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.

FWIW, Coat d'Arms are made by HMG paints - who also produce the P3 line as well as the Foundry Paints. Their CDA line contains quite a lot of "historical" colours, as well as the original & expanded Citadel ranges.

kb305 wrote:
the new GW washes are VERY hit and miss.

That's because they're NOT WASHES. They are watered down inks except that instead of water they use some other mixing medium. You'll notice that they dry glossy, too, unlike the old washes which dried flat.

If you use them the way inks are supposed to be used then you'll find they work much better. If you want coverage, use a glaze. Or buy an old GW/PP/Army Painter/whatever wash.

 Commander Cain wrote:
Plus it seems that GW paints are all $5 now...

A very legitimate complaint. As with the rest of their stuff, GW charges way more for their paint than they are worth. And yet I still find myself buying pots every now and again because the cost of gas and time makes the other stuff more expensive for me. :/

 carlos13th wrote:

 Eggs wrote:
I always feel cote d'arms gets overlooked in these discussions. They are the original citadel line rebadged and renamed. Massive range of colours, good pigment, large pots and cheap price. Same colours as I've been using since the late eighties!

Also decent inks.

I have never used Coat D'arms. heard good things though. I know blackhat sells them http://www.blackhat.co.uk/coat_darms/ but are getting screwed over a little atm with the new postage rules from the royal mail.

I am lucky enough to live near Dark Sphere, who have AP, GW, Vallejo, P3 and cote d'arms.

I;ve tried all their sepia washes, in order to get something near to the old Gryphonne. Unfortunately the cote d'amrs brown wash is dreadful - dries bitty and lumpy. AP soft tone is darker than the old Gryphonne, and it seems that the GW Seraphim Sepia is still the closest. So, as pointed out before, each individual range has its strengths and weaknesses.

Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:

 carlos13th wrote:

 Eggs wrote:
I always feel cote d'arms gets overlooked in these discussions. They are the original citadel line rebadged and renamed. Massive range of colours, good pigment, large pots and cheap price. Same colours as I've been using since the late eighties!

Also decent inks.

I have never used Coat D'arms. heard good things though. I know blackhat sells them http://www.blackhat.co.uk/coat_darms/ but are getting screwed over a little atm with the new postage rules from the royal mail.

I am lucky enough to live near Dark Sphere, who have AP, GW, Vallejo, P3 and cote d'arms.

I;ve tried all their sepia washes, in order to get something near to the old Gryphonne. Unfortunately the cote d'amrs brown wash is dreadful - dries bitty and lumpy. AP soft tone is darker than the old Gryphonne, and it seems that the GW Seraphim Sepia is still the closest. So, as pointed out before, each individual range has its strengths and weaknesses.

The AP washes are my prefered washes.

 Consul Scipio wrote:
I found the new GW paints lacking mostly. Some are good but their new paints don't work for me like the old paints did. I've switched to Vallejo, P3 and Army Painter Warpaints depending on need and I like them all. Though Warpaint is a bit thinner than the others.

I'm lucky my FLGS stocks Vallejo*, P3, Warpaint, Tamiya and GW paints. Tamiya paints don't take the humidity of Virginia very well so I can't paint outside with those like I can with the others. Yes, sometimes I paint outdoors.

+1 to this.

I've found that GW's lost its touch with paints, either its the paint itself, or whoevers mixing in the pigments, I have found that there is a heck of a difference between the texture, coverage, and visconcity ( How the paint takes to the brush) of the older paints to the new.

I as well am swithcing over to both Army Painter, which covers ALOT like a combination of the second gen GW, and Reaper, and Vallejo, which is becoming my new go to standard for paints.

And for the price? The new gw's standard paints honestly suck. The metals are ok, but I've had to add a little more flow medium then I have in the past to keep it from clumping on the brush..

 Breotan wrote:

kb305 wrote:
the new GW washes are VERY hit and miss.

That's because they're NOT WASHES. They are watered down inks except that instead of water they use some other mixing medium. You'll notice that they dry glossy, too, unlike the old washes which dried flat.

If you use them the way inks are supposed to be used then you'll find they work much better. If you want coverage, use a glaze. Or buy an old GW/PP/Army Painter/whatever wash.

 Commander Cain wrote:
Plus it seems that GW paints are all $5 now...

A very legitimate complaint. As with the rest of their stuff, GW charges way more for their paint than they are worth. And yet I still find myself buying pots every now and again because the cost of gas and time makes the other stuff more expensive for me. :/

ehh that is how all companies make a wash. transparent ink suspended in various acrylic mediums. and they are marketed as washes. so i'm not too sure what you're getting at.

i guess you're saying you need to use them much more precisely and with more care.
no thanks. i will buy army painter washes. my technique can be more loose with an even better end result. that is the mark of a far superior product.

