Thought this might be of interest to anyone who watched her videos for GW. Like Duncan Rhodes and Chris Peach before her she has decided to set up on her own.
New channel on YT and her first video:
Thought it was fun and well produced, if I were better at painting stripes I would have had a go at Rainbow Warriors
Not too familiar with her videos since they were mostly locked at Warhammer+ which I do not subscribe.
Both Peach and Duncan target demographic in therms of painters is mainly for starters or tabletop quality levels.
But its a bit sad that GW cannot hold these good painters on their presenting teams and they keep on leaving.
NAVARRO wrote: Not too familiar with her videos since they were mostly locked at Warhammer+ which I do not subscribe.
Both Peach and Duncan target demographic in therms of painters is mainly for starters or tabletop quality levels.
But its a bit sad that GW cannot hold these good painters on their presenting teams and they keep on leaving.
My guess is there’s only a limited budget for their painting tutorials, the painters get to a point where they know they’ll make more money doing their own YouTube channel and decide to give it a go.
NAVARRO wrote: Not too familiar with her videos since they were mostly locked at Warhammer+ which I do not subscribe.
Both Peach and Duncan target demographic in therms of painters is mainly for starters or tabletop quality levels.
But its a bit sad that GW cannot hold these good painters on their presenting teams and they keep on leaving.
My guess is there’s only a limited budget for their painting tutorials, the painters get to a point where they know they’ll make more money doing their own YouTube channel and decide to give it a go.
It might also be a factor that working at GWHQ in that role effectively requires living close to Nottingham. GW often hire younger people from all over the UK to work there, but after a while they might just want to go back home.
NAVARRO wrote: Not too familiar with her videos since they were mostly locked at Warhammer+ which I do not subscribe. Both Peach and Duncan target demographic in therms of painters is mainly for starters or tabletop quality levels.
But its a bit sad that GW cannot hold these good painters on their presenting teams and they keep on leaving.
My guess is there’s only a limited budget for their painting tutorials, the painters get to a point where they know they’ll make more money doing their own YouTube channel and decide to give it a go.
GW also got wise to making internet 'stars' out of their painting people and seem to really downplay their personalities etc now. She's probably one of the last few that the 40k community would be easily able to name and who could easily spin off into their own Youtube channel. Good luck to her.
NAVARRO wrote: Not too familiar with her videos since they were mostly locked at Warhammer+ which I do not subscribe. Both Peach and Duncan target demographic in therms of painters is mainly for starters or tabletop quality levels.
But its a bit sad that GW cannot hold these good painters on their presenting teams and they keep on leaving.
My guess is there’s only a limited budget for their painting tutorials, the painters get to a point where they know they’ll make more money doing their own YouTube channel and decide to give it a go.
GW also got wise to making internet 'stars' out of their painting people and seem to really downplay their personalities etc now. She's probably one of the last few that the 40k community would be easily able to name and who could easily spin off into their own Youtube channel. Good luck to her.
Between Patreon, Youtube earnings, product placements and comission work, being independent from GW ought to earn you (much) more money if you are as much as recognizable - GW pay might be steadier and better for an unknown artist, but it probably prevents you taking up all sorts of opportunities that come your way, and limits your long-term perspectives if you don't make the jump after a couple of years that you use to build your personal brand.
NAVARRO wrote: Not too familiar with her videos since they were mostly locked at Warhammer+ which I do not subscribe. Both Peach and Duncan target demographic in therms of painters is mainly for starters or tabletop quality levels.
But its a bit sad that GW cannot hold these good painters on their presenting teams and they keep on leaving.
My guess is there’s only a limited budget for their painting tutorials, the painters get to a point where they know they’ll make more money doing their own YouTube channel and decide to give it a go.
GW also got wise to making internet 'stars' out of their painting people and seem to really downplay their personalities etc now. She's probably one of the last few that the 40k community would be easily able to name and who could easily spin off into their own Youtube channel. Good luck to her.
Between Patreon, Youtube earnings, product placements and comission work, being independent from GW ought to earn you (much) more money if you are as much as recognizable - GW pay might be steadier and better for an unknown artist, but it probably prevents you taking up all sorts of opportunities that come your way, and limits your long-term perspectives if you don't make the jump after a couple of years that you use to build your personal brand.
No idea how much they are payed at GW, but GW has kind of helped the artists building their internet footprint. There is probably loads of other reasons too that we dont know about. Regarding how much better off the YouTubers are etc again Im not totally sure about that ( dont have any concrete numbers). The other day I was hearing a top Spanish painter pro with a big (probably the biggest) internet presence and he was talking with other pro painters and saying that being recognisable online does not sometimes translate in being commissioned and getting more money etc. Either way it's a fine balance like in any other line of work.
GW though should be clever about the talents they "created" and have a special package ready for those individuals since they are effectively now empty handed.
Wishing her the best, I haven't seen a ton of her painting tutorials, but the ones I did were well done and I appreciated her sense of humor.
I imagine it's tough for GW to keep their better and more charismatic painting people for a number of reasons that people have touched on here. One thing I think that is also pretty significant that I didn't see mentioned is variety. A lot of the very skilled painters I have met before at conventions at what not tend to be really passionate about painting and paint a wide variety of things. It's probably really nice for someone who makes painting content to be able to choose something they are excited about, rather than just being assigned a random GW miniature to make a tutorial on.
"The Painting Phase" with Peachy has a whole heap of "former insider" insights as to what was good (and bad) about working for GW. There's certainly a lot of discussion on the topic of good/bad management, remuneration and such in relation to being a "face". Certainly worth listening to/watching for both the insider gossip as well as more fun recollections, in addition to the normal banter and hobby discussion.
GW painting tutorials have really suffered over the past few ones.
The lion was abysmal and I can't believe they thought it was worth showing off.
I hope she does well, I suplbscribed for masterclass, but that seems gone now
Yeah her painting videos were the best content on wh+ at the beginning, she's a good painter and a charming personality so I think she's gonna do really well. That video is mostly her geeking out over obscure / fan lore which is great
Since GW has gone to only table ready painting on YT, I hope she adds more of the old Table + that GW used to do. I pulled a lot of inspiration from those older videos.
legionaires wrote: Since GW has gone to only table ready painting on YT, I hope she adds more of the old Table + that GW used to do. I pulled a lot of inspiration from those older videos.
The tabletop isn't even good and asks for some really....interesting asks.
Like repainting black when already painting black. Spraying it gold, then.....painting it gold. Just paint it grey. It makes basecating easier.
3 people have left so far. Duncan, peachy and Louise.
There have been more but those had the most personalities and good skill.
