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.

Honestly, whatever.

Next thing you know it'll be unfair to have well written lists...

I don't tell people their methods are "unfair" and they don't tell me that mine are. Win-Win scenario honestly. The minute I start to push views on other people, then we've got problems.

I don't know what fair means. But I'd rather throw down against a dipped army long before a great grey horde.

When I play I appreciate the effort put in to painting the army. I don't care whether it's dipped , painted or even commission painted.

I enjoy then game more when the opposing army looks like some attempt was made at painting.

Yeah I guess, I would appreciate it too.

Nope, certainly not unfair (including in competitions). Ultimately, the goal should be to play games with fully painted figures. If someone takes shortcuts to get there ... they got there. I'm cool with that.

Personally, my goal is to get acceptable quality figures out with the least amount of effort. That includes:

- Priming in colors other than white or black
- Painting with the largest brush I can get away with (#4 and #2 flats are my favorite)
- Full figure washes
- Creating templates in powerpoint and using them as masks for freehand iconography
- Using hobby tape to mask off areas for hazard stripes
- and many more

Here's an example of some Death Guard that were done using the above techniques. Primed Forest Green, basecoated, given a full body wash or paynes grey/brown, etc.

Ifurita, those look astonishing. I'm currently painting some plague marines and i tried using washes but i'm really unhappy with the results. i was following this guide:
http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.php?showtopic=162940

which shows the painter undercoating with white, then washes of black, brown and green, and it looks really good. so i gave it a go, i undercoated in light grey, and started with armour wash (i thought that would be close enough to black to make no difference), and already they terrible. i've only done a couple but i'm scared to do anymore because they look so bad. the wash has coelesced into droplets in odd places around the minis. it's not run into the recesses like it's supposed to, it's just bled away and formed into rubbish looking lumps. it looks like the surface of the model has resisted the wash completely. i thought it might be something to do with the finecast, because the backpacks are regular (non-finecast) resin and they've come out perfectly good. have i done something wrong?

anyway, this is the first time i've seen this army painter quickshade stuff. i don't really have a problem if someone wants to use it but it's something i would never, ever use. painting, for me, is three-quarters of the fun of the hobby, and it looks to me like this isn't really painting. if they're happy to do it, fine. i'm not going to throw my toys out the pram. for someone who only wants to get a decent-looking army on the board and isn't concerned about painting as a part of the hobby, i can see it would be perfect. i've got a couple friends that it would be perfect for - in fact i might introduce them to it as a quick-and-easy way to paint (one friend of mine only buys pre-painted minis off ebay). they've utilised a process that's efficient with good results, so there's nothing wrong with that. but for me, i want to field an army that i've painted with my own hand and that i'm really proud of. personally, i just wouldn't be proud of an army that i've painted using this process.

back to ifruta's models above, you've used various techniques that produce good results, but you've used them with skill, so it's not quite the same as the quickshade, to my mind.

Ifurita wrote:Nope, certainly not unfair (including in competitions). Ultimately, the goal should be to play games with fully painted figures. If someone takes shortcuts to get there ... they got there. I'm cool with that.

Personally, my goal is to get acceptable quality figures out with the least amount of effort. That includes:

- Priming in colors other than white or black
- Painting with the largest brush I can get away with (#4 and #2 flats are my favorite)
- Full figure washes
- Creating templates in powerpoint and using them as masks for freehand iconography
- Using hobby tape to mask off areas for hazard stripes
- and many more

Here's an example of some Death Guard that were done using the above techniques. Primed Forest Green, basecoated, given a full body wash or paynes grey/brown, etc.

They're ok, but if you look at Dark Angels Chapter-Master's gallery, you'll see how amazing they could be if you didn't cheat!!

/sarcasm

Seriously though, that is a very, very nice paint job.

Hey, they look okay, but since you used washes you had better not be proud of them.

(yes, that was sarcasm, they look darned good).

Thanks, I'm Still a kid, I'v got lots to learn!

CptJake wrote:Hey, they look okay, but since you used washes you had better not be proud of them.

