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.

16/May/09 DAMAGE

I’m in the process of beginning to paint my Valkyrie, and was drooling over Grey Death’s fantastic Land Raider. The longer I looked at it I felt, there were a number of issues I felt should be taken into consideration when it comes to weathering. Atleast I try to. I’ve discussed this with Grey too, but thought it’d be ok to post the issues here to everyone’s benefit.

I think the dreadnought has better (smaller patches) volumes of weathering in better locations (edges and ccw hand/feet).

With the Land Raider, super tough, ceramite beast, I find the large amounts of paint chipping in the middle of a flat surface carries the wrong message for me. The effects are all the same, "chipping" more than denting, burn marks etc. Exceedingly well highlighted it looks like a technical addition, "because you are supposed to do it" rather than, "insert battle showreel, with LR driving through hellish firefight and how it looks when it all calms down (after a month of this in freak weather possibly)"

If you go to this extent with chipping, working physical dents and chips on the actual model would really add to it too! What would CAUSE these dents?? Surely not bad quality paint and dust and UV radiation?, when the thing is supposed to fight in toxic environments, sea beds, desert storm etc.

Don't get me wrong, I absolutely love the tank. One of the best Land Raiders I've ever seen, but I always find honest analysis beneficial  If anything, it's also beneficial for me. I am painting my Valkyrie and I am thinking how the damage and tear is caused!! It should be very different in the wing surface and the touching part of the loading ramp for example!

Lets see if I can get you a reference in the next week or so.

Bloodthirster wrote:This is great work Migsula makes me want to paint a Alpharius. In fact i might just do that although if you don't mind me asking what colours did you used i don't have a clue how to paint Alpha Legion.

I used Vallejo Prussian Blue in several thin layers over white prime and wash of Lemon Yellow.

In the gallery is a step by step pic.

migsula wrote:16/May/09 DAMAGE

I think we need to draw some harsh, but hazy lines between battle damage, and weathering. As you say, the environmental effects of the 41st millenium must vary in inordinate amounts. The millions of biomes, climates, and hitherto unknown weather patterns that may be conceptually encountered by said Land Raider Crew would leave their mark. While modelling we try and get as close to the reality as possible, and really we have to tweak about with some of the effects that are shown in battle damage -- even if they look strange -- to get the most faithful result.

Both you and Grey are looking towards mainly one thing -- the desert. Vast amounts of sand, rocks, bleached by a sun of whose magnitude we can only guess at in the vastness of our imaginations. For a start, I'd look to draw on some real world imagery first -- this picture of a Tank during Desert Storm can be a good example:



To be honest this tank shows little amounts of real damage -- even though it has presumably been through a few fights. The crew laid out Reactive Armour plating down the front, and from this we can see (as well as the skirts) that a lot of dust congregates down these areas. This is a great way to draw a parallel with what we can model. However, their are relatively few actual chips out of the paint -- is this because it is especially designed to be hard wearing, or simply because not much fire has been directed at it, we will not know. But if we look at the former option, we can deduce that 39-odd Millenia later, they'd have anti-chip paint. This then leaves us in a visual quandary, because it is shown that on Grey's gorgeous LR there are chips by the dozen, and it looks tremendous. This is most probably down to his superb techniques, and skill with the realism of battle. However, what we see as a visually pleasing technique isn't actually the most realistic -- most fire would be directed at the front of the LR, and most would be around the vertices of the plating, due to the increased exposure around these areas. Glancing shots would still chip some off the side, and any gouging would be masked by the tough ceramite. On the other hand, whatever we see as unrealistic or less... practical (for want of a better word) weathering still produces a very aesthetically pleasing result, and that's what matters.

Environmental damage down -- battle damage now.

I've dragged up this (sorry it's a bit large) picture of the USS Liberty after battle, I think it's pretty fitting:



From this I've drawn two pointers for now:

_1 - Damage is indiscriminate on wide, open plating. This means that due to the orientation of the ship to the enemy, the damage is random in placing. However, look towards the bottom of the picture, and you'll see a line of what look like smaller gauge shell craters along the side. This tells us the valuable lesson that once targetting is done, damage can follow a pattern -- think about the lines of bullet holes you see on walls, however candid. Notably, for the 41st millenium, think about Autocannon shells. Fired off in quick succession, as opposed to one at a time, the damage is indiscriminate in first placing, but follows the pattern. This is helpful, we can apply damage as closely to real life as possible.

