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 have no idea if hand-painted miniatures will be made obsolete by colour printing any time soon. HeroForge are already doing colour-printed miniatures, but from what I can gather, they look pretty crappy. How far off are they from being able to reproduce the quality of a well-painted miniature? I have no idea, but at the rate technology it is advancing it unfortunately may not be long. Another creative part of the hobby gone. Everyone fielding armies with store-bought GW-paint-jobs that are just another thing you have to purchase from GW. Boring.

This is something that worries me. Although I'm sure a lot of war-gamers who see painting as a chore would love it, I think it would be a huge shame to see such an important part of the hobby taken over by automated machines. Even if there is still some creativity to be had in "painting" them digitally using software, it just wouldn't be the same.

I think the same thing about sculpting too. Miniature sculpting was an art-form that has basically been destroyed over just a few years. And a huge shame it is too. Like many things that are hand-made, the machine-made ones just don't have the same heart and soul about them. I suppose in that vein (boutique hand made stuff > computer machine made stuff) there will always be some kind of small niche for hand sculpted and hand-painted minis (I still buy my AD&D minis from Otherworld miniatures, who are old-school as it gets), but even so, I hope that colour printing never replaces miniature painting.

I've long wanted a 3-D printer so I could print pieces for conversions. I would argue that having one does not necessarily eliminate the need for skill at sculpting... especially if one does not have the skills with CAD to do it on a computer.

Color 3-D printing won't eliminate painting, either. I'll grant you it'll change painting, some people will use color printing instead of painting... but did the invention of the camera, the polaroid, and the photo-quality home color printer eliminate painting pictures and portraits?

Of course not.

I paint because I enjoy painting. I can't believe I'm the only one. No amount of computer technology can replace, for me, the simple joy of applying paint to a mini.

I'm also pretty bad at doing 'visual art' of any sort on a computer. No matter how good CAD and 3-D printing get, I won't be able to get the same results with technology I can get with paint.

There will always be people like me. And we'll keep the art alive. Diminished, to be sure, but never dead.

computer printing did not kill off proper hand painted sign writing, and mass produced clothes never stopped people knitting or sewing. Miniature painting will be the same. In general people want to create things with their hands, and those who don't or can't often like to own things that have been, and those things that are created with the human touch will generally be valued higher than mass produced generic items. I don't think this will ever change. Sure, some people who just want to wargame might be tempted by pre 'painted' miniatures, but I think even a large majority of game focused hobbyists would still want to do the building and painting side of things.

I hope you guys are right, but I'm not so sure unfortunately.

If a 3D-printer can spit out a miniature that looks just as good as a high-quality paint job, would you really labour over a miniature for days (or weeks) instead? Let's be honest, sometimes it's a pain the arse. Sometimes I really lack motivation to even do it at all and miniatures go unpainted or half-painted for months or years. But also, I paradoxically don't want 3D-colour printing to replace painting. I'm not even quite sure why not, something about it just seems a big shame.

The real question in mind is will it be able to in the near future? Because if the answer is, "yes", that's game over for mini painting.

Current 3D-colour printing looks like crappola to be honest. It's hard to imagine a 3D-printer being able to colour a miniature and get the same or a similar result as a good paint job. But if they ever can, and if they can do it cheaply enough, then I'm pretty sure that will be the end of the miniature painting hobby. Those new to the hobby (and I suspect the vast majority already doing it) won't bother putting in the countless hours over years of practice to become decent painters. Who wants to have a sloppy looking crappy army for years when you could have a professional looking one straight away? Companies like GW won't bother making painting products anymore and likely the smaller companies would just fold. There might be a few niche artisans left doing it "the old school way" but they will be the dying breed of a bygone time.

I believe the only thing that will save miniature painting long-term is if 3D-printing technology is simply not able to produce as good a result as a hand-painted job.

I hope I'm wrong.

I don't think that will be the case personally. I absolutely would labour over a paint job for weeks on end. I am a painter so that makes sense, but I think even most game focused players mostly still like having their own painted models on the table.

No, as folks like the hobby.

PieInTheSky wrote:

If a 3D-printer can spit out a miniature that looks just as good as a high-quality paint job, would you really labour over a miniature for days (or weeks) instead?