 Grot 6 wrote:


I as well am swithcing over to both Army Painter, which covers ALOT like a combination of the second gen GW, and Reaper, and Vallejo, which is becoming my new go to standard for paints.

And for the price? The new gw's standard paints honestly suck. The metals are ok, but I've had to add a little more flow medium then I have in the past to keep it from clumping on the brush..

Try the Vallejo Model Air Metallics - smooth and thin. No need to use thinner or flow medium, unless you're thinning them right down for layering. My only complaint is the gold/copper/brass paints are quite light and lack the depth/deep/dark/richer options seen in the VGC and other ranges. Great silvers through to gunmetal, though. Also, Model Colour has some great ones - gunmetal blue and oily steel are great!

I started using Vallejo Liquid Golds for metallics as fidly as they are. I was so disappointed when I ran out of boltgun (well it got weird and thin after 10 years) and picked up a pot of leadbelcher. It just has really bizarre coverage.

I haven't tried Liquid Gold. I often mix my metallics, and being alchohol-based, I won't be able to do so with them and other metallics.

Shrug, I must be the only guy on here completely satisfied with GW paints. Yeah, they're more expensive. But they're cheaper than ordering individual pots online and noticeably better than folkart brand from Walmart. And since those have always been my only two non-online choices...why change now?

One problem with the previous GW range is that foundation paints would often separate and be difficult to use because of this. Tallarn Flesh was especially horrid for me to use. Once my Skaven are finally done, I'll never have to use it again. I've only seen one place where the current Base paints have done this.

Who cares about the paint...the bottles were the best part.

I only have a few of the "new" GW paints.
Ceramite White is nice, makes painting white much easier.

Nuln oil is ok (though it still dries white on me sometimes, just like the old washes did).

Agrax Earthshade is poo - no where near as good as
Devlan mud was. Get the army painter stuff, or Reaper's excellent brown liner. (Which is useful for a million things - I loooove Reaper's liners).

I've just snagged a few of the new technical paints too (blood, rust, corrosion, oxide) they're all very handy shortcuts.

Mostly as I run out of my old GW paints I'm switching over to Reaper. The paints are just as good/better than GW paints - but they're way cheaper, have nicer bottles and have a huge variety (though I can see some people considering that a negative). I particularly love the wide variety of skin tones.

I have to say, I'm pretty tempted by P3 paints too though. I bought a bottle to test with, but haven't gotten to it yet. I really like the very natural "feel" to their colors.

Upon seeing this thread I proceeded to drive my happy ass down to Trinity Comics and bought $100 worth of discontinued paints, all in great condition. Got 2 pots of Devlan that were left, a ton of Calthan Brown and a good few Dheneb Stone, Tallarn Flesh and Graveyard Earth.

Happy as a pig in gak right now.

That should show how much I prefer the previous line to the current one. Everything else I use is now Vallejo unless I'm color matching an old project then I use my OOP GW's.

All the Reds I've purchased seem to dry out very quickly, and I'm using a metallic (Bronze Scorpion maybe?) that seperates after two minutes unless you put it in a paint shaker.

Agrax is alright, but nothing GW makes is close to Devlan.

I like the old paints a lot better. The colors were more vibrant, and the paint quality was more consistent. When I buy a new paint, nowadays I'm not sure if its either going to be extremely watery or chunky as spoiled milk. The colors also seem to be more grayed out, or pastel. Even the pots themselves do not seal well, especially the washes with those dreaded plastic string teeth all around the edges. I think it would definitely be well worth it to bring the old paints back.

Schmapdi wrote:
I only have a few of the "new" GW paints.
Ceramite White is nice, makes painting white much easier.

Nuln oil is ok (though it still dries white on me sometimes, just like the old washes did).

Agrax Earthshade is poo - no where near as good as
Devlan mud was. Get the army painter stuff, or Reaper's excellent brown liner. (Which is useful for a million things - I loooove Reaper's liners).

I've just snagged a few of the new technical paints too (blood, rust, corrosion, oxide) they're all very handy shortcuts.

Mostly as I run out of my old GW paints I'm switching over to Reaper. The paints are just as good/better than GW paints - but they're way cheaper, have nicer bottles and have a huge variety (though I can see some people considering that a negative). I particularly love the wide variety of skin tones.

I have to say, I'm pretty tempted by P3 paints too though. I bought a bottle to test with, but haven't gotten to it yet. I really like the very natural "feel" to their colors.