Their tutorials have suffered alot. For example, the Dantes lacks anything to help a new player learn to paint, but go look at the old nagash one, it was great
hotsauceman1 wrote: Their tutorials have suffered alot. For example, the Dantes lacks anything to help a new player learn to paint, but go look at the old nagash one, it was great
I feel that GW has decided that the free YouTube tutorials be strictly for new painters (they even limit them to 10 paints in the tutorial). The more in-depth tutorials are what Louise was doing on Warhammer+. Nick Bayton is still at GW doing battle reports on Warhammer+, so we'll see if they have him pick up the Masterclass tutorials or if they get someone new or drop them altogether.
She was on the Honest Wargamer stream for a bit on Monday and it sounds like there is no love lost between her and GW. She's now working out of the TSN studio with Rob's assistance- her desk is literally next to his, apparently she's been there a while and had to crawl under camera so as not to seen before she left GW.
hotsauceman1 wrote: Their tutorials have suffered alot. For example, the Dantes lacks anything to help a new player learn to paint, but go look at the old nagash one, it was great
I feel that GW has decided that the free YouTube tutorials be strictly for new painters (they even limit them to 10 paints in the tutorial). The more in-depth tutorials are what Louise was doing on Warhammer+. Nick Bayton is still at GW doing battle reports on Warhammer+, so we'll see if they have him pick up the Masterclass tutorials or if they get someone new or drop them altogether.
legionaires wrote: Since GW has gone to only table ready painting on YT, I hope she adds more of the old Table + that GW used to do. I pulled a lot of inspiration from those older videos.
The tabletop isn't even good and asks for some really....interesting asks.
Like repainting black when already painting black. Spraying it gold, then.....painting it gold. Just paint it grey. It makes basecating easier.
You mean black over black primer? Well if you don't paint better not make any mistake because you can't paint over mistake as black brush paint isn't same as spray black so would stick over like sore thump.
hotsauceman1 wrote: Their tutorials have suffered alot. For example, the Dantes lacks anything to help a new player learn to paint, but go look at the old nagash one, it was great
I feel that GW has decided that the free YouTube tutorials be strictly for new painters (they even limit them to 10 paints in the tutorial). The more in-depth tutorials are what Louise was doing on Warhammer+. Nick Bayton is still at GW doing battle reports on Warhammer+, so we'll see if they have him pick up the Masterclass tutorials or if they get someone new or drop them altogether.
Having watched her tutorials on WH+ and then her own tutorial on Rogue Hobbies, yeah, they stuck her to a script and little else. It's VERY obvious that her personality was suppressed in favor of a clean corporate script.
Her greater benefit is that she was able to showcase more of her personality on Twitter and Instagram.
GW lost a good one, but here's the thing: she's still making GW content. Talking GW lore and painting GW miniatures, just like Duncan is, and Peachy... They're all still supporting GW despite leaving the company, they're just getting paid more and get to do more of their own thing. Sure they'll do non-GW models and be able to say whatever they want now, but even if they truly hated GW (which isn't really the case, it's just a few issues with management), they're still feeding into the same hobby, because they have to, to remain relevant on Youtube
But, I wish her the best of luck, she has a really bright and colorful style and great personality.
It's generally a good thing when an artist gets good enough to make a living selling their own work rather than having to stay with a corporate job. Rebecca Guay, for example, was one of the best that Magic had, but she's able to make far more money now as an artist on her own.
I remember back around the time she joined GW, she hosted a warhammer preview stream alongside the other painting tutorial guy. It was honestly the best preview show I can remember, in terms of commentary. No waffling or corporate monotone droning about "wow... that is the best _____ ever..." Instead it just seemed like the two of them pure geeking out for an hour. They shouldve just let her do the preview shows from then on.
I think it was Peachy that said there was a certain amount of bad blood when Duncan left. Basically no one at GW saw it coming and then he left suddenly and set himself up in a very GW adjacent business, including ultimately competing with their paint range. Management at GW realised (correctly) that they'd create a substantial wargaming personality using their resources and then he left to compete with their content, which they weren't pleased about. It's not all bad blood because he is after all still pushing people towards GW miniatures, however GW do like to control to narrative and maximise their own revenue out of their products, so after that point they got wise and starting slowly pushing towards the videos just showing hands/voices, so that there wouldn't be another Duncan situation. People like Peachy and Louise were the people remaining from when GW was using their presenters personalities more and were to a certain extent 'grandfathered in' but now they've gone, I doubt you'll see GW making any other painting personalities. This is the company that doesn't even credit individuals for it's codexes anymore.
It's not really surprising this happens, GW do not pay well, they don't pay their games designers well, let alone painters. So inevitably people come along for a few years because it sounds cool to work for GW, then they start getting disillusioned with the pay and for those that had their personalities involved in the videos and became known to the wargaming community, breaking away and using that as a springboard for a Patreon etc is a no brainer. Also even with the ones that were allowed to show some personality and became community figures, they still had to tow the company line and not have free reign to show their full personlity. It's not just a thing amongst the painters, James Hewitt left GW because of the pay and used his experience in Blood Bowl/Necromunda/Adeptus Titanicus to set up his own 'for hire' rules writing company and regularly uses his GW experience for publicity. It's a tale as old as time in the wargaming industry, it's just that amongst the painting personalities it's a relatively recent thing - before recent times, most wargamers wouldn't even know who was on the 'Eavy Metal team in it's heyday.
As you said, their channel created personalities. Likeable personalities at that. People fairly natural in front of a camera, with an open, friendly presenting style. And crucially? Able to demonstrate even advanced techniques in pretty plain English, helped massively by decent camera angles, so you’re not just being told, but being shown.
Setting up on their own is…pretty cheap, especially if you yourself know how to edit video already. Just need two, possibly three decent quality cameras, functioning mic and suitable lighting - and away you go. Literally anyone can do that. Duncan, Peachy and Louise have the advantage of a fairly ready-made audience.
Not only do we know they’re competent painters, able to demonstrate and explain pretty much any technique, but some level of parasocial (in the positive way!) fan base ready to tune in straight away. Hit the ground running, let the algorithm give the push and you’re pretty much there.
Here’s an example of my mate Paul’s attempt. This was his first and so far only attempt. He’s got a super basic setup, but found it all a bit much, hence the one and only video. But this should go to demonstrate even an amateur can get the gear together fairly easily.
Note that when Duncan Rhodes left GW, he didn't leave alone. He took Roger Yates with him. He was a media director and producer at GW for over 8 years according to his Linkedin page and is now a co-owner of Duncan Rhodes Painting Academy Limited.
I suspected this would happen; She didn't seem to be sincerely enjoying her job at GW, well, not all of it anyway. Just based on my inuition and feels, could be wrong though..
I wish her the best of luck with the path she's taken
legionaires wrote: Since GW has gone to only table ready painting on YT, I hope she adds more of the old Table + that GW used to do. I pulled a lot of inspiration from those older videos.
The tabletop isn't even good and asks for some really....interesting asks.
