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.

So this is one off my loves , to paint 2:ed minis in old codex style
hear is Clagar


I have upploaded it on CMON but i only got 4,8 :(
is it really that bad ? what do you guys think?

http://coolminiornot.com/245080
please vote for him if you want

He's very nicely done. Too much red for me personally, I'm not a fan of it having lived through the GW Red Age (aka the Age of Strife).

Your score at CMoN will be low because:
It has some exceptional painters there, by that I mean people like 'yellow one' and several Golden demon winners who regularly post there. It's not that there's anything wrong with you mini, just that the bar is incredibly high.

And then there will be low scores from jackasses who voted it low because it's an older model (my fav calgar is the one sat on the throne...) and those that voted it low because it's an ultramarine and the vanillablue marines get much hate for being the posterboys of GW and their 'clean cut' image.

I like it. Really well painted and a nice looking model too.

Is it me or is it quite small compared to more modern IC models? The head looks like it is a little too big for the body somehow.

The scores on Cmon mean nothing..

Back in the day I posted an Ahriman which got like 7.8 or so yet it was painted no better. Smurf hate is likely your answer.

Great job painting. Looks like a figure that would be used on the table instead alot of display minitures that you see post on some other sites. Great job.

CMON is a tough nut to crack...

first of all, people take the voting guidelines too literaly...
it says a 5 is tabletop quality...
this is tabletop quality, so there you go...

then there are "snipers", who vote 1's just 'cause they can...
when CMON resets each night, the high and low vote get thrown out, and the other votes are averaged...
so your average vote is almost a 5, a perfectly acceptable score for an average tabletop mini...

as has been said, the bar has been raised over the years...
what used to be a 7.5 is now a 5...

CMON, as a community is much more of a "showcase painter's" website, where somewhere like Dakka is a "gamer's" website...
if you participate in the forums there, you will get good feedback, and a bit higher scores as people get to know you...

if you are looking to get high scores on CMON, you need to step up your game...
there should be more contrast in your layers...
for instance, your reds, golds, and skintones are quite flat...
deeper shadows, and that last, bright, fine highlight really make a mini "pop"...

it's just a matter of what you're after...
do you want to reach display quality, or do you just want to show your work...
if you want to step up your game, than take any constructive criticism you can get, and work hard to match what the top painters are doing...
if you show your minis, ignore the scores, and do what you do...

cheers
jah

Claimh_Solais wrote:So this is one off my loves , to paint 2:ed minis in old codex style
hear is Clagar

I like that, too! I´m a big fan of the 2nd edition ( more humour, more crazy units, more tables, more variety). You really managed to getr the nice colourful style
("bright red") of that time. I think the blue turned out really well, especially the highlights. If you like painting 2nd edition Miniatures, try Nightlords.
Blue armour, white lightnings, red details, some yellow-and-black danger signs... and bases in goblin green. I have painted a squad of them this way.

That actually is a very well painted mini. Unfortunately a lot of people don't appreciate the old, super-saturated style of painting that enjoyed so much popularity in 2nd and 3rd ed. As an avid collector of models of that era, I love it.

Nice job on a classic mini.

I would suggest giving the gold a slight highlight on the raised corners, as it looks a little flat at the moment. Otherwise, nice solid paintjob.

Doesnt it make you feel old when a model you remember being released gets called classic? . On a serious note though theres nothing wrong with it. Great quality and any battlefield graced by it will be richer as a result. I think jah-joshua summed it up best. CMON has some ridiculously talented painters showcasing. Not that thats bad. It just means something like your calgar thats well painted as it is, isn't on the same level as some of the golden demoners and others that have their paint jobs on there. Don't take the ratings personally. Thats above a lot of tabletop armies quality Ive seen of late. If you have a force of marines to go with him I'd like to see pics indeed!

Awesome!

And as noted, that green base trim, nice for that authentic old school touch!

jah-joshua wrote:CMON is a tough nut to crack...

first of all, people take the voting guidelines too literaly...
it says a 5 is tabletop quality...
this is tabletop quality, so there you go...

then there are "snipers", who vote 1's just 'cause they can...
when CMON resets each night, the high and low vote get thrown out, and the other votes are averaged...
so your average vote is almost a 5, a perfectly acceptable score for an average tabletop mini...

as has been said, the bar has been raised over the years...
what used to be a 7.5 is now a 5...

CMON, as a community is much more of a "showcase painter's" website, where somewhere like Dakka is a "gamer's" website...
if you participate in the forums there, you will get good feedback, and a bit higher scores as people get to know you...

if you are looking to get high scores on CMON, you need to step up your game...
there should be more contrast in your layers...
for instance, your reds, golds, and skintones are quite flat...
deeper shadows, and that last, bright, fine highlight really make a mini "pop"...

it's just a matter of what you're after...
do you want to reach display quality, or do you just want to show your work...
if you want to step up your game, than take any constructive criticism you can get, and work hard to match what the top painters are doing...
if you show your minis, ignore the scores, and do what you do...

cheers
jah

Well I think the CMON voting system is pathetic
First of all, you can `t even get a 10 point score that is sad , I mean if you have won a golden deamon that clerly is a mini worthy a 10 point rating (think the max i seen is a 9,8 pont mini)
then i really hate the EVERYONE cen vote , then ther are idiots how vote 1 on evrything just to

and for me a tebeltop mini is a mini that looks OK to play , the stuff that bluetablepaintign do is TT standard mini like this http://www.bluetablepainting.com/view_image.php?imgID=71576
thats TT mini = 5 points on CMON , do you agree or am I wrong ?

and the stuff thats on GW hompage , "evy metall team painters " is not TT minis that is higer , think most of the painters/players cont paint that good so it CANT be TT standard

well i think me mini should have a score of 6-6,5 ponts and its painted to look lite the old modells that GW´s team painted

so I can be wrong or do you guys agree ?!

