/dips/basing materials quicker than someone using a small brush to do everything?

awwwwwwwwwwwwww didums

Dark Angels Champ-Master wrote:I'm not jealous. If I wanted to buy quick shade or a primer I could do that quite right now. And in fact Dave_Salmon, I paint my models nicely for my age if you check my gallery.
-Thanks

and its unfair because?

sennacherib wrote:Wow. the opinion on dakka is as fickle as anywhere else. just a few months ago lots of posts on a similar topic were rants against dipping. Ahh reaon sets in.

hobbyists are like mindless drone like teenage girls, they'll jump on the latest fad quicker than an essex girl jumps on male genitals

Soon you know it, commission painters will be called unfair. It really depends on the people I suppose at the time. I have seen plenty of topics for and against dipping

BTW Army painter color spray cans (or at least the ones I have seen) are great! Very easy to do undead or space marines with them

Everyone is different, myself peronally i work away from home sometimes 6 wks away and home for a few days, but so far i have painted all my models, and i am a reasonable painter. however i have toyed with the idea of dipping purely for the reason of time saving, when/if i get home i spend most my time painting when i'd rather be playing, I dont see it as cheating like someone said earlier its" another tool in the arsenal" unless they beat me in a painting comp with a dipped model (i would actually whinge lol)

I have to wonder how many people who wail and gnash their teeth at dipping also hate playing against unpainted armies.

What is unfair is putting in the effort to do any amount of painting, only to play an opponent who's army is either Primer Black or Naked Grey.

insaniak wrote:

Dark Angels Champ-Master wrote:Is army painter really fair? What are your thoughts? I think its not.

I think you need to explain what you mean. How isa range of painting products 'fair' or 'unfair'...?

Another way to be elitist or snobby. Its like saying "armies must have X number of colors to be used" or the like.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

kenshin620 wrote:Soon you know it, commission painters will be called unfair.

They are...dont you know everyone should have their whole army painted to Golden Demon standards before ever attempting to play a game with it.

dave_salmon wrote:I've seen some discussions in various places around the web and the 'unfair' bit seems to boil down to one of the following things:

1. A spot of jealousy
2. Elitism
3. Little understanding of the technique -

Great post mate. That's exactly how I feel about it. As Zatguy says, some armies are perfect for dipping - such as Tyranids.

To the OP. Your figures are alright. Very much "average tabletop quality" if I'm to be generous. I notice that you've used washes throughout, though. Which is much the same "cheating" as using army painter. Well, AP would typically yield better results than what you have on your Deathwing. Maybe you should give it a try on a test figure and see how it goes if you can easily buy a can?

I've only ever dipped two units - tyranid gaunts and genestealers. And that was about 4-5 years ago using a local brand of stain varnish before Army Painter was around. It was mostly a "historical" technique back then. Maybe I should pick up a can of Army Painter myself and try it out. If it's any good, then I'll use that as well. It's always worth adding any new technique to the painting toolbox.

scipio.au wrote:

dave_salmon wrote:I've seen some discussions in various places around the web and the 'unfair' bit seems to boil down to one of the following things:

1. A spot of jealousy
2. Elitism
3. Little understanding of the technique -

Great post mate. That's exactly how I feel about it. As Zatguy says, some armies are perfect for dipping - such as Tyranids.

To the OP. Your figures are alright. Very much "average tabletop quality" if I'm to be generous. I notice that you've used washes throughout, though. Which is much the same "cheating" as using army painter. Well, AP would typically yield better results than what you have on your Deathwing. Maybe you should give it a try on a test figure and see how it goes if you can easily buy a can?

I've only ever dipped two units - tyranid gaunts and genestealers. And that was about 4-5 years ago using a local brand of stain varnish before Army Painter was around. It was mostly a "historical" technique back then. Maybe I should pick up a can of Army Painter myself and try it out. If it's any good, then I'll use that as well. It's always worth adding any new technique to the painting toolbox.

You are exactly correct. You'd never hear anyone who was good at painting say that using AP stuff is cheating.

But, in truth, I have no issue with dipping minis in any form or way.

I find the term cheating (again also mentioned before) wildly inappropriate.

there is no rule that your models have to be painted, except to play in GW stores or sponsored events. that is because they company profits from that when you have to paint the models you buy. nothing against it, just is what it is.

at you FLGS, if you face a guy with all naked grey or black models, nots not cheating because its not a rule, its just not very sporting. takes some of the fun out of imagining a battle happening.

really what everyone likes about a soild well done paint job, is the life that it brings to the game and to the models themselves. its all part of the story, and thats kind of the excitement. watching a battle unfold in front of you with pieces you can relate to (or hate) but things that stir up imagination and progress the game.

unpainted models, primed models, poorly painted models (up for contention) aren't BAD or wrong, they just don't inspire as much into the game.

we WANT to immerse ourselves into the battle at hand.

if dipping a model brings that vibrence to the tabletop, and a good time is had by all, then i say dip away.

If one discovers a techniques which gives him better results with less effort, why shouldn't he go that route?

Dark Angels Champ-Master wrote:I'm not jealous. If I wanted to buy quick shade or a primer I could do that quite right now. And in fact Dave_Salmon, I paint my models nicely for my age if you check my gallery.
-Thanks

Your stuff isn't bad, but it would certainly benefit from a primer to keep the paint from rubbing/chipping off, solid layering to get even coats of paint, and certainly a wash or a dip in quick shade in order to give the minis depth/highlighting/shading (I'm referring to your dark angels).

Hey, isn't Dark Angels Champ-Master the guy that was behind that dumb 'help my friend stop changing armies' thread?

I can see this thread has the potentional to get out of hand...

So i went and had a gander at that Quickshade stuff, Looks legit.

nectarprime wrote:There's nothing unfair about it, it's simply a different method.

this pretty much sums it up

CptJake wrote:It is only unfair if you use it in a speed painting competition where it is explicitly against the rules of the competition.

well,army painter takes ages to dry,so this wouldnt make sense in a speed painting competition anyway XD

my 2 cents:

i think its a great way to paint,if you know how to use it.
its not like you can prime your mini,dip it and you get a nice looking mini.

you need to know on what colors it looks good,how to apply it and so on. and done right you are not much faster then using a wash(plus the time it needs to dry up)

I will admit, when I discovered Gyphonne Sepia and Badab Black when painting my gold Space Marines, I felt like I was cheating, but in a good way. Such a simple method and it makes minis look so good.

Tek wrote:What is unfair is putting in the effort to do any amount of painting, only to play an opponent who's army is either Primer Black or Naked Grey.

This. A million times. Though my 40k army is not fully painted (about 40%), my spaceship fleets are. It makes me sad to play against my friends with unpainted spaceships when I've put in time to make my side look good. Especially when the battles are part of a campaign with a great narrative and background.

I don't care how people paint, so long as it is painted or working towards it. A lot of dipped armies look pretty decent.

I think it is completly fair, just expensive and lazy. :/

40k Ninja wrote:I think it is completly fair, just expensive and lazy. :/

Before Army Painter started selling their own tins of the stuff, there was Minwax wood stain, does pretty much the same thing for a fraction of the cost. On certain armies or units it looks great, others not so much. So far, I've used it on several units of: Guard, Kroot, Skaven, and Tyranids. I'm also a fan of the colored primers, if I can do the primer stage as well as the majority of the basecoat in seconds, sign me up.

Whenever I find a new method that looks better, saves me time, or both, I do my best to learn about it so that I can use it when it makes sense to. I consider it another tool in my toolbox.

LeBaron wrote:

Although... it's probably a good way to paint the forces of Mordor....

40k Ninja wrote:I think it is completly fair, just expensive and lazy. :/

how is using armypainter expensive?

its 24 euro and is enough for hundreds of minis(well if you apply it with a brush and dont dip it).

and while it looks good for certain armys, theres a certain point where your minis wont look better anymore

Buying pre made models that only need to be glued together is cheating. Every model should be made by hand as it isn't fair to those that scratchbuild their armies that others can just buy armies off the shelf. I also believe that paints should be handmade because buying pre-made paint is just as bad as buying off the shelf models and the same for glue and everything else.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

augustus5 wrote:

I think he refers to the Quickshade brand of Army Painter. Just watch the vid Alexandra made ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dXKD1zHpE7w ) about the product for better understanding :-).

Clicked on the link and almost wished I didn't. Is the person narrating the video in the link an actual woman? Because although you don't ever see anything but the painted nails, the voice screams drag queen.

My Grandma, what big hands you have.

Never looked at the Army Painter products before. Nice!

If i had known about it a year or so ago i probably would have gone for an Imperial Fists army and used that yellow spray to get a decent colour.

It's a shame they dont do metallic shades as well or i'd buy a can to mass base paint my IWs.

Praxiss wrote:Never looked at the Army Painter products before. Nice!

If i had known about it a year or so ago i probably would have gone for an Imperial Fists army and used that yellow spray to get a decent colour.

It's a shame they dont do metallic shades as well or i'd buy a can to mass base paint my IWs.

They actually have a metal color primer, called plate mail that works perfectly for the armies whose primary color is steel, IW, Grey Knights, ect.

Hmmmmm. Thanks for the info.

Dark Angels Champ-Master wrote:Is army painter really fair? What are your thoughts? I think its not.

There is no fair in the hobby.

Better ask yourself why do you paint miniatures to begin with?

For me painting miniatures is "me-time". Ever since i got back into the hobby i notice that my concentration is better, my eye-hand coordination is better, and I even quit smoking (after being a heavy smoker for 20 years). Painting is a hobby and should be treated as such. Its not a competition (but it appears that it is competition for some)

If someone invests 10x less time than me and has a prettier army, all I can say is that he rocks, but that doesn't automatically mean that I suck, but it certainly beats all the kids that come to our local game club and take pride in not painting their armies since they are there to play the game and not waste time on painting.

I can understand the OP's point. I do find it odd when people take pride in models they have dipped. They are your models and if you want to dip them there is nothing wrong with that but you can't really take pride in a model which has been painted using a method that requires no skill (I have experience dipping and it isn't hard). I prefer to play painted models and if dipping is your prefered method then do it but taking credit for great painting when others have at least put in some effort seems wrong to me.

HamHamLunchbox wrote:
how is using armypainter expensive?
its 24 euro and is enough for hundreds of minis(well if you apply it with a brush and dont dip it).

He probably means in comparison to the various off-the-shelf Wood Stain/varnish products that people were using before AP came along.

4M2A wrote:I can understand the OP's point. I do find it odd when people take pride in models they have dipped. They are your models and if you want to dip them there is nothing wrong with that but you can't really take pride in a model which has been painted using a method that requires no skill (I have experience dipping and it isn't hard). I prefer to play painted models and if dipping is your prefered method then do it but taking credit for great painting when others have at least put in some effort seems wrong to me.

Maybe folks who don't feel they have a lot of skill take pride in getting an army painted, that looks decent, using techniques they are comfortable with?

Why care what others feel proud about? Seems pretty condescending and petty to me.

Jake

4M2A - it does take skill - figures still need to be painted neatly and carefully. Just as neatly - or even more so than any other figure in fact since you can't go back and touch up areas that have been shaded.

Taking credit for great painting? Can't take pride? No skill? Mate, if someone dips then it's their work and they can be as proud as they like about it. Some effort?

What a load of elitist BS.

Ever used a wash or a glaze? Ever "liberally apply(ied) Devlan Mud to the whole model"? Same concept, different execution. Lazy.

You should have wet-blended the shading and the highlighting instead of being lazy and using a wash for shading.

Those last two paragraphs were sarcastic, but using the same logic as found in your post.

40k Ninja wrote:I think it is completly fair, just expensive and lazy. :/

You have no room to talk. Last I heard, you're so damn lazy that you don't even attempt to bother grinding your own pigments to make your paint, and instead buy pots right off the shelf.

4M2A wrote:I can understand the OP's point. I do find it odd when people take pride in models they have dipped. They are your models and if you want to dip them there is nothing wrong with that but you can't really take pride in a model which has been painted using a method that requires no skill (I have experience dipping and it isn't hard). I prefer to play painted models and if dipping is your prefered method then do it but taking credit for great painting when others have at least put in some effort seems wrong to me.

Hahahahahha wow!

Looks like you've used some washes on your miniatures.

Well I guess dipping was different when I did it. Dipping just requires you to be able to paint within areas. Painting single colours really isn't that difficult. It may appear elitist but IMO if someone takes the time and effort to learn how to paint a miniature without dipping they have a right to be proud of it. You wouldn't see someone who built furniture from scratch as equally skilled as someone who put together a kit and it would be wrong for them to claim they were.

I don't wish to take anything away from people who dip and they should still be proud that they bothered to paint their armies, as so many people don't, but I think it is unfair to claim they have put in as much effort and skill as someone who painted their army in the normal way. The whole point of dip is that it's easy and fast, you can't argue it takes as much time and skill as standard painting.

IMO it isn't right to say your a skilled painter because your dipped figures came out well. This isn't to say that people who dip are bad painters (they may not enjoy painting or not have time), just that those models don't demostrate good painting. I don't look down on dipped figures, they are still above the normal. However when I compare a dipped model and a normal model of the same quality I believe the person who put the time and effort into painting their model has more right to be proud of it.

4M2A wrote:Well I guess dipping was different when I did it. Dipping just requires you to be able to paint within areas. Painting single colours really isn't that difficult. It may appear elitist but IMO if someone takes the time and effort to learn how to paint a miniature without dipping they have a right to be proud of it. You wouldn't see someone who built furniture from scratch as equally skilled as someone who put together a kit and it would be wrong for them to claim they were.

Crappy example. No one is claiming someone who dips their minis is as skilled as a gold demon winner.

4M2A wrote:I don't wish to take anything away from people who dip and they should still be proud that they bothered to paint their armies, as so many people don't, but I think it is unfair to claim they have put in as much effort and skill as someone who painted their army in the normal way. The whole point of dip is that it's easy and fast, you can't argue it takes as much time and skill as standard painting.

Again, no one is claiming they they have as much skill. That does not mean they cannot be proud of the skill they do have and the results they got with that skill level.

4M2A wrote:IMO it isn't right to say your a skilled painter because your dipped figures came out well. This isn't to say that people who dip are bad painters (they may not enjoy painting or not have time), just that those models don't demostrate good painting. I don't look down on dipped figures, they are still above the normal. However when I compare a dipped model and a normal model of the same quality I believe the person who put the time and effort into painting their model has more right to be proud of it..