Like repainting black when already painting black. Spraying it gold, then.....painting it gold. Just paint it grey. It makes basecating easier.
I think the issue is that GW's sprays don't match their paint pot colours. So if you use the spray basecoat as the colour, you can't touch it up later, hence the need for the ridiculous repainting.
I watched quite a few of the masterclass videos by Louise on W+ and quite enjoyed them. I hope she is replaced soon, as other than the 'free' mini, W+ doesn't have a lot going for it imo.
Aidan hasn't done a W+ video for a while either, but the last two were done by one of the guys from Warhammer TV painting videos that I no longer know the name of since - which I guess is the point.
Louise is probably one of my favourite GW painters because she just seemed so atypical. On one end of the scale you have Darren Latham, who epitomises the current GW painting and sculpting styles, and then Louise is on the other end, with some absolutely "out there" colour schemes, that saturated, neon, almost flourescent style is just wild to look at when you're so used to seeing the usual 'Eavy Metal style. She also loves the history and lore of GW. Bolt Thrower t-shirts, Goff Rockers, long OOP pink horrors, and so on.
I don't know what the situation between her and GW was/is, but I'm glad we'll be getting more Sugden-style paintjobs FOR FREE, and I'm really looking forward to seeing her cut loose a little bit and go wild.
Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but she was involved on some level with development of The Old World, I know she drew some of the maps at least. How integral was she to the team? Also, she came into GW through Forge World, didn't she? Was she originally just a Forge World painter or did she do formatting and design work too? Just wondering what kind of gap she's left at GW. All this talk of "personalities", it does kind of make you wonder what a Louise Sugden/Duncan Rhodes/Peachy-shaped hole looks like in a company that is, in relative terms, pretty small to begin with. You can restrict what the fans and the public see of those personalities, sure, but you can't deny what they bring to the office and working environment every day, and, in my experience, losing someone like that from a small office can be a real downer for everyone.
There has definitely been a trend by GW towards the decoupling of artists and creatives from their work. You can see it with the signatures being air-brushed out of art, faces replaced by hands in videos, even with the rules writing of names disappearing from rules and army books.
All hidden behind the 'GW' logo.
The problem is that when you start to treat your creatives and artistic core as a disposable in this way, not crediting what is a very personal and human endeavour, this is what happens. As has been said it's probably not the money (I don't think anyone ever becomes an artist to make themselves rich) but more of a recognition of what they create and bring to the world.
And I think the evidence and impact of this (which I think is an over-encroachment of sales/production and corporate overreach into the studio) reduces the overall quality of the games that are being made. Because the people that have the talent, the creative flair, feel stifled once they have experience they and move on. When was the last time that GW produced a game that was genuinely brilliantly designed? Something that wasn't a rehashed version of an earlier game that is brought back and dissected into chunks so it could be sold as five separate rulebooks? It has made the name 'Games Workshop' something of an ironic reminder of what the company used to be.
legionaires wrote: Since GW has gone to only table ready painting on YT, I hope she adds more of the old Table + that GW used to do. I pulled a lot of inspiration from those older videos.
The tabletop isn't even good and asks for some really....interesting asks.
Like repainting black when already painting black. Spraying it gold, then.....painting it gold. Just paint it grey. It makes basecating easier.
I think the issue is that GW's sprays don't match their paint pot colours. So if you use the spray basecoat as the colour, you can't touch it up later, hence the need for the ridiculous repainting.
I watched quite a few of the masterclass videos by Louise on W+ and quite enjoyed them. I hope she is replaced soon, as other than the 'free' mini, W+ doesn't have a lot going for it imo.
Then tgere is an easy way to solve that prime grey
Pacific wrote: There has definitely been a trend by GW towards the decoupling of artists and creatives from their work. You can see it with the signatures being air-brushed out of art, faces replaced by hands in videos, even with the rules writing of names disappearing from rules and army books.
All hidden behind the 'GW' logo.
The problem is that when you start to treat your creatives and artistic core as a disposable in this way, not crediting what is a very personal and human endeavour, this is what happens. As has been said it's probably not the money (I don't think anyone ever becomes an artist to make themselves rich) but more of a recognition of what they create and bring to the world.
And I think the evidence and impact of this (which I think is an over-encroachment of sales/production and corporate overreach into the studio) reduces the overall quality of the games that are being made. Because the people that have the talent, the creative flair, feel stifled once they have experience they and move on. When was the last time that GW produced a game that was genuinely brilliantly designed? Something that wasn't a rehashed version of an earlier game that is brought back and dissected into chunks so it could be sold as five separate rulebooks? It has made the name 'Games Workshop' something of an ironic reminder of what the company used to be.
As a creative professional, I think you're being too dramatic here. Or maybe too naive? When you for work someone else (especially a larger organization), it's not about your personal creative expression or brand-building. You're loaning your creative talents to the organization in support of *their* business, and in exchange you receive compensation. Constraints come with the job. In some ways the job *IS* the constraints...you can't really pull them apart. You're working in a certain industry on a certain product or for a certain client as directed by a certain creative brief. All these things provide the shape of the creative space in which you work.
It's certainly legit to feel like you want a 'larger space' or more personal recognition. And usually what creatives do in that case is strike out on their own, which is what the subject of this thread did. It's just how things work.
GW may have been driven more by the creative studio decades ago, but that's no way to become or run a multinational corporation. When the business gets that big and complicated, you really do need all those other folks in other fields of expertise. And you build the business together. Sure, it's a different kind of gratification than doing whatever the hell you want to do in support of no one but yourself. But the paychecks are usually a lot steadier.
Having watched her tutorials on WH+ and then her own tutorial on Rogue Hobbies, yeah, they stuck her to a script and little else. It's VERY obvious that her personality was suppressed in favor of a clean corporate script.
Her greater benefit is that she was able to showcase more of her personality on Twitter and Instagram.
GW lost a good one, but here's the thing: she's still making GW content. Talking GW lore and painting GW miniatures, just like Duncan is, and Peachy... They're all still supporting GW despite leaving the company, they're just getting paid more and get to do more of their own thing. Sure they'll do non-GW models and be able to say whatever they want now, but even if they truly hated GW (which isn't really the case, it's just a few issues with management), they're still feeding into the same hobby, because they have to, to remain relevant on Youtube
But, I wish her the best of luck, she has a really bright and colorful style and great personality.
Honestly working for GW at most positions is likely more passion than "I want the money". So I'd expect they'd have to seriously misstreat someone to have them totally turn their back on everything.
But yeah this looks like managers who were just not budging causing issues and then the realisation and reality that she can step away from GW formally and still paint GW models and engage wtih the GW community way more and make more than GW could pay her in income.
