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.

I was wondering what you guys think of sealing an entire miniature first with gloss varnish (such as 'Ardcoat) and then sealing it again with a matte varnish (such as Testor's).

Would this give the model a lot of protection while looking nice? Would it be too much and look disgusting? Would the chemicals combine in some unknowable way and cause the mini to explode?

I have seen a tutorial where someone did this after applying transfers, but have no idea if using both is situational to making transfers look right or if it's just the best idea ever.

Your thoughts?

No problems with your idea.
In fact painters that create those stunning WW2 dioramas varnish between layers, using a gloss varnish if they're about to do a wash & matte if doing weatehring.

You just have to make sure the the temp & humidity aren't any where near extreme levels.
Test on old models 1st to get your confidence.

Good idea.

Yup, gloss varnish is generally tougher than matte, so doing this is the bast method if a model needs areas of both glass and matte.

And btw, if you have any transfers to add, put them on the glass varnish, before overcoating with matte or more gloss - gloss helps them stick better without air bubbles or frosting.

Thanks for the responses and advice, everyone. Can anyone think of a reason not to do it?

bubber wrote:No problems with your idea.
In fact painters that create those stunning WW2 dioramas varnish between layers, using a gloss varnish if they're about to do a wash & matte if doing weatehring.

Interesting. Why do they do this?

ImperialTard wrote:Thanks for the responses and advice, everyone. Can anyone think of a reason not to do it?

Have a read about varnish frosting and it'll make you think twice

I use krylon crystal clear "satin" first. couple of coats. then a coat or two (however many necessary) to get rid of any gloss. Looks good to me.

I do a gloss then a matt varnish as standard on all my models (except those who I want a gloss finish). Gloss is stronger than matt and I prefer the matt finish in general.

for reference: lizardman, praetorian armies.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/26990385@N06/




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Infneon wrote:

ImperialTard wrote:Thanks for the responses and advice, everyone. Can anyone think of a reason not to do it?

Have a read about varnish frosting and it'll make you think twice

that can be fixed with a gloss coat, easy.

Again, kudos to everyone who had something to say. I appreciate your help.

I have encountered the "frosting" before with GW's Purity Seal. It's the only thing I bought from GW that I've had any serious complaint about. Now I only use Testor's.

I guess my questions now would be:

1. Does anyone recommend how many coats of gloss (or testor's) is best for protection without dramatically changing the look of the mini?

2.

bubber wrote:
In fact painters that create those stunning WW2 dioramas varnish between layers, using a gloss varnish if they're about to do a wash & matte if doing weatehring.

Anyone know why people would put gloss on before a wash and matte before weathering?

Matte before weathering is to make sure the powders stay where they are put.

One good coat of gloss is all that is needed for protection. Not too thick, though. One pass either side.

Gloss is used for maximum protection (from greasy mitts and random droppings).
Matt is used to take the shine down a notch.

There is nothing wrong with using both coats. Serious model makers have been doing it for decades. Like every other technique the serious scale modeller uses, it will eventually drip down to TT gaming.

(OSL, NMM, etc. NONE of these techniques are new - I saw several award winning elements of both in the very early 80s, long before GD was a glint in GWs eye. )

Not even claiming to have thought of the idea myself, much less claiming to be the first to think of it. I haven't been around long enough to be "serious." Thanks though.

I am still puzzled. If it's so great and has no drawbacks and has been done for decades, why isn't it as much of a given as, say, priming? I've read over a hundred tutorials and advice articles, and no one I can remember has explicitly said "after you finish painting, you should coat the model with gloss and then matte, and this is why..."

Makes me think there must be some reason not to do it?

I do gloss for durability, then matte for the look. If I want shiny bits, I go back and hand paint on some Vallejo gloss varnish. I'd skip varnishing altogether for purely display pieces, but anything that might be gamed with gets the above treatment. If you're careful (i.e. test spray first to check technique, conditions, and product quality), issues like frosting or drips won't ever come into play, so it's well worth it, in my book.

That's how I make my decals blend in, I use 'ard coat then put the decal on, then another layer of 'ard coat then them matte spray the whole model

''Fire in the hole!''


*Grot bomb miniature explodes because of varnish*

Great idea!

I have been doing that for years. Great idea.

It works fine.

Just make sure the gloss is fully dry before you spray the matt on.

ImperialTard wrote:Thanks for the responses and advice, everyone. Can anyone think of a reason not to do it?

bubber wrote:No problems with your idea.
In fact painters that create those stunning WW2 dioramas varnish between layers, using a gloss varnish if they're about to do a wash & matte if doing weatehring.

Interesting. Why do they do this?

Gloss varnish works because it creates a very smooth finish leading to the light bouncing off it the way it does.
Therefore washes spread quicker & smoother ending up in the creases more.

Armour models offen use oil paint washes as it has a high pigment content (the highest of all types of paints we might use on a model).
The look they are trying is 'lining' and as many on this forum have found, washing tanks can lead to streakyness.
The method consists of wetting a small area at a time then adding very thinned down oil paint.
The joy of oils is that they take a long time to dry so mistakes and flooding can be dealt with easily.

Matte varnish cretes a dimpled finish - it's very fine so it doesn't cock up the colour or details too much.
This leaves a surface that can take weathering powders and drybrushing due to the micro-texture created by the varnish.

It should be noted that armour modellers can be quite anal, to the extent that they have observed that with real AFVs (armoured fighting vehicles) matte paint turns to a satin finish after a few years out in the open (due to the finish being degraded by the weather and the sun), so that's what the modellers try to achieve.
So for 'reallity' on your models, after all the shiney stuff is done, they will use a satin varnish instead of a matte one then weather the vehicle (as satin also has a micro-texture but less so than the matte).
As the vehicle will then be mounted, the powders are offen left un-fixed.

I have found on my own models that lighter powders are very hard to fix - the MIG fixing solution ends up washing the powders in to oblivion - I don't understand why so if anyone can give me any hints or tips please do so!!
I now generally don't try to fix the lighter powders as these are generally in the creases so figure lifting isn't so much as a problem.

Here's a couple of models that I have weathered (more in my gallery - link in my sig).



before -


after -




I know I've posted these before but what the heck! lol

Please feel free to post more questions or pm me.