Actually your logic is flawed, as well as elitist. If some one can crank out gold demon quality figures with no problem, they don't really have anything to be proud of. If it isn't hard for them, or challenging, where is the source of pride? If it is okay to feel pride at something that was not a challenge, how much more pride should the new kid feel at having painted his first army, regardless of technique? A kid who has never painted has every right to be proud of his first figure, no matter how crappy it is in comparison to the gold demon winner. He has done something he never did before. Should he then strive to be better? Of course. That still does not diminish the pride he should feel.

No they have the right to be proud that they got to that level. No one is born a good painter. Some people start off better than others but to be a good painter you will have to practice. The amount of practice varies but you still have to put in effort. I am not trying to say that people who dip have no right to be proud, as I said they put some work in and did more than many people do. However my problem is with people who dip then compare their work to people who did put a lot of work into getting their models to the same quality. IMO that is demeaning the effort people put into painting by hand.

No one on this thread is comparing their skill but IRL I have come across people who do often comapre their skill- and that was what I said in my first post. Dipping is advertised as a fast quick way to paint and that is exactly what it is. It's not lazy, you have still put the time into using that technique however neither is it as skilled as someone who painted by hand.

Hmm, I do believe successful troll was successful.

Although, to take part in the discussion, it's simply nice to see some people taking to the hobby with some sort of gusto - most of the people I play against barely pick up an aerosol primer, let alone a tin of dip.

Troll? If your suggesting i'm a troll then you're mistaken. Having a different view doesn't make some one a troll. If I had posted a thread ranting at people who dip then maybe but so far all I have done is contributed my opinion to an open thread.

You have a right to be proud of any model that looks good once you're done, no matter the method of painting used. Both dipping and washing dramatically speed up the time you can have a tabletop quality army ready so I'm generally in favor of them.

As for dipping, it's been my experience that most dipped models look like eyesores running amok on the table. That's because you have only one color, usually something brown, that an entire multi-colored models is dipped into. Frequently I see models dipped into something (usually varnish) that's usually too thick to look very good on miniatures.

Washing is superior to dipping because you can target specific areas with specific wash colors and better control how much wash each basecoat color receives. I use washes myself and love them. You can't call washing "cheating" either, cause GW makes a line of washes specifically for use on their figures.

GW washes are often used a bit bit differently though.

Aside from the point, I really love that old video of the Army Painter guy thrashing away with his model - he looks like he's going to do his shoulder in.

Breotan wrote:You have a right to be proud of any model that looks good once you're done, no matter the method of painting used. Both dipping and washing dramatically speed up the time you can have a tabletop quality army ready so I'm generally in favor of them.

+1

I love Quickshade. It helps a sub-par painter like me be able to field better looking models. I have no interest in becoming a better painter. It's just not a part of the hobby that I care for.

There will always be trolls/elitists like 4M2A on this board. There always have been. Why some people feel the need to tell others how they run their hobby is beyond me, but there are certainly enough of them out there doing it. It's best to ignore them and let them continue preaching from their high horse.

On a side note, Quickshade works wonderfully as a brush on product.

Painted models win over non painted models no matter how they got there. Seriously would you rather play against a sea of grey, or a dipped army?

I've seen new young players very proud of there models which to us my look like dog turd, are they not allowed to take pride despite us all knowing its rubbish?

I would guess not now then.

Dark Angels Champ-Master wrote:Is army painter really fair? What are your thoughts? I think its not.

Forgive me for not reading the entire thread but...

Who in the bloody poop are you, or anyone else to that matter, to judge the fairness of a painting technique?

Time for a gaming history lesson.

You started gaming in 2010. People have been doing the "dip" (with wood stain) for nearly 20 years before you even picked up a mini and at least 15 before the "invention" of Army painter Quickshade!

IMO, the only thing unfair about Army painter is how much more it costs than the Minwax polyshades that folks used before it was "invented".

All right I see your point, I hate seeing unpainted models in the battle field. Normally I don't play until I have painted my minis.

I am being no more elitist than people who view a painted model as superior to a non painted one. What right do you have to judge a painted one than a bare plastic one? Our criteria may be different but we are doing the same thing- applying our own standards to others. Since the majority of people in this thread would see a dipped model as better than an undercoated one your being as elitist as I am.

I think Army Painter is unfair. Because you know, people can paint their army and it looks better than mine. And NO ONE can have a better army than me, otherwise I get angry and kick puppies. Anyone who claims 40k is a hobby or "fun" is going to get kicked in the groin. By me! Because what 40k is really is all about is winning, winning playing games, but winning in painting too. I need to be the most winningest person ever, otherwise there will be hell to pay! Army Painter is unfair because it makes me lose the painting game! Anything that makes me lose is unfair! I AM SO ANGRY! GRRRR. RAWR. *headbutts the mailman*


Automatically Appended Next Post:

4M2A wrote:I am being no more elitist than people who view a painted model as superior to a non painted one. What right do you have to judge a painted one than a bare plastic one? Our criteria may be different but we are doing the same thing- applying our own standards to others. Since the majority of people in this thread would see a dipped model as better than an undercoated one your being as elitist as I am.

Yes, and this is the same logic which says murder is exactly the same as jaywalking. After all, one is just as much of a crime as the other.

Ok ok. But don't you agree that it's unfair in painting comps?

Depends what the rules of the contest are. Though in general, no.

Dark Angels Champ-Master wrote:Ok ok. But don't you agree that it's unfair in painting comps?

No, they are unlikely to win being dipped, unless the competition is pretty bad

Also a competition can dictate rules, if they don't want dipped models they can say so, but t hey could also say no airbrushing because that's not fair either.

Yeah, true but I don't care about painting contests, I care more about gaming. Evan though I am a better painter than a gamer.

XD

Dark Angels Champ-Master wrote:Ok ok. But don't you agree that it's unfair in painting comps?

Well, it'd be a handicap in a painting contest. If you think it's unfair that someone is pretty much automatically ruling themselves out of winning a painting competition, then I suppose I'll let you have it.

Dark Angels Champ-Master wrote:Yeah, true but I don't care about painting contests, I care more about gaming. Evan though I am a better painter than a gamer.

... sooooo... what exactly are you complaining about?

Painting isn't an integral part of wargaming, however playing with nice looking armies is. It doesn't matter how people get there.

If colour primer sprays and magic dip helps people put nice looking armies on table, I'm all for them.

As far as Golden Daemon etc. awards go, it's the result that matters, not the techniques used to achieve them. I very much doubt anyone could win a high level competition with colour primer and magic dip.

If you start to worry about "artificial aids" where should it stop? Renaissance painters had to make their own paints. Does that mean buying Citadel or Vallejo paints is "unfair".

Honestly, whatever.

Next thing you know it'll be unfair to have well written lists...

I don't tell people their methods are "unfair" and they don't tell me that mine are. Win-Win scenario honestly. The minute I start to push views on other people, then we've got problems.

I don't know what fair means. But I'd rather throw down against a dipped army long before a great grey horde.

When I play I appreciate the effort put in to painting the army. I don't care whether it's dipped , painted or even commission painted.

I enjoy then game more when the opposing army looks like some attempt was made at painting.

Yeah I guess, I would appreciate it too.

Nope, certainly not unfair (including in competitions). Ultimately, the goal should be to play games with fully painted figures. If someone takes shortcuts to get there ... they got there. I'm cool with that.

Personally, my goal is to get acceptable quality figures out with the least amount of effort. That includes:

- Priming in colors other than white or black
- Painting with the largest brush I can get away with (#4 and #2 flats are my favorite)
- Full figure washes
- Creating templates in powerpoint and using them as masks for freehand iconography
- Using hobby tape to mask off areas for hazard stripes
- and many more

Here's an example of some Death Guard that were done using the above techniques. Primed Forest Green, basecoated, given a full body wash or paynes grey/brown, etc.

Ifurita, those look astonishing. I'm currently painting some plague marines and i tried using washes but i'm really unhappy with the results. i was following this guide:
http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.php?showtopic=162940

which shows the painter undercoating with white, then washes of black, brown and green, and it looks really good. so i gave it a go, i undercoated in light grey, and started with armour wash (i thought that would be close enough to black to make no difference), and already they terrible. i've only done a couple but i'm scared to do anymore because they look so bad. the wash has coelesced into droplets in odd places around the minis. it's not run into the recesses like it's supposed to, it's just bled away and formed into rubbish looking lumps. it looks like the surface of the model has resisted the wash completely. i thought it might be something to do with the finecast, because the backpacks are regular (non-finecast) resin and they've come out perfectly good. have i done something wrong?

anyway, this is the first time i've seen this army painter quickshade stuff. i don't really have a problem if someone wants to use it but it's something i would never, ever use. painting, for me, is three-quarters of the fun of the hobby, and it looks to me like this isn't really painting. if they're happy to do it, fine. i'm not going to throw my toys out the pram. for someone who only wants to get a decent-looking army on the board and isn't concerned about painting as a part of the hobby, i can see it would be perfect. i've got a couple friends that it would be perfect for - in fact i might introduce them to it as a quick-and-easy way to paint (one friend of mine only buys pre-painted minis off ebay). they've utilised a process that's efficient with good results, so there's nothing wrong with that. but for me, i want to field an army that i've painted with my own hand and that i'm really proud of. personally, i just wouldn't be proud of an army that i've painted using this process.

back to ifruta's models above, you've used various techniques that produce good results, but you've used them with skill, so it's not quite the same as the quickshade, to my mind.

Ifurita wrote:Nope, certainly not unfair (including in competitions). Ultimately, the goal should be to play games with fully painted figures. If someone takes shortcuts to get there ... they got there. I'm cool with that.

Personally, my goal is to get acceptable quality figures out with the least amount of effort. That includes:

- Priming in colors other than white or black
- Painting with the largest brush I can get away with (#4 and #2 flats are my favorite)
- Full figure washes
- Creating templates in powerpoint and using them as masks for freehand iconography
- Using hobby tape to mask off areas for hazard stripes
- and many more

Here's an example of some Death Guard that were done using the above techniques. Primed Forest Green, basecoated, given a full body wash or paynes grey/brown, etc.

They're ok, but if you look at Dark Angels Chapter-Master's gallery, you'll see how amazing they could be if you didn't cheat!!

/sarcasm

Seriously though, that is a very, very nice paint job.

Hey, they look okay, but since you used washes you had better not be proud of them.

(yes, that was sarcasm, they look darned good).

Thanks, I'm Still a kid, I'v got lots to learn!

CptJake wrote:Hey, they look okay, but since you used washes you had better not be proud of them.

(yes, that was sarcasm, they look darned good).

a dig at my post?

i didn't say you're not allowed to be proud of models painted using a certain process. i'm saying that i wouldn't be. mm?

seejay wrote:

back to ifruta's models above, you've used various techniques that produce good results, but you've used them with skill, so it's not quite the same as the quickshade, to my mind.

Quickshade is the same as a wash, but it's not water based. Can you explain to me why you think they are so different?

It's not the process it's how reliant the technique is on it. I personally wouldn't feel as proud of a model that I base coated then dipped as a model I base coated, washed, highlight then picked out the details. For a lot of people feeling proud is more about effort and improving skills than end result.

I'm not saying it's wrong (and even if I were my opinion is only as important as you make it) just that I don't understand being proud of it.

Norsehawk wrote:

Praxiss wrote:Never looked at the Army Painter products before. Nice!

If i had known about it a year or so ago i probably would have gone for an Imperial Fists army and used that yellow spray to get a decent colour.

It's a shame they dont do metallic shades as well or i'd buy a can to mass base paint my IWs.

They actually have a metal color primer, called plate mail that works perfectly for the armies whose primary color is steel, IW, Grey Knights, ect.

now this intrigues me! I will have to try this!

Rimmy wrote:

Norsehawk wrote:

Praxiss wrote:Never looked at the Army Painter products before. Nice!

If i had known about it a year or so ago i probably would have gone for an Imperial Fists army and used that yellow spray to get a decent colour.

It's a shame they dont do metallic shades as well or i'd buy a can to mass base paint my IWs.

They actually have a metal color primer, called plate mail that works perfectly for the armies whose primary color is steel, IW, Grey Knights, ect.

now this intrigues me! I will have to try this!

I love it, I'm actually going to pick up another can today!

good stuff! I have used the boltgun spray from Citadel, and hated it. just didn't have the same color base nor did it primer the model.

is it a spraypaint, or a true primer?

Well if people who tried to paint and failed and don’t have the backbone to stick to it and get better, then use it. My first mini didn’t get base coated, painted straight onto the plastic, looked like . Cry and give up, no, find out what went wrong fix it, worked harder and harder, i now have won with ever painted mini I have entered to my flgs.
It use to take a day and a half for me to paint a imperial fist, now i can do 3 a day at the high standerd i do them.

But if you wanted your army painted quick with no effort, I dont care. But don’t use it and act like a king, just out of respect for people that try a little harder, you know the ones that sit for hours with a paint brush making every highlight stand out and every colour blend so they can get a wonderful looking mini that they can actually stand behind with a bit of pride...

RogalDorn69 wrote:But if you wanted your army painted quick with no effort, I dont care. But don’t use it and act like a king, just out of respect for people that try a little harder,

...

Seriously?

What a load of gak. Method means nothing. The end results are the only thing that matters. If the final product is something you're happy with, then how you got to that point is completely irrelevant.

nectarprime wrote:

seejay wrote:

back to ifruta's models above, you've used various techniques that produce good results, but you've used them with skill, so it's not quite the same as the quickshade, to my mind.

Quickshade is the same as a wash, but it's not water based. Can you explain to me why you think they are so different?

dipping a model requires no use of skill whatsoever (except in pre-painting it, fair enough, you need a small amount of skill doing that). that's not me getting on my high horse; it's a fairly obvious statement of fact. as i've said before, i don't care if you want to do that, it's none of my business. but i won't be impressed by what you've done because you've not really done anything. using a wash i would say is a technique halfway between dipping a model and actually painting it, so i can slightly understand when you're trying to liken the two things, but there is still a level of skill involved it; some decision making - what colours to use, controlling the ink, applying it in the right places, so on and so forth. it can be done well and it can be done badly. as evidenced by my statement above where i've tried it on my plague marines and it's come out horrible. given a small amount of teaching, a child could use quickshade. which is not me necessarily saying it as a bad thing.

again - use it if you want to. i won't judge you for it. i'm just saying you won't see it anywhere near my painting desk. i adore the hobby of painting far too much to let some super-clever insta-shade stuff ruin the fun for me.

