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.

 lambsandlions wrote:
Coolness does not necessarily mean modeling. Coolness is the overall feel of the miniature and painting is part of the overall feel of the miniature.

This is it in a nutshell, for me.

It doesn't have to be extensively converted. I'll give a mini a good Coolness score if I think it looks cool. There are any number of standard miniatures that I've seen with paintjobs that stand out in some way. Sometimes those paintjobs aren't even that fantastic, technically... but give the miniature a specific feel that I like. So it gets a good rating. By contrast, I might make a mini down on Coolness simply because I'm not a fan of that specific mini... again, conversion has little impact on that. It's all about how much I like the end result, not how much it has been altered from the original.

Under that interpretation, 'Painting' and 'Coolness' would probably equate somewhat to 'Technical Execution' and 'Artistic Expression' ... but the current titles sound less pretentious

 Aerethan wrote:
It still looks like any other AoBR dread. Paintjob I'd say is a 7-7.5, coolness is 5(my starting point).

The base is bland and the weathering makes it looks like it fell down a hill.

It's not terrible, but it isn't very original.

When every single SM player has the same model, you have to do SOMETHING to make yours stand out, and often times a paint job isn't enough.

This is all opinion of course, as there is no objective way to measure "coolness". I know what impresses me and what doesn't. That isn't to say that the things that don't impress me are bad, they just don't stand out to me.

Thats exactly the scores I was thinking. Its painted nicely for sure, but the rest looks like every other basic SM Dread Ive ever seen.

Technical execution and artistic impression is probably a good way to put it. But even then it still comes down to personal preference. So I return to my point, if more people vote more often, some sort of overall average should appear. If there are hundreds of votes, you should also average out the interpretations of the terms. To a certain extent anyway.

I wouldn't worry about getting a low coolness vote for a stock mini because I know a lot of people feel the way you guys do about, and that's fine. I think everyone would agree though that individual comments are the best kind of feedback you can receive, however critical they are. I think that is why we all post. To hear individual opinions, not really to garner a rough impression of how much people like your work. It's why the showcase forum works so well.

Oddly enough, I've never once considered other peoples idea of "cool" when making a model. I make what I think is cool. R&F troops I just bang out with minimal effort(I try to make them not look all like clones). But every single character model I've kitbashed I've made to what I think looks cool. Sometimes it's just a weapon swap, sometimes it's a full bash with every single piece being from a different box.

My painting I want input on, as I'm always trying to improve that, as well as build techniques like GS and such. But if I customize a model, I did so because I thought it looked cool, and I don't care if others agree because they don't have to live with it.

Seeking out validation for anything other than technique and perhaps certain executions(color schemes mostly) seems pointless to me.

I vote on minis based on how they appeal to me.

Some GD winning paintjobs I would score quite low, they may not do anything for me.

A standard mini with a few tweaks could be really cool (to me) and I may score them highly on the coolness scale.

Even if the voting was only for technical excellence (in the painting side) then a standard mini with primer, and 2 or 3 colours minimum could score a 10.

As other posters are saying its all subjective. I don't even think you can have a specific criteria without there being differing opinions on what they mean. to the individual.

Maybe a 3rd rating, strictly addressing 'Modeling' should be added?

Because as has been said, conversion work does not equate 'coolness'.

And maybe I should explain my readiness to give what you might consider to be generous coolness ratings (I gave that dread a 7 btw).

I'm a very recent returnee to the hobby having not played since mid 90's 2nd ed. This was before internet forums and galleries, before the actual internet in my own case, before weathering techniques, before anyone cared about bases, only the most basic of multi part plastic kits. If you've ever seen the 'eavy metal pages in the old rulebook or codex imperialis, you'd understand. I missed the evolution, I left at the end of 2nd ed and came back to this.

So yeh, I do have a tendency to find stock minis cool. But that's because I genuinely believe that most of them are pretty cool.... even before paint. Thanks for reading.

Something to keep in mind, other than the fact that there are no guidelines given for the Dakka Model Rating System: because the system is based on averages, if a photo only has a handful of votes the score is going to be VERY skewed. If you only have 10-15 votes, the occasional low score is going to really throw off the numbers. All it takes at that point is one user using "1" to cycle through pictures instead of "skip to next image" and, well, there goes your score for a while.

Above all... remember, too, that voters are just random people on the internet who have good and bad days, different experience levels, and possibly biases against certain techniques (I find NMM to be pointlessly done most of the time, for instance) or even armies (someone might really dislike Ultramarines and scores them down on coolness). They are looking at a mini, possibly for a merest fraction of a minute. These are not Golden Daemon Judges: they are people who could just be bored at work or sitting on the toilet.

 Aerethan wrote:
Seeking out validation for anything other than technique and perhaps certain executions(color schemes mostly) seems pointless to me.

Speaking for myself, it's not about validation so much as just that it's nice when someone says 'Hey, nice work!'. Gallery votes are a way for people to do that without having to actually write anything.

 insaniak wrote:

 Aerethan wrote:
Seeking out validation for anything other than technique and perhaps certain executions(color schemes mostly) seems pointless to me.

Speaking for myself, it's not about validation so much as just that it's nice when someone says 'Hey, nice work!'. Gallery votes are a way for people to do that without having to actually write anything.

I'm not saying to remove the rating. I agree that it is nice when someone does like your work.

But people shouldn't get upset when others DON"T like your work, or at least don't think it's "cool".

I think my work is cool, if other agree, great; if not, piss on em.

 Aerethan wrote:
Seeking out validation for anything other than technique and perhaps certain executions(color schemes mostly) seems pointless to me.

Call me vain, but I like seeing my models with a few hundred views and a few "that's cool!" comments My Tyranids, I hate the paint scheme, I liked it when I started them, but after a hundred or so hours painting the little bastards I've grown to hate my choice and wish I'd chosen something else. Especially the bloody carapace, the way I did the streaking takes me ages, I'm not some dude with tons of hours to paint nor someone who is skilled enough to paint it that quickly, so after a couple dozen models I was hating my choice to paint a damned streaky carapace. But some validation over on The Tyranid Hive and over here made me feel that maybe the colour scheme isn't too bad and inspired me to actually paint the rest of my Hormagaunts instead of throwing the army in a draw never to be seen again. I still haven't based them yet, but I'm more likely to get around to it now after some positive reinforcement than I was before when every time I'd walk past my painting desk I'd think "WHY DID I CHOOSE THIS STUPID SCHEME!!!"

I usually just give people tens if I think the score is too low. I've seen some really charming and unique models with scores like... 3.4 or something like that. Breaks my heart to see someone's work stomped on like that. The least I could do is help boost the average a bit.

Ratings are always subjective Even if it gets judged by a professional judge and here at dakka we are far from professional judges.

For me personally I would give many people 9 or 10, but then if I would compare to a golden demon winner or eavy metal, that score wouldn't make sense. It's just my way of judging, and like I said, everyone has a different way of doing so.

I think it's a nice indication of what people generally thing about your models. But don't let a bad score get you down.

Remember you always have trolls/wrong click/jealousy?/...