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 got one to test out. Im not seeing any good properties... it just seems like thinned down ink. The colors are vibrant is about the only good thing i can say about it so far.

i thought it would atleast be self leveling like the old GW washes (spreads itself out evenly over the surface) but no, i put it on a smooth surface and it just pools and sits there. The old GW washes make a far better glaze. or is there something im missing? has anyone had success with these?

They are supposed to tie the different colours together and tone them down instead of being like a wash - also they are designed to tint certain things like metallics etc.

Glazes are meant to brighten up colours, and you need to spread it around yourself to blend it into the surface. Washes are self-leveling because they're made to flow into cracks and crevasses. Glazes are not. If you have a Night goblin, use a wash to make him darker. If you have a forest goblin, use a glaze to make him brighter.

I believe there kinda like the candies if I'm correct. I have not used them before but from the sounds seem to be. Please let me no if I'm mistaken.

There's a reason they're not self-leveling.

You're looking for the Citadel Shade range.

Yep, they're meant to stay where they're at. I tried to use them as a highlight and it didn't work how I wanted it to.

It does do a pretty cool "candy" effect. For some power weapons I use the old Necron Abyss (really dark blue/purple), dry brush chain mail, then do a heavy coat of guilliman blue glaze, then 'ard coat.

Experiment more with it, it does do some stuff really well.

 Tyberos the Red Wake wrote:
There's a reason they're not self-leveling.

You're looking for the Citadel Shade range.

... and what is that reason exactly?

the whole point of a glaze i thought was to get an even layer of transparent color which these dont do but the old GW washes do perfectly.

They're glazes. You don't coat or shade a model with them like you did with the old washes.

They're designed for well, glazing. Which means their purpose is to subtly tint a surface. It's for when you want to blend colours or layers together or imbue a surface with a particular hue.

You've painted a miniatures face for example. You might then want to add some subtle colour to his cheeks, eye sockets or wherever else to emphasize his expression or tone.

Or perhaps you're painting some true metallics and need your metals to be reflecting the sky or the cloth the model is wearing. Again you subtly glaze some colour in.

A key part of glazes is they have to be very thin and you really don't want to be applying much with your brush. The layers should be so thin and in such small quantities it's almost drying instantaneously on the model.

 rems01 wrote:
They're glazes. You don't coat or shade a model with them like you did with the old washes.

They're designed for well, glazing. Which means their purpose is to subtly tint a surface. It's for when you want to blend colours or layers together or imbue a surface with a particular hue.

You've painted a miniatures face for example. You might then want to add some subtle colour to his cheeks, eye sockets or wherever else to emphasize his expression or tone.

Or perhaps you're painting some true metallics and need your metals to be reflecting the sky or the cloth the model is wearing. Again you subtly glaze some colour in.

A key part of glazes is they have to be very thin and you really don't want to be applying much with your brush. The layers should be so thin and in such small quantities it's almost drying instantaneously on the model.

You can do all of that with the old GW washes? and they do it much better than these actual "glazes".

oh well, im going to try putting it through an airbrush. maybe if it cant paint like magic it will surprise me and spray like magic.

Are you talking about the old washes as in Devlan Mud, Badab Black etc etc range? Or the old old washes as in Black Ink, Blue Ink, Flesh Wash etc (i.e the classic hex pots)?

The Devlan Mud era of washes were terrible at glazing with, since their pigmentation was so weak when thinned down to the levels they needed to be for glazing.

I haven't used the new Glaze range, so I don't know what kind of consistency or pigment strength is the norm for them. From the sound of your problem, you're either applying them neat (or close to), when a glaze should essentially be paint thinned to almost transparent colour (it's used to tint, not fill colour), or the paints just aren't suitable for their purpose (which is entirely possible).

Ap0k wrote:
Are you talking about the old washes as in Devlan Mud, Badab Black etc etc range? Or the old old washes as in Black Ink, Blue Ink, Flesh Wash etc (i.e the classic hex pots)?

The Devlan Mud era of washes were terrible at glazing with, since their pigmentation was so weak when thinned down to the levels they needed to be for glazing.