RogalDorn69 wrote:Well if people who tried to paint and failed and don’t have the backbone to stick to it and get better, then use it. My first mini didn’t get base coated, painted straight onto the plastic, looked like . Cry and give up, no, find out what went wrong fix it, worked harder and harder, i now have won with ever painted mini I have entered to my flgs.
It use to take a day and a half for me to paint a imperial fist, now i can do 3 a day at the high standerd i do them.

But if you wanted your army painted quick with no effort, I dont care. But don’t use it and act like a king, just out of respect for people that try a little harder, you know the ones that sit for hours with a paint brush making every highlight stand out and every colour blend so they can get a wonderful looking mini that they can actually stand behind with a bit of pride...

Why would anyone want the respect of someone who makes rude and disrespectful comments like yourself?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

seejay wrote:

nectarprime wrote:

seejay wrote:

back to ifruta's models above, you've used various techniques that produce good results, but you've used them with skill, so it's not quite the same as the quickshade, to my mind.

Quickshade is the same as a wash, but it's not water based. Can you explain to me why you think they are so different?

dipping a model requires no use of skill whatsoever (except in pre-painting it, fair enough, you need a small amount of skill doing that). that's not me getting on my high horse; it's a fairly obvious statement of fact. as i've said before, i don't care if you want to do that, it's none of my business. but i won't be impressed by what you've done because you've not really done anything. using a wash i would say is a technique halfway between dipping a model and actually painting it, so i can slightly understand when you're trying to liken the two things, but there is still a level of skill involved it; some decision making - what colours to use, controlling the ink, applying it in the right places, so on and so forth. it can be done well and it can be done badly. as evidenced by my statement above where i've tried it on my plague marines and it's come out horrible. given a small amount of teaching, a child could use quickshade. which is not me necessarily saying it as a bad thing.

again - use it if you want to. i won't judge you for it. i'm just saying you won't see it anywhere near my painting desk. i adore the hobby of painting far too much to let some super-clever insta-shade stuff ruin the fun for me.

You can use Quickshade with a brush. You can dunk your whole model in wash if you have a big enough container of it. They are both materials used for shading. I fail to see a difference between the two regarding skill. The difference is how you apply it.

As you your en devour with washes, as admitted by your previous post, you didn't really follow the same method as the person you were citing. Trying to use colored washes over a grey primer is, well, obviously not the best idea.

black wash, actually.

tbh, the issue is with the finecast material i believe, as the wash came out perfectly good looking on the ordinary plastic backpacks.

Bookwrack wrote:

RogalDorn69 wrote:But if you wanted your army painted quick with no effort, I dont care. But don’t use it and act like a king, just out of respect for people that try a little harder,

...

Seriously?

What a load of gak. Method means nothing. The end results are the only thing that matters. If the final product is something you're happy with, then how you got to that point is completely irrelevant.

think this out
to save a country (CountryA) the METHOD you could use is killing another (Country B), OR save country A by coming to an agrement with country B, But according to you it dosnt matter because in the end Country A is safe even though one way means killing thousands of people...
Relation,
The first way is easier (drop a nuke, Army Painter) and the other requiers some effort ( come to an agrement, paint by hand) and also this way both Countries are safe, unlike the first method?...
Think of how many more wars there would be if people were ignorant like you, Method is EVERYTHING

my issue is this - if i use wash on a model, it's because i want to achieve a certain effect. i use it on highly textured surfaces, such as fur or chainmail. i wouldn't use it on my loyalist SM or on eldar because i want to achieve a bright, shiny look. so, what effect are you trying to achieve when using quickshade? to my mind, it seems to be "i've painted this mini, but i don't want to shade it. *dunk* there we go".

correct me if i'm wrong?

question, how many shades of quickshade are there? i'm not hugely knowledgable on the subject so everything i've written should be read as "as i understand it..."

seejay wrote:

question, how many shades of quickshade are there? i'm not hugely knowledgable on the subject so everything i've written should be read as "as i understand it..."

3 shades, light, medium, dark

Surely the end result is more important that the means by which it was arrived. There are many techniques, none are more or less 'fair' than another.

The quality of the result is of course partly determined by the method. I have no problem at all in 'dipping' being used in competition pieces... but I doubt you'll win because it's a shortcut technique and looks it. But the overall result is good and dipped armies look fine to me.

The only unfairness I can imagine is if you paid someone else to paint your army and then attempted to win prizes or points at a tournament with it. But that's a different thing to the topic here I think.

i agree, use of the word "fair" was a poor choice. it's neither fair nor unfair, it's just a process like printmaking, photography or word processing.

Yeah thats true I know what you mean.

4M2A wrote:Well I guess dipping was different when I did it. Dipping just requires you to be able to paint within areas. Painting single colours really isn't that difficult. It may appear elitist but IMO if someone takes the time and effort to learn how to paint a miniature without dipping they have a right to be proud of it. You wouldn't see someone who built furniture from scratch as equally skilled as someone who put together a kit and it would be wrong for them to claim they were.

I don't wish to take anything away from people who dip and they should still be proud that they bothered to paint their armies, as so many people don't, but I think it is unfair to claim they have put in as much effort and skill as someone who painted their army in the normal way. The whole point of dip is that it's easy and fast, you can't argue it takes as much time and skill as standard painting.

IMO it isn't right to say your a skilled painter because your dipped figures came out well. This isn't to say that people who dip are bad painters (they may not enjoy painting or not have time), just that those models don't demostrate good painting. I don't look down on dipped figures, they are still above the normal. However when I compare a dipped model and a normal model of the same quality I believe the person who put the time and effort into painting their model has more right to be proud of it.

I think the pride people feel is dependent on the person. A novice could feel as proud of their simple model, which had been dipped or washed, as person completing something to competition standard. Only the person making the model knows what the effort or the accomplishment means to them, how proud someone is of something is not a measure of how good it is objectively. What you seem to want to do is tell people when they have the right to feel proud... it's not really up to you or anyone else.

Fair, unfair.

Just another tool in the toolbox, that's all.

Alongside the airbrush, stippling brushes, weathering pigments (artist pastel chalks), and so on.

Some people take shortcuts that pay off, other folks do it the long way. Both find their rewards. Nothing fair or unfair about it. Life's like that. It sucks, get a helmet.

well, if someone uses it as another tool in a toolbox, as a way of achieving another effect, then i have no issue. someone who, for example, dips an entire army... as i say, it's up them. but it wouldn't be my choice.

I was proud of my first painted model (heroquest barbarian painted with some enamels from my dad's model aircraft sets), and i am equally proud of my more recent work (St.Celestine in full NMM).

I enjoy the challenge of painting and getting better at it. I have no doubts that i can paint to a higher standard than someone who dips their models but then why should i care how they go about their business? I'd probably tell them that their army looked nice but that it could look a heck of a lot better if they tried to push their painting to the next level.

RogalDorn69 wrote:

Bookwrack wrote:

RogalDorn69 wrote:But if you wanted your army painted quick with no effort, I dont care. But don’t use it and act like a king, just out of respect for people that try a little harder,

...

Seriously?

What a load of gak. Method means nothing. The end results are the only thing that matters. If the final product is something you're happy with, then how you got to that point is completely irrelevant.

think this out
to save a country (CountryA) the METHOD you could use is killing another (Country B), OR save country A by coming to an agrement with country B, But according to you it dosnt matter because in the end Country A is safe even though one way means killing thousands of people...
Relation,
The first way is easier (drop a nuke, Army Painter) and the other requiers some effort ( come to an agrement, paint by hand) and also this way both Countries are safe, unlike the first method?...
Think of how many more wars there would be if people were ignorant like you, Method is EVERYTHING

Dakka dakka - where painting the wrong way costs LIVES!

You're also flat out wrong, method means nothing, but if you have to try so hard to make yourself feel superior about how paint your man-dollies, have at it.

RogalDorn69 wrote:

Bookwrack wrote:

RogalDorn69 wrote:But if you wanted your army painted quick with no effort, I dont care. But don’t use it and act like a king, just out of respect for people that try a little harder,

...

Seriously?

What a load of gak. Method means nothing. The end results are the only thing that matters. If the final product is something you're happy with, then how you got to that point is completely irrelevant.

think this out
to save a country (CountryA) the METHOD you could use is killing another (Country B), OR save country A by coming to an agrement with country B, But according to you it dosnt matter because in the end Country A is safe even though one way means killing thousands of people...
Relation,
The first way is easier (drop a nuke, Army Painter) and the other requiers some effort ( come to an agrement, paint by hand) and also this way both Countries are safe, unlike the first method?...
Think of how many more wars there would be if people were ignorant like you, Method is EVERYTHING

Congrats, that is the worst analogy I have ever had the pleasure of reading.

RogalDorn69 wrote:

Bookwrack wrote:

RogalDorn69 wrote:But if you wanted your army painted quick with no effort, I dont care. But don’t use it and act like a king, just out of respect for people that try a little harder,

...

Seriously?

What a load of gak. Method means nothing. The end results are the only thing that matters. If the final product is something you're happy with, then how you got to that point is completely irrelevant.

think this out
to save a country (CountryA) the METHOD you could use is killing another (Country B), OR save country A by coming to an agrement with country B, But according to you it dosnt matter because in the end Country A is safe even though one way means killing thousands of people...
Relation,
The first way is easier (drop a nuke, Army Painter) and the other requiers some effort ( come to an agrement, paint by hand) and also this way both Countries are safe, unlike the first method?...
Think of how many more wars there would be if people were ignorant like you, Method is EVERYTHING

Okay, think this out.

It doesn't matter. It's toy soldiers.

Saying that the techniques by which you paint your models doesn't matter as long as you get a good result is not advocating a 'ends justify the means' approach to life, or government foreign policy.

Tell me, what are the dangers or someone choosing a different technique to another to get a better result? Will people die? Will an atomic bomb explode? Will in fact there be any consequences AT ALL?

This post is very special, rarely do you see something taken to this level of stupid hyperbole.

I would like to put a few points out there.

1) Dipping does have room for technique. Not to the same degree as NMM or shading, but whether dipped or brush-dipped, the amount of dip that you leave on, how it is applied and how tastefully it is removed are all techniques.

2) Many non-dippers seem hung up on the fact that dipping is easier than other methods. That doesn't matter to dippers. Many of us don't like to paint that much. We are impresseed with the fine results of a non-dipper, but we aren't more impressed with you as a person because of the amount of effort you put in. We know it's easy and we see it's ease as a virtue, not as a stumbling block.

3) Some non-dippers focus on the fact that dipping is faster, as though taking more time is necessarily a virtue. That's a pretty big stretch. For starters, you have no way of telling how much free time a dipper has to paint, and you don't know what other aspects (converting, playing, etc) we do spend time on.

In the end, it often comes down to letting judgment of a technique. (i.e. it's not how I would do it) become judgement of a person (lazy, don't care, shouldn't be proud of, etc.). It's a fine line, but it gets stepped over all too often in discussions like these.

For the record, I don't like the painting process that much (I much prefer converting and terrain building), am slow at it, don't have alot of hobby time to begin with and I am very proud of the solid tabletop quality results I get with dipping.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/387792.page

@ Howard A Treesong.... i just wanted to say that i love your post. AWSOME exhalt like 5000 times. that really is one of the most full of self, ignorant and logically incongruent analogy ever posted ever anywhere. I challenge Dakka to come up with a more rediculouse statement.

Ahhh. since this thread has achieved 5 pages i can see that the illogical haters of dip etc have arrisen. So many good points have been made about...
1) is using a spray paint or a airbrush cheating
2) is using wash cheating
3) is using premade paints cheating
etc. etc. None of the arguments made against using dip make any sence whatsoever. They are mostly composed of of reasons why induviduals dont use those techniques themselves and them trying to justify why they feel like other people should not use those techniques. Honestly, if you dont like something then dont do it ok. simple as that. Im a chef. I use premade stock when i make a quick sauce. It is widely available and it is adequate for most uses outside of a 4 star resturant (guess what, those four star resturaunts probably sneak a little premade stock into their food on occasion and lie about it ). Why bother spending tediouse hours on something that makes a negligible difference. Unless you want to be the absolute best painter in the whole world then i say do whatever you want to speed the process. It is your army. You do what you like with it. Anyone else who tries to tell you how you should be doing things should just mind their own buisness. After all. A painted army is better than a plastic or primer colored army any day.

Eh, the way I see it, I can paint an army in the time it takes some people to paint one unit. I am fine with that. Furthermore I am quite proud in how they came out. In fact I enjoy the challenge of making a dipped army look really good.

Come at me bro!

Dorksim wrote:Eh, the way I see it, I can paint an army in the time it takes some people to paint one unit. I am fine with that. Furthermore I am quite proud in how they came out. In fact I enjoy the challenge of making a dipped army look really good.

Come at me bro!

there you have it folks. this is what all the haters are worked up about. You painted your army in 1/10th the time it took them and it looks pretty good. from anywhere but up close it looks awsome. You have pride in your army. You are happy and so are all the people who you face except the arrogant elitests who judge a person by how they paint their toy soldiers. I dipped my nids army. Took a month to complete several thousand points worth of nids. They look pretty good. Lots of peeps look at them and comment about how cool they look. One kid got upset and said something about how my army was so simple to paint it really bummed him out because he spent so long on his. Well gang. his looked crappy by comparison but rather than be a jerk i assured him that his army looked fine and not to worry about it. Really .... its his toy soldiers. Everything isnt a contest in life. I play 40k to have fun, to model. ITs MY HOBBY. I get to do it any way i like.

Bookwrack wrote:

RogalDorn69 wrote:

Bookwrack wrote:

RogalDorn69 wrote:But if you wanted your army painted quick with no effort, I dont care. But don’t use it and act like a king, just out of respect for people that try a little harder,

...

Seriously?

What a load of gak. Method means nothing. The end results are the only thing that matters. If the final product is something you're happy with, then how you got to that point is completely irrelevant.

think this out
to save a country (CountryA) the METHOD you could use is killing another (Country B), OR save country A by coming to an agrement with country B, But according to you it dosnt matter because in the end Country A is safe even though one way means killing thousands of people...
Relation,
The first way is easier (drop a nuke, Army Painter) and the other requiers some effort ( come to an agrement, paint by hand) and also this way both Countries are safe, unlike the first method?...
Think of how many more wars there would be if people were ignorant like you, Method is EVERYTHING

Dakka dakka - where painting the wrong way costs LIVES!

You're also flat out wrong, method means nothing, but if you have to try so hard to make yourself feel superior about how paint your man-dollies, have at it.

QFT.