So in a sense it is indeed a win win for everyone involved really save that she's no longer on Warhammer + and it seems that GW is reeling a bit in working out how to manage Warhammer+ in that regard and with focus on art and painting tutorials.
ekwatts wrote:Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but she was involved on some level with development of The Old World, I know she drew some of the maps at least. How integral was she to the team? Also, she came into GW through Forge World, didn't she? Was she originally just a Forge World painter or did she do formatting and design work too?
I think she started out on the graphic design side of FW and dabbled in presenting some stuff. Then some of her painting work (that she already showed off on social media) got showcased by GW those two things combined and she kinda drifted into doing painting tutorials for GW.
gorgon wrote:You're loaning your creative talents to the organization in support of *their* business, and in exchange you receive compensation.
That might be the issue. With how GW is supposedly not paying too well these corporate dictated boundaries might simply end up too constraining rather quickly for that level of compenation. If you can get more money (at little extra risk) and more freedom to do what you want then that makes the choice to leave the comfy corporate safety net much easier. It's as close to having the cake and eating it too as one can get. The only "loser" is the company but that's not really something one needs to lose sleep over.
And GW doesn't even really lose too much because she and Peachy and Duncan are still advertising GW stuff.
It might mean in the future GW might adjust how they do painting tutorials at the pro end. Perhaps they'll do away with the idea of an inhouse person and instead get a rotating group of independent pros, like them and others, who are setup to do video work and who can do a series of videos for Warhammer to use on contract but without having to pay them full time and such.
It could be a way for GW to resolve the issue of painters "escaping" them whlist also being able to have talented painters and presenters
GW is weird, because usually for creative people you understand the interplay between creative freedom and financial security. <that's what the money is for.gif> Given GW's legendary miserliness when it comes to salary, it doesn't take much to push a person out for more money AND more creative control.
Overread wrote: And GW doesn't even really lose too much because she and Peachy and Duncan are still advertising GW stuff.
One can like the product but not the corporate machine behind it. Dakka is proof of that...
Honestly I try to live by the rule of never really learning all too much about the creators of things I enjoy. I like enjoying their creations, be they art, music, stories, games or whatever. I don't really see the need to worry if they are a "good" person who is in keeping with my outlook on life, morals, life choices and whatever. It's like the whole thing over Harry Potter and JK and her stance on genders and such. I can watch and enjoy the films and not care one bit that she doesn't like certain groups or not.
I think being able to separate creator from creation is important in life.
legionaires wrote: Since GW has gone to only table ready painting on YT, I hope she adds more of the old Table + that GW used to do. I pulled a lot of inspiration from those older videos.
The tabletop isn't even good and asks for some really....interesting asks.
Like repainting black when already painting black. Spraying it gold, then.....painting it gold. Just paint it grey. It makes basecating easier.
I think the issue is that GW's sprays don't match their paint pot colours. So if you use the spray basecoat as the colour, you can't touch it up later, hence the need for the ridiculous repainting.
I watched quite a few of the masterclass videos by Louise on W+ and quite enjoyed them. I hope she is replaced soon, as other than the 'free' mini, W+ doesn't have a lot going for it imo.
Then tgere is an easy way to solve that prime grey
Which would leave lighter shadows at non-black areas
Or is painting overall black undercoat over grey better than paint black parts of model over black undercoat? Dunno. Feels you are painting more black that way
Londinium wrote: It's a tale as old as time in the wargaming industry, it's just that amongst the painting personalities it's a relatively recent thing - before recent times, most wargamers wouldn't even know who was on the 'Eavy Metal team in it's heyday.
Depends when you think the heyday was. I certainly remember the one page spreads showing the painter and some of their work in WD, along with the attributing of paint jobs to different people.
It's very common for people to use big companies like GW in their debuts then go freelance on their own. It's a great way to gain experience quickly and it always looks good on your CV. It's not really a matter of "GW not being able to retain stars", it's just the way big companies work that makes it enticing to use it that way.
There's this classic MBA line where the CEO wants to increase training spend for the employees. The CTO replies, "What if we invest in training them and they leave?" The CEO responds, "What if we don't and they stay?"
It seems penny-wise and pound foolish to try an eliminate all creative outlets for their talent (e.g. forcing Darren Latham to shut his YouTube channel) and eliminating the personality of the presenters. Sure, some of them may take the fame and parlay that into a Patreon. So hire a new person and let them believe they're going to be the next Duncan/Louise/etc. You'll get better talent who have ambition.
Of if you're going to keep everyone behind the scenes, make sure they're superbly trained. I watched the painting video for the Lion model and the new presenter has fairly poor painting skills and a "unique" voice and delivery. One detail I remember from a Warhammer Podcast interview with Duncan is that the producer he left with had him practice reading BBC news stories, in time with the TV presenter and trying to match their pronunciation. Being on camera is a real craft! If you aren't going to recruit people who will practice it on their own, make sure you train them up!
In a world of skewed corporative interpretations of reality based just on profits... I think warhammer+ and painting tutorials may well be seen as something not that profitable and altogether cut and not invested in.
The real WHY's it got to that low level of quality and why people are leaving is not looked at since it may compromise the management performance, as such its easier to blame the "Duncans" and clients for not supporting dubious quality content.
Support your staff and help them to grow and you will grow with them. I feel GW internal philosophy is at the total opposite, as such they potentially grow only a fraction of what they could have.
I haven't watched a GW tuts in a while and dont sub to W+ the modelling content there is not worth it.
Pacific wrote: I'm actually waiting for GW to embrace AI artwork as a way to create art content without needing the artist at all.
Although, if I was going to be a sarcastic gakker, at least then (unlike the new HH rulebook) we might actually see some new artwork!
Not gonna happen as long as some very fundamental questions about AI art are not resolved legally. At the moment it is unsure if, and under what conditions if at all, AI-output art can be copyrighted and protected, while it's also unclear what excatly the status of the needed art input is, i.e. if they need to secure the rights to the art they train the models with. These are actually pressing legal questions because there are already systems in the wild that use AI when shooting normal photos, without exactly asking or even informing the user
I am very happy for Louise that she has made the decision to go her own way and wish her all the best.
It's interesting that in her very first video I ended up knowing so much more about her and her interest in the hobby than I ever gleaned from all of her Warhammer+ content.
For example, she was very open about her autism which is a very positive thing and should be celebrated but I would probably never have known if she had still been working for GW - which is a shame as it would be great for them from a ED&I pov.
But also a deep-dive (ish) into the socio-political origins of the Rainbow Warriors and why she loves them is also not something you would ever have seen on Warhammer+.
Pacific wrote: I'm actually waiting for GW to embrace AI artwork as a way to create art content without needing the artist at all.
Although, if I was going to be a sarcastic gakker, at least then (unlike the new HH rulebook) we might actually see some new artwork!
Joking aside... thats a page that we should try not to look at I mean If GW goes AI then its an official bye bye IP rights. Today anyone can already do AI things with no need for GW, their IP has already been stolen and added to AI libraries.