I would. A lot of the fun of the hobby for me is that time and effort to make something truly mine, that I can look at and be proud of regardless of quality. It's why I value miniatures over, eg, action figures. It's the difference between something I've invested time and skill to vs just something that cost money.

Ashaar wrote:

PieInTheSky wrote:

If a 3D-printer can spit out a miniature that looks just as good as a high-quality paint job, would you really labour over a miniature for days (or weeks) instead?

I would. A lot of the fun of the hobby for me is that time and effort to make something truly mine, that I can look at and be proud of regardless of quality. It's why I value miniatures over, eg, action figures. It's the difference between something I've invested time and skill to vs just something that cost money.

Yes I agree, but that's only true while the 3D-printed ones are not as good as what you can create with your own time and skill.

If it ever came to that they were just as good or better, I think I would just hang up my hat to be honest. I wouldn't be really interested in laboring for days or hours to produce a result worse than what a machine can spit out on repeat, that would just be totally motivation-crushing; and I don't think I'd really be interested in the hobby anymore without the painting.

I don't know if you read White Dwarf? Every issue nowadays has a section which showcases miniatures done by the readers of the magazine. I can tell you, AFAIK, minis which are a "paint by numbers" template copy of the box art minis NEVER get covered in that section of the magazine.

Sure enough, sufficiently decent 3D colour printing might make some people who only like the playing aspect of the hobby give up painting. But that will mostly only affect commission painters. People who love making the miniatures "My Guys" by custom colourschemes, kitbashing and conversionss, will not be interested in assembly line looking clone minis, even if they look like the miniature box art.

PieInTheSky wrote:
I hope you guys are right, but I'm not so sure unfortunately.

If a 3D-printer can spit out a miniature that looks just as good as a high-quality paint job, would you really labour over a miniature for days (or weeks) instead? Let's be honest, sometimes it's a pain the arse. Sometimes I really lack motivation to even do it at all and miniatures go unpainted or half-painted for months or years. But also, I paradoxically don't want 3D-colour printing to replace painting. I'm not even quite sure why not, something about it just seems a big shame.

The real question in mind is will it be able to in the near future? Because if the answer is, "yes", that's game over for mini painting.

Current 3D-colour printing looks like crappola to be honest. It's hard to imagine a 3D-printer being able to colour a miniature and get the same or a similar result as a good paint job. But if they ever can, and if they can do it cheaply enough, then I'm pretty sure that will be the end of the miniature painting hobby. Those new to the hobby (and I suspect the vast majority already doing it) won't bother putting in the countless hours over years of practice to become decent painters. Who wants to have a sloppy looking crappy army for years when you could have a professional looking one straight away? Companies like GW won't bother making painting products anymore and likely the smaller companies would just fold. There might be a few niche artisans left doing it "the old school way" but they will be the dying breed of a bygone time.

I believe the only thing that will save miniature painting long-term is if 3D-printing technology is simply not able to produce as good a result as a hand-painted job.

I hope I'm wrong.

The existence of photography has not eliminated the art of painting, and it's been around for almost two centuries. Perhaps it's diminished the importance and profitability of painting portraits, but that's about it. We've had mass-produced plastics for what, seventy years? More? Sculpture is still an art form, and amateur pottery is still a thing. New technology may make the old way of doing thngs less profitable, but never kills it off entirely. Heck look for it and you can still find buggy-whips and sealing wax for sale, if you care to meet the price.

Weaponsmithing is about as useless a skill as you can ask for in this age of mass-produced assault rifles. And yet, there are dozens of sword manufacturers out there, no few of whom forge swords the old-fashioned way... just using new tools like gas forges and mechanized hammers.

It's quite likely that sometime soon color 3-D printing might replace base coating minis and be sufficient for people who just want absolute minimum. It might at some point even become good enough to replace basic 3- or 4-color layering and washing. I don't see it becoming good enough to replace NMM, wet-blending, or other advanced techniques anytime soon. So there will always be room for the top painters to make money, just as now top smiths still make money with hand-forged swords.

The hobbyist can do what the hobbyist does regardless of 3-D color printing. Just because the printer can print in color doesn't mean you must do so. And frankly, I paint minis for relaxation as much as to get painted minis.

In short, hobby painting isn't going anywhere.

 tauist wrote:
I don't know if you read White Dwarf? Every issue nowadays has a section which showcases miniatures done by the readers of the magazine. I can tell you, AFAIK, minis which are a "paint by numbers" template copy of the box art minis NEVER get covered in that section of the magazine.