_2 - Glances leave their mark. Look at the tower to the top left -- the black striping down it's side is most probably a few glancing blows from shells or from smaller calibre yield. We have to think about the shells that miss -- it's accounted for in the game's rules, but we so often forgo it in place of dramatic craters and pitting of the surface.

I hope that that hasn't sounded like a rant/preach. I just wanted to lay down my thought process on this issue as I myself am thinking about applying damage to my current projects, and would like to hear your take.

Peace.

sA

I really enjoy the open and honest conversation on this topic. And am glad that my work has shown a little bit more light on it.

I think the direction of the dreadnought and the land raider are somewhat different. The Dreadnought has much the same amount of weathering in much the same patterning that the regular marines have. The thought being that their ability to maneuver more, lends them to less damage all over and only really catching along their exposed edges that catch or scrape by coincidence. The Land Raider I went for the look of a hard used tool that really hasn't seen much down time. The countless battles and skirmishes over the long Badab War campaign. The wear and tear building up. The battle damage as well.

The main issue I see is that the chipping effect is used to represent BOTH wear and tear as well as battle damage. But in keeping with the set army theme, the chipping is the main weathering component.

sA brings up a good point in that the variety of weathering/damage should be used to full effect for weathering vehicles. Take his two examples into account when thinking of this. (For the record the Bradley is from this decade ^_-, that reactive armor started going on the beast after 2003!) The bradley shows a good amount of dirt and grime, but unfortunately, that piece hasn't seen much in the way of battle time (no denting or burn marks on those plates at all) and you honestly can't see much of the normal wear from just getting trained and getting it over there! The paint is indeed resilient, but still chips to hell and back in the field after hundreds of missions and field problems. Much of my knowledge is from working with these same vehicles day in and day out in my time as enlisted in the Army with 1st Cav.

Battle damage should definitely be represented differently than normal wear and tear on any 'hyper-detail' projects. I'm eying the battle damage picture sA provides for an example. There is some chipping here and there from the smaller caliber shells, but much of it is denting or burn/smudges on the paint. There is something to be learned in the pattern of those markings too. The center seems to be the only spot actually chipped and has only cracked the paint surrounding it, as well as leaving a dark smudging all around it.

Now where my mind wanders to is what do those dents and dings from battle damage start looking like after countless missions over a few years of a marine units campaign? And this is where we start to speculate instead of 'know' what the answers are.

Ok, I think that's enough from me for now ^_^. Great convo!

GD, I knew you were there! I remember something in the injuries thread... Anyway. Great stuff. I couldn't put my finger on the Bradley - I've been around them before at shows, but I obviously don't have the sheer experience and man hours that you do! That's why it's important that we pool ideas, you've got the knowledge, the memories etc. etc. I completely dig you're reasoning on the Dread/LR comparison. It's important to see such a difference, and if we didn't, then it we tantamount to an insult to the models and our vision.

Something I see as a problem, as you say, is applying both battle damage and weathering -- and having them stand out as unique and clear in their own way. Thinking about it, I've got the idea that you apply battle damage first -- the major damage. As in, craters, large dents, large scratches, etc. etc. This actually is a change in the topography of the plating, not just in the paint, or the skin-deep attributes of the bodywork. However, heavy puntures of the sort that we see on the ship are probably less common on tanks or APCs -- am I right? This, I would guess, be because any deep punture in such a confined space would be really deadly for the crew and for the hardware, and also people don#t generally get direct hits on a tank with such AP shells that you'd use in naval combat. This is where we have to draw the line in the picture.

Burns are definately one of the best ways to show wear and tear, because with GW's "AWESOME" obsession with Flamer weapons, you're going to be set on fire a lot I'm going to try and bear in mind here that unless you're ambushed from behind (unlikely in a full-frontal SM open-field sort of Warfare), you're going to get directional fire up front. That being along the huge breaching deck down front, and along the sides. This fire/Las-charges will be directional, so going from front to back. It would be a pretty sorry state if we represented burn marks as 'dots' on the body; however around the shell holes you'd find this.

