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.

So when are these going to come out? I feel like I have been living under a rock because this is the first I've heard of it.

Anyone know the price of the "solution" underneath.
I have my eyebrows raised very high if that's what I suspect it to be.

 oni wrote:

Spoiler:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 oni wrote:
What?

I have a suspicion that he's just finding out about the FW weathering powders, doesn't understand what they are and is calling them paint.

Nope, they're actually doing a line of airbrush paints.


Everything below the second row on the rack are airbrush paints. It looks like they also have a line of airbrushable washes.

Personally, I hope that I can buy these through my local GW. There have been a lot of people asking about airbrushing locally and I am awful at explaining things.

Wow! I stand corrected and amazed. I'm curious if we'll be seeing a private labeled Forge World airbrush.

Just wanting to point out that I was corrected as well. Those are traditional brush-on paints.

There are airbrush paints coming, but they are apparently being finalized.

Will be interesting to see what these turn out like, I've switched to Vallejo air after some time of using Tamiya, I wonder how these will compare in terms of formula.

Are you serious about the Forge World airbrush Oni? These are precision manufactured pieces of kit, I can't imagine FW having the resources or financial inclination to make their own, so if they did have one it would just be a re-branded device produced by another manufacturer. I really can't see that happening..

Buttery Commissar wrote:Anyone know the price of the "solution" underneath.
I have my eyebrows raised very high if that's what I suspect it to be.

And what do you suspect it to be?

That's what "private labeled" means in this context.

 Pacific wrote:
....

Buttery Commissar wrote:Anyone know the price of the "solution" underneath.
I have my eyebrows raised very high if that's what I suspect it to be.

And what do you suspect it to be?

I'm going to guess either a AB thinning agent or slightly differently something like that 'Eavy Metal solution that came out a few years ago in a special EM paint/brush set - it was sort of like paint without the pigment for thinning brush paint without losing viscosity. I hope its the latter.

Either way i'm looking forward to some sort of review of this as FW tends to make the stuff their artists want so should be good quality, one hopes anyway.

I hope we do see an Airbrush starter kit from forgeworld.

 Vermis wrote:
Almost four quid for 18ml of watery paint sounds about par for the course for GW.

Not even "about" par, they are exactly the same price as the regular GW paints: £2.50 @ 12ml = £3.75 @ 18ml. Which just shows how expensive the regular paints are. People seem to be easily fooled by the fact that the regular pots are a 3rd smaller than competing brands.

@ Op... I agree that a dropper bottle for airbrush paints makes a lot of sense, but why on earth would a "proper" professional painter not own a pipette?

GW paints are actually good, but the price is what turns me off from them because it FEELS like you're being ripped off. These are no different. I'm sure they will be pretty good colors, but there's zero reason they are the most expensive paints out there.

Huh. Had no idea this was even a thinv.

notprop wrote:

 Pacific wrote:
....

Buttery Commissar wrote:Anyone know the price of the "solution" underneath.
I have my eyebrows raised very high if that's what I suspect it to be.

And what do you suspect it to be?

I'm going to guess either a AB thinning agent or slightly differently something like that 'Eavy Metal solution that came out a few years ago in a special EM paint/brush set - it was sort of like paint without the pigment for thinning brush paint without losing viscosity. I hope its the latter.

Either way i'm looking forward to some sort of review of this as FW tends to make the stuff their artists want so should be good quality, one hopes anyway.

Ah cheers mate, will have to keep an eye out for reviews (or, could stop being tight-fisted and get one myself I suppose! )

ToxicBox wrote:I hope we do see an Airbrush starter kit from forgeworld.

I'd recommend looking up a local hobby shop, anything from Badger or Iwata should serve well, and there are dozens of online reviews of the best place to start.

If you want to just try out an airbrush, or are just planning on painting terrain and larger areas, you can get Chinese knock-offs of the above for around £100 from ebay. If you get on with it, you could always get a better airbrush itself at that point.

I can't imagine anything from FW (if they release one, which I think is highly unlikely) being close to the dedicated airbrush producers for quality, or close to the Chinese models for price.

Looks like they're available on the site - http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Modelling-Supplies

Forge World Airbrush Paints are specially formulated acrylic paints designed to give great results with an airbrush, whilst retaining the perfect consistency for applying with a paint brush. This range of 26 paints includes flat colours and metallics, as well as clear colours which can be combined to create effects such as fades, blends, washes and for changing the shades and tones of other colours. Forge World Airbrush Paints are ideally suited for using with our Horus Heresy model range, as well as with all other Forge World and Citadel models and scenery.

So, much like Badger or Vallejo, it looks like they're airbrush paints that can also be brushed on.

I'm intrigued about the line of 'clear' paints - I wonder if these are more like candies than GW washes - intended to be used more like a glaze or blending aid. The minitaire range already includes a selection of candies, so it's not without precedent.