Sure enough, sufficiently decent 3D colour printing might make some people who only like the playing aspect of the hobby give up painting. But that will mostly only affect commission painters. People who love making the miniatures "My Guys" by custom colourschemes, kitbashing and conversionss, will not be interested in assembly line looking clone minis, even if they look like the miniature box art.

I imagine with 3D printing you will still be able to choose your own colours.

Look at HeroForge. You already can.

There's nothing to say it should be a clone of the box art.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vulcan wrote:

PieInTheSky wrote:
I hope you guys are right, but I'm not so sure unfortunately.

If a 3D-printer can spit out a miniature that looks just as good as a high-quality paint job, would you really labour over a miniature for days (or weeks) instead? Let's be honest, sometimes it's a pain the arse. Sometimes I really lack motivation to even do it at all and miniatures go unpainted or half-painted for months or years. But also, I paradoxically don't want 3D-colour printing to replace painting. I'm not even quite sure why not, something about it just seems a big shame.

The real question in mind is will it be able to in the near future? Because if the answer is, "yes", that's game over for mini painting.

Current 3D-colour printing looks like crappola to be honest. It's hard to imagine a 3D-printer being able to colour a miniature and get the same or a similar result as a good paint job. But if they ever can, and if they can do it cheaply enough, then I'm pretty sure that will be the end of the miniature painting hobby. Those new to the hobby (and I suspect the vast majority already doing it) won't bother putting in the countless hours over years of practice to become decent painters. Who wants to have a sloppy looking crappy army for years when you could have a professional looking one straight away? Companies like GW won't bother making painting products anymore and likely the smaller companies would just fold. There might be a few niche artisans left doing it "the old school way" but they will be the dying breed of a bygone time.

I believe the only thing that will save miniature painting long-term is if 3D-printing technology is simply not able to produce as good a result as a hand-painted job.

I hope I'm wrong.

The existence of photography has not eliminated the art of painting, and it's been around for almost two centuries. Perhaps it's diminished the importance and profitability of painting portraits, but that's about it. We've had mass-produced plastics for what, seventy years? More? Sculpture is still an art form, and amateur pottery is still a thing. New technology may make the old way of doing thngs less profitable, but never kills it off entirely. Heck look for it and you can still find buggy-whips and sealing wax for sale, if you care to meet the price.

Weaponsmithing is about as useless a skill as you can ask for in this age of mass-produced assault rifles. And yet, there are dozens of sword manufacturers out there, no few of whom forge swords the old-fashioned way... just using new tools like gas forges and mechanized hammers.

It's quite likely that sometime soon color 3-D printing might replace base coating minis and be sufficient for people who just want absolute minimum. It might at some point even become good enough to replace basic 3- or 4-color layering and washing. I don't see it becoming good enough to replace NMM, wet-blending, or other advanced techniques anytime soon. So there will always be room for the top painters to make money, just as now top smiths still make money with hand-forged swords.

The hobbyist can do what the hobbyist does regardless of 3-D color printing. Just because the printer can print in color doesn't mean you must do so. And frankly, I paint minis for relaxation as much as to get painted minis.

In short, hobby painting isn't going anywhere.

Others have made those points. And I'm on your "team" in that I don't want it to go away, I'm just not as optimistic.

I don't see a painting and a photograph or weapon-smithing as good analogies. Yes, I get your point, there's always a niche market for boutique hand-made stuff. But I can tell you for sure if a 3D-printer could spit out weapons of the same quality as an artisan weapon-smith, that guy is going out of business. Forever. Painting and photography are two distinct art-forms, and painting had taken multitudes of abstract and otherwise non-realist forms before the invention of the camera. So neither example really applies to miniatures.

My hope is that you are right about the other thing, they will never be good enough to simulate well painted techniques (or at least, not for a long time yet). Although I'm nitpicking here, I can only imagine it would be more difficult for a printer to print out true metallics that look good than it would be to print NMM. There's no reason an advanced printer couldn't do it as long as they're capable of doing simple blends and fine lines. True metallics (at least nice looking ones) are much harder (for me personally anyway), and I can't imagine how a printer could actually print out metallic resin (or whatever), but then again, I know nothing about 3D printers.

