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

Just for interest.

Good tabletop standard. I won best painted that one time none of the pros showed up.

A lot of garbage.
Just look in my gallery.

This is actually an interesting question. I think people could really make their armies look a lot better if they focused less on the "cool" factor and more on the "clean" factor. I have seen some pretty bad armies/mini's and if the person would just work on brush control, it would improve the look of their stuff so much.

Instead people are always looking for the shortcut and trying to figure out the "quick" way.

Ashton

Lol, I seem to do better when painting OTHER peoples army.

I would classify my army as better than standard, but everyone I play against and the event I attend consider my army great or better. Even had requests for commission painting bu I just don't have the time.

My Orks are painted good, some say 'awesomely good' others say 'I couldn't do that' or 'they aren't all yet finished!' but it seems people think them as well painted so I consider them as being well painted as well I'm proud of my Orks ^^ yet my necrons (being first army and stuff) oooohh that's just not good at all >< but they are ALL painted though

Tabletop standard.

I'm so dismissive of my painting skills, its put me off painting any models in recent months.

Prime->Undercoat->Watery Overcoat->Washes and a drybrushed gravel base equates to "low TT standard" correct?

Eh, your scale is missing a step between better than average and great. Average is terrible, so better than average doesn't mean much.

I put down great, but I really should be "good", which isn't an option.

I'd say great, but not golden demon. I've won best army awards at really big tournaments, but golden demon is about models that take as long to paint as I spend on whole units.

It is all painted, which is more than the standard at some places I have played. Nothing like playing the grey tide or primed only army. Guards man will not win any special prize, but, the vets and special characters are better than average.

The more I paint, the less I enjoy it so now I just spray, overbrush then drybrush everything and then spend a little more time doing the details. I've even stopped doing washes on everything. I basically take loads of models, get them up to only needing the detail to finish and then just finish one per night until they're all done. Very quick and the results aren't too bad.

My stuff is tabletop standard and I'm happy with that as I don't intend to enter any painting competitions or anything like that.

I'm best in my group of friends, bar none, but that doesn't mean much b/c they absolutely suck at painting, if they even bother painting their armies at all.

I'd say tabletop, with a few better than TT, just cuz some miniatures (my WG, Lictors, PoM, for example) I put a little more effort into, because they're awesome and important in my scheme of things.

Most other people would probably shun me

Hmm.

Interesting results...

From what the handful of painters/players that have seen my stuff in person have said, I'm better than average and I'd like to agree (it's hard for me to reconcile an experienced, if not terribly skilled hobbyist being blown away by a model, then calling it "high TTQ"). Not sure if I'm over- or underestimating myself, though, considering the limited poll options in my general skill range and the ridiculous degree of variance between what people consider "tabletop." Horst makes a valid point - the dead average paintjob isn't really all that much to look at, so I'm definitely better than average (as, likely, are a number of people who placed themselves in the middle), but I'm far from great. Like, really far.

Should probably also take into account the fact that the painted portion of my "main" (determined only by number of models painted, as my two armies are roughly the same size, by points, and I don't play enough to favor one or the other) army is only legal if I split one large mob into two and play at <500 points. Can't say if my average quality would be higher (through practice) or lower (after giving up and speeding up the process) if I had a reasonable army's worth painted up, already.

[edits:] I need some sleep. Stupid unintentional orkmoticons...

Table top + - but since I paint for me, of course I'm happy with it.

I'd like to say better than average, but that's in reference to what I see at my local gaming store. Most of my army, however, is unpainted. I started on Orks within the past year, and have spent most of my time kustomizing them. I also did several with a black primer (BAH!) before experimenting with a white primer, washes, and using solid paints only for detailing or certain textures/materials. My first battlewagon was the first mini I painted. It was a beat-to-hell landraider my roommate had stripped and discarded. I worked on that before even buying the AOBR box I bought. After building a rotating rocket turret, a kustom deffrolla, and (in my opinion) botching the paint job, guys at the store were still all over it.

As is, I've stripped down the first squad of lootas I painted solidly, and I'm in the process of using white primer and washes. They look far more organic, and I'm hoping that when I finish the army it'll be as nice to look at as it is to play.

There isnt an option between "mine isnt even painted" and "garbage."

I dont want to call never painted plastic "garbage" as i love them as they are too T-T

My units are far from amazing, but I think theyre have a pretty solid base. If you compare it to the other armies around my LGS i win only by virtue that all of my units are painted....

Also, Check my gallery !

How does paint?

I looked at a lot of your galleries, some of you are better than you think.

Tabletop for sure.

My army is very simple, but I would say slightly above tabletop. However, I am not even close to being really good

I take it that tabletop standard is a 3 color minimum and a wash. I would rate my wolves then as tabletop standard.

I want all my orks to look great. I hate the ones i painted in my first weeks in the hobby, they look horrible.

Right now im painting a nob, and I started working on him 5 days ago....

but i am, very happy with how he turned out!

I think at tabletop standard. But if I must say so myself, I really think my army looks great when you see them all together. Very unified.

I'd say my main army (Orks) are tabletop standard for the most part, some are quite a bit better though.

My Deathwing (which admittedly I use probably more than my Orks these days) I'd definitely consider above average, but that doesn't say a great deal, it's more of a slight at the quality of most the armies I've seen in my area than a statement of my greatness.