I'll see your war example and raise you. Calligraphy looks much better than something that is typed on the computer. How about all future dakka posts be written in calligraphy, scanned into the computer and then posted as a picture? If method is much more important than the outcome than this is how i propose you post from now on. Easy is sometimes the better option. With limited time i would much rather type this post and dip an entire 'nid army than mail this answer to your home and hand paint 200+ hormagaunts.

I looked through the Dip haters galleries here and none of them were fielding figs that were all that great. Honestly one dip-hater had a big fat mold line on the side of his thunderhammer and he was calling dip users lazy for using dip. How about spending the time to scratch off that big fat mold line. That dosnt take any skill really at all to just scratch off some plastic. Some of the other haters didnt drill out the barrel on their bolters etc. How hard is that dip haters.

I have a theory. Dip haters are the same people that hated on kids who didnt listen to the kind of music that they liked, didnt like the same video games. they were always a bunch of egomananical, elitests that think they are right for X illogical reason.

RogalDorn69 wrote:

Bookwrack wrote:

RogalDorn69 wrote:But if you wanted your army painted quick with no effort, I dont care. But don’t use it and act like a king, just out of respect for people that try a little harder,

...

Seriously?

What a load of gak. Method means nothing. The end results are the only thing that matters. If the final product is something you're happy with, then how you got to that point is completely irrelevant.

think this out
to save a country (CountryA) the METHOD you could use is killing another (Country B), OR save country A by coming to an agrement with country B, But according to you it dosnt matter because in the end Country A is safe even though one way means killing thousands of people...
Relation,
The first way is easier (drop a nuke, Army Painter) and the other requiers some effort ( come to an agrement, paint by hand) and also this way both Countries are safe, unlike the first method?...
Think of how many more wars there would be if people were ignorant like you, Method is EVERYTHING

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtNHuqHWefU

Everyone grab your popcorn and sit back and watch this thread, which contains some of the most high horse haters on dakka, making fools of themselves by telling those who dip/wash models that while they think it's okay that you use that technique, you are lazy and are failing at your hobby.

Yeah, wow. I could care less how you paint your army. So what if you take 3 years to paint one guy and i paint three armies in the same time. If your going to get pissy about it, dip your freakin little toy men and save yourself some time. There. BOOM, i just solved your problem.The end result and a good looking army is ALL that matters. But as the saying goes, haters gonna hate. Thats what they do.
"Dakka dakka - where painting the wrong way costs LIVES!" HAHA, This almost made me spit wheat beer on my laptop.

I personally find it funny the switching from person to person's opinions. It goes from, "There is no real fairness and its all about how you derive your enjoyment." to "Lol newfag 12 year old is stoopid!!1!."

Personally I enjoy the slow progress of painting models individually and don't like the Quickshade product(mine was gloopy and hard to use)

Ouch, well, after the beating RogalDorn69 has taken, I don't think we're going to be seeing him in this thread again. However, to make a further point of why his POV fails so hard, here's a picture example: .

To paint these chaps, I went basecoat>wash>drybrush>wash>drybrush>highlight. Did them all in an evening, and since my goal is to have a squad that looks good on the tabletop, they're perfect. Without washes, I could've blended and layered the paint to get the exact same final appearance, but taken 5 or 6 times as long to complete. Does that mean at the end of the day, the latter method would've given me _better_ models?

Nope, not by any objective evaluation, and there is certainly no moral high road by going slower. Since this thread is already burdened with horrible analogies, I'll make my own belabored contribution. Some of the attitudes here really reek of unmitigated snobbery, like if when building a wall, they'd laud the guy who hand carried one brick at a time, and look down their nose at the guy who used a wheel barrow to carry an entire load of them. At the end of the day, you've got the exact same wall, but one of them took a heck of a lot longer to build at no benefit to anyone.

Tools of the trade.

All iis fair!The end result is the key.

Nice work. I agree with you. I have a target level of acceptable quality and then try to find the fastest way of getting there.

Dippers in my experience just want a painted army to put on the table. With Dipping or even just washes growing in popularity I play against fewer and fewer primer armies. I see this as a positive thing for our Hobby. The day a dipped model wins a Demon I'll join the elitist crowd with my head in the sand. Other than that clearly dippers are into the playing side of the hobby rather than the painting side.

I am just saying, you got to respect armies that are painted without shortcuts

Dark Angels Champ-Master wrote:I am just saying, you got to respect armies that are painted without shortcuts

Why? Respect should come from how the model looks at the end, not what path it takes to get there.

Should I respect a crap paint job that took 10 hours?

Dark Angels Champ-Master wrote:I am just saying, you got to respect armies that are painted without shortcuts

Washing and drybrushing are shortcuts, no?

No because it's crap. But if the painter put a lot of pride and effort in the model then it should be respected.

Dark Angels Champ-Master wrote:No because it's crap. But if the painter put a lot of pride and effort in the model then it should be respected.

That doesn't make sense; as someone could put pride and effort into something and still not be up to someone else's standards. And someone who uses a dip or wash for the last step of shading on their models might put a lot of effort and pride into it as well.

AustonT wrote: With Dipping or even just washes growing in popularity I play against fewer and fewer primer armies. I see this as a positive thing for our Hobby. The day a dipped model wins a Demon I'll join the elitist crowd with my head in the sand.

Very much agree.
There's so much upainted metal and plastic at my FLGS, I'd be nothing but pleased to see lots of dipped armies

AustonT wrote:Dippers in my experience just want a painted army to put on the table...
...Other than that clearly dippers are into the playing side of the hobby rather than the painting side.

Dissagree. I see what you're saying, but there are other reasons someone might dip besides being primarily into the playing side. For myself, I dip because I most enjoy the converting and assembling side of the hobby (though I do enjoy playing). I know folks who love to paint but dip because they like the effect or they have limited time and want to paint lots of different figures.

My 2 cents...

I draw as a hobby (yes, a hobby for my hobby). Mostly sketchy stuff. My sketchpad? Wal*Mart Special. My pencils? Same. Paints? Scanner? Tools? Everything I use was bought for bargain basement prices (or close to it. Didn't skimp too much on my scanner). Am I good? Some say so. Am I great? Probably not. Am I professional-grade? Almost assuredly not. Do I enjoy it and take pride in it? Immensely.
Does it make me lazy or cheap or lame compared to someone that spent thousands of dollars at an art store for the top of the line supplies? I'd like to think not (well, maybe the cheap bit). I've seen all too many artists out there go for the best tools without having a grasp on the concepts of how to use them.

Now, pulling this back to the topic at hand. I use washes and drybrushing. I blend my own colors on occasion. (Why is there no GW pink?!) Are the washes considered a shortcut because I'm not painting the shadows with dark paints directly? And if it is, then would Reaper/Vallejo paints be considered a shortcut also because I don't have to mix 1 part dark red with 1 part black to get my darker dark red?

Am I ever going to win a Golden Demon? Probably not. Do I have fun? Of course! Am I proud of what I've done? Damn right I am!
I don't need other people telling me the "right" way to paint my little soldiers any more than I need someone telling me the "right" army list to have. If there was only one way, then there wouldn't be choices, would there?

There's a lot of elitism in this thread. I'm getting a feeling of "if you can't use the techniques like the big dogs, then don't bother trying" around here sometimes. This kind of mentality is flawed, as it keeps new painters away and discourages them from ever trying anything... Plus, I'm sure that the elitists out there didn't come from the womb knowing how to do NMMs and edge highlighting.

JustPlainJim wrote: I'm sure that the elitists out there didn't come from the womb knowing how to do NMMs and edge highlighting.

None of the elitists even know where to start with NMM lol. Most of the folks who talk down about others using washes/dips are not very good themselves.

Dark Angels Champ-Master wrote:I am just saying, you got to respect armies that are painted without shortcuts

No you don't, no more than you got to 'respect' the guy building a wall who carries the bricks by hand. instead of using a wheelbarrow.

We're talking about tools. I'm building a table right now. I'm using a table saw for cutting, and a power drill for making guide holes, as well as using it to make the guide for, and screw in the two dozen screws securing the hinge that attaches the heavy leaf. If you decide to do the exact same thing, but use a hand saw, manual drill, and a screw driver, it won't make your table better, or deem you any more worthy of 'respect.' It just means your wrists will be a lot more tired at the end of the day. If you have a good looking mini at the end of the day, than it doesn't matter if you dipped, dry brushed, or doodles, you're model is just as good and you're just as deserving of 'respect' as the guy who did just as good of a job, but got their by taking a week painting the model one water thin paint layer at a time..

Respect+Internet?

WTF?

Anyways, point is, a well painted army is a well painted army. When I see something I like I tell the person who did it and ask how they achieved certain effects.

If someone tells me "dipping", hell who cares? Yeah, I know it must have taken less time to achieve than full wet blending, and you can tell the difference in the overall quality, but at the end of the day at least it's painted.

I'm going to put money down on a lot of people who hate on dipping (this thread, others, other boards etc) and say that they play with a bunch of gray plastic (of which I'm guilty myself to some extent, so I'm not hating on that either).

i have started dipping armies simply because i dont have time any more to paint each model.

it gives me a decent result, and with my other techniques i use i get maybe 75% of total paint score if one is given. i'm not a good enough painter to win best painted, but i do want most of the points for painting. so i paint 3+ colors, dip and base the minisatures nicely.

Given the way GW push the hoard armies it makes sense to dip them.

Practice the painting techniques on the characters. No one has to dip everything or try to paint every last figure to perfection, you do the regiments quickly and spend time on the special stuff.

It wouldn't surprise me one bit if the elitists that are leading the attack on the dipping technique aren't actually that good at painting themselves. But I'll admit, I haven't done the research to check that, it's just a suspicion.

You have two types of people: Those that like to paint, and those that don't.

Those that don't like to paint are more likely to use the dipping method. And why not? It's easy and lets them get their painted minis to the 7-8 range in terms of looks. (1-10 scale.) They won't improve their painting skills much, but who cares? It's not their goal, and they are most likely not looking to win any painting awards. They just want to plop toy soldiers down on the table and have fun.

Those that do like to paint will instead choose to paint their models by hand, instead of dipping (most of the time - time permitting.) As they continue to paint, they will get better, and their overall paint jobs will look better. At first, the results will be lower than the "dipping" method, which can be really disheartening. But if you keep up at it, if you keep painting, you will get better, and keep learning more techniques (OSL, NMM, etc), to the point where suddenly your stuff comes out looking nicer than dipped models.

The table analogy someone brought up earlier was pretty good. No craftsman is going to, on his first try, make an outstanding looking table. Doesn't happen. It looks somewhere between acceptable and gak. But as he continues to ply the trade, as he continues to build tables and learn new techniques, then eventually he can make a table that will be leaps and bounds better than anything someone could pick up at a store.

But dipping as a medium is not cheating, not in the sense you are talking about. If anything, dipping is cheating only in the sense that it cheats you out of the practice and skill you would have gained had you painted the model by hand. Which, most people probably couldn't care less about, and that's fine. Keep practicing, and eventually you'll have better painted miniatures. Just don't get salty that you're not there yet, instead focus on learning and improving.

Personally? I'll skip the dipping and paint everything by hand using layering techniques, and any others I can pick up on the way. Am I to the point where my paint jobs match/are better than dipping? Who knows, probably not. Is it frustrating? Sure. But I know I'll be able to produce better results, and a better painted army, one day, than someone who just dipped. Though, when I'm on my 30th termagant, with another 30-40 to go (not to mention gargoyles, hormagaunts, genestealers, etc), ask me again how I feel about dipping. May have changed my mind by then, if I haven't gone insane. Stupid bugs.

You paint the way that gives the result you want. If you're jealous that others get their armies painted quickly, do it the same way yourself. What's to be unfair?

Peons! Not only should you paint and shade everything by hand, but you should make your own brushes from bone and horse hair, and go dig up minerals yourself and grind your own pigment!

Except for when you need red. Then it is perfectly permissible to use your own blood. In fact, it is encouraged.

Real Men(tm) mull their own paint.

bazookatooth wrote:Yeah, wow. I could care less how you paint your army.

I am better than you because I couldn't care less. And before you call me an elitist grammar snob for being better than youse at grammer I readily admit Im am one.

Stavkat wrote:

bazookatooth wrote:Yeah, wow. I could care less how you paint your army.

I am better than you because I couldn't care less. And before you call me an elitist grammar snob for being better than youse at grammer I readily admit Im am one.

Irony. Oh sweet dear irony.

DAvid Mitchells soap box. Dear Americans

Portugal Jones wrote:Real Men(tm) mull their own paint.

Somehow, cinnamon and cloves do not seem a good additive to my paint.

what are you talking about?

Hi, I'm Aerethan. I'm here about the dead horse. I hope you don't mind but I brought my own stick. Shall we begin?

Sure. And by the way, inland empire stinks!!!!! The people by the shore rule!

Dark Angels Champ-Master wrote:Sure. And by the way, inland empire stinks!!!!! The people by the shore rule!

No argument here. I hate being in the IE.

CiaranAnnrach wrote:

Stavkat wrote:

bazookatooth wrote:Yeah, wow. I could care less how you paint your army.

I am better than you because I couldn't care less. And before you call me an elitist grammar snob for being better than youse at grammer I readily admit Im am one.

Irony. Oh sweet dear irony.

Indeed, where's the face palm pic when i need it!

............................................________
....................................,.-'"...................``~.,
.............................,.-"..................................."-.,
.........................,/...............................................":,
.....................,?......................................................\,
.................../...........................................................,}
................./......................................................,:`^`..}
.............../...................................................,:"........./
..............?.....__.........................................:`.........../
............./__.(....."~-,_..............................,:`........../
.........../(_...."~,_........"~,_....................,:`........_/
..........{.._$;_......"=,_......."-,_.......,.-~-,},.~";/....}
...........((.....*~_......."=-._......";,,./`..../"............../
...,,,___.\`~,......"~.,....................`.....}............../
............(....`=-,,.......`........................(......;_,,-"
............/.`~,......`-...............................\....../\
.............\`~.*-,.....................................|,./.....\,__
,,_..........}.>-._\...................................|..............`=~-,
.....`=~-,_\_......`\,.................................\
...................`=~-,,.\,...............................\
................................`:,,...........................`\..............__
.....................................`=-,...................,%`>--==``
........................................_\..........._,-%.......`\
...................................,<`.._|_,-&``................`

Aerethan, it must suck, and don't do drugs in there......

hahaha i thank you sir, for the face palm. It made my day.

I like to give back to the community. Never mind that it's court mandated giving.

