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.

insaniak wrote:

Alfndrate wrote:Last time I checked, there was nothing stopping people from making their own purple with shades of reds and blues....

Absolutely. GW should just cut the range back to half a dozen primary colours. People can mix their own paints.

Then again, that seems strangely appropriate when you're using those paints on a 'fine' range of miniatures that you also have to resculpt before they're presentable...

Well, you have to make priorities.

How many different armies use various Greens as a primary or secondary color? Cadians, Catachans, Orks, Biel-Tan, Dark Angels, Salamanders, Death Guard, Nurgle Daemons, Wood Elves, Greenskins, Nurlge WoC, and Rohan.

How many use various purples? Emperor's Children, Slaanesh Daemons, Behemoth, Dark Eldar, Dark Elves, Slaanesh Woc.

Who exactly is shocked that there's more Greens than Purples? and that's before you get into the real differences between greens which are tough to home blend, and the limited palette of purples that are actually used. There's no purple equivilent to olive green, for example.

Flashman wrote:

Breotan wrote:

Flashman wrote:Hmm... strikes me there's one or two names in there that you couldn't trademark (e.g. Incubi Darkness and Balthasar Gold).

Why couldn't you trademark those?

Incubi and Balthasar are not names created by GW. There are in general use. Thus, Incubi Darkness is no different to Blood Red.

I would think that common usage and combination would set the ability to trademark here. Blood Red is a common combination, Balthasar Gold, in respect of a model paint, is highly individual and it would be Balthasar + Gold that's trademarked, not Balthasar or gold, but the combination.

Flashman wrote:

Breotan wrote:

Flashman wrote:Hmm... strikes me there's one or two names in there that you couldn't trademark (e.g. Incubi Darkness and Balthasar Gold).

Why couldn't you trademark those?

Incubi and Balthasar are not names created by GW. There are in general use. Thus, Incubi Darkness is no different to Blood Red.

That's irrelevant to whether a word/phrase can be trademarked. Apple, for example, is a trademark and it certainly wasn't invented by Apple.

The full explanation is long (and you can google it) but in essence if no one else is using 'Incubi Darkness' as a paint colour and GW then register it, they have protection over the mark.

Blood Red is used in all manner of similar forms (lipstick, make-up, paints etc.) so wouldn't be defensible, Incubi Darkness is unique (which makes it a stronger mark).

I think the fact that some names have the color in their name while others don't is one of the stupidest things I've seen from GW in a long time. I play Tau and even I couldn't guess what color "XV-88" is gonna be.

I've been flirting with Vallejo paints for certain things I paint because its so much easier to mix, is thinner and doesn't dry out nearly as quickly. Since I'm gonna have to learn and buy new colors this year, whether its GW or Vallejo, I may as well make the full switch to Vallejo now... great job GW. :(

Actually, I've had issues with vallejo paints being thick and gloppy just as much as gw paints. I buy based on need, color , and whether I want to mix or do I want a single color. I see old players being confused until they take the time to sit down and learn the colors... just like with a new codex.


Edit: apparently my kindle is British because it auto-corrected color to Colorado.

Yeah, droppers in general, but especially the vallejos, require extensive shaking prior to use.

-Loki- wrote:I noticed there's no turqoise on the list, at least that I could see. Does anyone know if the Vallejo Game Colour turqoise is a good match to Hawk Turqoise? And, on that note, if they have a good match to Shadow Grey?

Both of the vallejo game colour equivalents are very good matches.

Polonius wrote:Yeah, droppers in general, but especially the vallejos, require extensive shaking prior to use.

I've shaken to my heart's content and then some, some paints won't mix well, and others are too thick...

I thought an earlier poster suggested that the name change is partially to hide any changes in color, shade, tone, or hue? They're redoing the pigments with a new manufacturer. I think they re-named "goblin green" at least partially because goblin green as we know it won't exactly exist.

This doesn't wash because GW has already done this in the past. Back when they switched from Coat d'arms to their current manufacturer they kept the exact same names for their colors even though some of the shades did change (for example, Goblin Green originally had a brownish tinge not found in the current color).

I find the new names confusing and a bit annoying. I assume "Fang" is grey, but who knows? Also, what about old painting guides?

You don't have to worry about that Kestral--they've pulled the old painting guides months ago!

Alfndrate wrote:

Polonius wrote:Yeah, droppers in general, but especially the vallejos, require extensive shaking prior to use.

