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.

Yeah. I just got some Coat D'arms inks (those who used to produce GW paints) in hopes they would be the same as the old GW inks. They're not, they are absolute trash. I have also tried the Liquitex inks and they are not like the old GW inks either.

Im desperate, what made the old GW inks so amazing? Any substitutes on the market? Or a recipe so I can make my own.


PS: I like the old inks for their super high pigmentation for staining techniques. I do not want any of the new generation inks that are out of the bottle shading.

I think the original (glossy, very high pigment) GW inks were winsor & newton artists' inks, rebottled, so try those.

Very shortly after release (less than a year I think) GW brought out another range of washes which were more akin to modern washes rather than proper inks. I think those were Cote D'arms.

Also Andrea inks are excellent and come in super handy pipette bottles.

winterdyne wrote:
I think the original (glossy, very high pigment) GW inks were winsor & newton artists' inks, rebottled, so try those.

Very shortly after release (less than a year I think) GW brought out another range of washes which were more akin to modern washes rather than proper inks. I think those were Cote D'arms.

Also Andrea inks are excellent and come in super handy pipette bottles.

Alright thanks! I will try those.

I switched from GW inks to artist inks from the local hobby (as opposed to game) store. They work just fine for me, and for twice the price of GW washes you get over three times the volume... and it's a lot more concentrated. After dilution it's close to ten times as much.

Andrea inks are nice, but pricey as heck. I have only 3 colors.

Alternatively Liquitex makes great inks, big quantities for cheap-er. If you use them in the airbrush also use Liquitex airbrush medium though or they'll spider too easily.

Vallejo also makes inks but I feel like they don't have that same intense croma that others have.

 Gunzhard wrote:
Andrea inks are nice, but pricey as heck. I have only 3 colors.

Alternatively Liquitex makes great inks, big quantities for cheap-er. If you use them in the airbrush also use Liquitex airbrush medium though or they'll spider too easily.

Vallejo also makes inks but I feel like they don't have that same intense croma that others have.

I have tried both liquitex and vallejo but they both have the same problem, they look allrigth when applied but when they dry they become semi matte and they dont pool.

That "pooling" that people seem to hate thats what Im after, I speculate that the fluid that stops this "pooling" is the one that makes the color look less vibrant when applied.

When you apply an old GW ink to a color, its like the color explodes, its so intense and beautiful. The problem is its hard to use and I guess that is why GW discontinued it. My last hope now is WInsor & Newton, if that doesnt work I dont know what to do.

Alternatively hit the facebook buying/selling/trade groups and throw a request on there for old inks.

I believe I may even have some knocking around somewhere. If my brain is right I've got at least half a dozen squirreled away...

'Pooling' as you use it might mean one of a couple of things.

First, that it beads up within a surface - this means the liquid has a high surface tension and it wants to ball up with itself rather than flatten out to the surface it's applied to. This is the behaviour that causes 'tide marks' on larger areas when you try to wash them (and visible brush strokes). For this you want to dilute with just water. In very hard water (lots of calcium / salts) areas, you may want to use distilled or deionized water in preference to tap water.

Second - that it floods into recesses and concentrates in finer corners. This is a result of a low surface tension which causes the liquid to be pulled along recesses, panel lines etc, and on matte surfaces to 'spread' like a stain. For this you want to dilute with a little flow improver or washing-up (dish washing) liquid as well as water. Or use an oil wash (depending on what you're doing).

In either case, the surface you're working on will change the behaviour notably. Glossy or satin surfaces will have more pooling to detail (think of it that there's less 'grip' for the liquid in other places) and matt surfaces will have more staining and tide marking.

Remember that inks are a liquid pigment in solution, not like a paint which is a solid pigment in suspension. This means it's much, much harder to wipe it away, especially on matt surfaces.

Ok I got in the Winsor & Newton burnt sienna today. Its good and has almost exactly the same qualities as old GW ink except one thing. If you paint one layer, let it dry, and then put on another layer, the first layer will get dissolved. That's a huge problem since I work in many many thin layers.

Add some acrylic medium to your mix.
Should help bind it.

winterdyne wrote:
Add some acrylic medium to your mix.
Should help bind it.

Thanks I'll try that!

Allright it worked quite well. It does dilute the pigment a bit so i cant stain with it but its still iridescent. Makes you wonder what kind of miracle liquid the old GW inks were.