But yes, when VMC is £2 for 17ml I can see myself paying £3.75 for 18ml, especially if I have to pipette the bloody stuff into my airbrush!!

I did just order three pots of the Phoenician Purple for my Pre-Heresy Emperor's Children along with other stuff. I'm having a devil of a time finding just the right color of purple (it's one of those "I'll know it when I see it" kind of things). Hopefully it will do the job, the color swatch as it appears on my screen does look just about right. I had settle on the Minitaire Ecchymose as being "close enough", but I'll see how this works. Speaking of Minitaire, I suspect the FW clear paints could be much the same thing as Minitaire's Ghost Tints?

Speaking of Minitaire, I suspect the FW clear paints could be much the same thing as Minitaire's Ghost Tints?

I think you're right - the Ghost Tints are basically candies, and Tamiya label their equivalent as 'Clear' paint too.

For anyone who doesn't know, candies feel like a really sticky wash - they can be used like an ink, to do a bright wash over a dark surface, but they're mostly used to tint other colours - for example, spraying something silver then a candy colour will give a good metallic colour...

It's also the one big thing currently missing from the GW paint range, and it makes sense that, as a more 'niche' product (like weathering powders) FW would be the ones to do it.

I'm still not sure what the 'solution' is though? If it's thinner, then they wouldn't say you can use it to clean too. Maybe it's an alcohol/water solution, which could thin AND clean (assuming these FW paints are alchohol friendly like the Tamiya ones).

 Vermis wrote:
... there are perfectly good alternatives out there...

Head down to your local model train shop and check out the paints they carry. You'll find paints that are just as good along with instructions on how to "convert" regular paints so you can airbrush with them. Your wallet will thank you.

After seeing the range, I can honestly say that I am priced out of the market for them. Same song and dance with Forge World, great product, insane pricing...

Shame too, but is anyone else amazed that they are now CHEAPER then regular 40k figures are now? Seriously?

was a great game once. I'll always have fond memories of it....

So, question for the people who think that they're too expensive and won't buy them: is it a case of literally being out of your budget, or do you just object to the principle of paying more than some specific amount for paint? I can understand the first problem, but the second just confuses me. Paint is such a small expense compared to everything else in the hobby that I don't really see any difference between brands. If I have to pay more for a single pot of paint that is exactly the right color I'm not going to hesitate at all before making that investment.

Re pricing at £10 for 250ml the solutions are parable or possible cheaper than Vallejo AB thinners (£9 for 200ml).

 Peregrine wrote:
So, question for the people who think that they're too expensive and won't buy them: is it a case of literally being out of your budget, or do you just object to the principle of paying more than some specific amount for paint? I can understand the first problem, but the second just confuses me. Paint is such a small expense compared to everything else in the hobby that I don't really see any difference between brands. If I have to pay more for a single pot of paint that is exactly the right color I'm not going to hesitate at all before making that investment.

If the price is more than the perceived value then it is too expensive.

For example the £3.75 they are listed as is apparently $7.40 AUD, which is only a little more expensive than the PP, Vallejo or Scale 75 paints I use but they are 20ml to the 17 or 18 of those brands. Personally I find that perfectly reasonable so it all comes down to the quality. I dislike the GW paints not because they are smaller than the others, I find them too expensive because the bottle design is grossly inferior and leads to drying out and the composition of the paint being iffy at best when mixing them.

"They are too expensive" sure means a hell of a lot more than simply 'they charge $7 instead of $5'.

 Peregrine wrote:
So, question for the people who think that they're too expensive and won't buy them: is it a case of literally being out of your budget, or do you just object to the principle of paying more than some specific amount for paint? I can understand the first problem, but the second just confuses me. Paint is such a small expense compared to everything else in the hobby that I don't really see any difference between brands. If I have to pay more for a single pot of paint that is exactly the right color I'm not going to hesitate at all before making that investment.

To some people, paint is a small expense and yet to other people (like myself), it is not. However, I do not let the price of a bottle of paint keep me from purchasing it and I have plenty of paints that cost a fair bit for than paints from GW (of course, these are specialty paints like Alclad and the like). You are right that there isn't much of a difference between most basic hobby paint brands in general, but that doesn't mean all paints are created equal either.

In the end, it comes down to a lot of people choosing not to buy GW paints because as you mentioned, there isn't much of a difference between brands, so why should one have to pay more money for less paint when they could buy a higher quantity for less money? It's no different than buying anything else: if all items in question are equal, why should you pay a premium just for the name on the pot?

 ArbitorIan wrote:
For anyone who doesn't know, candies feel like a really sticky wash - they can be used like an ink, to do a bright wash over a dark surface, but they're mostly used to tint other colours - for example, spraying something silver then a candy colour will give a good metallic colour...

