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.

unistoo wrote:

Soviet Yam wrote:Whats with the hate for dipping though?

I think similarly to drybrushing, it has it's applications (skeletons, zombies and skaven in particular), but some people view it as a crutch which stops people learning to paint better.

Every technique has it's place, whether they're just starting out or have painted for years. The trick is to choosing the right technique for the right surface and look.

At the end of the day though, I prefer my opponent to have some kind of painted models, no matter how he got there, than unpainted ones! It's the effort that counts

I concur

I don't think i've ever heard of anyone hating drybrushing, although i have seen a few people write comments along the lines of 'meh, you've just drybrushed it and added some ink'. As if they expect every picture posted to be at GD standard or something.

Drybrushing was pretty much the first technique I learned after basic priming and blocking in colours, and for a while that was good enough for me. I know quite a few players who have got this far with their painting and stopped as they are happy enough with the standard of their models.

I've always prefered the painting part of the hobby and it was just natural for me to progress to blending, edging, fading, nmm etc.

If someone asked for my opinion of a model that had been drybrushed and washed, i'd always try to give them some constructive criticism as to how they could improve the model using the techniques available to them. I wouldn't look down on them for it.

Sirius42 wrote:Its never going to win you any golden daemons

It might...




Ok, it's only a bronze one... but that Aquila's almost entirely drybrushed.

I always wondered who pulled that off

I started off painting DnD stuff back in the 80's. I could take my time over minis. It was all about the painting. Life was good . Then 40k came along , a few years ago for me, and suddenly I was painting armies. 10 man squads , 20 ork boys then 40 ork boys. This is when drybrush and wash are your friends. I have 5 armies now, all aroud 5000pts each. Its all about getting the suckers painted asap and on the table. I've almost painted every model I bought, just a valk and a psyker battle squad to go ( and their chimera ). Then I might go back and improve a few characters.

It's already been mentioned and I agree with the arguement that drybrushing is fine if done moderately. A whole mini that has been drybrushed looks awful nine times out of ten; not because it looks drybrushed but because it looks quite unrealistic.

It's shunned by people because it's a simple technique that everybody learns early on in their painting 'career'. Because they've moved on to layering and blending they see dry brushing as a joke. Think of it as an old metal head looking at an emo. He'll have nothing pleasent to say, that's for damned sure.

I haven't used drybrushing on my minis for a very long time as I simply paint on the effects. I find drybrushing to look good but not look realistic so it doesn't fit the grungy feel I so love. However, I do use drybrushing on my bases to very good effect. The trick is to use multiple layers of different colours.

I drybrush all the time! It's a tool and some models call for it. But given the chance on a wavy piece of cloth, EVERYBODY should PRACTICE! I don't think I've ever drybrushed a cloak and had it look right. So jump in! Drybrushing was awesome when I first found out about it and I think anyone who downplays it is a wannabee elitist. To each his own. If you want to blend 5 tones of grey into every link in the chainmail, go for it. I personally love it when people are painting anything. All the guys at my FLGS seem to love playing black primer VS gray primer lol FAIL.

-Sorry, I'm just thinking of the lurkers that want to post pictures and just realized that they are all drybrushed. I'll support you friend!-

LunaHound wrote:

KingCracker wrote: It used to be the super method back in the day. Now its kind of shunned

Its shunned because the amount of painting elitists has increased , and they just need to make fun of who ever spends less then
2 hours per figure. ( im sure most people go for table top quality , speedy yet good to look at )

I agree with this.

Historical wargamers are more interested in getting a large army onto the table, looking good, than a small army looking like a collection of Gold Daemon winners. Drybrushing, washing and Magic Dip are all good techniques for this.

GW do sculpt their figures with a view to them being painted 'the Citadel way'. Hard edge highlighting is one example.

To amplify, I've just been looking at some excellent WHFB dwarves by Sunfalcon. They are super, super figures and look extra super nicely shot with a good camera and displayed on a bright monitor double lifesize. However, from a practical wargaming viewpoint, they are only one unit of lots on the tabletop.

I don't think it really matters how you paint it - rather what it looks like afterwards

I'm all for drybrushing, fantastic and easy way to get details to show more prominently. I'm sure a lot of gamers would play with worse looking minis if they wouldn't do any drybrushing.

Hate Drybrushing? Who does! I'll shank them but good!

I love Drybrushing. I don't like Drybrushing dark fabrics, but anything else I'm all for it. I love adding weathering and wear to tanks, armour, and terrain.

Heck, Tyranids painted in Drybrush look mad-scary in the run for your life way

GoFenris wrote:Minis that are painted are never completed, only abandoned.

Caboose wrote:...That is the noobiest noob technique that has ever noobed its way to noobville....

Yeah, I'm stealing this and putting it in a signature somehow. Great material!

You put it's in your signature instead of its. It's is a contraction of "it is." When you want the word it to be possessive you don't put in an apostrophe. It's just its.

Funnier is the fact that caboose got it right, but you didn't.

LOL x 10 and epic fail on your part.

Now please fix your signature because it's pretty embarrassing to even look at, what with it having such a noob mistake.

Hell yea they do! Whne I first got into the hobby seriously (I was 16 whohoo!) I painted an entire army of nids for one of my brothers, and I mainly drybrushed it all. It really looks crazy on them. Same with dipping, Nids for some reason, just take to those 2 methods GREATLY.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Lagduf, seriously your going to make fun of someone for messing up a sentence? How about you troll for text talkers.

KingCracker wrote:
Lagduf, seriously your going to make fun of someone for messing up a sentence? How about you troll for text talkers.

Yep.

Especially given that he took the time to take the text that he quoted and make it in to an image and then upload it for all to see.

By the way you meant "you're" as in "you are" not "your."

Have a nice day and keep practicing your grammar!

PS: Drybrushing is a great technique and it's how I used to do a lot of my metals, however, I'm starting to use more washes to get the effects I want. I'd like to get some weathering pigments at some point too. Drybrushing has its place but then again is there any one technique that is the "end all/be all" of techniques?

Of course there is an end all/be all. You contact a propainter and wait for the mail to arrive lol

Lagduf wrote:

GoFenris wrote:Minis that are painted are never completed, only abandoned.

Caboose wrote:...That is the noobiest noob technique that has ever noobed its way to noobville....

Yeah, I'm stealing this and putting it in a signature somehow. Great material!

You put it's in your signature instead of its. It's is a contraction of "it is." When you want the word it to be possessive you don't put in an apostrophe. It's just its.

Funnier is the fact that caboose got it right, but you didn't.

LOL x 10 and epic fail on your part.

Now please fix your signature because it's pretty embarrassing to even look at, what with it having such a noob mistake.

Now this is funny! Yep, I messed up, oops. (and I'm a writer. It makes it that much funnier) Irregardless, you should look to you're own be for criticizing other peoples stuff. You may never no what kind of mistakes you'll might find.


P.S. I'll change it when I feel like it.

Wow that drybrushed aquila makes me angry, could be because I have yet to even get a 'first cut badge' at GD, more likley its because I'm about to strip my current entrant as I chipped it and I can't get it to repair without chip lines (about 20 hours work including NMM gold and silver, grr), also it proves me wrong, which I'm not a fan of.

Oh damn! That would suck man.