Why would it matter?

Let's say you're right; 3D printing (or autonomous micro-scale airbrushing), or some other technology (replicator!) gets to the point where you can click a button and out pops a fully painted model.

People are still going to paint, because it's enjoyable. Humans do a lot of things that are done better, faster, and cheaper by machines simply because they enjoy the process of creation.

I for one welcome anything that makes stuff more accessible for more people. Not everyone has the physical ability, time, inclination or access to paint. If new technology means more folks can get to the gaming table, that's a win.

Fire_Forever wrote:
Why would it matter?

Let's say you're right; 3D printing (or autonomous micro-scale airbrushing), or some other technology (replicator!) gets to the point where you can click a button and out pops a fully painted model.

People are still going to paint, because it's enjoyable. Humans do a lot of things that are done better, faster, and cheaper by machines simply because they enjoy the process of creation.

I for one welcome anything that makes stuff more accessible for more people. Not everyone has the physical ability, time, inclination or access to paint. If new technology means more folks can get to the gaming table, that's a win.

Yes, others have also posted, "people will still paint because it's enjoyable". I don't agree. Maybe some very few niche individuals will, but the hobby will be broadly dead. It will only survive while the technology either produces worse results or is prohibitively expensive. Comparisons to artisan weapon-makers (or furniture, or whatever else you want) doesn't cut the mustard as the hand-made ones are still superior to machine-made. And once machines can do it significantly better than humans, it's just not that enjoyable any more; because the enjoyment is in the satisfaction of the results, not so much the process (not for everyone, but for most). I can't think of one thing that machines do better, cheaper and faster than humans that humans still do just for the fun of it. At least not as a large-scale hobby.

Regarding your second point, of course the games are "accessible for people" regardless of their painting skill. Just not pro-quality paint-jobs are accessible. Whether advanced 3D-printers that make pro-quality paint jobs available to everyone would be "good" because it allows more people to play with beautiful-looking armies, or it would just be a sad shame that another human art-form is lost to automation and machines is really subjective and up for debate imo. I can see arguments on both sides.




...

Gardening? Pretty hard to argue that large scale agricultural doesn't do it easier, faster and cheaper than a home garden. Knitting? Knitting machines can churn out socks far faster than someone with needles. Art? It's not hard to print artwork on canvas, but people still want hand-made originals, and tons of amateur artists do it as a hobby. And before the inevitable 'but it's not the same!' well that's a good thing, isn't it? None of those automations identically mimic what comes out of the hobby version.

*shrugs* I don't see much point in getting snarled up in the worry of what the future might bring for something relatively minor in the grand scale of things. Enjoy the now, paint more minis! I mean we just got a brand new synthetic blue, sadly way too expensive for hobby use right now, which is pretty darn awesome!

If there's one thing I believe cannot be removed from the human equation short of full species extinction, it's the need to create. One way or another, humans make things. It's what we do.

House of Ix says yes. If Frank Herbert is right.

Fire_Forever wrote:
Gardening? Pretty hard to argue that large scale agricultural doesn't do it easier, faster and cheaper than a home garden.

I don't know how much the stuff you grow in your garden cost, but mine are almost free. They're much better too as well as being fresher and free from pesticides and preservatives.

Fire_Forever wrote:
Knitting? Knitting machines can churn out socks far faster than someone with needles.

Would you rather have hand-knitted socks or a pair from the shop? I think most people would go for the hand-knitted ones because they're usually just better than mass-produced ones.

Fire_Forever wrote:
Art? It's not hard to print artwork on canvas, but people still want hand-made originals and tons of amateur artists do it as a hobby. And before the inevitable 'but it's not the same!' well that's a good thing, isn't it? None of those automations identically mimic what comes out of the hobby version.

Well of course a print out of the art work is not the same. I dare say that if a printer could perfectly mimic the original down to the texture of the paint, demand for the original would plummet.

Fire_Forever wrote:
*shrugs* I don't see much point in getting snarled up in the worry of what the future might bring for something relatively minor in the grand scale of things. Enjoy the now, paint more minis!

Yes, well now we agree.

But it's just a discussion and a question. I'm not "snarled up" about it. lol.