What do you use brown liner for? How is it different from a wash?

Also, someone mentioned that inks had a particular use distinct from glazes or washes. Please fill me in on the details. I'd love to be a better painter.

Chrissy_J wrote:
I can't find the logic in any manufacturer, with a customer base so dependent on existing ranges, changing their paint ranges so often.

It's not really often though is it? They had one range of paints for 20 years, now they have a new one.
During the last range there were no significant changes to the paints: some types and colours were added while the worst selling paints were ditched. Very minimal changes though.

 Breotan wrote:

kb305 wrote:
You'll notice that they dry glossy, too, unlike the old washes which dried flat.

The Shades dry matt. They only dry glossy if you don't shake them before use or quick-dry them with heat.


I use GW paints exclusively- When the new ones were released I didn't have any existing projects that would be significantly affected, so I binned all of my old Gw paints and bought fresh from the new range.
I've learnt more about painting in the past 18 months than I did in 20 years of painting before. I experimented with some Vallejo and P3, but I didn't find anything that was better and in the end GW is far more easily accessable with 3 stores in my area.
My favourites have to be the metal base paints- so damn smooth straight out of the pot!
I admit, they current range does suffer from seperation quite a bit- but nothing a good shake or stir can't sort out!

 Riquende wrote:

Never used any of the other new Citadel paints, I've got no interest buying paints from a manufacturer that chops and changes their lineup every few years. Sometimes I buy stuff I have to try to match up with things I painted years ago, and surprise, surprise, GW have always stopped making that paint.

All manufacturers do that. It's just that most of the time they don't bother to change the titles so you're left with illusion that the paints range has stayed same.

Haven't tried that many new paints yet (maybe 20 or so). I'm pretty crappy painter myself, but for the most part I liked the change. Only major down side is that GW made basically no effort to produce even remotely close matches to old range (bad news if you're halfway painting through Dark Angels army, then run out of old DA green and try Caliban Green...d'oh!). Oh, and many of the names are silly. "XV-88", eh.

Base paints, cover well. Ceramite white is much, much better than old Skull White. They do separate quite a bit in the pot, lot of shaking is required. Shades I was initially aghast about since they don't work at all like old washes. However I found out comparing Nuln Oil and Badab Black that when using them in combination with other paints, instead of quick-fix "liquid talent", they produce much better results. I also like mat velvety finish they have, nice for some effects. Metallics what I have tried out so far are nice and there are lots of them.

Just gonna put this out there but for the last year or so I have been using a mixture of Agrax Earthshade and null oil to get almost the exact same colour as the old Devlin mud, a little darker but hey it looks good.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
What do you use brown liner for? How is it different from a wash?

Also, someone mentioned that inks had a particular use distinct from glazes or washes. Please fill me in on the details. I'd love to be a better painter.

A brown liner is great for when black is too strong a tone - I use about three times as much brown ink as I do black. Most typically I use Higgins' Waterproof Brown, but The Army Painter Strong Tone is used a lot too. (It is a lot easier to get the Army Painter ink locally.)

The only real difference that I know of between a liner and a wash is how much the ink has been watered down.

I use Higgins' brown ink straight for lining, and add water for washes.

A glaze is also ink, but watered down even more.

Recently I was painting canvas wings on a Reaper clockwork dragon. I painted the canvas in a bone color, and the ribs of the wings in a color that I hope is close to lindenwood. I gave both the canvas and the wings a brown ink wash, and used a brown liner right along the edge of the ribs, to make them stand out more.

After highlighting the wings I gave them a light glaze, to pull the lighting and the shading together. (Then I added heraldry.)

The Auld Grump

 TheAuldGrump wrote:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
What do you use brown liner for? How is it different from a wash?

Also, someone mentioned that inks had a particular use distinct from glazes or washes. Please fill me in on the details. I'd love to be a better painter.

A brown liner is great for when black is too strong a tone - I use about three times as much brown ink as I do black. Most typically I use Higgins' Waterproof Brown, but The Army Painter Strong Tone is used a lot too. (It is a lot easier to get the Army Painter ink locally.)

The only real difference that I know of between a liner and a wash is how much the ink has been watered down.

I use Higgins' brown ink straight for lining, and add water for washes.

A glaze is also ink, but watered down even more.

Recently I was painting canvas wings on a Reaper clockwork dragon. I painted the canvas in a bone color, and the ribs of the wings in a color that I hope is close to lindenwood. I gave both the canvas and the wings a brown ink wash, and used a brown liner right along the edge of the ribs, to make them stand out more.

After highlighting the wings I gave them a light glaze, to pull the lighting and the shading together. (Then I added heraldry.)