Hahaha

Dark Angels Champ-Master wrote:I am just saying, you got to respect armies that are painted without shortcuts

After nearly 20 years of seeing tables covered with grey plastic and bare metal on a regular basis, I'll respect anyone whose army is painted.

I'll respect a little more anyone whose army is painted well. What techniques they used to achieve that standard are entirely up to them. Sneering at someone because you personally think they didn't put enough effort into achieving their results smacks of the worst kind of elitism.

10 years ago, the sort of people who complain about army painter were the people complaining about dry brushing, for more or less the same reasons. One of my semi-regular opponents had a couple of armies that were largely drybrushed, and that (aside from the fact that he was a little lazy about mould-lines) were better painted than probably 80-90% of armies I've played against in my time playing 40K... and yet people (whose own armies were largely unpainted) sneered at him because he was 'just' drybrushing.

Any technique has the capacity to return good results or bad. It's the end result that matters, not the technique you used to get there.

I agree with insaniak. Any paint job is better than no paint job.

I am, however, completely fine with elitism. That could be my NPD talking though.

Yeah but isn't army painter kinda like a cheat code?

Dark Angels Champ-Master wrote:Yeah but isn't army painter kinda like a cheat code?

If painting is a video game to you, sure.

I don't play video games, I don't even own a system

Not at all. A discerning eye can tell the difference between a dipped army and a hand highlighted army.

While I personally have more respect for those who painted the "hard" way, I still respect those who dip.

I find that mostly people who dip do it for one of a few reasons.

1. Time. They simply don't have the time to sit and paint the old fashioned way.

2. Skill. Perhaps they don't currently possess the skill to hand brush highlights and shading, so they do what works.

I'm perfectly fine with people who dip, even though I myself don't do it. I understand it's purpose and it's use.

I still think it defies the purpose of the hobby

Different people like diferent techniques, I really could'nt care less if some body used army painter it's their choice. I personaly like the time and effort taken to paint my models, it gives me a sense of acheivement. But I do like the effect that army painter can achieve. For people with not much time this product is great.

Dark Angels Champ-Master wrote:I still think it defies the purpose of the hobby

define the "purpose" of the hobby. Some people are in it to play, others to paint, some just like to collect the models.

I'm a painter first and a player second, so for me dipping is counter productive to my hobby. I enjoy painting the "hard way".

For people who are gamers first and painters second, dipping is an easy way for them to get all painted up so that they can enjoy the gaming aspect of the hobby more.

[I still think it defies the purpose of the hobby] dark angels champ.
If this is your perception of the hobby than fine. But IMO it seems as though you are getting worked up on something that simply isn't a problem.

Dark Angels Champ-Master wrote:I still think it defies the purpose of the hobby

And what is the purpose of the hobby? The miniatures have been painted, you don't approve of the means by which they did it? What next, criticising people for using coloured spray paint instead of hand painting everything individually?

It's a technique like any other. It's only like a general purpose wash, and washing and drybrushing are considered normal practice.

You should see my skeleton army, I undercoated in bone, put a wash over and drybrushed in white. I could just as easily dipped them for all the difference it makes. Then I did a bit of green and flocking on the bases. Did that defy the purpose of the hobby?


The majority of armies are painted as playing pieces not display pieces, they are not competition standard pieces because they suffer wear and tear. Not everyone wants to spend an inordinate amount of time painting, most people I think like the idea of a painted army, and if dipping makes this achievable then why not? You seem to be pressing the point that 'the hobby' should require some minimum level of painting effort that it really doesn't need. The important thing is that the army looks good on the table, and dipped armies can look good. The tyranids in the dipping article on Dakka look great. The impression I get is that if a person hasn't spent your approved amount of time on something or have used a technique to cut down on the work then they aren't getting in the hobby properly. I think it's good that people do use the dipping technique if it means they can get a painted army to the table, there are a lot of unpainted armies out there and that is far less appealing for the hobby IMO.

Every time Howard posts I get distracted by his avatar...

Stavkat wrote:

bazookatooth wrote:Yeah, wow. I could care less how you paint your army.

I am better than you because I couldn't care less. And before you call me an elitist grammar snob for being better than youse at grammer I readily admit Im am one.

When insulting other people's grammar, it helps if yours is impeccable.

On topic: I really don't care how/if my opponent paints/has painted their army. Personally, the painting, conversion and creation of an army is one of my favourite parts of the hobby, but unto each, their own.

Dark Angels Champ-Master wrote:Yeah but isn't army painter kinda like a cheat code?

No more so than using spray paint or an airbrush.

How about we start insisting that everyone should be using an 00 brush to paint their tanks, because using a tank brush is faster, and therefore 'cheating'...

Or, as someone mentioned earlier, how about we insist that everyone actually makes their own miniatures completely from scratch, and paints them with paints that they have made themselves from tree bark and paraffin?

Wargaming isn't a video game. There is no 'right' way to enjoy the hobby, nor are there points or penalties for how you choose to do so.

Dark Angels Champ-Master wrote:I still think it defies the purpose of the hobby

The purpose of a hobby is to relax and spend some time doing something that you enjoy. Whether you do that by spending an hour and a half painting a Guardsman's left hand, or by spending that same hour and a half dipping 340 models so that you can use them in a game the following day, what matters is whether or not you're personally happy with what you are doing.

Sitting there claiming that someone else is 'cheating' because they don't persue their hobby interests in exactly the same way as you? That way lies madness.

I've looked at Dark Angels Champ-Master's gallery entries and it's my impression they are painted using a lot of thinned paints and washes, the pair of terminators especially. The irony!

Dark Angels Champ-Master wrote:I still think it defies the purpose of the hobby

As mentioned previously, the objective of a hobby is to relax doing something you enjoy. There are people (me) that only paint and rarely play. How does that synch with your defined purpose (again emphasis on your definition) of the hobby if I choose not to play, or only play Apocalypse, or just let my kids set up figures.

There are others who only want to play and hate to paint. Why would you force them to do something that gives them absolutely no joy just because you have a purist view of your hobby? IMO, the fact that they dipped, gives me joy, because I like playing against other painted armies.

That's the great thing about this hobby. There are lots of ways of enjoying it. Some people like to assemble stuff (amazing stuff) but don't paint or play. I would suggest that you simply be happy that people are willing to paint (in any sort of way) so that you aren't playing against grey plastic.

As long as the models are beautiful, that is what matters.

Dark Angels Champ-Master wrote:I still think it defies the purpose of the hobby

You don't even know what the purpose of the hobby is, but if it really bothers you so much, we can go ahead and call a whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaambulance for you.

The purpose of the hobby is for people to enjoy the time they spend doing whatever with their toys. I'm not surprised at your failure to understand it though. You seem to have a _serious_ problem about people having fun in ways you don't approve of. Pull the stick out of your ass. You don't get to decide how other people enjoy their hobby.

Dark Angels Champ-Master wrote:No because it's crap. But if the painter put a lot of pride and effort in the model then it should be respected.

There are no shortcuts to painting a 2000 point horde infantry IG army. There are simply smart ways to do it, or inasenly masochistic ways of doing it.

Its not fair.

Dark Angels Champ-Master wrote:I still think it defies the purpose of the hobby

This. .... I.... .... the hobby has so many sides to it that you are just not considering.

I've seen people play (heck I've played on) tables that were absolute gak, and nothing but household items scattered about. They still made for fun games, but the lack of real terrain did not make the game any less fun. Just like whether or not a building is painted or not does not make a difference in the fun, it just makes it more pleasing to paint, or play on, or whatever. I have a friend who "took that shortcut" and simply primed his 40k Buildings black, and then drybrushed them with grey. He was done painting all four buildings in about twenty minutes. Effort? Nill, effect? amazing.

Do you sneer at speed-painting too then? Most people wouldn't even have painted armies, or armies that they'd care to be proud of if it wasn't for the "shortcuts".........

"the hobby" is an area of common ground where army-list theoreticians, players, painters, assemblers and everyone in between pools together

Bookwrack wrote:

Dark Angels Champ-Master wrote:I still think it defies the purpose of the hobby

You don't even know what the purpose of the hobby is, but if it really bothers you so much, we can go ahead and call a whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaambulance for you.

The purpose of the hobby is for people to enjoy the time they spend doing whatever with their toys. I'm not surprised at your failure to understand it though. You seem to have a _serious_ problem about people having fun in ways you don't approve of. Pull the stick out of your ass. You don't get to decide how other people enjoy their hobby.

Pfft, you are so wrong. Everyone must spend weeks painting each miniature to Golden Daemon levels. Then they must compile a super-competitive list, all else is a waste of time. Then, you should only play in tournaments, against armies painted to the exact same standard with the exact same painstaking method, unless you are playing practice games for the tournament (and even then, painting standards still apply). Each time you lose, you must remove a digit from your hand or foot. If you do not win the Golden Daemon award, you must swallow a cyanide capsule.

Anyone else who fails to meet these exacting standards... hmm. Not sure what to do to them. I know! Let's put them all in camps. Camps where they can concentrate on painting and playing in the proper fashion. We can call them Concentration Camps!




Automatically Appended Next Post:
PS, I say this with tongue firmly planted in cheek, as opposed to the fine chap who likened dipping to causing an international nuclear crisis.

Dark Angels Champ-Master wrote:Yeah but isn't army painter kinda like a cheat code?

Dark Angels Champ-Master wrote:I still think it defies the purpose of the hobby

All right. I call shenanigans. You've just stepped over the line.

A few posts ago you were a sadly mis-informed newb, ignorant of the history of the hobby and the technique you were complaining about.

Now...

You're just a Troll trying to keep an argument going.

Perhaps you should pick up some minwax and try it.

I second that motion. Having repeatedly looked at Dark Angels Champs gallery and seen nothing that vaugly qualifies as a well painted mini i think that a can of minwax is in order. watch a few videos on how to dip. Give it a shot and then look in AWE at the difference it will make in your minis. They deserve to look this good.

BTW. there are many facets to the hobby. They include, investing time in an artistic pursuit, collecting minis, playing the game, social interaction etc. I would not still be collecting the minis if i couldnt play with them. why? because frankly the level of detail that GW minis and models display is low compared to military models of comparable price coming out of italy and japan. Italeria makes far superior models for a much lower price.

Devlan Mud and Badab Black are my bestest friends evar.

Seriously, they just... make everything look better, especially if you're among the ungifted masses that struggle just to get drybrushing right.

I paint, I wash, I flock, I varnish. Bing, Bam, Boom, Done.

Speaking towards the OP - first, you're what, 13, I think it was? You should count washes as a blessing. Second, I took a look at your gallery. Now, I'll admit - I'm not Picasso. It's one of the reasons why I'm switching to 15mm and 6mm - the 3 foot rule makes everything look awesome. But I don't think you're in the position to label washes as 'cheating'.

I second that motion. Having repeatedly looked at Dark Angels Champs gallery and seen nothing that vaugly qualifies as a well painted mini i think that a can of minwax is in order.

I agree... I'm completely serious, Dark Angel Champ dude, your minis would benefit immensely from a dip or a wash of some kind.

For painters of average skill, there's nothing that a little Devlan Mud can't fix.

I am pretty sure Delvan Mud can't cure cancer.

Stavkat wrote:I am pretty sure Delvan Mud can't cure cancer.

What about the cancer of un painted armies

Well I admit theres only one army that looks good unpainted, and thats Sprue Crons. You cant really paint anything made out of just sprues, it would look unnatural! (unless its a terrain piece)

4M2A wrote:Troll? If your suggesting i'm a troll then you're mistaken. Having a different view doesn't make some one a troll. If I had posted a thread ranting at people who dip then maybe but so far all I have done is contributed my opinion to an open thread.

He's clearly talking about the OP.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Dark Angels Champ-Master wrote:I am just saying, you got to respect armies that are painted without shortcuts

No, you're clearly just trolling. Going from "what about painting competitions?" to "I don't really care about panting competitions." within two posts makes that pretty clear.

Maybe you should go practice your painting and get a bit better at it instead of spending your time trolling here? It'd be a much better use of your time.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nectarprime wrote:
Most of the folks who talk down about others using washes/dips are not very good themselves.

QFT

This thread makes me laugh when ever I read it, The OP gets worked up over nothing! he should really think about what he posts before posting it.

People have different methods. I remember when in the 2nd ed era I started from darker colours up and lightening them, leaving in shading, People looked at me as if I had a goats head and a frogs body... Nowadays it's how GW teaches you to paint...
Dipping and washing are great tools in a painters arsenal, just learn how to use them. You don't want the dipping to look like just dipping? Do some highlights after the matt varnishing as apparently it's possible to.
Still not got round to just dipping an army yet as I know that while it will look better than what I can do with my own skill, I would like to improve a bit first .

SO many people hate on the dip its unreal. I am going to put together a How Too for dipping marines along with a few other techniques thrown in. Its really shocking how nice a figure you can produce in about 20 minutes.

For all the haters. Get a grip. Let other people do what they want with their toy soldiers. Stop being so controlling and worry less about other people and more about yourself. Everyone including you will be happier.

After coming to the end of the thread, the thing I take away with me the most is being really quite surprised at how tolerant the Dakka mods are of obvious trolls.

I mean there are people with disparate views which are fine, whether I agree with an individual or not, but the OP's chain of posts clearly show us that there's a 13 year old chuckling to himself over how much crap he's been able to stir up in a very short time.

Sennacherib: you just finished this argument, your point is so valid. Seriously everyone stop worrying about what others do and look in your own backgarden.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I also reckon that the OP has been band for a while as he hasn't spocken up about his trolling.

The OP still isn't a patch on the person who compared dipping to exterminating whole populations with atomic weapons.

Yes that post was a bit wrong, and I found it slightly offensive and off topic.

I think that if you like painting, you dont use army painter.

You'd be wrong though. I quite enjoy painting...

I recently started using armypainter quickshade to get things actually finished. I still enjoy painting immensely, but painting a horde of 200+ miniatures to your highest possible standard is just plain not possible. Not if you have a fulltime job, a household to run, social obligations, etc... So to get a finished army on the table that allows me to play a game that still looks more then ok, I get the can of quickshade out of my toolbox and use my airbrush for some basecoats.

For those models going in my display cabinet, I leave the quickshade in the toolbox. It's that simple! If you want to be an idealist who claims that nobody should use armypainter quickshade because you consider it beneath you... fine by me. I'll just deploy a fully painted army against your dozen or so painstakingly painted models in a sea of grey and metal (or finecast). That's the reality sadly. There is a reason why such a thing as "table top standard" excists. I'd much rather finish a gaming army quickly and efficiently, leaving me more time to finish display pieces that will never see the gaming table. You want to know why they'll never be used for gaming?