It would be annoying though if suddenly just any old Johnny-come-lately could print out miniatures that looked as good or better than the ones I spent twenty years learning how to paint. But I guess that's just kind of selfish and egotistical.

The thing about miniature painting too, is often, for me at least, the satisfaction and the thrill of the hobby come in the form of the finished product. The actual process can at times be tedious, boring, frustrating and a giant pain in the ass. It's worth it though when the finished product comes together. I must say that if I could easily print out minaitures that looked as good or better than what I could paint, I'd probably skip the painting process myself and use those countless hours on something else productive that can't be spat-out by a machine.

In any case, I just hope that it's a long time or never that 3D-printers will actually catch-up. I seriously doubt they'll ever be able to print them, but with the growing popularity of 3D-printing, there might be some kind of automated micro-spray painting process that comes along just for 3D-printed stuff.

Fire_Forever wrote:
I mean we just got a brand new synthetic blue, sadly way too expensive for hobby use right now, which is pretty darn awesome!

That is pretty awesome. I do fwiw have a few pretty expensive oil paints that I use for miniature painting on occasion. Cobalt blue is a pretty pricey pigment. But that's neither here nor there...

Fire_Forever wrote:
If there's one thing I believe cannot be removed from the human equation short of full species extinction, it's the need to create. One way or another, humans make things. It's what we do.

I'm not suggesting we will stop creating as a species. It will just be on a computer instead.

PieInTheSky wrote:

In any case, I just hope that it's a long time or never that 3D-printers will actually catch-up. I seriously doubt they'll ever be able to print them, but with the growing popularity of 3D-printing, there might be some kind of automated micro-spray painting process that comes along just for 3D-printed stuff.

It's getting there already. Have a look at the Mimaki 3DUJ-553: https://mimaki.com/product/3d/3d-inkjet/3duj-553/

OK, it costs about as much as a small house, and it's not at the level of a pro paint job on a GW sized miniature, but it's still pretty impressive. I know I'd be happy enough if I achieved an effect like on the dragon's wings here: https://mimaki.com/special/3d_print/gallery.html

Crispy78 wrote:

PieInTheSky wrote:

In any case, I just hope that it's a long time or never that 3D-printers will actually catch-up. I seriously doubt they'll ever be able to print them, but with the growing popularity of 3D-printing, there might be some kind of automated micro-spray painting process that comes along just for 3D-printed stuff.

It's getting there already. Have a look at the Mimaki 3DUJ-553: https://mimaki.com/product/3d/3d-inkjet/3duj-553/

OK, it costs about as much as a small house, and it's not at the level of a pro paint job on a GW sized miniature, but it's still pretty impressive. I know I'd be happy enough if I achieved an effect like on the dragon's wings here: https://mimaki.com/special/3d_print/gallery.html

Those (image below from that website) look something similar in quality to what HeroForge custom miniatures print. Which to be honest, is not great for miniature painting standards. It would be a low-tabletop quality, which is fine if you just want to play. I am also assuming they're giant-sized compared to modern miniatures. Although who-knows with the scale-creep we see in GW models these days.

It's hard to imagine a 3D-printer will ever be able to match a well-painted miniature, but I don't know, I don't know much about the technology. What I suspect will happen first is some kind of automated micro-air-brushing contraption that will either be built into 3D-printers or sold as a separate product for 3D-printed models. But I struggle to believe that they will ever be able to actually lay down coloured layers of resin in such a way as to simulate a painted surface. I may well be wrong though.

That none of the things I mentioned have been replaced just goes to show that it's unlikely that some yet-unmade-future-technology is going to 100% replace hand painted miniatures.

Though there are fully automated aquaponics designs that need no pesticides, preservatives, nor manual labour beyond initial construction. They're really quite cool, and have a smaller ecological footprint than many traditional methods. And I prefer machine made socks because they're standardized and even. And printed art means it's easily replaced should something happen like UV damage. There are always benefits and drawbacks to any new thing.

Those doll figures (?!) certainly aren't cutting it; the weird fuzziness is very unappealing. Not even as good as traditional pad-printing, though it'll surely improve.

Fire_Forever wrote:
Those doll figures (?!) certainly aren't cutting it; the weird fuzziness is very unappealing. Not even as good as traditional pad-printing, though it'll surely improve.

I agree completely, but we are only taking our first baby steps with this technology.