(yes, that was sarcasm, they look darned good).

a dig at my post?

i didn't say you're not allowed to be proud of models painted using a certain process. i'm saying that i wouldn't be. mm?

seejay wrote:

back to ifruta's models above, you've used various techniques that produce good results, but you've used them with skill, so it's not quite the same as the quickshade, to my mind.

Quickshade is the same as a wash, but it's not water based. Can you explain to me why you think they are so different?

It's not the process it's how reliant the technique is on it. I personally wouldn't feel as proud of a model that I base coated then dipped as a model I base coated, washed, highlight then picked out the details. For a lot of people feeling proud is more about effort and improving skills than end result.

I'm not saying it's wrong (and even if I were my opinion is only as important as you make it) just that I don't understand being proud of it.

Norsehawk wrote:

Praxiss wrote:Never looked at the Army Painter products before. Nice!

If i had known about it a year or so ago i probably would have gone for an Imperial Fists army and used that yellow spray to get a decent colour.

It's a shame they dont do metallic shades as well or i'd buy a can to mass base paint my IWs.

They actually have a metal color primer, called plate mail that works perfectly for the armies whose primary color is steel, IW, Grey Knights, ect.

now this intrigues me! I will have to try this!

Rimmy wrote:

Norsehawk wrote:

Praxiss wrote:Never looked at the Army Painter products before. Nice!

If i had known about it a year or so ago i probably would have gone for an Imperial Fists army and used that yellow spray to get a decent colour.

It's a shame they dont do metallic shades as well or i'd buy a can to mass base paint my IWs.

They actually have a metal color primer, called plate mail that works perfectly for the armies whose primary color is steel, IW, Grey Knights, ect.

now this intrigues me! I will have to try this!

I love it, I'm actually going to pick up another can today!

good stuff! I have used the boltgun spray from Citadel, and hated it. just didn't have the same color base nor did it primer the model.

is it a spraypaint, or a true primer?

Well if people who tried to paint and failed and don’t have the backbone to stick to it and get better, then use it. My first mini didn’t get base coated, painted straight onto the plastic, looked like . Cry and give up, no, find out what went wrong fix it, worked harder and harder, i now have won with ever painted mini I have entered to my flgs.
It use to take a day and a half for me to paint a imperial fist, now i can do 3 a day at the high standerd i do them.

But if you wanted your army painted quick with no effort, I dont care. But don’t use it and act like a king, just out of respect for people that try a little harder, you know the ones that sit for hours with a paint brush making every highlight stand out and every colour blend so they can get a wonderful looking mini that they can actually stand behind with a bit of pride...

RogalDorn69 wrote:But if you wanted your army painted quick with no effort, I dont care. But don’t use it and act like a king, just out of respect for people that try a little harder,

...

Seriously?

What a load of gak. Method means nothing. The end results are the only thing that matters. If the final product is something you're happy with, then how you got to that point is completely irrelevant.

nectarprime wrote:

seejay wrote:

back to ifruta's models above, you've used various techniques that produce good results, but you've used them with skill, so it's not quite the same as the quickshade, to my mind.

Quickshade is the same as a wash, but it's not water based. Can you explain to me why you think they are so different?

dipping a model requires no use of skill whatsoever (except in pre-painting it, fair enough, you need a small amount of skill doing that). that's not me getting on my high horse; it's a fairly obvious statement of fact. as i've said before, i don't care if you want to do that, it's none of my business. but i won't be impressed by what you've done because you've not really done anything. using a wash i would say is a technique halfway between dipping a model and actually painting it, so i can slightly understand when you're trying to liken the two things, but there is still a level of skill involved it; some decision making - what colours to use, controlling the ink, applying it in the right places, so on and so forth. it can be done well and it can be done badly. as evidenced by my statement above where i've tried it on my plague marines and it's come out horrible. given a small amount of teaching, a child could use quickshade. which is not me necessarily saying it as a bad thing.

again - use it if you want to. i won't judge you for it. i'm just saying you won't see it anywhere near my painting desk. i adore the hobby of painting far too much to let some super-clever insta-shade stuff ruin the fun for me.

