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.

Topic. I have my own ideas would like to hear a few of yours.

I think that both of them have a certain level of skill involved. I've been hand painting for about 7 years yet I doubt I'd be able to pick up an airbrush and be just as good as I am by hand. That said however, I'm never really 'wowed' by airbrushed armies. They are certainly painted well, no doubt about that, but the airbrush just looks like it's a speedy way of doing things, like you can just put a couple of different colours through an airbrush and come out with a good result. I know I'll probably get flak from others for that but IMO, I don't really pay a second glance to airbrushed armies because they just look flat, like a cheap way to do OSL in particular. I would care more about a hand painted army that's 6-7/10 for example than I would an airbrushed one that's been rated 10/10.

I haven't seen an air-brushed army in person that truly impressed me. They really do look flat and cheap, and I feel like it's the quick and dirty way to a nice looking army. That being said, they still look good, and I'd be tempted purely from a perspective of saving time, but I think that hand-done work always looks better.

That is kind of how I feel. I don't think the AB armies are bad I feel as though they lack the personal touch of HB.

Examining techniques is a foolish way of judging a paintjob.

Judge the finished article, the way the colours interplay, the story that the miniature is telling, not the way that the paint has been applied.

Air brushing requires you to still pick up a paint brush for detail. You don't just spray a mini and it is done.

So I don't see the two mutually exclusive the way washing vs dipping is.

Airbrushing alone can look very flat and impersonal especialy when it is done in mass quantities. Any technique looks bad when someone doesn't put a lot of time or effort into it. Both require skill though. I like to use an air brush just for the base and some highlights before moving on to washes and brush details.

I think the skill is in making your army look good, and that means using the right tool at the right time. Using all of one or the other if you have access to both just on principle is silly if using both will get a better result in the end.

I would say both. true they are both different techniques but they both require skill in some what similar ways as well as for example being good with the tool at hand and such.

I have never painted with airbrush, so i dont know... I think it is less time consuming, and maybe easier (due to the "no brush" effect). But it is probably best to mix them up, using everyone to achieve certain effects. (it is probably painfull to paint with airbrush when you have to many colors involved).

Evertras wrote:
I think the skill is in making your army look good, and that means using the right tool at the right time. Using all of one or the other if you have access to both just on principle is silly if using both will get a better result in the end.

That's what I think. Some things just look better with an airbrush, simple as that. You look at some of the things done by skilled airbrushers and you realise you could never achieve that by brush. Look at many of forgeworld painted vehicles and a lot of them are airbrushed, but they certainly don't look flat or cheap. BuyPainted also does some really excellent work with an airbrush and compliments it with manual brushing as well.

It's just another technique that is more appropriate in some situations and not in others. Certain models, like many tanks, I think you really need to be able to both airbrush and manual brush to really produce something cool.

I may seem that Airbrushing is easier, but that'll fade after you watch a guy make an elaborate coloured painting with an airbrush on a canvas the size of a quarter.

Basically most airbrush users do the most rudimentary basecoating and basic layering, that's the tip of the iceberg, not the whole extent of it.

Both are equally valid and to achieve top results equally required. Tools for the job, and all that. You may as well argue decals vs. freehand. To achieve some things you need to do both.

Both. Whether painting by brush or by airbrush, at the end of the day they're just tools to help you achieve the results you want and that takes a level of skill in itself.

IMO, it's just another tool in the toolbox. Good to know how to use, but not 100% necessary. Just like washing, dipping, specialty paints (Tamyia Clear Red, for example), sculpting and many others... they all comes together to achieve your desired results.

I think that they each take a different skill set to master. I've seen some stuff with an airbrush that blew my mind, and I've seen stuff done with a handbrush that also blew my mind. However, having tried both, I can tell you a different mind set is required to get the job done depending on what tool you happen to be using.

 Augustine wrote:
I may seem that Airbrushing is easier, but that'll fade after you watch a guy make an elaborate coloured painting with an airbrush on a canvas the size of a quarter.

Basically most airbrush users do the most rudimentary basecoating and basic layering, that's the tip of the iceberg, not the whole extent of it.

When I see someone do that kind of work on their models, I'll be extremely impressed and give them the respect they deserve. So long as "most airbrush users do the most rudimentary basecoating and basic layering," I'm just not going to be swayed.

I hope you don't take offense. I'm merely speaking candidly.

JB_Man wrote:

 Augustine wrote:
I may seem that Airbrushing is easier, but that'll fade after you watch a guy make an elaborate coloured painting with an airbrush on a canvas the size of a quarter.

Basically most airbrush users do the most rudimentary basecoating and basic layering, that's the tip of the iceberg, not the whole extent of it.