I've shaken to my heart's content and then some, some paints won't mix well, and others are too thick...

had these exact same issues when i tried them, this was prior to the GW foundation paints which brought me back to GW.

i know dropper bottles are all the rage and all that but i use GW paints and i use an eye dropper i bought from a craft store to measure the paint i need.
granted there is still some lost paint that stays in the eye droper vs the dropper bottle but its minimal, plus it isnt hard to clean the eye dropper between colors to stop mixing and clogging.

n0t_u wrote:It's not that crazy (sort of...), for example Cadbury holds a trademark on the shade of purple they use. It's a step along that path.

bloooody 'ell

Ghaz wrote:

I thought an earlier poster suggested that the name change is partially to hide any changes in color, shade, tone, or hue? They're redoing the pigments with a new manufacturer. I think they re-named "goblin green" at least partially because goblin green as we know it won't exactly exist.

This doesn't wash because GW has already done this in the past. Back when they switched from Coat d'arms to their current manufacturer they kept the exact same names for their colors even though some of the shades did change (for example, Goblin Green originally had a brownish tinge not found in the current color).

It might be that GW's newly selected manufacturer has informed them that they'll be unable to match the old colors?

Alpharius wrote:

biccat wrote:
Personally, I'll stick with Vallejo.

Same here!

I think GW could have increased sales by keeping the same names on existing colors and increasing the range of paints with... new paints!

I believe the point of renaming everything was because the base formula changed, Im not entirely sure on the matter but it may have something to do with legality of changing the chemical make up and marketing as the same thing, but who knows.

Hopefully it doesnt mean they dry out faster like Ive been hearing.

Alpharius wrote:It might be that GW's newly selected manufacturer has informed them that they'll be unable to match the old colors?

Yet the colors didn't match when they switched from Coat d'arms to their current manufacturer but they kept the same names. Goblin Green went from an olive color to its current shade but they kept the same name.

Two thoughts & boring legal gak

* Is this really the list of color names that will be released? Knowning British humour I wonder if they are pulling one over on us by 'leaking' out the new names to get extra hype on the product. We all know if your talking about the 'new' names you'll end up in a GW store to look at the beautiful job they did (cough) renaming the paints. You may not by XV-88 but you may pick up a WD whilst there.

* If this is not a hoax, did the paint manufacturer have a trade mark on the names because GW failed to protect that portion of their IP? If so then I'll bet the price to buy the names was ridicoulus

Legal issues both cites taken from WIKI and re-read the rulings.
In the US the Supreme Court ruled that a specific color alone would be enough for a trademark and could not be used by others without a roalty. ISee Co. v. Jacobson Products Co., Inc., 514 U.S. 159 (1995
In the EU the courts declared the color alone is enough to be trademaked Council Regulation (EC) No. 40-94 of 20 December 1993 .

[color=blue]
For instance T-Mobile owns the rights to Magenta, but they can only claim a trademark in the Cellular Phone realm. My understanding is the same would hold true for GW. They could slap a trademark on the color alone, adding the name would only give them a right to the name. Best guess is they would need a trademark on the name and color.


Pantone has the largest database of all colors. Color-swatches.com will pull up Citadel paints. For instance Badab Black is still there. When I looked in the Pantone web site the color names are not there. You would have to know the Pantone number to find it.

Oh holy hell! My eyes, they burn! The goggles do nothing!

Whats with the Technicolor dream post?

infinite_array wrote:Oh holy hell! My eyes, they burn! The goggles do nothing!

Whats with the Technicolor dream post?

colors man we are talking bout colors.

you notice the colors, i see grey all gak grey

Cameron Baum wrote:The big problem with the proposed GW range is that it will be very off-putting to new customers, as they will feel very swamped by all the different paints, and the significance of the different types of paint. I know I am, and it is a month and a half of painting experience I have. Hence me looking at paints from other sources, because I don't want the confusion.

Mate, whatever you do, don't go into B+Q or Homebase, it will blow your mind!

The fact is, its more colours, more choice! That is only a good thing.

I appreciate if you're new to the hobby, pretty much everything is confusing and/or intimidating right now, but believe me, in 6 months to a year, you will look back and be so glad this has happened.

I am as pumped for this release as much as anything other than maybe 6th Ed 40k, and the only thing that could get me more excited is if they announce "Nick's Raven Guard Battleforce" which features all the models and bits I want for £50. I can't wait to try out the new sorts of paint and play with the new colours.

I'm no GW fanboy, I have Vallejo and P3 on my paint station too, but as much as there is to criticise GW and Citadel for, there are things in the paint range that are as good or better than anything out there.

You have a huge advantage that you have very little you will need to unlearn, and hopefully the new types of paint will mean you can get better results much quicker and won't experience the frustrating period of everything you paint looking like you sneezed on it for as long as many of us veterans did!

Just don't get hooked on doing things a certain way because thats how GW does it, revel in the choice and variety that you have, better than anytime in the hobby, find your own way, and if you need help, there is always somebody who will happily give you tips, even if it is a Redshirt!

I've had the opposite expereince with Vallejo, they always seem too liquidy, which isn't so good for me since I like to drybrush everything. It's great for regular painting, but the thicker GW paints give me better results when I drybrush stuff.