RogalDorn69 wrote:Well if people who tried to paint and failed and don’t have the backbone to stick to it and get better, then use it. My first mini didn’t get base coated, painted straight onto the plastic, looked like . Cry and give up, no, find out what went wrong fix it, worked harder and harder, i now have won with ever painted mini I have entered to my flgs.
It use to take a day and a half for me to paint a imperial fist, now i can do 3 a day at the high standerd i do them.

But if you wanted your army painted quick with no effort, I dont care. But don’t use it and act like a king, just out of respect for people that try a little harder, you know the ones that sit for hours with a paint brush making every highlight stand out and every colour blend so they can get a wonderful looking mini that they can actually stand behind with a bit of pride...

Why would anyone want the respect of someone who makes rude and disrespectful comments like yourself?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

seejay wrote:

nectarprime wrote:

seejay wrote:

back to ifruta's models above, you've used various techniques that produce good results, but you've used them with skill, so it's not quite the same as the quickshade, to my mind.

Quickshade is the same as a wash, but it's not water based. Can you explain to me why you think they are so different?

dipping a model requires no use of skill whatsoever (except in pre-painting it, fair enough, you need a small amount of skill doing that). that's not me getting on my high horse; it's a fairly obvious statement of fact. as i've said before, i don't care if you want to do that, it's none of my business. but i won't be impressed by what you've done because you've not really done anything. using a wash i would say is a technique halfway between dipping a model and actually painting it, so i can slightly understand when you're trying to liken the two things, but there is still a level of skill involved it; some decision making - what colours to use, controlling the ink, applying it in the right places, so on and so forth. it can be done well and it can be done badly. as evidenced by my statement above where i've tried it on my plague marines and it's come out horrible. given a small amount of teaching, a child could use quickshade. which is not me necessarily saying it as a bad thing.

again - use it if you want to. i won't judge you for it. i'm just saying you won't see it anywhere near my painting desk. i adore the hobby of painting far too much to let some super-clever insta-shade stuff ruin the fun for me.

You can use Quickshade with a brush. You can dunk your whole model in wash if you have a big enough container of it. They are both materials used for shading. I fail to see a difference between the two regarding skill. The difference is how you apply it.

As you your en devour with washes, as admitted by your previous post, you didn't really follow the same method as the person you were citing. Trying to use colored washes over a grey primer is, well, obviously not the best idea.

black wash, actually.

tbh, the issue is with the finecast material i believe, as the wash came out perfectly good looking on the ordinary plastic backpacks.

Bookwrack wrote:

RogalDorn69 wrote:But if you wanted your army painted quick with no effort, I dont care. But don’t use it and act like a king, just out of respect for people that try a little harder,

...

Seriously?

What a load of gak. Method means nothing. The end results are the only thing that matters. If the final product is something you're happy with, then how you got to that point is completely irrelevant.

think this out
to save a country (CountryA) the METHOD you could use is killing another (Country B), OR save country A by coming to an agrement with country B, But according to you it dosnt matter because in the end Country A is safe even though one way means killing thousands of people...
Relation,
The first way is easier (drop a nuke, Army Painter) and the other requiers some effort ( come to an agrement, paint by hand) and also this way both Countries are safe, unlike the first method?...
Think of how many more wars there would be if people were ignorant like you, Method is EVERYTHING

my issue is this - if i use wash on a model, it's because i want to achieve a certain effect. i use it on highly textured surfaces, such as fur or chainmail. i wouldn't use it on my loyalist SM or on eldar because i want to achieve a bright, shiny look. so, what effect are you trying to achieve when using quickshade? to my mind, it seems to be "i've painted this mini, but i don't want to shade it. *dunk* there we go".

correct me if i'm wrong?

question, how many shades of quickshade are there? i'm not hugely knowledgable on the subject so everything i've written should be read as "as i understand it..."

seejay wrote:

question, how many shades of quickshade are there? i'm not hugely knowledgable on the subject so everything i've written should be read as "as i understand it..."