When I see someone do that kind of work on their models, I'll be extremely impressed and give them the respect they deserve. So long as "most airbrush users do the most rudimentary basecoating and basic layering," I'm just not going to be swayed.

I hope you don't take offense. I'm merely speaking candidly.

But what does that have to do with airbrush vs 'manual' brush? That's entirely on the individual, not on the tools at hand.

They are different tools for different jobs.

Pick the best tool for the best job - some are better than others.
Period.

So, what is the point of this poll? Most of the time I see these, someone is trying to prove some kind of point....

Leave the ego at home, use what you want and who cares what anyone else uses.

It shouldn't matter I think. The real skill is finding how to get the look or texture you want by using any medium possible.

Equal, as they both are techniques. It just depends on how far you go with it.

Evertras wrote:

JB_Man wrote:

 Augustine wrote:
I may seem that Airbrushing is easier, but that'll fade after you watch a guy make an elaborate coloured painting with an airbrush on a canvas the size of a quarter.

Basically most airbrush users do the most rudimentary basecoating and basic layering, that's the tip of the iceberg, not the whole extent of it.

When I see someone do that kind of work on their models, I'll be extremely impressed and give them the respect they deserve. So long as "most airbrush users do the most rudimentary basecoating and basic layering," I'm just not going to be swayed.

I hope you don't take offense. I'm merely speaking candidly.

But what does that have to do with airbrush vs 'manual' brush? That's entirely on the individual, not on the tools at hand.

This is fair. I guess it would be more reasonable to say people get lazy and think just slapping on some paint with an airbrush is auto-pro. It bugs me when people try to claim to be so good when it's really just the tool.

Both are really just tools, and both are amazing when used properly. I think that's the unbiased answer.

TBH i think this is an absolutely ridiculous poll and also a little bit insulting...
people keep insinuating that people that use an airbrush are "cheating" or something because people that dont use an airbrush seem to have an idea that its easier...

well its not

if anything its faster that painting with a regular brush, but even the best, most advanced painters that use an airbrush cant finish a miniature without use of a regular brush... and if his brush skill sucks it will still be an fugly mini

JB_Man wrote:
This is fair. I guess it would be more reasonable to say people get lazy and think just slapping on some paint with an airbrush is auto-pro. It bugs me when people try to claim to be so good when it's really just the tool.

Both are really just tools, and both are amazing when used properly. I think that's the unbiased answer.

I can go with that. That would bug me too. Thing is, if it DOES look awesome, then I can't really argue.

Go to youtube.

Type in buypainted astorath the grim

Be amazed.

 Thorn678 wrote:
Go to youtube.

Type in buypainted astorath the grim

Be amazed.

The guy that does BuyPainted is amazing no matter what tool is in his hands. And he has an awesome accent.

Airbrushing and brush painting both take immense skill when considering the apex of their respective fields, but for miniature painting? I'd break it down like so:

Brush = 10% skill, 10% equipment, 80% patience
Airbrush = 10% skill, 80% equipment, 10% patience

It's kinda like asking: what is better, pliers or a screwdriver?

Airbrush is just a different tool, it's not better or worse. You can do things with airbrush you can't easily do by hand, and vice versa.

RayND wrote:

 Thorn678 wrote:
Go to youtube.

Type in buypainted astorath the grim

Be amazed.

The guy that does BuyPainted is amazing no matter what tool is in his hands. And he has an awesome accent.

Airbrushing and brush painting both take immense skill when considering the apex of their respective fields, but for miniature painting? I'd break it down like so:

Brush = 10% skill, 10% equipment, 80% patience
Airbrush = 10% skill, 80% equipment, 10% patience

Well I can give you a tool that costs a gazillion of money and still you won't know how to use it. I ve seen people dipping kolinsky brushes up to the neck into paint and I ve seen people with Iwata airbrush and compressor not being able to properly undercoat a model. Equipment doesn't make someone a master painter they just make his job easier if he knows how to use it. The skillset necessary to accomplish a great result is different when it comes to brushing or airbrushing but the techniques involved are far greater in number when it comes to using the brush. Patience is always need either you brush or airbrush so patience being a constant value

Brush= 80%skill and technique, 20% equipment
Airbrush=60% skill and technique 40% equipment.

Not trying to offend anyone here but for those that are bashing the airbrush, have you even used one before? How were the results? How do they compare to your normal brush paintings? There's a lot more to an airbrush than just point and spray. Movements, pressure, technique, paint (including type, consistency, additives, etc) and so on... It's never the tool that instantly makes the person a God at the job, it just helps along the way, haha.