I haven't used the new Glaze range, so I don't know what kind of consistency or pigment strength is the norm for them. From the sound of your problem, you're either applying them neat (or close to), when a glaze should essentially be paint thinned to almost transparent colour (it's used to tint, not fill colour), or the paints just aren't suitable for their purpose (which is entirely possible).

yes im talking about devlan mud era.

i do not agree with your opinion. did you ever try mixing a bit of paint into the wash and glazing with that? you keep the washes properties and you also get a stronger tint.

kb305 wrote:


... and what is that reason exactly?

the whole point of a glaze i thought was to get an even layer of transparent color which these dont do but the old GW washes do perfectly.

Well the reason is that they're glazes and not washes....Its even in the name. Its already been explained fairly clearly several times in this thread
Washes (Shades) Should self level and flow into cracks and crevices, while glazes should do the opposite and stay where you put them. Really not much else to it, they're named after the techniques that they're designed for and are most suitable for.

edit; the old GW washes were nowhere near glazing quality. They (much like the new ones) will become totally opaque in a very small number of layers. Thus they are only semi transparent. While a glaze should be fully transparent and never become totally opaque no matter how many layers go down.

It's been explained. If you don't like them, stop using them, but stop trying to state they should be used like washes. They are not meant for it.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the glazes are what the old (old, old) inks line were supposed to do. I still have some of the inks from the 80's (still good!) Well, they've got ink in them, not paint pigments, so the properties are completely different. They give a translucent uniform semi-gloss color to whatever you put them on. Want your monster to look sweaty? Want your cloak to look velvety? Want your leathers to look oiled? That's sort of what you use them for.

Washes on the other hand are poor-man's shading for people who are crappy at blending, like me.

*edit* Some of the better washes have artist ink in them, like Les' washes. But the formula isn't the same as a glaze, which is very inky.

kb305 wrote:

yes im talking about devlan mud era.

i do not agree with your opinion. did you ever try mixing a bit of paint into the wash and glazing with that? you keep the washes properties and you also get a stronger tint.

I don't know if this is a language thing, but you're not supposed to be keeping the washes properties. When people talk about glazing, they're talking about approximate ratios of 1 part ink/paint to 10-12parts water (or more). The consistency aim is that you basically have very very slightly tinted water that you apply a few layers of to an area, which helps blend transitions and tint said area towards a certain colour overall.

If you're noticing concentrated pigmentation on any parts (like in recesses where it pools, for example), then either your technique is wrong (you're applying too much glaze at once), or you're not mixing it in a high enough ratio (an expected effected of not thinning down enough is that you would be left with a thin film-like effect over the area you applied it, indicating that your mixture has too much pigment concentrated in too little thinning medium).

In a roundabout way, this takes me to my next point about the devlan mud era of washes. It's not that they can't be used for glazing, it's that they were terrible for it. With washes intended to self-level, the fluid the pigment is suspended in operates differently when thinned down to extreme levels. Related to that, and much more problematic, is that the pigment used in those colours has a tendency to clump when heavily thinned. The result of this is a very uneven finish when glazing with them, because you end up with weird pigment particles in random places for no reason - The wash just didn't retain cohesion in the same way the old inks did when thinned down to that level. Any time I've ever glazed with the devlan mud era of washes has been a pain in the ass. It's not impossible, but it's much much harder to get the intended finish because they don't operate in the expected fashion when thinned.

If you want something that's going to work for proper glazing, I'd look into Coat D'Arms. They're the guys behind the original blue-top GW 17.5ml hexpot range, which contained the classic washes (flesh wash etc) which were perfect for that purpose. I actually don't know if they're still around (though I suspect they are), and I'm sure there are other companies who do equivalent lines that I'm not familiar with. All I can tell you is that as soon as my classic hexpots are finished, Coat D'Arms will be my first stop for replacements.

Might be an idea if the manufacturer put a few words on the pot, say under a heading like "Directions for use" just saying.

jprp wrote:
Might be an idea if the manufacturer put a few words on the pot, say under a heading like "Directions for use" just saying.

they cant do that, how ealse would GW sell its over sized Evy metal guide, and there internet half guides on the site


wait they got ride of thouse so now you have to bye there books to learn there products.

well untill you learnhow to use the internet and ask people on Dakka

I have used them to make stockings and such on some of the models that I have been working on recently. They have worked well for that.

When you think "glaze", think "donut".