I agree on some points, and disagree on others...

with any kind of voting system, some people are gonna feel bummed about the results...

i personally only vote on minis i feel are an 8 or better, 'cause i don't want to bum anyone out by voting on a mini that i don't think is well painted...
i also always leave a comment when i vote...
no secret sniping from me...

personally, i feel that there are different levels of tabletop quality, which is why i don't vote on minis i think are 5's...
each person's painting level is different...

i think Blue Table is at the very low end of tabletop quality, so yes they should rate about a 5...
Winterdyne, on here, does some solid quality tabletop, and scores solid 7's...
i paint to what i consider "high-end tabletop", which means that i paint to 'Eavy Metal standard, with bases that are game legal, and score solid 8's...
i consider the 'Eavy Metal studio's work to be high tabletop standard...
the work that the guys do in their spare time outshines their studio work by far...

it's all so subjective, that i can't argue with the scores i recieve on CMON...
some people like what i do, and vote high...
other people are not into my choice of mini, and vote lower...

as for a mini that wins a Golden Demon deserving a 10, i disagree...
i won a demon 5 years ago, and my painting has only gotten better since then...
if you won a demon this year, hopefully you would look back in 5 years and say, "man that paintjob sucks!!!"...
the painting side of the hobby, for competitive painters, should be all about improvement...

times should change, and it should get harder to get a high score...
i see so many comments on forums that say how excellent someone's work is, or how it's the best version of the mini they've ever seen, or how it's better than GW's version...
more often than not, i disagree, but i'm not going to post that, 'cause there is no reason to knock someone's hard work, wether i think it's good or not...

i have to admit that i'm a paint snob, but then i'm a professional painter, and a competitive painter...
i'm only impressed by the mind-blowing paintjobs...
they are the ones that inspire me to keep improving...
i'm unsatisfied with every mini i paint, which only pushes me harder...

like i said in the first post, it's all about what you want to achieve with a mini...
if you want to take it back to the old school, cool...
i think you do deserve a 6 for this guy...
maybe it will balance out after 50 votes...

just keep doin' what makes you happy, and don't sweat the results of votes on a very elitist website...
it's not life or death, just good fun...

cheers
jah

Claimh_Solais wrote:First of all, you can `t even get a 10 point score that is sad , I mean if you have won a golden deamon that clerly is a mini worthy a 10 point rating (think the max i seen is a 9,8 pont mini)

Well, technically it's possible to get a 10 ... but would require you to get voted 10's pretty much exclusively.

Although personally, I rarely vote anything a 10, since a 10 should be a flawless, perfect miniature. That's a very rare thing, even in a Golden Demon winner.

and for me a tebeltop mini is a mini that looks OK to play , the stuff that bluetablepaintign do is TT standard mini like this http://www.bluetablepainting.com/view_image.php?imgID=71576
thats TT mini = 5 points on CMON , do you agree or am I wrong ?

That's actually a good example of where the skew starts...

'Tabletop Quality' means very different things to different people. To some, it's the standard they personally would want to put on the table. To others, it's a neat paintjob with a certain (arbitrary) level of highlighting and shading.

To me, a 'Tabletop Quality' paintjob is simply a miniature that is painted in the appropriate colours and based. Highlighting and shading, so long as it's neatly done, immediately puts the miniature up to at least a 6. But that's not the general opinion on CMON, and isn't likely to be anytime soon.

From my experience of CMON, a 4-5 is about standard for a mini of the quality of this one. It should be higher, but that's just CMON.

I think they would actually get less complaints about the system if they revised the explanations for what the scores mean. Putting 'tabletop quality' in the middle gives little room for distinction at the top, and gives too much room below 'tabletop' ... I think if they specified tabletop quality as being a '3' more non-GD-winning miniatures would get appropriate scores.

jah-joshua:Tanx for the replay

I looked at your CMON page and saw that you had weard scores to , and you paint better then me , I mean the salamander marine i think its a 9,5 ! not only a 8, but yeah CMON score is not everything

The reason i post hear is that the mini took a long time to make (2H only fore one arm) and i thought it was nice and i got a 4 so it made me little sad

btw which mini did win a GD ?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

To me, a 'Tabletop Quality' paintjob is simply a miniature that is painted in the appropriate colours and based. Highlighting and shading, so long as it's neatly done, immediately puts the miniature up to at least a 6. But that's not the general opinion on CMON, and isn't likely to be anytime soon.

From my experience of CMON, a 4-5 is about standard for a mini of the quality of this one. It should be higher, but that's just CMON.

I think they would actually get less complaints about the system if they revised the explanations for what the scores mean. Putting 'tabletop quality' in the middle gives little room for distinction at the top, and gives too much room below 'tabletop' ... I think if they specified tabletop quality as being a '3' more non-GD-winning miniatures would get appropriate scores.

Totally agree
the bluetable mini i posted a link too is o TT standard mini (god for games but not a display pice) and yeah a 3ponit sounds reasonable
hope the CMON team fix it some day

i never put the winner in any of my galleries, because i don't have any good pics of him...

this guy was painted in '03, won a bronze in L.A. in '05, and was sold last year to our own RiTides (he likes the paintjob a whole lot more than i do, so i'm happyhe has a good home)...

Inquisitor scale, Kal Jericho:



i have way too many finalist badges...
it's a bummer when your mini gets put aside last in the final selection, but it pushes me to paint better...

CMON is not perfect, Dakka gallery is not perfect, and competition results are not perfect...

as long as painting is a relaxing, fun, way to spend your time, that's all that counts...

cheers
jah