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.

 tauist wrote:
These colors, when used as they are, remind me a lot of the old 90's citadel paint shades I was using at the time for painting WFB & Epic models - the blue we used for Ultramarines, The goblin green base..

Were the citadel paint shades less complex (less desaturated) back then, than they are today? This sort of saturated colors feel very nostalgic, and oddly childish compared to modern colourschemes

While I don't have any of the AK paints, I can maybe provide some thoughts on the old school 90's range. They were by and large less "complex" or rather, more pure colours versus the more modern style of pre-mixed, desaturated "realistic" blends ready to use. Many pigments do not have good opacity so adding black and/or white to them strengthens their coverage, making the resulting paint more convenient for beginners. This is one of the reasons it's very hard to find perfect equivalents in modern miniature brands outside of specialty ranges like Kimera. Paints with 1-3 pigments are the standard in the artist world, not the exception, and the old ranges were artist's acrylics made-to-order for Citadel. While it's possible to mix colours and get very close to the overall hue versus using the original pigment, this will often lack the undertones and not mix out to anything but a muddy grey-ness. The downside of course to having low-count pigment paints is that they are highly variable in handling. There simply aren't, for example, any opaque, brilliant yellow pigments that aren't also too toxic to put into a mass market consumer product. Opacity, thickness, flow and undertone are all dictated, at least in part, by the pigment(s) used to make the paint.

Yellows are the most notable culprits for "can't cover worth drek" but oranges often have the same issue (no surprise, they're mostly mixes that rely heavily on yellows as there are no inexpensive, non-toxic opaque brilliant orange pigments either). Red isn't great at covering on its own, unless you lean on the cadmium or cinnabar pigments and both of those have toxicity issues. Or you get into the earth pigment reds, which are very brown and brick-y.

There's really only a handful of good pigments that get used for most of our paints - no miniature paint manufacturer is going to use crushed lapis lazuli when phthalocyanine blue is thousands of times cheaper and more potent.

GW's paint range is designed for GW's painting style, which is "buy these 20-40 pots of paint and layer them exactly in this order". Nothing wrong with that (other than GW's ridiculous overpricing of minuscule paint pots that dry out in months) but it doesn't lend itself to actually learning how to paint - mixing paint, knowing how to manipulate color, hue and saturation to get the results you want is one of the primary hurdles between the basic and intermediate painter tiers. GW's paint isn't very mixing friendly because it's a lot of blends of many pigments already, and anyone who's mashed a bunch of paint together as a kid knows you get some gross flavour of brown or grey when you do that.