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.

Bossasarus whatever mate. Stick up some photo's of your army, do something positive like write an article, contribute to dakka. Or alternatively piss on everyones bonfire, your choice.

I think that dipping is just another way of painting. You don't just dip a completely un-painted mini. I would see it as the epitome of lazy for, say, a an eldar player to spray base white, than dip golden yellow and just leave it at that. Even Tyranids need two colors to be considered 'table quality'.
However, back to my point of dipping being a painting tool. I have seen a absolutely STUNNING Blood Angles army, extremely well done conversions (if a tad on the chaosy side), very good paint job. When it very lightly dipped, it looked even better.

Say you had some catachans, with base coat colors painted. Could I use this method to 'dip' them? And what should I use to dip with?

Bossasaurus wrote:They look dipped. A painted version looks better. I put in effort. You didn't. Thus my space wolves look better than your 'bear claws'.

Even for the internet this seems needlessly inflammatory.

Also, if your work doesn't look better without needing to tell people that you put time and effort in, doesn't that make your time and effort a waste?

Cortez667 I have sent a PM with some tips, but check out my earlier article in this thread. Catachans would look ace expecially in Dark Tone Quickshade, but do not "Dip" them, put some washes on then get 10ml of Quickshade add 1-2ml of white spirit then paint it on with an old tank brush. Dullcote it when dry and they will look very good.

Dipping directly into the "Can" and then flinging the thing around can look ok, but it can "blob" your models, obscure details and leave drips or pools of dip.

"Thin it down, paint it on, Anti-varnish spray it" It will look better than you would imagine.

I don't think anyone is saying that the effects of dipping are as good as a well applied series of shading, washing, and highlighting. Dipping is just another technique that quickly achieves some aspects of the previously mentioned techineques.

So why the need to put down those who choose to dip? Why do anti-dipping advocates seem to need to tell us that...

"I put in effort you didn't",
"ive never seen a dipped model but im betting they look terrible "
" I'd just rather they put effort in and learnt to paint."
"I hate dipping, it's so lazy"

...just to quote a few from this thread.

I love converting, like playing, but don't really enjoying painting. I'm not lazy, or averse to putting effot into the hobby, so why is it so wrong that I dip my miniatures in order to achieve a better painting result than just block painting? Is it that bad of a thing to want to have more time to spend on the aspects of the hobby I like?

For many of us who aren't fond of the painting process, it's not a choice between dipping and a high standard of painting. Rather, it's a choice between dipping or just having block painted models. Here's my work. Just block painted with a drybrush on the mud and metals followed by a brushed on dip and matte spray.

Rest of the army here:
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/343518.page
Yes it's not carefully shaded, hightlighted washed, etc. But I think that most of us will agree that it looks a darn sight better than just block painted.

I really like your army Eili, has a real theme and a cohesive feel just like a real army would. Plus it looks good and didn't take you 1000hours to do... I would take time and effort in preparing a battlefield if you were coming around to battle, it makes the whole experience that much better if you have 2 well painted armies fighting over an interesting battlefield, you don't need to suspend belief for starters!

I would recommend an Army Profile to bring this all together out of the P&M Blog.

samwellfrm wrote:I don't see anything wrong with it. Some people don't have time to paint thier entire armies with a brush. I'd much rather see a dipped army on the field than a gray plastic army.

I just wanted to "Amen" the above statement.

Vasarto wrote:Actually meant "future owner"
Gonna be within 3 years...maybe 2-1/2. Saving up money for the first store and gonna have it ready by than.

Don't do it- it's a trap.

Seriously, starting up a gamestore is pretty much throwing away money, time and effort. It *can* be sustainable, but it takes an enormous amount of work and outlay. You would be better off sticking the seed money in a low interest account. Hobby games are a pretty bad business. The margins are low and its highly niche specialized. Given that it's hard as hell to startup a business anyway, it pretty much playing Russian roulette with all chambers loaded and hoping one is a dud.

Back on topic:

I consider myself a very good painter. I have won awards and done paid commissions. I also take a fairly long time to finish and get frustrated fielding grey plastic (though, I don't really care if my opponents do) and recognize that painting takes alot of time, practice, skill, and talent. Dipping is a quick, efficient way to get good looking models on the table. The product is easier and produces better results than many hobbyists can achieve otherwise. I think it is fantastic, especially for people who don't want to spend a bunch of time painting toy soldiers or who have limitations that prevent them from doing so.

Condemning dipping because it doesn't produce Golden Daemon caliber models is like saying no one should jog because they wouldn't qualify for the Olympics. It's a ridiculous line of criticism. The dipped models mwnciboo showed are very good and certainly top notch for tabletop use. But I suspect Bossarus is either being sarcastic or a troll....

Maybe I'm missing something, but dipped models still need to be basecoated (neatly) and simply are shaded by the dip.

Using the dip doesn't replace paint, it's simply a very strong wash.

Correct. It is simply a wash method that can quickly bring out details. But it is easier than using multiple washes and highlights, hence the appeal.

I'm not conviced it's that much easier. If you have a full army already based coated, I suppose you can spend an evening dipping the whole thing. But if you're painting by squads, I almost think it's easier to wash.

But that's my point: you can dip an unpainted model and have it look good.

A wash is definitely easier.

What I like about the Dip is that it's a wash, a shade and simulates a bit of a highight (if you use lighter colors underneath) as well as just about the most protective hardcoat you can get. All in one step.

Hmmm...I am yet to be convinced on the Colour Primer spray and then dip it immediately method. You need some detailing to help bring the model alive, even if it is just painting the eyes on and claws before dipping a Tyranid. But that said I could see a Tyranid army being a quick production line especially for Gaunts, Spray colour base coat then a quick eyes, claws and a few details, Dip dry and then leave them shiny to look slimey.. yeah that could look awesome.