As I said before, if it happens, I imagine it will be some kind of micro-painting apparatus, not actually layering down coloured resin. But wtf do I know about it?

We could go back and forth on the other stuff until the cows come home. Everything is different. I just struggle to imagine miniature painting surviving as a large-scale hobby if a machine can do the job just as good if not better. There would probably be a few die-hards that keep doing it the "traditional way" though. I doubt I'd be one of them.

Yeah, like I said it's not there yet.

This is, while bigger than a GW mini, a lot more impressive quality: https://ten_24.artstation.com/projects/Qy5a3

Aside from quality though, there's still the cost. The Mimaki printer is *expensive* - about $240,000. The resin it uses is expensive - I've seen figures quoting about $185 a litre. I don't know what the print time is like, but regardless there's still a considerable initial investment and ongoing costs to recoup.

I don't think anyone is going to be buying one of these as a solution to the apparent tyranny of GW paint prices just yet...

Crispy78 wrote:
Yeah, like I said it's not there yet.

This is, while bigger than a GW mini, a lot more impressive quality: https://ten_24.artstation.com/projects/Qy5a3

Aside from quality though, there's still the cost. The Mimaki printer is *expensive* - about $240,000. The resin it uses is expensive - I've seen figures quoting about $185 a litre. I don't know what the print time is like, but regardless there's still a considerable initial investment and ongoing costs to recoup.

I don't think anyone is going to be buying one of these as a solution to the apparent tyranny of GW paint prices just yet...

Not yet, but soon.

And I guess I was wrong about not printing with coloured resin too. The quality of that bust is pretty damn impressive.

It won't be long before that technology is affordable. Everything is expensive when it's first invented, it will only getter better and cheaper and fast. What a shame for the miniature painting hobby! I think it's pretty much dead in the water after seeing that. :(

Sure, the technology is out there and as it progresses and gets older, it inevitably becomes cheaper. Once it hits a good saturation point and when will that be, that's the question.

I think it is still a good decade off. What I mean by this is you can buy your mini for a few dollars, or a color printed one for $40+, so how many of us might be able to afford an army or number of color printed figs?

So let's say the saturation point of color minis gets down to the few bucks - does that mean there will be uncolored minis at a few cents each? Possibly, as the movement to home resin printers has gotten it to nearly that mark now.

Will this destroy the painting hobby? It might diminish, but never disappear anytime soon. There will always be the disparity in cost and many who want to paint will choose the lower and many that might be on the fence about painting will still go the less expensive route as it is still just a hobby (unless you are wealthy enough to get want you want!)

As far as the gaming hobby itself? Who cares where you get the minis and if they were pre-colored? It could possibly even expand the hobby as more people might be able to get all the pretty minis they want immediately ready for action. And when it comes right down to it, this is more important than whether fewer people take the time to paint or not.

...sorry for the rant...

 MDSW wrote:
Sure, the technology is out there and as it progresses and gets older, it inevitably becomes cheaper. Once it hits a good saturation point and when will that be, that's the question.

I think it is still a good decade off. What I mean by this is you can buy your mini for a few dollars, or a color printed one for $40+, so how many of us might be able to afford an army or number of color printed figs?

So let's say the saturation point of color minis gets down to the few bucks - does that mean there will be uncolored minis at a few cents each? Possibly, as the movement to home resin printers has gotten it to nearly that mark now.

Will this destroy the painting hobby? It might diminish, but never disappear anytime soon. There will always be the disparity in cost and many who want to paint will choose the lower and many that might be on the fence about painting will still go the less expensive route as it is still just a hobby (unless you are wealthy enough to get want you want!)

As far as the gaming hobby itself? Who cares where you get the minis and if they were pre-colored? It could possibly even expand the hobby as more people might be able to get all the pretty minis they want immediately ready for action. And when it comes right down to it, this is more important than whether fewer people take the time to paint or not.

...sorry for the rant...

It's not a rant, you're cool mate. This is the thread to discuss such things!

Regarding your last point, it really could work the other way too. Miniatures as they are now are special. People who are not into them find them absolutely amazing. The site of them in the games store window is what attracts so many first-timers to walk through the door. But if anyone can just print one out in a few minutes in their home? They risk to lose their uniqueness and "wow factor", and everything that made the hobby attractive to begin with, even the still-hand-painted ones. Which may in turn even cause a down-turn in gaming with them because there's nothing that special about it anymore. Granted I'm doing some mental gymnastics here, but I think it's entirely possible that could happen.