Soon you will have AI generated YouTube painting tutorials.
But lets not got there its going to be very messy.
Pacific wrote: I'm actually waiting for GW to embrace AI artwork as a way to create art content without needing the artist at all.
I don't know if anyone here has seen them, but there are some "AI generated miniatures" floating around that are near-photo realistic depictions of 40k minis (Deathguard are the ones I've seen) that look like fantastic conversions/kitbashes, but are 100% fake.
The AI still can't get the weapons looking right, but the rest of the model looks like something GW could sell tomorrow.
StraightSilver wrote: I am very happy for Louise that she has made the decision to go her own way and wish her all the best.
It's interesting that in her very first video I ended up knowing so much more about her and her interest in the hobby than I ever gleaned from all of her Warhammer+ content.
For example, she was very open about her autism which is a very positive thing and should be celebrated but I would probably never have known if she had still been working for GW - which is a shame as it would be great for them from a ED&I pov.
But also a deep-dive (ish) into the socio-political origins of the Rainbow Warriors and why she loves them is also not something you would ever have seen on Warhammer+.
watched the video, to be honest shes not someone I'd actually heard of except in passing, certainly not someone I recognised
subscribed though, she has a wonderful and very watchable style, comes over as both very human and very interested in her subject matter, the lore stuff is usually a bit of a switch off to be honest as it tends to be somewhat dry, she made that watchable.
hotsauceman1 wrote: Their tutorials have suffered alot. For example, the Dantes lacks anything to help a new player learn to paint, but go look at the old nagash one, it was great
I feel that GW has decided that the free YouTube tutorials be strictly for new painters (they even limit them to 10 paints in the tutorial). The more in-depth tutorials are what Louise was doing on Warhammer+. Nick Bayton is still at GW doing battle reports on Warhammer+, so we'll see if they have him pick up the Masterclass tutorials or if they get someone new or drop them altogether.
Yeah I noticed that. So few paints.
Yes, they should all be like this video...
Spoiler:
Agreed. The Underworlds tutorials were the best ones and even those have been stripped down now.
hotsauceman1 wrote: Their tutorials have suffered alot. For example, the Dantes lacks anything to help a new player learn to paint, but go look at the old nagash one, it was great
I feel that GW has decided that the free YouTube tutorials be strictly for new painters (they even limit them to 10 paints in the tutorial). The more in-depth tutorials are what Louise was doing on Warhammer+. Nick Bayton is still at GW doing battle reports on Warhammer+, so we'll see if they have him pick up the Masterclass tutorials or if they get someone new or drop them altogether.
Yeah I noticed that. So few paints.
Yes, they should all be like this video...
Spoiler:
Agreed. The Underworlds tutorials were the best ones and even those have been stripped down now.
Did you look at the video I linked to? If you had you may have seen I was being sarcastic because Nick used 53! different paints in that video.
Honestly for all GW's massive improvement on social and community interaction online - and it is a massive massive improvement over the Kirby days when was wasn't just silence but open hostilities - I can 100% appreciate that someone who wanted to get into the hands on community interaction; would feel limited under GW's current approach.
It is very corporate in style; not the hands on that one might expect or get from much smaller wargaming firms.
So yeah I can totally see how a creative person in a social community role would be grating to be just doing videos and pre-recordings and not really allowed nor able to actually interact with the community in a direct sense; likely outside of anything bit a handful of major in person events.
I can also see why a larger firm would want the approach they've taken; its not a bad move all round, there are sensible reasons for a separation at the top end.
Sounds like she made the right choice and perhaps her and a few others leaving GW like this and for those reasons might well make GW suites realise that perhaps if they are going to have community staff and community systems that build fanbases and such that perhaps they want to give them some freedom.
Right now they seem to have doubled down on the suit approach and that might well hurt them in the long run. At least in terms of internal staff and such; it won't hurt sales really since all these content creators are just going out into the wild and still spreading the word of GW products, paints and stuff
legionaires wrote: Since GW has gone to only table ready painting on YT, I hope she adds more of the old Table + that GW used to do. I pulled a lot of inspiration from those older videos.
The tabletop isn't even good and asks for some really....interesting asks.
Like repainting black when already painting black. Spraying it gold, then.....painting it gold. Just paint it grey. It makes basecating easier.
I think the issue is that GW's sprays don't match their paint pot colours. So if you use the spray basecoat as the colour, you can't touch it up later, hence the need for the ridiculous repainting.
I watched quite a few of the masterclass videos by Louise on W+ and quite enjoyed them. I hope she is replaced soon, as other than the 'free' mini, W+ doesn't have a lot going for it imo.
Then tgere is an easy way to solve that prime grey
Which would leave lighter shadows at non-black areas
Or is painting overall black undercoat over grey better than paint black parts of model over black undercoat? Dunno. Feels you are painting more black that way
A black shadow might also be undesirable. With a grey primer you can go more easily for a more realistic look instead of the dark moody look of a black primer (and very dark shadows) that, admittedly, is what most want from Warhammer miniatures.
Before I had to drop painting due to time issues (years ago) I had actually switched to priming everything grey (even GW minis). You have to work on the shadows a bit more instead of only rendering lighter (to your midtones) and lighter (highlights) like with a black primer but most colours cover better over grey than black and the process is not much more work (and my process for metallics never needed a black basecoat under the metallics). It's only the darkest blacklining that's already done for you by a black primer (but also might need to be touched up) but if you don't even need it that dark for your style then a black primer doesn't even save you that.
Easier coverage of all colours and a slightly different texture of the grey primer I had and how paint sticks to it made the process of painting basecoats of flat untextured areas really enjoyable. It felt more like painting instead of "removing the dark parts that I don't need anymore", if that phrasing makes sense. Also, if somebody wanted to replicate Louise's colourful and prismatic style then a lighter coloured primer (grey and maybe even white) would make that somewhat easier.
I don't mind people trying to strike out on their own, good or bad. But the more it happens the more companies will make it harder for them to do it.
I bet Games Workshop now has a few-year non-compete agreement in the "artist" contracts now. But sometimes you can feel when they are kind of
headed for the door. More and more corporate channels only want hands and voice-overs in their video, so you don't know who the personality is.
Miniature Market has a Social Media rep that randomly shows up in their videos, she wears a dice costume and pushes the current products, just
get the feeling she is just using Miniature Market media as a testing ground and springboard to going out on her own. Good for her, not so much
for the next person that will lose the flexibility and trust of the company because they don't want to build a following only to have it cut into pieces
when a personality leaves again.
It's completely understandable, these folk know that they can be doing the same job for a lot more money away from GW. I can't blame any of them for wanting more money, but they are kidding themselves if they think they have more control of their creative output.