Definitely agree. Even the dipped Tyranid army in the Article on Dakka has a red color for the plates and black accents drawn in with sharpie.

Skeletons are about the only thing that I think a strait spray and dip would work for, and even then you should probably paint the weapons.

My Tyranids are brush-on dipped.

I do the following scheme.

1. Spray grey primer.
2. Spray the ventral surfaces with Rattan Satin (Bleached Bone) -- when I run out of this I will switch to Elm (from Montana Gold range)
3. Spray the sides with Sahara Yellow (from Montana Gold range)
4. Spray the tops with Sand (from Montana Gold range)
5. Paint the mouths and mucous bits red oxide
6. Paint the teeth, spikes and claws pink.
7. Magic Dip! with Quickshade Softcoat.
8. Spray matt varnish.

I don't bother with the eyes because they are too small to notice. I used to, and it was a waste of time. They are so tiny on Nids.

I got 40 Termagants, four medium sized models and a Tervigon done in a weekend with that method.

IMHO, dipping is a useful painting tool that works on certain models only. I would use it, but infortunately dark elves aren't exactly cut out for that

The point of this thread is for us to share our opinions about dipping, thus opinions have been given.

Dipping is like using a drum machine, while painting is like playing the instrument.

Dipping is NOT painting, its a way to get mediocre results with only minimal effort.

Bossasaurus wrote:The point of this thread is for us to share our opinions about dipping, thus opinions have been given.

Dipping is like using a drum machine, while painting is like playing the instrument.

Dipping is NOT painting, its a way to get mediocre results with only minimal effort.

Have you dipped before?

No. But i have seen many dipped models.

Bossasaurus you don't really have the grounds to criticise dipping when you haven't even used it before
just cause you've seen dipped models...so what?
I've seen the moon many times. Does that make me an expert on it?

Hey guys,
I find Bossasaraus' opinion as offensive and il-informed as some of you do, but that doesn't mean he has no grounds to put out his opinion.

If only those who had done whatever is discussed commented on threads at Dakka, there'd be alot less going on here. Everyone gets their say on Dakka.

Bossasaurus wrote:The point of this thread is for us to share our opinions about dipping, thus opinions have been given.

Dipping is like using a drum machine, while painting is like playing the instrument.

Dipping is NOT painting, its a way to get mediocre results with only minimal effort.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, however wrong it may be.

No dipping is not painting by definition.... it's a staining/shading technique, no different than applying a GW wash over a mini.The fact is you still need to paint your mini in base colors before applying the shade wash. I personally have brushed on a thinned out wash of polyshade over my base coats but I still had to "paint" on the colors,,, they didn't fly out of the pots on there own.

The fact is you can leave the figure as is after "dipping" but you can also go back and pick out details and add highlights to further improve the look. And if done right, the results are far from mediocre. It does take some experimentation to get the result you want, i.e. the right shade, the right amount of thinner, etc... but that's the fun part of it my opinion. To each his own. It's not a contest.

Bossasaurus wrote:Dipping is NOT painting, its a way to get mediocre results with only minimal effort.

I'd be interested to see how you define painting. I mean, is it simply "any technique other than dipping?" Is there a minimum level of effort? Or is it based on results?

Painting involves paint and a paint brush...
And honestly, why do I need to have dipped to not like dipping? I can put a mini in my water cup and brush of the excess- and I doubt dipping takes a lot more skill that that.
I was asked for my opinion, and pointed out that dipping was,
lazy- due to the fact it is as complicated as what i outlined above, and that it was not painting.
I also said that I was disappointed that people chose to dip instead of learn to paint properly.
Regardless of your rudeness I will still give you as much painting advice as I can.
This does not mean I am not irked by the attitude that since I do not agree with you I am being offensive.

So then to you airbrushing isn't painting, an airbrush isn't a paintbrush, it's an airbrush...

Also painting with sponges, salt or marmite weathering, and other such non brush techniques.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
feth it!

I've decided that anyone who doesn't use a neutron microscope and X-Ray beams to manipulate elements at the atomic level to create and position pigments is just being downright lazy.

All of you need to learn to paint properly.

Marmite weathering?

Bossasaurus wrote:Painting involves paint and a paint brush...
And honestly, why do I need to have dipped to not like dipping? I can put a mini in my water cup and brush of the excess- and I doubt dipping takes a lot more skill that that.
I was asked for my opinion, and pointed out that dipping was,
lazy- due to the fact it is as complicated as what i outlined above, and that it was not painting.
I also said that I was disappointed that people chose to dip instead of learn to paint properly.
Regardless of your rudeness I will still give you as much painting advice as I can.
This does not mean I am not irked by the attitude that since I do not agree with you I am being offensive.

I think you're operating under a misconception of what painting is; either that or your being intentionally obtuse or just plain trolling. As mentioned before, by several individuals in this thread; dipping is a method of applying a wash-like affect and a protective coat in one go. The act of dipping does not preclude the necessity to paint your mini before you dip it (although myself and many people just brush the minwax on to the mini as it's less messy and you maintain control over how heavy the minwax layers on given areas of the mini).

To recap. Dipping does not replace painting nor is it meant to; what it does do is replace the time that I would spend on applying several washes to an already painted mini and applying a varnish coat at the same time. Why would anyone want to take the time to apply several washes to a mini if you can get the same results by a quick flick of the brush or a dip? It's like telling someone building a house they're doing it wrong when they're using power tools instead of hand tools.

So, you're right in that it is not painting....because it's not as it is applied after completing the painting process.

There; hopefully I've repeated it enough that you'll understand.