For me, I'm erring away from the paint chipping, simply because I'm basing my fluff on an intense urban wasteland atmosphere -- temperate, but dusty. However, this will open up new avenues in terms of where I put the damage, being able to be ambushed from, well, everywhere! I'm going to have to seek you peoples' advice.

This is great!

Peace.

sA

migsula wrote:

Bloodthirster wrote:This is great work Migsula makes me want to paint a Alpharius. In fact i might just do that although if you don't mind me asking what colours did you used i don't have a clue how to paint Alpha Legion.

I used Vallejo Prussian Blue in several thin layers over white prime and wash of Lemon Yellow.

In the gallery is a step by step pic.

Right thanx that's great help time to get to work

cool - good discussion - sorry that I have no time to make proper comments now, off to stockholm for a few days.

Beautiful LR as I said and waiting to see it finished upon my arrival back

With the TWAR, I tried to study several different methods and effects in weathering: wear and tear, damage, rust, soot, different depths of scratches etc., and with the lessons learned I hope to do something nice with this project.

Back in town - we should be having the Jade Vessel finale this weekend! So I may not have that much time to dedicate for this now, but instead you should get a full pictorial of the finale in the Jade Vessel blog

I've been painting the Valkyrie this week. It's a nice kit to paint I must say - but having done the interiors too, it really takes time. After I'm done with this one, I'll post lots of pics and then get back to the Dune Twists.

The Planetstrike is perfectly timed for this project. I have a campaign in mind where the Imperium and the Chaos come to sort them out and retake Rhisienne. And I'm really looking forward to all the new terrain.

Hmm Imperium vs Chaos. Will the Alpha Legion be Chaos alligned? What I loved so much about Legion was the fact that the legion's loyalties have become very vague.

Malika2 wrote: What I loved so much about Legion was the fact that the legion's loyalties have become very vague.

Same here!

I think that we'll eventually find that the Legion's loyalties lie with both sides. A Legion split down the middle, more or less...

It would help 'explain' a lot!

Looking forward to your Valkyrie migsula!

I think that we'll eventually find that the Legion's loyalties lie with both sides. A Legion split down the middle, more or less...

It would help 'explain' a lot!

I assumed (after reading Legion) that the Alpha Legion was loyal to humanity rather than the Emperor, Chaos or the Cabal. The Cabal predicted that the universe would be saved if humanity would die quick which would be caused by a victory for Horus. If the Emperor would win, the universe would end 10 thousand years later (our current 40k universe). I don't think the Alpha Legion wants humanity to die out, but at the same time doesn't want the Primordial Annihilator (Chaos) to win. I think they are kind of working with the Cabal (when it suits them) to follow to try to save the universe from Chaos, but at the same time try to find an alternative so that humanity could be saved as well.

Sounds good!

I also think that Alpharius and Omegon will eventually have a falling out over just how to accomplish all that.

And as a result, some of the Legion will end up drifting towards Chaos, which will help explain how we've been seeing "Chaos Alpha Legion" since the Heresy...

Let me get this straight, some of the Alpha legion are not Chaos?? Do they suffer from mutations and such or are they renegade due to their own way of doing things??

Just curious, I love chapters that aren't necessarily good, yet they are most definitely not evil. A nice shade of gray so to speak.

Alpharius wrote:Sounds good!

I also think that Alpharius and Omegon will eventually have a falling out over just how to accomplish all that.

And as a result, some of the Legion will end up drifting towards Chaos, which will help explain how we've been seeing "Chaos Alpha Legion" since the Heresy...

Well, the fact that we have not seen any loyal Alpha Legionaires, doesnt mean that theyre not out there We all know that they favor covert operations so who knows where theyre actually present and where not.

Chaplain Pallantide wrote:Let me get this straight, some of the Alpha legion are not Chaos?? Do they suffer from mutations and such or are they renegade due to their own way of doing things??

Just curious, I love chapters that aren't necessarily good, yet they are most definitely not evil. A nice shade of gray so to speak.

Thats is certainly what the book Legion implied. Officially, the Alphas sided with Horus, but appearently theyre following their own, or the cabals scheme. Its all pretty vague, which makes it so awesome And I am totally with Malika. They want whats best for humanity, not the Emperor.