They are still completely beholden to GW. They now all have a race to put out content for the latest GW releases, whilst its still relevant. Most of these 'hobby' channels are just gw product advertisements, they rush content out to show off current releases. They put out a video for something more 'creative', like star wars legions or historicals and they watch their views drop. Then its back to speed painting 40k models.
Meanwhile GW have just saved paying a full time wage, can sling an interns hands under the camera for a quick painting video and for the cost of a single plastic kit and postage can have thousands of people advertised to via these 'content creators'. Its probably of some annoyance when someone leaves, but I'm sure GW are not loosing too much sleep or profit from them leaving. Ducan bringing out his own paint line is probably the one thing thats raised more than a single conversation at head office.
Creative control isn't just the models but how they paint, what products they use and what they can do with the model before it gets painted. With GW it's the stuff on the box and thats about it, with an exception for Masterclass which is what Louise hosted.
Genoside07 wrote: Good for her, not so much for the next person that will lose the flexibility and trust of the company because they don't want to build a following only to have it cut into pieces when a personality leaves again.
I would suggest that if a personality is bringing enough value to the company that their loss would be a problem, then it would be in the company's best interests to make it worthwhile for that personality to stay, rather than making it harder for their replacement to do their job effectively...
Mallo wrote: They put out a video for something more 'creative', like star wars legions or historicals and they watch their views drop. Then its back to speed painting 40k models.
gorgon wrote: As a creative professional, I think you're being too dramatic here. Or maybe too naive? When you for work someone else (especially a larger organization), it's not about your personal creative expression or brand-building. You're loaning your creative talents to the organization in support of *their* business, and in exchange you receive compensation. Constraints come with the job. In some ways the job *IS* the constraints...you can't really pull them apart. You're working in a certain industry on a certain product or for a certain client as directed by a certain creative brief. All these things provide the shape of the creative space in which you work.
It's certainly legit to feel like you want a 'larger space' or more personal recognition. And usually what creatives do in that case is strike out on their own, which is what the subject of this thread did. It's just how things work.
GW may have been driven more by the creative studio decades ago, but that's no way to become or run a multinational corporation. When the business gets that big and complicated, you really do need all those other folks in other fields of expertise. And you build the business together. Sure, it's a different kind of gratification than doing whatever the hell you want to do in support of no one but yourself. But the paychecks are usually a lot steadier.
What a load of rubbish - I can't think of another company in the gaming sphere that doesn't credit the people who work on a product where appropriate. Kinda hard for someone to highlight specific products on their CV when there is no evidence of what they've done in the end result.
Hell, if Wizards of the fething Coast are willing to credit artists on Magic cards, then GW can credit the artists, designers and miniature painters who contribute to a given book.
Yeah, not getting credited correctly is a big deal.
When my name got left out of the credits for The Lathe Worlds the guys at FFG just about fell over themselves trying to apologise to me, and I got very nice hand-written messages in my writer's copy as a result. I was appreciative.
gorgon wrote: As a creative professional, I think you're being too dramatic here. Or maybe too naive? When you for work someone else (especially a larger organization), it's not about your personal creative expression or brand-building. You're loaning your creative talents to the organization in support of *their* business, and in exchange you receive compensation. Constraints come with the job. In some ways the job *IS* the constraints...you can't really pull them apart. You're working in a certain industry on a certain product or for a certain client as directed by a certain creative brief. All these things provide the shape of the creative space in which you work.
It's certainly legit to feel like you want a 'larger space' or more personal recognition. And usually what creatives do in that case is strike out on their own, which is what the subject of this thread did. It's just how things work.
GW may have been driven more by the creative studio decades ago, but that's no way to become or run a multinational corporation. When the business gets that big and complicated, you really do need all those other folks in other fields of expertise. And you build the business together. Sure, it's a different kind of gratification than doing whatever the hell you want to do in support of no one but yourself. But the paychecks are usually a lot steadier.
What a load of rubbish - I can't think of another company in the gaming sphere that doesn't credit the people who work on a product where appropriate. Kinda hard for someone to highlight specific products on their CV when there is no evidence of what they've done in the end result.
Hell, if Wizards of the fething Coast are willing to credit artists on Magic cards, then GW can credit the artists, designers and miniature painters who contribute to a given book.
I think D&D books still credit artists too and most companies in this specific niche industry also do that.
My 9 to 5 is has a creative professional for a huge multinational and yes its facelesss has Gorgon says but its a completely different industry.
On my own free time I work in the miniature industry has a different type of creative guy too and here you are credited has the sculptor or artist or even painter etc...
What Im saying here is that different industries have different ways of working and crediting their creatives. I expect GW in the context of the industry that its part off to actually credit artists.
Mallo wrote: It's completely understandable, these folk know that they can be doing the same job for a lot more money away from GW. I can't blame any of them for wanting more money, but they are kidding themselves if they think they have more control of their creative output.
To add to points made above, they are also now free to actually engage with their viewing public. They can, you know, talk to them online; interact with them. Take polls, get feedback, give people more of what they want. This interaction is insanely invaluable but also for many creative people making tutorials and such; its also a part of what they actually enjoy. It's something GW won't really allow outside of conventions and even then those are only a few days a year and you'll have a good part of the day made up with structured parts and then some rough freedom for interacting with a handful of people.
But yeah she can also use different materials and paints and brushes. She can also paint models in different "not studio theme" styles. Go into way more detail, way less, go totally off the rails with a funky vibrant scheme of pink space marines or rainbow seraphon or whatever.
Yes she's still got to work toward certain creative elements to keep the money coming in; still likely producing content related to GW. But that isn't really a punishment to someone who already enjoyed working for GW and enjoys their products and output. That's the ok part of the job they had and they can keep doing it. They are just more free to do it their way now and that will steadily include "off brand" things - at least off brand from GW's perspective.
In the end GW's loss is that their Warhammer+ is changing to more corporate video style for their tutorials and they are losing online personalities as part of their program. They are also refusing/reluctant to directly engage online outside of things like their Twitch stream or facebook comments - both of whcih are more shout-outs than actual interaction.
Now granted GW makes up for this as they have staff in their local stores who 100% do interact in person. However it feels like they are missing a trick to not openly embrace online interactions in a way that can help promote services like Warhammer+ and create popular artistic personalities and such - even though they might lose them here and there too.
Also I do agree its a shame we don't know more of GW's creatives. Many of their sculptors are totally unknown to the market save for a handful from the early days. Granted some of this might be more complex - a model from GW might be the result of a designer, artist, manager, another designer chipping in, some collaborated parts on their server of bits and designs in 3D - so it might not be as straight forward. But it is an area GW could do more in.
Mallo wrote: They put out a video for something more 'creative', like star wars legions or historicals and they watch their views drop. Then its back to speed painting 40k models.
