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.

Well after ordering nearly $150 in paint as I am getting back into 40k I thought the whole new "collection" paint system GW has would be pretty solid.

I may have had some bad luck but with several pods being completely tried up to the point where water/flow aid doesn't even bring them back to a workable state I'm gonna call it a day with GW paint..

When I was originally introduced to this hobby nearly 5 years ago I was told to go with Reaper paints, so I did and never had any issues. I had GW washes back then and they were fine as well.

So I suppose I'll be buying some more new paint now. Reaper or Vallejo for airbrushing is probably what I'll be getting.

Any thoughts/suggestions on this matter?

Call GW and they will replace them.

Agreed, give them a shout, they'll take care of you. At least they have taken care of me with no hastle, and on more than one occasion too.

I'm with you, bud. I'm transitioning to Vallejo. Not that I'll never buy/use GW paints, but...

Two things: First, I'm color blind, so I rely on a color wheel and the name of the paint. Most of their paint descriptions don't tell me what f****** color the paint is. I could probably use 'Dheneb Stone' for other things than painting rocks, know what I mean?

Second, I don't like the pots. Most of the time I just need a drop or two on my pallet. The squeeze bottles are just superior for this. GW pots make me waste 2 drops for every drop I use. And a lot of toothpicks. And they do dry up quicker, which I blame on the pots, not the paint.

As others said already GW is pretty good at customer service so they will likely give you a refund or replacement.

As for switching to another system, a lot of people like Vallejo but I love Reaper. The paints are good quality just as Vallejo but they're easier to find at your FLGS or online. Reaper does free shipping over $35, which is 11 paints. They even have a great online paint palette where you upload any image and it tells you what paints match the best:

http://www.reapermini.com/PowerPalette/

They use eye dropper bottles too and they're made in the USA. You can't go wrong with reaper. However I will say that people who use Vallejo and Reaper paints still suggest GW metallic paints and washes (and glazes and technicals if you use those) as they are far superior. Vallejo also has a metallic medium for you to make a metallic version of any color (it's good but it will add a gray tone to the color.

One last pitch for Reaper is they have a Twelve Days of Christmas thing where you get free minis when you order some amount. Christmas is a great time to restock your Reaper paint because of that.

There is also Wargames Foundry, the best paint pots ever! They have color sets, and I've literally had some of these paints over ten years and they're still great! Same as the original Citadel paint pots that they never should have stopped using.

ive personally been using reaper master series paints for years now.. after gw started changing colors and giving them old names it pissed me off and they stopped carrying my colors. so i decided to stat my army after that with reaper paints and omg im happy they are amazing and come in dripper bottles.

You could also track down Coat d'Arms paints. They're the original GW paints from back in the hexagonal bottle days. Same colors, even named similarly, and there are plenty of conversion charts around. More than half of my current paints are CdA. Scale Creep used to carry them in the US, not sure who does now.

I wouldn't give up completely on GW though, some of their paints are excellent - technicals, washes, etc. My paint drawer has paints from GW, P3, Army painter, Vallejo, Reaper, etc. Different paints/colors work better from line to line.

As has been said already, GW will most certainly replace the paints, their customer service is excellent!

I personally love their paints, despite the stupid naming system which does indeed confuse us colourblind folk. That being said I love their paint pots
(dropper bottles aren't my thing) and the range of colours, washes and effects is just awesome.

Edit: Hmm, just noticed the new paint section on the GW site, kinda nifty...

Tydil wrote:
As for switching to another system, a lot of people like Vallejo but I love Reaper. The paints are good quality just as Vallejo but they're easier to find at your FLGS or online.

I know of several stores in my area that carries Vallejo, but only one carries Reaper (and I believe that was because they were affiliated with Reaper at one time). Where you live will determine what is easier to find locally.

As for online, the War Store carries both lines.

That being said, I really wanted to like the Master Series paints but I could never get a result I was happy with. With that being said, there are still some colors that I use. I use the Stone Colors and the Redstone Triads for basing and the Silver Metallics Triad would be perfect for Grey Knights. The best advice I can give to someone looking for a new line of paints is to try multiple lines and choose what works for you.

 Cruentus wrote:
You could also track down Coat d'Arms paints. They're the original GW paints from back in the hexagonal bottle days. Same colors, even named similarly, and there are plenty of conversion charts around. More than half of my current paints are CdA. Scale Creep used to carry them in the US, not sure who does now.

Scale Creep still carries them.

Just stating the obvious.. It wasn't one of their new drybrush colours, no? Underhive Ash, Longbeard Grey.. I had a friend level the same complaint ("completely dried up") on a colour specifically designed to be that way... until I told him what things are for

Vallejo is one of the better choices. Rich pigments nice squeeze bottle droppers.

I'm a big fan of Vallejo paints. I have never had any issues with their line.

Funny thing is, I still have some GW paint pots I bought in UK 20 years ago (not exaggerating, it was 1994) which are still in a usable state. These days I check the paints when buying them in a FLGS and do not order them anymore. When they are too dry I simply exchange them immediately. That way I evade the problems, cause I'm very content with the paint quality, especially in terms of consistency of results.

This is the citadel I used to know. not so much anymore. However, I like their washes and sometimes use some new paints. I used to call them Inks back in the day.

 Sammoth wrote:
This is the citadel I used to know. not so much anymore. However, I like their washes and sometimes use some new paints. I used to call them Inks back in the day.