On the other hand, assume it does result in more people getting into miniature gaming because it's so much more accessible. Is that worth consigning the art-form of miniature painting to the dust-bin of gaming history? Maybe. I can see arguments either way. Personally I think not. The hobby is popular enough already. Do we need more people getting into it? Especially ones that aren't even interested in the crafting/creative side of it?

Let's be honest, without the miniatures, painting, creating terrain, etc, we're just grown men playing with toys. Maybe the gaming hobby will not be as attractive without mini painting.



.

People say that there will always be a niche for painting your own models, but I don't know. How many wargamers sculpt and cast their own models, or buy molds to cast in pewter at home? Sure, people still do it, but the convenience and quality provided by someone else doing that work has reduced those skills to a tiny niche.

I think we sometimes underestimate just what a pain it is to get into painting for someone who isn't really, truly interested in it. I've met a lot of gamers over the years who paint because it's a requirement, not because they like to.

If decent-quality pre-paints become the norm I'm sure we'll still have Golden Demon, and there'll be weirdos like me who want their own color scheme, but your average gamer who paints his Space Marines as Ultramarines following a base-wash-highlight recipe dictated to him by GW isn't going to repaint models that meet or exceed his standards out of the box.

“Will photography make painting obsolete?”

No. Painters gonna paint.

 Mastiff wrote:
“Will photography make painting obsolete?”

No. Painters gonna paint.

Just FYI, this has been mentioned & covered in the discussions above.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 catbarf wrote:
People say that there will always be a niche for painting your own models, but I don't know. How many wargamers sculpt and cast their own models, or buy molds to cast in pewter at home? Sure, people still do it, but the convenience and quality provided by someone else doing that work has reduced those skills to a tiny niche.

I think we sometimes underestimate just what a pain it is to get into painting for someone who isn't really, truly interested in it. I've met a lot of gamers over the years who paint because it's a requirement, not because they like to.

If decent-quality pre-paints become the norm I'm sure we'll still have Golden Demon, and there'll be weirdos like me who want their own color scheme, but your average gamer who paints his Space Marines as Ultramarines following a base-wash-highlight recipe dictated to him by GW isn't going to repaint models that meet or exceed his standards out of the box.

Exactly. And those folk are of course the prime income stream too.

I think your analogy to casting your own miniatures is spot-on. Once upon a time (that was all before my day, but whatever) I can imagine I might have thought that was a great fun hobby and really enjoyed it. But it is results orientated, just like painting. Once a machine or computer could do it way better than I ever could at home there's no way I'd continue casting my own miniatures. And to think ... once that was the norm.

Painting miniature is a culture. I doubt you can uproot a culture simply with a new, improved technology.

FYI, color powder printers (z-corp comes to mind) have been around for nearly a decade. It still hasn't replaced grey plastic kits.

 skchsan wrote:
Painting miniature is a culture. I doubt you can uproot a culture simply with a new, improved technology.

FYI, color powder printers (z-corp comes to mind) have been around for nearly a decade. It still hasn't replaced grey plastic kits.

Why would that be true? There's an example in the post directly above yours. And countless more ... do you think no pass time has even been made obsolete by technology?

Show me a 3D-printer that can print a professional standard painted miniature at a cheap price and I'll show you the remnants of an ex-painting "culture" from yesteryear.

PieInTheSky wrote:

 skchsan wrote:
Painting miniature is a culture. I doubt you can uproot a culture simply with a new, improved technology.

FYI, color powder printers (z-corp comes to mind) have been around for nearly a decade. It still hasn't replaced grey plastic kits.

Why would that be true? There's an example in the post directly above yours. And countless more ... do you think no pass time has even been made obsolete by technology?

Show me a 3D-printer that can print a professional standard painted miniature at a cheap price and I'll show you the remnants of an ex-painting "culture" from yesteryear.

Figureprints print out high detail prints in color for decent price (busts: $70 USD; full statue: $130). Now, I demand my remnants of ex-painting culture from yesteryear.

I have to say though, your stance is quite misleading judging from the difference in tone of from your OP & your last post. It's almost as if you're rooting for color 3D prints to takeover.