Mallo wrote: They put out a video for something more 'creative', like star wars legions or historicals and they watch their views drop. Then its back to speed painting 40k models.
Yeah its pretty common knowledge that GW stuff gets more attention.
Heck some channels regularly do "anit GW" videos complaining about something to generate viewership spikes and you can see their regular videos on viewer numbers way under; then they do a "GW kills kittens" video and boom the numbers jump up.
Mallo wrote: They put out a video for something more 'creative', like star wars legions or historicals and they watch their views drop. Then its back to speed painting 40k models.
Yeah its pretty common knowledge that GW stuff gets more attention.
Heck some channels regularly do "anit GW" videos complaining about something to generate viewership spikes and you can see their regular videos on viewer numbers way under; then they do a "GW kills kittens" video and boom the numbers jump up.
For sure but then again it's also very dependent on the type of content right? So Duncan and Peachy are specialised in tabletop fast simple paint jobs... GW being the biggest wargaming company it makes sense to cover that. For a high quality professional painter with high end tutorials, the mini itself is not the most important factor but rather the technique... But yes your are right, GW sells more than anything.
Matt from Miniwargaming said similar things repeatedly: they reached a size where they can try out other wargames like Flames of War, Bolt Action, SW:Legion, Middleearth and so on, but they have to keep a constant stream of 40K/Aos to generate the important views/ numbers.
Overread wrote: Honestly for all GW's massive improvement on social and community interaction online - and it is a massive massive improvement over the Kirby days when was wasn't just silence but open hostilities - I can 100% appreciate that someone who wanted to get into the hands on community interaction; would feel limited under GW's current approach.
It is very corporate in style; not the hands on that one might expect or get from much smaller wargaming firms.
So yeah I can totally see how a creative person in a social community role would be grating to be just doing videos and pre-recordings and not really allowed nor able to actually interact with the community in a direct sense; likely outside of anything bit a handful of major in person events.
I can also see why a larger firm would want the approach they've taken; its not a bad move all round, there are sensible reasons for a separation at the top end.
Sounds like she made the right choice and perhaps her and a few others leaving GW like this and for those reasons might well make GW suites realise that perhaps if they are going to have community staff and community systems that build fanbases and such that perhaps they want to give them some freedom.
Right now they seem to have doubled down on the suit approach and that might well hurt them in the long run. At least in terms of internal staff and such; it won't hurt sales really since all these content creators are just going out into the wild and still spreading the word of GW products, paints and stuff
I would suggest from my perspective of knowing little of value about anything, GW could do a hell of a lot worse than keeping Peachy, Duncan & Louise (and anyone else) up to date on new releases, providing preview copies of stuff etc. They sort of get the best of all worlds, they have their own corporate, controlled, media channels and they also have skilled people who are known and popular working on the latest things they release
Agreed. The Underworlds tutorials were the best ones and even those have been stripped down now.
Yeah, those were the last to go - it's a shame as there had been "Parade Ready" tutorials for all the warbands (except one I think) up until the most recent one, but then that went the way of 10-paint Battle Ready also.
legionaires wrote: Since GW has gone to only table ready painting on YT, I hope she adds more of the old Table + that GW used to do. I pulled a lot of inspiration from those older videos.
The tabletop isn't even good and asks for some really....interesting asks.
Like repainting black when already painting black. Spraying it gold, then.....painting it gold. Just paint it grey. It makes basecating easier.
I think the issue is that GW's sprays don't match their paint pot colours. So if you use the spray basecoat as the colour, you can't touch it up later, hence the need for the ridiculous repainting.
I watched quite a few of the masterclass videos by Louise on W+ and quite enjoyed them. I hope she is replaced soon, as other than the 'free' mini, W+ doesn't have a lot going for it imo.
Then tgere is an easy way to solve that prime grey
Then you end up doing two coats of your base colour rather than one. Spray black, roughly paint over black bits in black with a single coat, is faster than spray grey, neatly paint the black bits with two coats of black.
If you then put another colour on another part of the model, it won't matter if you're painting over an arm that's half primer black, half pot black. Yes, they're slightly different, but they still look the same once you put red over it. That's not necessarily going to be the case if the arm is half black, half grey.
Not that they often prime black at all on the GW tutorials - they normally use some variant of grey (Wraithbone, Grey Seer or Mechanicus Standard Grey) - it's just when black is the primary colour on the mini.
NAVARRO wrote: For sure but then again it's also very dependent on the type of content right? So Duncan and Peachy are specialised in tabletop fast simple paint jobs... GW being the biggest wargaming company it makes sense to cover that. For a high quality professional painter with high end tutorials, the mini itself is not the most important factor but rather the technique... But yes your are right, GW sells more than anything.
no, content does not matter
the problem is the YT algorithm for suggestions/feed
Warhammer is popular, therefore the feed will show Warhammer related videos to more people, not matter the content
Wargaming is not popular, even if you subscripe to a Wargaming channel, the feed will show you Warhammer videos instead
so content creators that make Warhammer videos, no matter if their content is related to Warhammer to get suggested to more people
Yeah its the issue that the search engine systems have switched over. We've moved from an age where search and algorithms worked to show us what we looked for; to telling us what we should be looking at.
It's a subtle shift that's been happening over time, but the result is that if you're not pandering to THE hot thing at the moment or the major element in your market (or even a market that's "viable" then you'll just get drowned out.
Heck its why titles on so many top trending videos all sound and look the same, but that's what the algorithm looks for and promotes and thus that's what people use and thus the algorithm looks for that all the more.
Tyranid Horde wrote: I wish her all the best, she's a great painter and personality.
Interested to see who she is replaced by at GeeDubs.
A hand with no face. A disembodied voice.
Possibly from different people... who knows.
I lost a bit of interest. I prefer seeing the person doing the talking at some point. Much like I used to prefer reading WD battle reports with photos showing them standing round the table showing real people playing a real game (even if it was set up and rigged), I dislike the zoomed in battle reports showing no human interaction and just smoke machine shots of models in a purple light.
Other than the 'free' model and the few episodes of Blood Angels I've watched, the occasional Masterclass is all I really enjoy out of my subs. A corporate painting video is making me wonder for year 3 if I bother.
Perhaps someone mentioned this, but I'm curious if any or perhaps all of these individuals would have continued at GW if they were permitted to have their YouTube channel while also working at GW.
It seems like this 'no side job' policy at GW is the root of the problem.
oni wrote: Perhaps someone mentioned this, but I'm curious if any or perhaps all of these individuals would have continued at GW if they were permitted to have their YouTube channel while also working at GW.
It seems like this 'no side job' policy at GW is the root of the problem.