Uh, what do you mean "back in the day"? Washes and inks are very different things. You can still get inks, privateer press makes them, that I know of. Only reason I know that is because GW has garbage for red washes, they all have some strange tint, which is okay for finishing a model, but garbage to work with for vibrancy. You might get lucky and pick up inks from your local art store that don't dissolve in water once dried. Black India ink works decently well for shading at the last step, provided you don't ever get the model wet again, cause that pigment will dissolve. I've used it to good effect on my models: I lay down some black India ink at the start to get my darkest shadows, and each layer of ink/wash loosens up the black pigment and diffuses the shadow. Black India ink can be used to decent effect, but I don't recommend it for the trouble it's worth.

 Sammoth wrote:
This is the citadel I used to know. not so much anymore. However, I like their washes and sometimes use some new paints. I used to call them Inks back in the day.

Which were made by the same company as the aforementioned Coat d'Arms paints. Coat d'Arms = old Citadel paints.

 poda_t wrote:

 Sammoth wrote:
This is the citadel I used to know. not so much anymore. However, I like their washes and sometimes use some new paints. I used to call them Inks back in the day.

Uh, what do you mean "back in the day"? Washes and inks are very different things. You can still get inks, privateer press makes them, that I know of. Only reason I know that is because GW has garbage for red washes, they all have some strange tint, which is okay for finishing a model, but garbage to work with for vibrancy. You might get lucky and pick up inks from your local art store that don't dissolve in water once dried. Black India ink works decently well for shading at the last step, provided you don't ever get the model wet again, cause that pigment will dissolve. I've used it to good effect on my models: I lay down some black India ink at the start to get my darkest shadows, and each layer of ink/wash loosens up the black pigment and diffuses the shadow. Black India ink can be used to decent effect, but I don't recommend it for the trouble it's worth.

Citadel Washes back then where called Inks. 1980's - early 90's. You didn't really have a Wash it was just inks and you watered it down accordingly.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/328595.page


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ghaz wrote:

 Sammoth wrote:
This is the citadel I used to know. not so much anymore. However, I like their washes and sometimes use some new paints. I used to call them Inks back in the day.

Which were made by the same company as the aforementioned Coat d'Arms paints. Coat d'Arms = old Citadel paints.

Oh yeah I know.

Thank you Dr. Sammoth for illustrating the point I was making, that the two are not in fact the same thing. Now if you'd have cared to read my post you would have noticed that inks can still be obtained, and companies that don't arbitrarily change dye lots, unlike GW, but like Reaper, still manufacture both inks and washes which have different applications when painting miniatures.

 poda_t wrote:
Thank you Dr. Sammoth for illustrating the point I was making, that the two are not in fact the same thing. Now if you'd have cared to read my post you would have noticed that inks can still be obtained, and companies that don't arbitrarily change dye lots, unlike GW, but like Reaper, still manufacture both inks and washes which have different applications when painting miniatures.

I simply stated to the OP that these were the paints I loved back in the day but, not so much anymore. I also stated I used to use the inks back then because they didn't have washes. I also stated that I still use NEW citadel paints and washes today but, not as much.

I read your post and no in the 80's they did not have washes they had inks. I know you can still get them thank you for pointing out something I already knew. If you read my OP I already stated that the pic was the paints I USED to know. I am well aware that Coat d'Arms is the ones they contracted out to make the paints back then. I simply stated they did not call them washes in the 80's they were called inks. So please feel free to go on you little rant about me not reading your post.

You don't need to be a jerk about it.

Here is a link to prove my point.

http://realmofchaos80s.blogspot.com/2012/09/retro-painting-and-modelling-or.html

 Sammoth wrote:
I read your post and no in the 80's they did not have washes they had inks.

Yes, we have established that.

I simply stated they did not call them washes in the 80's they were called inks. So please feel free to go on you little rant about me not reading your post.

I think there is a breakdown of communication here...

You used to call them "inks" because that is what they were. This is what Poda is trying to explain: washes and inks are two different things and GW used to make inks, now they make washes. Again, these are two different products. You can use an ink as a wash, but that does not make the same as the washes offered today. The Dakka post you previously link discussed the fact that they are two different products, not something that they changed the name of (like with the "Washes" become "Shades" in the last couple of years). The old school ink set even says right on the box: "Brilliant inks for shading and washing"

So again, what Poda was saying is that the old Citadel Inks are not the same product as the current Citadel Shades (Washes).

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

 Sammoth wrote:
I read your post and no in the 80's they did not have washes they had inks.

Yes, we have established that.

I simply stated they did not call them washes in the 80's they were called inks. So please feel free to go on you little rant about me not reading your post.

I think there is a breakdown of communication here...

You used to call them "inks" because that is what they were. This is what Poda is trying to explain: washes and inks are two different things and GW used to make inks, now they make washes. Again, these are two different products. You can use an ink as a wash, but that does not make the same as the washes offered today. The Dakka post you previously link discussed the fact that they are two different products, not something that they changed the name of (like with the "Washes" become "Shades" in the last couple of years). The old school ink set even says right on the box: "Brilliant inks for shading and washing"

So again, what Poda was saying is that the old Citadel Inks are not the same product as the current Citadel Shades (Washes).

BTW: Thanks for sticking your 2 cents in.


They were called inks in the 80's PERIOD. They did not have washes it's not hard to understand. I already stated I use GW washes. SO that means I am WELL AWARE they make them and they are 2 different things. You 2 are not telling me something I don't know already. I was simply stating and REPEATING MYSELF once again that back then I used to love GW inks and paints.

You would think If I said I use washes/ shades now that I would know the difference between the 2. Thanks you 2 for assuming I'm an idiot.


I wasn't arguing they were NOT 2 different things. However, back then they did NOT have washes/shades you had to use the inks watered down for a wash.