Playing games with your miniature can damage your fine paintjob... This is another example of why quickshade is an awesome and reasonable choice to paint your gaming armies with. Not only is it fast, it makes your miniatures quite "gameproof" as well. Not only that, but as an added bonus for seperating your gaming and display miniatures, you can actually paint whatever the hell you feel like painting without being bound to certain armies.

But I guess there will always be some form of "painting elitism". Others have already pointed out that about a decade ago, some asshats were pulling up their noses to people who drybrushed their miniatures. In reality however, they were often the ones fielding an army with only the characters painted, and like 2 or 3 models actually finished in a regiment/squad. /shrug

A paiting product is a painting product, saying that shades/washes/dipping paints is not fair is like saying that having a smaller brush to paint small details is cheating

I think army painter is just a quick way of painting and washing... Dont see whats not fair about it

Lots of people are butthurt that someone spent 10% of the time they did painting for similar or better results at 3 feet away.

IMHO, I personally have not dipped, although it sometimes sounds like an easy way out. Trying to handpaint my nids has been fun, but trying to handpaint 60 stealers to a quota I feel is appropriate is incredibly difficult. It is never far from the back of my mind, and sometimes I feel like I want to try it. but then I remember "Dude, you blew all your cash on that monolith you've always wanted, you cant afford to try that..."

Overall: Is it fair, yes. Is it practical, yes. BUT, would you feel accomplished after speed painting an army by using dipping? Probably not.

Rennoc215 wrote:Overall: Is it fair, yes. Is it practical, yes. BUT, would you feel accomplished after speed painting an army by using dipping? Probably not.

You might not feel accomplished but i'm sure hundreds of others do.

wwwZugZugorc wrote:

Rennoc215 wrote:Overall: Is it fair, yes. Is it practical, yes. BUT, would you feel accomplished after speed painting an army by using dipping? Probably not.

You might not feel accomplished but i'm sure hundreds of others do.

Exactly this. Everyone has their own standard of "done" and "good" paint jobs. While I don't personally consider my own models as "done" during the wash phase of painting, nothing is stopping others from being finished right there.

I'm 100% fine with people dipping their armies. Anything is better than bare plasic, and I love seeing fully painted forces of any quality as it shows that the person has invested at least SOME time and effort into the appearance of their force.

aerethan wrote:

wwwZugZugorc wrote:

Rennoc215 wrote:Overall: Is it fair, yes. Is it practical, yes. BUT, would you feel accomplished after speed painting an army by using dipping? Probably not.

You might not feel accomplished but i'm sure hundreds of others do.

Exactly this. Everyone has their own standard of "done" and "good" paint jobs. While I don't personally consider my own models as "done" during the wash phase of painting, nothing is stopping others from being finished right there.

I'm 100% fine with people dipping their armies. Anything is better than bare plasic, and I love seeing fully painted forces of any quality as it shows that the person has invested at least SOME time and effort into the appearance of their force.

Certainly they do, and if you put a bit of gravel and flock on the base they improve a hell of a lot more. Any scruffy or untidy bits tend not to be noticed once you have a good base because the model looks complete. Even simple paint jobs can look grand when a whole army is amassed on the table. You're not expecting someone to point a camera at them with the macro setting on.

You might not feel accomplished but i'm sure hundreds of others do.

I completely understand. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. If those people feel accomplished after dipping an entire army, then I say "Good for you!" If not, then I'll say "Its ok. at least you tried!"

Exactly this. Everyone has their own standard of "done" and "good" paint jobs. While I don't personally consider my own models as "done" during the wash phase of painting, nothing is stopping others from being finished right there.

I'm 100% fine with people dipping their armies. Anything is better than bare plasic, and I love seeing fully painted forces of any quality as it shows that the person has invested at least SOME time and effort into the appearance of their force.

I completely agree.

As it stands, I have dipped some Cadians and Tyranids, but even with that, I don't use it as a final step on painting the miniature, instead, it is an interim step that I can complete for a large portion of the models, get them playable, and then upgrade the painting in small batches to continue. For the most part dipping is very similar to a heavy wash of Devlan mud, Gryphonne sepia, or Badab Black (depending on which flavor of dip you are using)

Rennoc215 wrote:Overall: Is it fair, yes. Is it practical, yes. BUT, would you feel accomplished after speed painting an army by using dipping? Probably not.

Sure, if you're one of 2 people in the store who can actually field a completely painted and based army ...

Ifurita wrote:

Rennoc215 wrote:Overall: Is it fair, yes. Is it practical, yes. BUT, would you feel accomplished after speed painting an army by using dipping? Probably not.

Sure, if you're one of 2 people in the store who can actually field a completely painted and based army ...

I agree, I have the only tyranid army thats fully painted that i have ever seen in person. Thats 3.5k at least, mostly little bugs. I didn't dip them but I brushed on devlan mud, and then dry brushed the rest of the detail. Had I not used the shading I would be working on my bugs until I am in the ground. They look great and I really enjoy seeing the fully based and painted swarm. I completely understand using dipping and if you use it, more power to you.

Why for gods sake has this thread over 200 posts?

Alot of people see this as a touchie topic. And most of the original posts were just word fights with the OP, and his gak sturing.

Rennoc215 wrote:IMHO, I personally have not dipped, although it sometimes sounds like an easy way out. Trying to handpaint my nids has been fun, but trying to handpaint 60 stealers to a quota I feel is appropriate is incredibly difficult. It is never far from the back of my mind, and sometimes I feel like I want to try it. but then I remember "Dude, you blew all your cash on that monolith you've always wanted, you cant afford to try that..."

Overall: Is it fair, yes. Is it practical, yes. BUT, would you feel accomplished after speed painting an army by using dipping? Probably not.

I think people who are dippers would indeed feel accomplished. Getting any army from grey to coloured is an accomplishment. I'm a good painter, but I'm slow. I've never fully, properly finished an army to my own satisfaction. (though I have had fully-painted forces). I bought the original Spacehulk. I only got my first genestealers painted in 2009 (I think) by dipping them. It was also thematically approprate as I was matching a specific look for that army. (I really need to get some pictures of them taken...)

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/156666.page

Rennoc215 wrote:Overall: Is it fair, yes. Is it practical, yes. BUT, would you feel accomplished after speed painting an army by using dipping? Probably not.

Given that at the end of it I would have a fully painted, reasonable looking army in a relatively short time, yes, absolutely I would feel 'accomplished'...

thenoobbomb wrote:I think that if you like painting, you dont use army painter.

I enjoy painting. But I also enjoy being able to field fully-painted armies in less than a decade.

So I paint armies using whatever methods will get reasonable results as quickly as possible, and spend the time on character models and models I'm painting for fun.

Tech Guard wrote:Alot of people see this as a touchie topic.

But why should it be? Why do people care about the methods others use to paint their models? It's like reading the rantings of a person who have lost their grip on reality.

This isn't even about bashing people who paint badly. Which I think would be totally unacceptable. It's about attacking people using a technique irrespective of the outcome. Apparently there's this bizzare attitude that people need to spend a certain amount of time and effort on something before they deserve respect or should be allowed any pride in their own damn work. Never mind if the technique actually gives decent results, it's the TIME they spend on it is the crucial thing. Whaaa..? It's just a dick measuring contest, some people want to claim they are better than others because they use more hardcore techniques to paint their toy soldiers.

I mean look at the dipping article here on Dakka.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/wiki/en/Dipping_Tyranids

How can anyone complain about that?

Anyone who can place a competently painted and based army on the table has something to be proud of. It wouldn't surprise me if such people are in the minority because most games seem to field a couple if not large portions of unpainted figures. And that's not even getting into the not inconsiderable number of people who refuse to even pick up a brush.

Today at the shop there was 2 painted and based armies. One looked ok, though dipping would have helped and one was bought fully painted so it doesnt count.

Dip if you want.

I have dipped (not AP though - my attempts were done in the late 80s), I have painted, I have drybrushed, I have airbrushed and I have used spraypaint.

As I said previously. All are tools and methods used to achieve a desired effect. Desired to the person using them (whether they are to anyone else is more or less irrelevant).

Is using NMM cheating?
Is using lighting effects cheating?
Is having a painted army cheating?

Dip all you want.

chromedog wrote:Is having a painted army cheating?

I swear the dice gods favor a painted army over a non-painted, so yes.

Howard A Treesong wrote:It's just a dick measuring contest, some people want to claim they are better than others because they use more hardcore techniques to paint their toy soldiers.

Actually, I think a good analogy would be 'it's a dick measuring contest, and some people are claiming theirs is bigger and better because their number is bigger... because they're using the centimeter side of the ruler and not the inches, and then calling inches unfair because even though the end result is exactly the same, the number is smaller.'

Enzephalon wrote:Why for gods sake has this thread over 200 posts?

Because you are WRONG and I am RIGHT. Or something.


PS - I wrote this message on a computer I built myself, out of materials I mined myself, out of electricity I generated while riding this stationary bicycle.

Bookwrack wrote:

Howard A Treesong wrote:It's just a dick measuring contest, some people want to claim they are better than others because they use more hardcore techniques to paint their toy soldiers.

Actually, I think a good analogy would be 'it's a dick measuring contest, and some people are claiming theirs is bigger and better because their number is bigger... because they're using the centimeter side of the ruler and not the inches, and then calling inches unfair because even though the end result is exactly the same, the number is smaller.'

This made me lol. Good analogy.

Kirbinator wrote:

chromedog wrote:Is having a painted army cheating?

I swear the dice gods favor a painted army over a non-painted, so yes.

Not just the dice gods. A club that I used to play at years ago had a standard rule for tournaments whereby unpainted models suffered a -1 penalty to their armour saves...

Wow. really insaniak. that is crazy. Around here the best you can expect would be to face a lot of grumbling about how unpainted armies look like junk. Yet even that is starting to get toned down. My freind matt has the best meathod. constantly " Hey man, so when are you going to finish painting that, when are you gonna base those.... etc." It works

Ahh enacting change through public ridicule, my favorite. This thread continues because a group of Dakkanaughtz continue to make inane posts that slip under the Mods radar better than "btt" so everyone can see how epic this thread has become as we escalated to and backed away from total thermonuclear annihilation in full observance of godwins law and in the bargain have learned that the OP deplores dippers but upon viewing his models I can't understand why as I see no evidence of gradient shading, mixed paints, blending, osl, nmm, et cetera. I guess what Im saying is: at what point are we permitted to point at the OP and ask what high horse he's on?

sennacherib wrote:Wow. really insaniak. that is crazy.

It was effective, though. Even outside of tournaments, the club had very few people showing up with unpainted armies.

AustonT wrote: I guess what Im saying is: at what point are we permitted to point at the OP and ask what high horse he's on?

I thikn that was really covered already. At this point, people are mostly just airing their views on different painting techniques vs unpainted miniatures.

I think the key to understanding this "controversy" is that there is a chunk of the gaming community that doesn't actually want to see painted armies. They want to restrict the gaming community, either to simply keep it small, to conintue to have one of the best looking armies, or simply because they want to feel surperior about something.

Nobody that actually wants painted armies for the sake of aesthetics has a serious problem with dip. some don't like the look, but no more or less than any other technique.

Those that have a problem are part of the crusty side of gaming that wants the ability to judge others while playing against the same three guys.

What I don't understand is how a group of people largely characterized by the intense smell of BO, funions, marijuana, unkempt hair and an eternal lack of female companionship can judge others.

AustonT wrote:What I don't understand is how a group of people largely characterized by the intense smell of BO, funions, marijuana, unkempt hair and an eternal lack of female companionship can judge others.

Try to be less obviously troll-tastic next time.


PS - Is the BO really a problem? I am going to my first tournament, a very very large tourney, and while I have a poor sense of smell I can still smell body stank if it is strong enough. Should I be worried?

Stavkat wrote:

AustonT wrote:What I don't understand is how a group of people largely characterized by the intense smell of BO, funions, marijuana, unkempt hair and an eternal lack of female companionship can judge others.

Try to be less obviously troll-tastic next time.


PS - Is the BO really a problem? I am going to my first tournament, a very very large tourney, and while I have a poor sense of smell I can still smell body stank if it is strong enough. Should I be worried?

Worried, about your own BO or about others?

Colored Primers, Quick Shade dips, Washes, Inks, Paints, Brushes, Super Glue, "Natural Light" bulbs, hobby knives, etc.

All of the above are tools that people use in the war gaming hobby. Saying that the use of any are "cheating" is just silly to me.

My wife refuses to enter one of the hobby stores in our area because of the unique odor de nerd. Most gamers are polite enough to shower before going to tourneys, but a small segement do not. These days you are more likely to be assaulted by Axe than BO.

Any combination of enclosed spaces and lots of people will smell like a sewer eventually. Even bridal shows.

Stavkat wrote:PS - Is the BO really a problem? I am going to my first tournament, a very very large tourney, and while I have a poor sense of smell I can still smell body stank if it is strong enough. Should I be worried?

The stench of BO in a GW on a hot day when crammed with kids playing games could cut through bank vaults. If you could contain it you'd have something the Geneva Convention would probably class as a biological weapon.

LOL. Thanks for the warning.

Man, you see this kind of stuff cropping out all the time, only with different mediums.

Film photographers complaining that digital photography is too easy and you don't need a dark room to develop your photos.

Again, more traditional photographers complaining about Photoshop.

Graphic designers who are used to doing it manually complaining about softwares like Indesign.

Traditional painters complaining about digital painting.

and to go way, way back..... Bowmen complaining about crossbows. "They're too easy to learn how to use! They can punch through armor! It's so unfair!"

And so on and so forth.


To save this thread from eternal damnation, let me pose another question:

Your opponent's army is , at best, only 30% done. More than half of the army is just basecoated, and only a few are painted. BUT the painting level of those few are very, very sweet. A gakload of conversions, NMM, hardcore freehand painting: you can certainly say that your opponent took time and effort to produce said results.

How would you feel playing against that kind of opponent? Would you rather play with someone with a completed, average army or an incomplete (but oh GOD THE EFFORT) army?

I'm fine with playing against a WiP army, provided that something new is painted each time we play.

Mostly I play against my wife, and I paint both our armies so anything not complete is my own fault.

starsdawn wrote:Man, you see this kind of stuff cropping out all the time, only with different mediums.

Film photographers complaining that digital photography is too easy and you don't need a dark room to develop your photos.

Again, more traditional photographers complaining about Photoshop.

Graphic designers who are used to doing it manually complaining about softwares like Indesign.