It's about the only thing that makes sense from a corporate perspective, if you don't lay down policies incredibly well you'll be on a slippery slope to all sorts of problems otherwise. GW has been burned by copyright/IP stuff before, they're understandably wary of anything not absolutely ironclad in their favour.
oni wrote: Perhaps someone mentioned this, but I'm curious if any or perhaps all of these individuals would have continued at GW if they were permitted to have their YouTube channel while also working at GW.
It seems like this 'no side job' policy at GW is the root of the problem.
It's about the only thing that makes sense from a corporate perspective, if you don't lay down policies incredibly well you'll be on a slippery slope to all sorts of problems otherwise. GW has been burned by copyright/IP stuff before, they're understandably wary of anything not absolutely ironclad in their favour.
People have their employment terminated all the time when they act a fool on social media. This doesn't seem any different to me. The WarhammerTV YouYube channel is not monetized, so I also cannot see an argument for direct competition. It seems very draconian.
oni wrote: Perhaps someone mentioned this, but I'm curious if any or perhaps all of these individuals would have continued at GW if they were permitted to have their YouTube channel while also working at GW.
It seems like this 'no side job' policy at GW is the root of the problem.
It's about the only thing that makes sense from a corporate perspective, if you don't lay down policies incredibly well you'll be on a slippery slope to all sorts of problems otherwise. GW has been burned by copyright/IP stuff before, they're understandably wary of anything not absolutely ironclad in their favour.
People have their employment terminated all the time when they act a fool on social media. This doesn't seem any different to me. The WarhammerTV YouYube channel is not monetized, so I also cannot see an argument for direct competition. It seems very draconian.
The competition sits on a sliding scale, if they e.g. use competitors colours in their side buisnesses, or recommend products that don't come from GW, or are painting stuff on commisison that's outside of what GW would allow and so on. Anything that leads to a variant of 'Hey this GW-person says brand XY paints are much better than GW, and cheaper too' or something like that. It is draconian no doubt, but one can understand where they're coming from.
Tyranid Horde wrote: I wish her all the best, she's a great painter and personality.
Interested to see who she is replaced by at GeeDubs.
A hand with no face. A disembodied voice.
Someone I spoke to came up with the idea of getting a very distinguishable tattoo on their hand. Or even a tattoo of a picture of their face on their hand.
Tsagualsa wrote: The competition sits on a sliding scale, if they e.g. use competitors colours in their side buisnesses, or recommend products that don't come from GW, or are painting stuff on commisison that's outside of what GW would allow and so on. Anything that leads to a variant of 'Hey this GW-person says brand XY paints are much better than GW, and cheaper too' or something like that. It is draconian no doubt, but one can understand where they're coming from.
remember the famous White Dwarf picture of the GW painting team with non-GW colours in the background on the working table
or that GW painters telling people behind the scenes that Citadel Colours suck and they are not using them at all but tell/show people using them for marketing
hence of course this is a problem, as even if those information are outdated and they only use Citadel now for promo-models, people are still using other brands for their own models, and have always done this
now it is much more critical as in the past as the marketing has reached the community that Citadel are the best of the best and no other brand comes close (and they are cheaper for a reason), and people now people seeing that all this not being true is not something GW wants
oni wrote: Perhaps someone mentioned this, but I'm curious if any or perhaps all of these individuals would have continued at GW if they were permitted to have their YouTube channel while also working at GW.
It seems like this 'no side job' policy at GW is the root of the problem.
I absolutely doubt it's for this reason, but thinking about it, by switching to anonymous presenters, it means there's now no reason those presenters couldn't have their own channels as they wouldn't be linked to GW. I'd imagine the policy remains the same though.
oni wrote: Perhaps someone mentioned this, but I'm curious if any or perhaps all of these individuals would have continued at GW if they were permitted to have their YouTube channel while also working at GW.
It seems like this 'no side job' policy at GW is the root of the problem.
I absolutely doubt it's for this reason, but thinking about it, by switching to anonymous presenters, it means there's now no reason those presenters couldn't have their own channels as they wouldn't be linked to GW. I'd imagine the policy remains the same though.
I strongly believe that "no side Jobs" is probably very clear on the contract. This is GW we are talking about here and many companies in the UK that are a lot more flexible than GW also have that.
GW's poor wages are the biggest issue IMO. Lots of creatives would prefer the security of a regular monthly pay packet, and accept the restrictions associated with that, as long as the pay was good enough.
Ian Sturrock wrote: GW's poor wages are the biggest issue IMO. Lots of creatives would prefer the security of a regular monthly pay packet, and accept the restrictions associated with that, as long as the pay was good enough.
It's also the fact that a lot of people nowadays run Patreons, and due to it somewhat-transparent nature, you can guesstimate (a very rose-tinted version of) what you're leaving on the table by taking the safe corporate money. On the face of it, making multiple to ten-thousand pounds a month seems very attractive, especially if you're not aware that the platforms themselves take a hefty cut and you'll be paying all sorts of staff or freelancers and random expenses for assorted work like doing taxes, web hosting, video stuff etc. etc., but even if you're abstractly aware of these costs the sheer number on a page looks extremely enticing.
Soundtheory wrote: That's funny - YT actually "recommended" her video to me, and I watched, liked it, and subbed. Had no idea she was an ex-GW employee!
Me too!! I simply went...OOOHH looky, a video about the oft unmentioned Rainbow Warriors!
It was only when i found this very thread i learned she was ex-GW.
P.S. I am absolutely convinced by the whole Tzeenchian Renegades theory
oni wrote: Perhaps someone mentioned this, but I'm curious if any or perhaps all of these individuals would have continued at GW if they were permitted to have their YouTube channel while also working at GW.
It seems like this 'no side job' policy at GW is the root of the problem.
I absolutely doubt it's for this reason, but thinking about it, by switching to anonymous presenters, it means there's now no reason those presenters couldn't have their own channels as they wouldn't be linked to GW. I'd imagine the policy remains the same though.
I strongly believe that "no side Jobs" is probably very clear on the contract. This is GW we are talking about here and many companies in the UK that are a lot more flexible than GW also have that.
All 4 companies I worked for as a corporate accountant/analyst over 14 years in the UK had a "you require our permission for a side job" clauses,which I invoked once..... to work as a Key Timer for GW before the Great Key Timer Purge
For these people still interested in her reasons for leaving GW, she now made her own video on the subject and on how her new label came into existence:
Really liked that video! Some painful parts for her to start opening up about here and there; but overall a really positive outlook on the past, present and future and sounds like she's found herself a role that's both something she loves doing and is going to be more suitable for her as a person.
It was a great, honest and open video, I wish our hobby goblin nothing but the best going forward, she's one of the few I follow across social media and when she posts, it's always fun to see pop up on my timeline.
Not bad for a lass who first got noticed for painting ability on 4chan of all places. (Anonymous internet forums! )
Looks like she's landed on her feet well after her departure from GW, so good on her! I don't have many channels saved on my youtube, but hers will definitely be one of them.