I don't really care about the new names, I just want new jars.. or it's not even the jar that's the issue, it's the lid. I hate the ones that don't stay open on their own.

Might have to buy up a surplus of Devlin Mud just in case, but otherwise, I'll wait and see.

Can't believe they are adding so many new ones though, would pretty much mean all the GW store paint racks will need to change.

Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote:Might have to buy up a surplus of Devlin Mud just in case, but otherwise, I'll wait and see.

Can't believe they are adding so many new ones though, would pretty much mean all the GW store paint racks will need to change.

somewhere in the post which is now a blog heheh. it references new racks

Orinoco wrote:

n0t_u wrote:It's not that crazy (sort of...), for example Cadbury holds a trademark on the shade of purple they use. It's a step along that path.

bloooody 'ell

Its not that spectacular, they just own the right to use a particular pantone colour on certain items, in this case chocolate and drink wrappings.

Its no different to say trademarking the word "Cadbury's" where its in a particular font, it just prevents other people using the same thing in their own products so that people dont think theyre buying something theyre not.

azreal13 wrote:

Cameron Baum wrote:there is always somebody who will happily give you tips, even if it is a Redshirt!

Not if it's the Preston GW store, one of the dude's in there had *the* worst customer service ever, and the Manchester Arndale the guys in there are too eager, I was asked three times in five minutes if I was ok, and if I needed anything. So I'm staying well away from any GW stores now haha

Necros wrote:I've had the opposite expereince with Vallejo, they always seem too liquidy...

Note that the Game Color and Model Color lines have different consistencies. Game Color is much thinner than the Model Color line.

Ghaz wrote:

Necros wrote:I've had the opposite expereince with Vallejo, they always seem too liquidy...

Note that the Game Color and Model Color lines have different consistencies. Game Color is much thinner than the Model Color line.

I have 1 model color dropper bottle, and it has a very similar consistency with my Game Color, but my game color bottles are the ones that are like either really drippy or really gloppy...

I don't have a single problem with all the new colors. More options= more options. Sounds good to me.

I just don't get why they are renaming the old colors. If Blood Red is the same shade but now it's labelled Saim Hann Red, why isn't it still just friggin' BLOOD RED??

Think Tank guy: You see, people didn't seem to like the word "green". So we are now using the word "purple" to mean "green" It's still the same shade, though, because they liked the shade- just not the name.

azreal13 wrote:

Cameron Baum wrote:The big problem with the proposed GW range is that it will be very off-putting to new customers, as they will feel very swamped by all the different paints, and the significance of the different types of paint. I know I am, and it is a month and a half of painting experience I have. Hence me looking at paints from other sources, because I don't want the confusion.

Mate, whatever you do, don't go into B+Q or Homebase, it will blow your mind!

The fact is, its more colours, more choice! That is only a good thing.

I appreciate if you're new to the hobby, pretty much everything is confusing and/or intimidating right now, but believe me, in 6 months to a year, you will look back and be so glad this has happened.

I am as pumped for this release as much as anything other than maybe 6th Ed 40k, and the only thing that could get me more excited is if they announce "Nick's Raven Guard Battleforce" which features all the models and bits I want for £50. I can't wait to try out the new sorts of paint and play with the new colours.

I'm no GW fanboy, I have Vallejo and P3 on my paint station too, but as much as there is to criticise GW and Citadel for, there are things in the paint range that are as good or better than anything out there.

You have a huge advantage that you have very little you will need to unlearn, and hopefully the new types of paint will mean you can get better results much quicker and won't experience the frustrating period of everything you paint looking like you sneezed on it for as long as many of us veterans did!

Just don't get hooked on doing things a certain way because thats how GW does it, revel in the choice and variety that you have, better than anytime in the hobby, find your own way, and if you need help, there is always somebody who will happily give you tips, even if it is a Redshirt!

Redshirt= GW employee?

I've noticed that there seems to be an indoctrination process when you have paint lessons with them. I've only had one, and I'm not certain I want to have a second...

I can see me keeping the metallics, because I use them a lot. They are great for guns and weapons, and are really awesome on DE armour: using them can create a medeival knight feel to the model that is pretty impressive. I know I seem obsessed with purple, but have you seen two-tone armour with Mithril highlights? Truly something else. I also am worried there seems to be a lack of turquoise in the mix, because Hawk Turquoise is turning into one of my main colours in my non-dark DE I am trying to put together.

I have to admit that I am cautiously hopeful about the washes, because they seem to be a magical item in the range. They can tint and colour things in certain ways, and create wonderful atmosphere. I'm just waiting for Saturday, so I can see the look on a friends face when he sees the list... He's a primary school teacher, and has been trying to get some pupils to paint models. This development will certainly make him panic, which will be amusing to watch...

As usual, I'm moaning about GW and as usual, I'll probably be the first to own every new colour. In this respect, I won't be alone!!