Traditional painters complaining about digital painting.

and to go way, way back..... Bowmen complaining about crossbows. "They're too easy to learn how to use! They can punch through armor! It's so unfair!"

And so on and so forth.

Digital painting and sculpting are interesting for the complaints... Somehow people get the idea that it takes less skill or talent to sculpt or paint with a computer than it does by hand. Which to a certain extent is possibly correct... since software can help with a lot of the gruntwork, it's easier to get a reasonable result. But getting a good final product? That still takes the same amount of knowledge of what you are doing and artistic ability as doing it the old-fashioned way.

How would you feel playing against that kind of opponent? Would you rather play with someone with a completed, average army or an incomplete (but oh GOD THE EFFORT) army?

Personally, I would rather play the completely painted army.

insaniak wrote:
Digital painting and sculpting are interesting for the complaints... Somehow people get the idea that it takes less skill or talent to sculpt or paint with a computer than it does by hand. Which to a certain extent is possibly correct... since software can help with a lot of the gruntwork, it's easier to get a reasonable result. But getting a good final product? That still takes the same amount of knowledge of what you are doing and artistic ability as doing it the old-fashioned way.

I think part of the issue with the digial vs traditional means is that the traditional means tends to require more foresight and is less forgiving. If you screw something up, with a computer program all you have to do is hit ctrl+z. (Or erase it and change parts as necessary.) But with traditional mediums, you can't just erase something. You have to try to paint over it, fix it with other painting techniques, or start over. It's even worse with some sculptures - particularly those out of wood or stone, where you remove material from it. Accidentally remove too much, and you have to either start over or perform major damage control.

Think about painting our miniatures. If you royally screw something up, i.e. spill paint on it or have someone (or something, possibly with four legs) knock your hand as you are applying a fine detail to a miniature, then it becomes a pain to "fix". There's no "undo" option IRL, as much as I wish there was, so there's more skill required in the execution of your vision.

So to that extent, I can understand why a traditionalist would scoff at their digital counterparts - but the sell prices more than make up for it, I would think. An original painting should be worth a whole lot more than a print of a digital piece of art. But this doesn't really correlate well with the current topic at hand, as we are talking about the casual gamer and not the professional painter who is getting paid for their skills.

starsdawn wrote:How would you feel playing against that kind of opponent? Would you rather play with someone with a completed, average army or an incomplete (but oh GOD THE EFFORT) army?

I honestly wouldn't care - my purpose is to play the game, so as long as my opponent actually has an army, I'm good either way. I'd be much more likely to take pictures and write a battle report when my opponent has a fully painted army too, though.

As none of my friends have completely painted armies, I would find it hypocritical to turn my nose up at a game due to the quality of the paintjobs or lack thereof, seeing as none of my armies are completely painted and I think GW's painting "rules" are primarily designed to sell more Red, Black and Gunmetal paint....

What is this "fair" nonsense? I mean, I know what you're talking about. I used to be one of those hoity-toity players who thought if it wasn't 100% hand painted it wasn't 'real' artwork. Anything other than a can of spray primer was blasphemy. But I'm 42 now and after doing my first 40 zombies with the spray-paint method I was so impressed with the results I went out and bought an airbrush compressor. On a mostly one color army, hand painting is for the birds! And I've seen the dipping method on my friend's Nids and it looks spectacular. You'd never be able to duplicate that with a brush.

What about pens? Are pens cheating too? Let's face it, my eyesight is going and my hand isn't steady enough to write "Kill Kill Kill" legibly on a shoulder pad anymore.

Painted=better. I highly believe better painted models are "luckier" than lesser or non-painted models. It's just a fact. I can feel it in my dice. But it's not cheating to have great looking models. It just intimidates the enemy player more. It's the psychological factor.

insaniak wrote:
Digital painting and sculpting are interesting for the complaints... Somehow people get the idea that it takes less skill or talent to sculpt or paint with a computer than it does by hand. Which to a certain extent is possibly correct... since software can help with a lot of the gruntwork, it's easier to get a reasonable result. But getting a good final product? That still takes the same amount of knowledge of what you are doing and artistic ability as doing it the old-fashioned way.

I do agree. I think in the end, it's less manual labor (which makes sense, since supposedly every invention we make is to make things easier to do. Like wheels.) but it would still take training for years to have good results.

Personally, I would rather play the completely painted army.

Me, I would be welcome to play both. Especially if you can see that insane painter guy's army would take at least a year to complete.

starsdawn wrote:To save this thread from eternal damnation, let me pose another question:

Your opponent's army is , at best, only 30% done. More than half of the army is just basecoated, and only a few are painted. BUT the painting level of those few are very, very sweet. A gakload of conversions, NMM, hardcore freehand painting: you can certainly say that your opponent took time and effort to produce said results.

How would you feel playing against that kind of opponent? Would you rather play with someone with a completed, average army or an incomplete (but oh GOD THE EFFORT) army?

I would rather play the guy with the fully painted army, that is average looking. That doesn't mean I'm going to be a douche and not play the guy with the 30% completed army with some good looking models. Playing games with 2 fully painted armies on a finished game-table just adds a certain cinematic effect to it... Those are the games that are somewhat rememberable in this hobby, and sadly, even a single unfinished squad/regiment kinda ruins that cinematc experience entirely.

Even if your individual models are painted to a low-end table top quality, there is a good chance that the look of the army as whole will turn out to be good. The end result is usually better then the sum of it's parts.

Much of this argument seems to come down to folks who object to what they see as dippers who aren't "painting".

I use spray primers (sometimes colored) and I use a varnish matte spray, but these are widely accepted practices and considered part of panting. Additionally, I apply my minwax "dip" with a brush, thus meeting the standard definition of "painting".

So I ask, "Am I not Painting? "

Alternatively, are you offended that the pigment and oil-base of the "dip" is also mixed with polyurethane?

Carried to it's conclusion, we end up with silly rules like:

Paint applied shall be a mixture of pigment, base and other suspended materials. However, it shall not be mixed with any polyurethane or other varnish or hard finishing protective elements, lest one be not really painting and shall be commiting the dire sin of shortcuting, thereby cutting oneself off from the glorious tree of True-Painters.

Silly? Yes, but so is declaring Army Painter to be "not fair".

So, you'd rather that people wait until they finish their armies completely (meaning bases, paint, and any conversions) than play against someone who's partially done? What about those of us that take 3 days to paint an Ork Boy to the standard we consider 'done'? What about those of us who aren't going to buy two armies, one for conversion and one for playing, and so are continually working on the army we have, maybe for years, maybe for decades, and not painting because we're still doing some of the basic skratching and Konvertin', and paint would A- get in the way, and B- be useless before we know how we're gonna need to paint it?

Anvildude wrote:So, you'd rather that people wait until they finish their armies completely (meaning bases, paint, and any conversions) than play against someone who's partially done? What about those of us that take 3 days to paint an Ork Boy to the standard we consider 'done'? What about those of us who aren't going to buy two armies, one for conversion and one for playing, and so are continually working on the army we have, maybe for years, maybe for decades, and not painting because we're still doing some of the basic skratching and Konvertin', and paint would A- get in the way, and B- be useless before we know how we're gonna need to paint it?

so what? They didn't say that they wouldn't play against the partially or unpainted army, but they would prefer to play against fully painted. There really is no need to go into hysterics over it.

I prefer coffee flavored icecream over other flavors, but if someone offers me chocolate, I probably will eat it too. I won't stamp my feet and scream that I want coffee ice cream only.

Norsehawk wrote:so what? They didn't say that they wouldn't play against the partially or unpainted army, but they would prefer to play against fully painted. There really is no need to go into hysterics over it.

I prefer coffee flavored icecream over other flavors, but if someone offers me chocolate, I probably will eat it too. I won't stamp my feet and scream that I want coffee ice cream only.

Exactly. I've played against plenty of unpainted or partially painted armies over the years. I've used them myself, or that matter, on plenty of occasions. It's not a deal breaker... I just prefer playing with and against fully painted armies.

Anvildude wrote:So, you'd rather that people wait until they finish their armies completely (meaning bases, paint, and any conversions) than play against someone who's partially done? What about those of us that take 3 days to paint an Ork Boy to the standard we consider 'done'?

In a word Yes. I make no bones about my extremely strong prefference for painted armies. I'm an adult with responsibilities. I have limited game time and one of my favorite parts of the hobby is the specatcle of painted miniatures. I'm even more interested in glorious layout of painted armies on a battlefield of good terrain than I am in the actual playing of the game. I only field painted figures and I seek out those who do likewise.

Further, we have an unrwitten rule at our gaming club against playing with bare miniatures. This is mitigated by the fact that we play mostly skirmish games of 10-20 minis on a side and we'll let the occasional basecoated fig in, but we stick pretty much to it, and our battles are usually some of the best looking in the store where we play.

Sum up, I could be persuaded to play against your unpainted figures and I'm not going to turn down a personal request for a game. However, unless your an extremely good sport, an excellent conversationalist and/or making real progress painting your army, I'm not going to seek you out for a second game. I realize that this may sound elitist, but it's not. It's simply a choice. My paint jobs aren't anywhere near golden demon winners, and I don't judge the charachter of those playing with unpainted figs. I simply choose the gaming experience that pleases me most.

I'm not saying you're elitist, or that anyone who would rather play against painted, finished armies are. But I'm coming from the side of someone who's not going to be satisfied with themselves if they are pressured into fielding what they'd consider poorly painted armies by their local group. I could paint a Boyz mob in a day, and I could do it so that it'd look fine from 3 feet- but I'd know that they were 'unfinished', all the little details hadn't been picked out, that last wash wasn't finished... Yet I still like to play.

It's a lot less stressful, and a lot more fun, if the people I'm playing against, or the people that are watching, aren't of the stripe that thinks unpainted armies are 'lazy'. I'll grant you that yes, perhaps a vast majority of unpainted armies are the product of lazyness, but there's also those that are the product of psychological disorders, or tough home life, or working 3 jobs to pay for college/a family, or sheer pigheaded perfectionism- and people who have armies like that aren't coming to gaming stores, or inviting people to their houses/going to others houses to have their work or lack thereov picked over and looked upon critically. If I wanted to display my army, I'd shell out for a camera from my next bit of gaming allowance, instead of the mold rubber for my custom made bases that probably won't be fielded for another 2 years. When I go somewhere to play, I'm going to play, as a method of escape from the daily grind- a chance to joke with friends, maybe get some good ideas from seeing an interesting use of bitz on another model.

Yeah, a well painted army looks nice. Yeah, the spectacle of a couple fully painted, coordinatingly themed armies going at it on a custom table is awesome. But I don't game in order to look cool. I game to Game, to have fun and do silly things with little plastic army men, and tiny green things that let me get away with bellowing WAAAGH!! in the middle of a store.

Clearly you are too inhibited. I yell WAAAAAGH in the middle of the mall. Just to make sure everyone knows I'm the biggest so I'm the boss.

Anvildude wrote:So, you'd rather that people wait until they finish their armies completely (meaning bases, paint, and any conversions) than play against someone who's partially done? What about those of us that take 3 days to paint an Ork Boy to the standard we consider 'done'? What about those of us who aren't going to buy two armies, one for conversion and one for playing, and so are continually working on the army we have, maybe for years, maybe for decades, and not painting because we're still doing some of the basic skratching and Konvertin', and paint would A- get in the way, and B- be useless before we know how we're gonna need to paint it?

This is me. spending years, maybe decades on an army before it is completely painted. I have been working on my Deathgaurd since about 2008. I have finished about 20 models (see the link in my signature if your interested). However this is a army that i am enjoying the process with. I also dipped all of my nids, and painted up a ork army and a space marine army. None of these armies besides my nurgle is painted to a high standard but i fielded a fully painted army most of the time. I prefer to face an army that i can tell the user is trying to paint. I make no bones however about an unpainted army unless its my freinds whom i can gently tease about it. For the most part i play for my own reasons. I play to have fun playing the game. I model to enjoy the moldeling. The two are not mutually exclusive but for me, it required two armies so that i could play with one while i model the other.

BTW. when i am done with my nurlge i will go back and repaint and detail all of my Ultramarines. Its a process. It just takes time.

sennacherib wrote:This is me. spending years, maybe decades on an army before it is completely painted. I have been working on my Deathgaurd since about 2008.

Though we're getting a bit off topic, I like this particular rabbit trail. There's nothing inherently wrong with playing with unpainted figures, but by the same token, there's definitely nothing wrong with the delayed gratification of not playing with an army until it's painted. Everything doesn't have to be right-now. At the risk of sounding like an old fogey, I do feel that the masses of unpainted figs on the table is at least partially a product of the instant gratification ethos that seems to permeate most everything else. The miracle of the dip is that it allows those of us who don't enjoy painting or are extremely slow (me on both counts) to get a fully painted army up to tabletop standard in a reasonable period (not short, as I still spend quite a bit of time painting even with the dip) of time. Dippers still have to put forth the effort to paint their armies, which is infinitely preferrable to the grey hordes.

Also, it is entirely possible to play smaller point games, or play with a different army (if you have one). Folks might say that it's hard to find opponents for smaller point games, but not only do I think it's possible, if more folks only fielded painted figs, then you'd see many more low pointed games.

If it takes you decades to finish an army you're running the serious risk of having large parts of it squatted or rendered useless. I'm still painting my Dogs of War, look where that got me.

Yeah I would agree with Eilif, and I think every body doesn't care weather you use army painter or not. Whatever, I withdraw my case.

On the plus side, a thread was created to disparage a line of products has apparently served to introduce between 2 and 3 hobbyists/new customers per page to their offerings.


Claiming that using colored primers and dip is "cheating" is not functionally different from saying that people who use a basecoat brush to work quickly instead of using an eyeball brush for the whole mini are cheaters.

Ok ok. My bad. Next time I will look at how other people paint differently, and there is no need to bad mouth about army painter. Looks kinda good too. My friend could really use it. And do you think that "voting graphic" thing is really helping Dakka Dakka's community? Aren't you a DCM? For a jolly good sake, be encouraging to the site, be always polite, and remember, have fun! Don't worry, your outside social problems shouldn't effect the way you post on Dakka Dakka. Cheer up, I only wanted to see what peoples opinions were.

I was polite! I said it was, in my opinion, a terrible thread, not that you were a terrible person.

I do encourage people to play, and that includes not pushing them away by prejudging them by their painting methods. Asking if something is "fair" is kind of loading the question. As others have said, anything that's gets more painted armies on the tabletop, I'm good with.