The Auld Grump

interesting.

New stuff is much better, and the pots mean it never dries out. Very reasonably priced also which I find strange given GW...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 pretre wrote:
The only paints I don't like in the new range are leadbelcher and Fenris Grey. Not because they are bad because they are subtly different from the colors they replaced (Boltgun and Space Wolf Grey).

Ugh. I'm starting to run low on both of the originals. :(

Starting to run low on SW Grey myself. Got a pot of Fenrisian on stand-by. As you say, it's going to be quite obvious on the table-top which is irritating (then again the new SW models are taller and thinner too so I could just pass it off as a new generation of armour I guess...). Funnily enough 'Scab Red' and 'Berserker Red' or whatever it is called, are exactly the same colour. Would be nice if they could maintain consistency but hey-ho.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 fishy bob wrote:

 Compel wrote:
Plus... Seriously, what's up with their colour choices. I paint my Blood Ravens in a dark red, yet the only dark one they've got is Khorne Red, which... really is not dark at all.

It's not even red. It's supposed to be a new Scab Red, but it looks more like Warlock Purple to me.

Khorne Red that's the one - you need to put like three coats of that stuff on. Irritating, especially when I use it on the shoulder pads, so with my shaky hands its more like 6 coats...

My Deadly Nightshade is almost gone. Need to find a replacement. I like the new GW paints, from a technical standpoint. They cover well, etc. It's just they don't match what the rest of my army is using. Some of that I can attribute to the layers of dust and fading from sitting on the shelf for years though...

The new pots are better than the old hard plastic flip tops, but are still worlds away from being as good as dropper bottles.

Everyone I see that uses GW paints uses them with the pot open while they paint, which means it's drying out just as much, and I see them replacing paints every few weeks to replace the ones that couldn't be saved with more water.

Meanwhile, I'm over here with the GW paints I put in dropper bottles 4 years ago and they are like new. And I've got a few Vallejo paints from 10 years ago that are like new as well.

As far as I'm concerned, anything other than a dropper bottle is designed to waste paint one way or another.

I still use select GW colors, Mephiston Red and Ceramite White being the primary ones. But I also transfer them into dropper bottles and add some retardant right away to prolong shelf life.

 Aerethan wrote:
The new pots are better than the old hard plastic flip tops, but are still worlds away from being as good as dropper bottles.

Everyone I see that uses GW paints uses them with the pot open while they paint, which means it's drying out just as much, and I see them replacing paints every few weeks to replace the ones that couldn't be saved with more water.

Meanwhile, I'm over here with the GW paints I put in dropper bottles 4 years ago and they are like new. And I've got a few Vallejo paints from 10 years ago that are like new as well.

As far as I'm concerned, anything other than a dropper bottle is designed to waste paint one way or another.

I still use select GW colors, Mephiston Red and Ceramite White being the primary ones. But I also transfer them into dropper bottles and add some retardant right away to prolong shelf life.

As a counterpoint, I have some GW paints from ~20 years ago that are still good. And I paint with the lid open. They have gone through about a half dozen different pot designs, and some of them did blow giant chunks. The screw top ones 3? designs ago were the worst. They were basically single use. If they weren't dry in a week after opening, you were lucky.

I loved and missed the old paint line. The original Bolt Gun Metal, the inks that were simply called "Brown" and "Chestnut". The pigments on that were unbeatable. They were a bit on the thick side, but always layered smoothly and stayed a consistent color when thinned down.

For the most part the newest range is ok, but I despise some of the subtle replacements, namely what used to be Goblin Green and I think Blood Red (which is now this crappy Wazdakka Red? …or whatever it is now).

But mainly the old inks. I have but one pot of the "Brown" Ink, a sacred pot more valuable than Corbulo's Blood Chalice

You can buy ink at an artist supply store, Kaiserbudheim.

 Nevelon wrote:
My Deadly Nightshade is almost gone. Need to find a replacement.

Standard practice is to try the Coat d'Arms equivalent, which is the same manufacturer as at least one generation of the older paints:

http://www.blackhat.co.uk/online_shop/product_info.php?cPath=21_39&products_id=88&osCsid=4938a28646e8998e0b82764aa1b47f1e

I haven't had much luck with the washes or metallics, never tried matching to a regular paint though so might be okay.

 Tehjonny wrote:
New stuff is much better, and the pots mean it never dries out. Very reasonably priced also which I find strange given GW...
.

I suppose 'reasonable' in the sense that they're not automatically 200% more than you think they should cost, like everything else GW releases, although they are still more than equivalents from Vallejo, P3, army painter etc.