3 shades, light, medium, dark

Surely the end result is more important that the means by which it was arrived. There are many techniques, none are more or less 'fair' than another.

The quality of the result is of course partly determined by the method. I have no problem at all in 'dipping' being used in competition pieces... but I doubt you'll win because it's a shortcut technique and looks it. But the overall result is good and dipped armies look fine to me.

The only unfairness I can imagine is if you paid someone else to paint your army and then attempted to win prizes or points at a tournament with it. But that's a different thing to the topic here I think.

i agree, use of the word "fair" was a poor choice. it's neither fair nor unfair, it's just a process like printmaking, photography or word processing.

Yeah thats true I know what you mean.

4M2A wrote:Well I guess dipping was different when I did it. Dipping just requires you to be able to paint within areas. Painting single colours really isn't that difficult. It may appear elitist but IMO if someone takes the time and effort to learn how to paint a miniature without dipping they have a right to be proud of it. You wouldn't see someone who built furniture from scratch as equally skilled as someone who put together a kit and it would be wrong for them to claim they were.

I don't wish to take anything away from people who dip and they should still be proud that they bothered to paint their armies, as so many people don't, but I think it is unfair to claim they have put in as much effort and skill as someone who painted their army in the normal way. The whole point of dip is that it's easy and fast, you can't argue it takes as much time and skill as standard painting.

IMO it isn't right to say your a skilled painter because your dipped figures came out well. This isn't to say that people who dip are bad painters (they may not enjoy painting or not have time), just that those models don't demostrate good painting. I don't look down on dipped figures, they are still above the normal. However when I compare a dipped model and a normal model of the same quality I believe the person who put the time and effort into painting their model has more right to be proud of it.

I think the pride people feel is dependent on the person. A novice could feel as proud of their simple model, which had been dipped or washed, as person completing something to competition standard. Only the person making the model knows what the effort or the accomplishment means to them, how proud someone is of something is not a measure of how good it is objectively. What you seem to want to do is tell people when they have the right to feel proud... it's not really up to you or anyone else.

Fair, unfair.

Just another tool in the toolbox, that's all.

Alongside the airbrush, stippling brushes, weathering pigments (artist pastel chalks), and so on.

Some people take shortcuts that pay off, other folks do it the long way. Both find their rewards. Nothing fair or unfair about it. Life's like that. It sucks, get a helmet.

well, if someone uses it as another tool in a toolbox, as a way of achieving another effect, then i have no issue. someone who, for example, dips an entire army... as i say, it's up them. but it wouldn't be my choice.

I was proud of my first painted model (heroquest barbarian painted with some enamels from my dad's model aircraft sets), and i am equally proud of my more recent work (St.Celestine in full NMM).

I enjoy the challenge of painting and getting better at it. I have no doubts that i can paint to a higher standard than someone who dips their models but then why should i care how they go about their business? I'd probably tell them that their army looked nice but that it could look a heck of a lot better if they tried to push their painting to the next level.

RogalDorn69 wrote:

Bookwrack wrote:

RogalDorn69 wrote:But if you wanted your army painted quick with no effort, I dont care. But don’t use it and act like a king, just out of respect for people that try a little harder,

...

Seriously?

What a load of gak. Method means nothing. The end results are the only thing that matters. If the final product is something you're happy with, then how you got to that point is completely irrelevant.

think this out
to save a country (CountryA) the METHOD you could use is killing another (Country B), OR save country A by coming to an agrement with country B, But according to you it dosnt matter because in the end Country A is safe even though one way means killing thousands of people...
Relation,
The first way is easier (drop a nuke, Army Painter) and the other requiers some effort ( come to an agrement, paint by hand) and also this way both Countries are safe, unlike the first method?...
Think of how many more wars there would be if people were ignorant like you, Method is EVERYTHING

Dakka dakka - where painting the wrong way costs LIVES!

You're also flat out wrong, method means nothing, but if you have to try so hard to make yourself feel superior about how paint your man-dollies, have at it.