Well every one has a opinion right? A thread is aloud to have an opinion. I should be able to have one as well. Please don't be egotistical, the world doesn't revolve around just you. Maybe the Sun, don't you think? Remember, threads are aloud to have opinions, just not "off topic spam". Thanks, and help Dakka Dakka's community!

Lord of Baal wrote:Well every one has a opinion right? A thread is aloud to have an opinion. I should be able to have one as well. Please don't be egotistical, the world doesn't revolve around just you. Maybe the Sun, don't you think? Remember, threads are aloud to have opinions, just not "off topic spam". Thanks, and help Dakka Dakka's community!

Inanimate objects can't have opinions, and this isn't your thread. You are getting all uppity for nothing.

Yes actually this is my thread but I just changed my name recently with Yakface. My old name was Dark Angels Champ-Master but I now play Blood Angels. Sorry if you feel that I am uppity, I just explained to another guy on being great full on another post. Sorry, I just want to respect Dakka Dakka and be kind. Your brain is functioning in a way where your replacing my voice to be stubborn, and thats not how I intend it.
-Really sorry

Well, this is his thread, and how is he being uppity? He is just stating his valid point.

ChaosLordSam wrote:Well, this is his thread, and how is he being uppity? He is just stating his valid point.

Is that a good way to be encouraging? I think not. Please stop being mean, join together as one community. Here, I even mad A wall to separate our differences.
This side is for thou who like to argue
-------------------------wall-----------------------entrance--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And this side is for thou who would like to help Dakka Dakka's community! Join the fun with a good old post!

I'm over ur wallz, trollin yur doodz.

Seriously, you sound like one of those guys who make an inflammatory comment, and as soon as someone diagrees with you, you're all 'Chill out, man. Jeez, ain't this guy a loser, amirite?'

To be on topic, army painter (and washes in general) are fantastic ways for people who want their army to look decent, but don't have quite the skills yet, to get a satisfying look to their armies. The only way GW gets my money anymore is through my purchasing of Devlan Mud.

Lord of Baal wrote:Yes actually this is my thread but I just changed my name recently with Yakface. My old name was Dark Angels Champ-Master but I now play Blood Angels. Sorry if you feel that I am uppity, I just explained to another guy on being great full on another post. Sorry, I just want to respect Dakka Dakka and be kind. Your brain is functioning in a way where your replacing my voice to be stubborn, and thats not how I intend it.
-Really sorry

No you don't get it, people don't 'own' threads. The OP doesn't own the topic, after the first post it's released into the wild.

Ok ok. I get it. I am just saying I created it. Look at yourself, your not improving anything, your only making things worse.
And Infinite Array, please don't bully me anymore.

I'm not making anything 'worse', I'm just pointing out that you don't get to dictate rules on a thread.

Ok ok. I don't dictate but I am helping the Dakka Dakka community become more of a success rather than a failure.

Didn't you make a thread about how your friend should stop changing armies? Bit hypocritical don't you think?

Lord of Baal,
I see why you're a bit frustrated, but here's the thing.

You came on Dakka and put up a thread asking a very greenhorn question in a slightly troolish manner. When confronted with this fact and an abundance of evidence and opinion to the contrary, you simply restated your point (see my previous post calling you a troll).

If you do that on Dakka, you are going to get spanked a bit. Don't take it personally. Learn from it, laugh it off and next time you post a potentially contentious thread, study up on the topic so you know what you're talking about and/or be ready for more of the same.

Lord of Baal wrote:Yeah I would agree with Eilif, and I think every body doesn't care weather you use army painter or not. Whatever, I withdraw my case.

OR you could continue to troll the thread you started wit a deliberately inflammatory topic heading and try to get cute now that you've been called out. Sometimes when you stick your neck out your head gets chopped off, ask the French. Best to quietly fade into obscurity, again: see France

Lord of Baal wrote:Ok ok. My bad. Next time I will look at how other people paint differently, and there is no need to bad mouth about army painter. Looks kinda good too. My friend could really use it. And do you think that "voting graphic" thing is really helping Dakka Dakka's community? Aren't you a DCM? For a jolly good sake, be encouraging to the site, be always polite, and remember, have fun! Don't worry, your outside social problems shouldn't effect the way you post on Dakka Dakka. Cheer up, I only wanted to see what peoples opinions were.

Lord of Baal wrote:Ok ok. I get it. I am just saying I created it. Look at yourself, your not improving anything, your only making things worse.
And Infinite Array, please don't bully me anymore.

Lord of Baal wrote:Well every one has a opinion right? A thread is aloud to have an opinion. I should be able to have one as well. Please don't be egotistical, the world doesn't revolve around just you. Maybe the Sun, don't you think? Remember, threads are aloud to have opinions, just not "off topic spam". Thanks, and help Dakka Dakka's community!

Lord of Baal wrote:Is that a good way to be encouraging? I think not. Please stop being mean, join together as one community. Here, I even mad A wall to separate our differences.
This side is for thou who like to argue
-------------------------wall-----------------------entrance--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And this side is for thou who would like to help Dakka Dakka's community! Join the fun with a good old post!

coolyo294 wrote:Didn't you make a thread about how your friend should stop changing armies? Bit hypocritical don't you think?

He was also the guy who started the half dozen threads proclaiming how awesome the Dark Angels were.

And Eilif's got it right. Most people on Dakka have a level of snark, which then translates to either funny or confrontational. For the most part, we get a few laughs out of everything, but there can be times when the snark-factor gets out of control (look back a few months, when the White Knights of the Dark Empire fought against the Semi-Collective Grognard Resistance).

Best to form your snark armor now, young one, or your days will be filled with woe, misery, and sweaty armpits from replying to what appears to be a never ending torrent of seemingly personal attacks.

infinite_array wrote:

coolyo294 wrote:Didn't you make a thread about how your friend should stop changing armies? Bit hypocritical don't you think?

He was also the guy who started the half dozen threads proclaiming how awesome the Dark Angels were.

And Eilif's got it right. Most people on Dakka have a level of snark, which then translates to either funny or confrontational. For the most part, we get a few laughs out of everything, but there can be times when the snark-factor gets out of control (look back a few months, when the White Knights of the Dark Empire fought against the Semi-Collective Grognard Resistance).

Best to form your snark armor now, young one, or your days will be filled with woe, misery, and sweaty armpits from replying to what appears to be a never ending torrent of seemingly personal attacks.

Or, consider each post you make before hitting the "Submit" button. Ask yourself the following questions:
* Will this cause someone to get upset?
* Will this offend someone?
* Am I being confrontational?
* Am I trying to assert something as fact, which it really is just my own opinion?
* Am I trying to justify/push my own opinions/beliefs? (This thread falls under this category.)
* Is it actually important that I make this post? (Or, am I making a new thread just because I can/I'm bored?)
* Did I write this post while upset/sad/angry/hurt/defensive? (Past few posts.)

If the answer to any of these questions is "yes", I highly recommend not posting to begin with. And I follow these tenets myself, as I personally do not like confrontation and arguments.

If you break one of these tenets, post something stupid and get flamed for it, or find yourself in the middle of an argument - then stop. Wait an hour or two. Think about what you want to say, and try to say it in a way that will offend as few people as possible, or head off any additional confrontations. If you realize you've screwed up, then just apologize, and don't try to shift blame/focus onto your attackers in the same post. Just let it slide. Remember, the more you post when the thread/mood is confrontational, the more opportunity you are giving them to lace into you. It's important to get the mood back to neutral as quickly as possible, instead of perpetuating it.

CiaranAnnrach wrote:

infinite_array wrote:

coolyo294 wrote:Didn't you make a thread about how your friend should stop changing armies? Bit hypocritical don't you think?

He was also the guy who started the half dozen threads proclaiming how awesome the Dark Angels were.

And Eilif's got it right. Most people on Dakka have a level of snark, which then translates to either funny or confrontational. For the most part, we get a few laughs out of everything, but there can be times when the snark-factor gets out of control (look back a few months, when the White Knights of the Dark Empire fought against the Semi-Collective Grognard Resistance).

Best to form your snark armor now, young one, or your days will be filled with woe, misery, and sweaty armpits from replying to what appears to be a never ending torrent of seemingly personal attacks.

Or, consider each post you make before hitting the "Submit" button. Ask yourself the following questions:
* Will this cause someone to get upset?
* Will this offend someone?
* Am I being confrontational?
* Am I trying to assert something as fact, which it really is just my own opinion?
* Am I trying to justify/push my own opinions/beliefs? (This thread falls under this category.)
* Is it actually important that I make this post? (Or, am I making a new thread just because I can/I'm bored?)
* Did I write this post while upset/sad/angry/hurt/defensive? (Past few posts.)

If the answer to any of these questions is "yes", I highly recommend not posting to begin with. And I follow these tenets myself, as I personally do not like confrontation and arguments.

If you break one of these tenets, post something stupid and get flamed for it, or find yourself in the middle of an argument - then stop. Wait an hour or two. Think about what you want to say, and try to say it in a way that will offend as few people as possible, or head off any additional confrontations. If you realize you've screwed up, then just apologize, and don't try to shift blame/focus onto your attackers in the same post. Just let it slide. Remember, the more you post when the thread/mood is confrontational, the more opportunity you are giving them to lace into you. It's important to get the mood back to neutral as quickly as possible, instead of perpetuating it.

Disregard this, yell "WAAAAAGH" hit submit and get stuck in.

Lord of Baal wrote:Thanks, I'm Still a kid, I'v got lots to learn!

Really the thread should have ended here.

Yeah, when a person considers any slightly negative comment about his threads "bullying" they probably need some seasoning.

Polonius wrote:Yeah, when a person considers any slightly negative comment about his threads "bullying" they probably need some seasoning.

And I didn't even get to the tar and feathers, or even the 'superglue down the pants' routine.

I will, however, be taking your lunch money. You know, GW's prices and all that.

Lord of Baal wrote:Ok ok. But don't you agree that it's unfair in painting comps?

No, it is a method of painting, if somebody is painting better than you using the dipping method, try to emulate them.

Lord of Baal wrote:Ok ok. I get it. I am just saying I created it. Look at yourself, your not improving anything, your only making things worse.
And Infinite Array, please don't bully me anymore.

Wow... That is hysterical.

Welcome to the internet my son. Pull up a chair and sit down. We need to have "the talk".

Can you get chlamydia from the internets?

AustonT wrote:Can you get chlamydia from the internets?

From as awful a thread as this? Mayhaps...

Personal opinion, this thread needs to get closed.

Main reason: Every time someone comes up with a different opinion, Lord of Baal takes the contrary opinion, just to keep the thread going. He's against army painter, ok it's great, its cheating, its ok, my friend should use it, it's cheating, etc.

Norsehawk wrote:Personal opinion, this thread needs to get closed.

Main reason: Every time someone comes up with a different opinion, Lord of Baal takes the contrary opinion, just to keep the thread going. He's against army painter, ok it's great, its cheating, its ok, my friend should use it, it's cheating, etc.

Secondary reason: Most of his other threads are similar.
Motion seconded, I call the vote.
Should sad thread costumed as something bright and shiny be closed?


But before it goes, I'd just like to chuck out that Minwax wood finish has replaced gryphonne sepia in my arsenal of paint. Its totally fair.

OHH which minwax? I've been trying to match Gryphonne Sepia with a version of Les' washes forever.

Special Walnut 224.
Penetrates, Stains & Seals my friend. 8 Fluid ounces for the same cost as a pot of gryphonne.

I don't dip though, preferring to paint it onto the model. Gives me more control to get the painting effect I want. It does fill me with a modicum of shame every single time though, knowing I'm not blending three colors to get the same effect.

This is a pretty epic thread for such a stupid question.

Oh,oh, before the thread get's closed can I shamelessly plug my latest "Cheating" dipped figs...

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/389699.page

Eilif wrote:Oh,oh, before the thread get's closed can I shamelessly plug my latest "Cheating" dipped figs...

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/389699.page

First image return from a standard google search:

Sigh, this thread should be locked.

I don't understand what all the debate is about. If a fig looks good, it's good.

On the flip side I have figs in my collection that I spent hours painting and they look like dog poop.

Sidstyler wrote:...I think everyone's tanks should be covered in thick paint with ugly brush strokes like mine are.

I lol'd at work. Awesome.



Ghidorah

there is no such thing in painting as being "unfair". I've seen how dipping comes out, and while I wouldn't do it myself, I wouldn't say it's "wrong" or "cheating". I just know that I am one of those people that prefers to spend time levelling up his painting skill(I'm a bit of an artistic sort). If I didn't like painting all that much, and just wanted a good-looking army, I'd certainly use whatever was easiest for me. Some people don't like painting, and I'm not going to, you know, pull the plug on the good-looking models they want to use. It's much better to play with finished armies, anyway, it improves the dice rolls.

sennacherib wrote:Wow. really insaniak. that is crazy. Around here the best you can expect would be to face a lot of grumbling about how unpainted armies look like junk.

What is awesome is that I often seen paint-natzis give out endless amounts of crap because other people's armies do not meet their standards, and they go on and on about the visual importance of painted armies, and wanting to "immerse" themselves visually, yet they play on utterly boring and horrible looking tables with crap terrain...

I especially like the tournaments that make such a big deal about painting, and then when you see pics of the event the tables/terrain look like they came out of a dogs ass...

Lord of Baal wrote:Ok ok. My bad. Next time I will look at how other people paint differently, and there is no need to bad mouth about army painter. Looks kinda good too. My friend could really use it. And do you think that "voting graphic" thing is really helping Dakka Dakka's community? Aren't you a DCM? For a jolly good sake, be encouraging to the site, be always polite, and remember, have fun! Don't worry, your outside social problems shouldn't effect the way you post on Dakka Dakka. Cheer up, I only wanted to see what peoples opinions were.

No need to be passive-aggressive with the little snark about people's outside social problems. After all, you're the 13-year-old troll here who has been trying to stir the pot, so perhaps you're the one with outside social problems. Low self-esteem perhaps? Now you're crying that people are bullying you. All your crap about being polite and helping the community? You're as transparent as they come. Kid, if you were posting on a bunch of other forums I spend time on, you'd have been banned as a troll long ago. Just be grateful that Dakka seems to be (over) tolerant of trolls like yourself.

Anyway, I need to buy some army painter now. Going to give it a go on some GW spiders to make them look as horrid, slimy and just awful as possible.

Haha! Hilarious, scipio.au, he's gone for a while though, so he won't be trolling for at least a week. Oh, and hes 12. Ya, He is lucky that Dakka is tolerant.

How do you know he's gone?