The best quality of British SciFi - inspiring, yet vague enough for us to interpret the way we find the most inspiring.

I certainly have my own theories of what happened after the Heresy - and what the agenda for the Cells at Rhisienne is

migsula wrote:26/March/09 Shapers

Today, little progress shots of Alpharius and Bulldons captain and an Ad. Few weeks ago, good friend CMDante shared showed images of his sculpting tools, including “shapers” that are like brushes with a shaped silicone head that doesn’t stick to gs at all. BUY THEM! They revolutionised my sculpting - mostly the feel, where it came an absolute joy from something of a chore! So each guy in the project will get sculpted detail.

Where to get hold of these ones? Wouldn't mind getting my hands on some of them.

I goolged them as "paint shapers" and ordered online. I tried searching my email, but couldn't find a link for you.

For weathering stuff I'd suggest you ask Gundam-Mecha his Thunderbolt and T34 were both awesome examples of this and I'm sure his KV1 will be as well.

migsula wrote:I goolged them as "paint shapers" and ordered online. I tried searching my email, but couldn't find a link for you.

Thank for the tip. Will continue my search on Google.

This army is simply amazing and has inspired me to try my hand at a true scale pre-heresy army. Your sculpts are amazing and the paint job on those marines is stunning. I love how all of your works are so full of character.

Also, could someone please point me in the direction of somewhere that I can find an explanation of what =I=munda is? Is it just a variant of Necromunda or something? This amazing army and CmDante'S Blood Pact have built up my curiousity of what =I=munda is.

Keep up the awesome work!
Lucas

Look in the skirmish games section for more info on potential =I=munda rules.

Lucas - see the original =I=munda "Jade Vessel" thread in this forum that gave birth to the whole craze.

I've been painting the Valkyrie bit by bit. The going is slow, mostly because I have little spare time, and also because, this being the first vehicle establishes the whole concept for tanks and valkyries to come. I want to get it just right and am carefully considering each step. I want the overall effect to be distinctly in line with the spirit of this project too. It's harder with vehicles.

Balefire_storm wrote:

migsula wrote:26/March/09 Shapers

Today, little progress shots of Alpharius and Bulldons captain and an Ad. Few weeks ago, good friend CMDante shared showed images of his sculpting tools, including “shapers” that are like brushes with a shaped silicone head that doesn’t stick to gs at all. BUY THEM! They revolutionised my sculpting - mostly the feel, where it came an absolute joy from something of a chore! So each guy in the project will get sculpted detail.

Where to get hold of these ones? Wouldn't mind getting my hands on some of them.

The ones I use are called Colour Shapers, they are manufactured by Royal Sovereign. I think there is another company that calls them Clay Shapers. Available in the United States from places like Dick Blick Art Supplies and Jerry's Artarama. I believe both of those companies will ship internationally.

Balefire_storm wrote:

migsula wrote:26/March/09 Shapers

Today, little progress shots of Alpharius and Bulldons captain and an Ad. Few weeks ago, good friend CMDante shared showed images of his sculpting tools, including “shapers” that are like brushes with a shaped silicone head that doesn’t stick to gs at all. BUY THEM! They revolutionised my sculpting - mostly the feel, where it came an absolute joy from something of a chore! So each guy in the project will get sculpted detail.

Where to get hold of these ones? Wouldn't mind getting my hands on some of them.

Maybe this can help?

http://sculpt.com/catalog_98/CLAYTOOLS/clayshapers.htm

Nice find - Thanks for that!

So nice to see the blog spreading the hobby lore and craft

No problem, just glad to help.

Check out this guys thread and scroll down to the bottom to see alot of nice sculping tools

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/270/236631.page

Thanks to chatting with a mate, or rather venting how bored I am with the hobby at the minute . I did a bit of painting and now have all the boring stuff in place and can start the experimenting (fun).I'm planning a semi translucent camo pattern akin to what the USAF F22s have.

Like in this pic, but with lighter overall shade and more gradient within the pattern itself.

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/images/AIR_F-22A_F-16s_Over_Water_lg.jpg

http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/planes/f35/f16-f35-f22.jpg

I think it looks gorgeous with the geometric edge stripes and markings.

Hmm. Somehow I though you'd go macro-digital.

sA