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.

The scales are 1-10 for Paint Job and 1-10 for Coolness

What standards are you applying?

1-Better off leaving it unpainted.
2-Random colors slapped on, atleast figure recognizable
3-Not sure if trying
4-Getting there!
5-Getting there + trying stuff ( me goes here! )
6-Clean lines, can tell had effort
7 Clear and clean high lights and shading
8- Definately a pro ( with proper shading ,blending )
9- Golden Demon standard
10- Golden Demon and beyond ( omg shopped! etc )

Yeh n/a or 1 if unpainted and I use the coolness vote for modeling. Otherwise your voting for the paint job twice right?

I also find it hard to use scale for coolness...

I look at it from

-is it conversion?
-is the conversion original?
-difficulty of it ?

because honestly, how cool a model is? if not the person's painting
its how well the sculpt is.

conversion is the only thing that can make it *cool aside from painting.

I think your right, I think painting would be considered in coolness but there's a separate scale for painting. I'd actually suggest changing coolness to modeling because atm I'm just putting n/a if the model hasn't been changed from the original.

Painting I'd agree with the others who have posted.

Coolness on the other hand can have a number of factors applied to it.

What I apply to coolness is pose of the model, conversion, if it's a group how do they all look together and how good does the picture look.

To me, I use the scale 5-10 because I regard the 4- as being a case where someone shouldn't have bothered. But I don't want to discourage people so I don't mark low scores. Obviously people post WIP work too, which is valuable because it shows off progress and ideas. In these cases the N/A button is suitable and should count as a vote even though it isn't a score.

As for painting, there are different aesthetics. I prefer the gritty, weathered look and that's how I paint myself. However, I appreciate the clean, hard-edged style too. Either way, you can tell a model where the painter knows what they are doing from one where the painter slapped on poster paint with a decorating brush.

Coolness is harder to define. It definitely involves conversion or different ideas, which could include painting technique.

I don't think it matters how cool is defined. The important thing is that people think some images are worthwhile to bring to the attention of others. There are nearly 15,000 images in the gallery and no-one has time to browse widely.

Painting:

Unfinished/sloppy: 1
Painted, not based: max of 5
'Standard' Painting, generally 6-8, depending on colour scheme.
'Advanced Painting' - includes freehand, NMM, weathering, lightsourcing, other advanced tricks, 8-10

Coolness:
Non-converted, out-of-box assemblies - Max of 6.
Minor conversions: 6-8
Major Conversions, Well-done scratchbuilds: 8-10

I also find that the 'grouping' feature on the gallery works against my votes. The eighth time I see essentially the same model with a different angle, or a closeup of a different member of the unit, I can't seem to help but vote lower than one the first one of the group that I saw. See something cool once, and it's COOL! See something cool a dozen times, and it's like, 'geeze, this again'.

On painting I look at the techniques the contributor has used, even coating, highlighting and the like( was the contributor going for a 'comic book' look, or 'realistic' highlighting for example). Breaking the final result into it's component painting stages to make my decision

The coolness rating I tend to use for the overall look of the model, after all even if it's a stock multi-part mini it's still possible to make a mess of things like arm position. I tend to use this also to judge any basing work done, again according to criteria like ; does the base overwhelm the mini ? does the style of base fit the painting style of the mini ? if showing a group, are the bases consistent throughout the group ?

Considering that, I would agree that Coolness might be better off being changed to Modelling.

Kilkrazy wrote: where the painter slapped on poster paint with a decorating brush.

So THAT'S where I'm going wrong ! Doh !

So 6 is a good baseline for tabletop?

And for coolness, you don't give points for things like Source
Lighting, NMM, nifty photoshop, sheer scope and scale (large
armies).

Maybe it should be like Figure Skating.

Technical
Artistic

So if the painter wears a skimpy dress...

For Painting, I usually give a 5 for what I consider tabletop quality. 8 and up is usually for models that use advanced techniques or use simple techniques that are executed very well.

4 for less than tabletop quality, less for extremely poor painting (craft paints with a decorating brush, etc.).

Coolness I use as a sort of "General Effect" score. This is a combination of painting, modeling, how cool the model itself is, cool conversions, etc. If the overall execution of the model is good, I'll give it a high coolness score. Basically anything I see and think "Man, that is cool," is going to get a high (7+) coolness score from me.

For WIP stuff, and stuff with blurry or dark photos I tend to vote N/A. If it's a finished cool conversion but unpainted, I'll vote N/A for painting but give it a coolness rating.

I think "tabletop quality" should be a 4.

Because, that leaves 6 degrees of above-tabletop, which is good. I prefer to have more space to vote higher than tabletop rather than 5 different 'below tabletop' gradiations.

As for lightsourcing, NMM, etc - I think that's covered in painting. Really big armies could earn 'cool' points. Photoshop, hrm, are we grading the photo, or what's in the photo?

I think 4 seems like kind of a low score for "tabletop quality," but I don't think it would be a problem if we somehow set a "Dakka Voting Standard" so that everyone knew that a 4 means "tabletop quality." I do agree that having room to vote higher is probably better. In general if a model is painted pretty poorly, it doesn't really matter if it's got a score of 1, 2, or 3, it's still a bad looking paintjob. I don't think anyone is going to be arguing like, "What man, you gave that a 2? It should totally be a 3!"

Redbeard wrote:I think "tabletop quality" should be a 4.

Because, that leaves 6 degrees of above-tabletop, which is good. I prefer to have more space to vote higher than tabletop rather than 5 different 'below tabletop' gradiations.

As for lightsourcing, NMM, etc - I think that's covered in painting. Really big armies could earn 'cool' points. Photoshop, hrm, are we grading the photo, or what's in the photo?

Cool factor. Seems like an anything goes category.

I'm starting to think of it like a reviewer's tilt.

I judge by how I would react if a stranger walked in to my rec and started setting up for a game;

I consider 4 and below stuff I wouldn't want lined up across from me.
I consider 5 tabletop stuff I would be apathetic about if it was lined up across from me.
I consider 6-7 tabletop stuff I would enjoy seeing lined up across from me.
I consider 8 stuff I would love to see lined up across from me, probably ask questions about their models after the game.
I consider 9-10 models that warrant for me to stop setting up, point out and make conversation about if it was lined up across from me.


Cool Factor is pretty simple for me. I don't care about if it was converted or stock, it's just my gut reaction when I first see it. For example, unique/interesting palettes can earn high cool factor from me...simply because it was a gut reaction to the model.

So is it the model or do you sometimes judge a photo (a well
prepared battle scene, for example)

The photo definitely is a factor, as that effects the overall presentation. Blurry or dark photos are going to get lower scores from me, almost always. I mean really, how can you really tell how well a model is painted if it's so dark you can't see it, or if it's so blurry you can't make out the detail?

N/A means I wouldn't accept it.
1 = Really good.
2 = Extremely Good.
3 = Scrumptious.
4 = Corking.
5 = Out of sight.
6 = Fergalicious.
7 = Un-sane.
8 = Scralphalpatacionarious
9 = Oafv.
10 = The most.

malfred wrote:So is it the model or do you sometimes judge a photo (a well
prepared battle scene, for example)

Sure, photo plays a part it effects my overall 'wow' when I click the pic.