I think the best description of a clear is that it's a paint of regular paint-like consistency that has very little pigment, therefore is mostly transparent but can be painted on like a regular paint. Compared to a wash which also has very little pigment but is much thinner consistency than regular paint, so it collects in the crevices instead.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 ArbitorIan wrote:
For anyone who doesn't know, candies feel like a really sticky wash - they can be used like an ink, to do a bright wash over a dark surface, but they're mostly used to tint other colours - for example, spraying something silver then a candy colour will give a good metallic colour...

I think the best description of a clear is that it's a paint of regular paint-like consistency that has very little pigment, therefore is mostly transparent but can be painted on like a regular paint. Compared to a wash which also has very little pigment but is much thinner consistency than regular paint, so it collects in the crevices instead.

On this OT note, I've always wondered can these "candies" be cleaned up with water like regular paint or do they require thinner like enamels?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
So, question for the people who think that they're too expensive and won't buy them: is it a case of literally being out of your budget, or do you just object to the principle of paying more than some specific amount for paint? I can understand the first problem, but the second just confuses me. Paint is such a small expense compared to everything else in the hobby that I don't really see any difference between brands. If I have to pay more for a single pot of paint that is exactly the right color I'm not going to hesitate at all before making that investment.

To some people, paint is a small expense and yet to other people (like myself), it is not. However, I do not let the price of a bottle of paint keep me from purchasing it and I have plenty of paints that cost a fair bit for than paints from GW (of course, these are specialty paints like Alclad and the like). You are right that there isn't much of a difference between most basic hobby paint brands in general, but that doesn't mean all paints are created equal either.

In the end, it comes down to a lot of people choosing not to buy GW paints because as you mentioned, there isn't much of a difference between brands, so why should one have to pay more money for less paint when they could buy a higher quantity for less money? It's no different than buying anything else: if all items in question are equal, why should you pay a premium just for the name on the pot?

Back on topic, this is basically it. The GW paints are good, but they're more expensive than equivalents (and give less). There's basically zero compelling reason to buy them over Vallejo as you get less paint and pay more. For example, a GW paint pot is $4 USD for 12ml, Vallejo is around $4 (or a bit less often) for 18ml, before factoring in any online retailer discounts; there's no reason to pick GW when I can get Vallejo other than the fact it's GW (which is worthless to me personally) despite the paint being good quality. Now the FW paints are supposed to be 20ml for £3.75 (Just under $6 USD) that's $2 more for 2ml and not factoring in shipping (as ForgeWorld is not readily available in the US), and Vallejo is £2.25 retail ccording to Wayland Games), so you are paying £1.25 for 2ml more.

That doesn't seem like a good deal to me at all, especially as an American who would have to order the FW stuff direct from them anyways and therefore pay a premium for shipping. Why would I pay that much more when I can get Vallejo for around $3.50 generally?

Now if GW themselves went to 20ml paint for $5.80 for the entire range, Vallejo is still cheaper but it boils down much closer to preference as I like some GW colors (and their washes/glazes), so maybe I'd be willing to spend a bit more, get 2ml more paint and have the Citadel Color range as well. But not for FW where I have to pay high shipping, and certainly not for GW base at only 12ml a pot.

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
So, question for the people who think that they're too expensive and won't buy them: is it a case of literally being out of your budget, or do you just object to the principle of paying more than some specific amount for paint? I can understand the first problem, but the second just confuses me. Paint is such a small expense compared to everything else in the hobby that I don't really see any difference between brands. If I have to pay more for a single pot of paint that is exactly the right color I'm not going to hesitate at all before making that investment.

To some people, paint is a small expense and yet to other people (like myself), it is not. However, I do not let the price of a bottle of paint keep me from purchasing it and I have plenty of paints that cost a fair bit for than paints from GW (of course, these are specialty paints like Alclad and the like). You are right that there isn't much of a difference between most basic hobby paint brands in general, but that doesn't mean all paints are created equal either.

In the end, it comes down to a lot of people choosing not to buy GW paints because as you mentioned, there isn't much of a difference between brands, so why should one have to pay more money for less paint when they could buy a higher quantity for less money? It's no different than buying anything else: if all items in question are equal, why should you pay a premium just for the name on the pot?

For me it is all about individual customer value, I buy GW paints because I thin my paint in the pot using the little lip inside the lid, that way I do not have to faff around with mixing, using a wet/dry pallet and I like the triad system which is why I also buy Foundry paints who's colours are of a more natural tone than GW paints so a nice complement to brighter GW colours (I also buy Coat D'arms as they have some lovely bright colours in their fantasy range).

I've tried dropper bottles from Vallejo and hated them, pigment sinks to the bottom of the bottle so you need to put an agitator in them for them to mix properly (companies like AK interactive, AMMO, Andrea and Reaper include an agitator, why not Vallejo?) they clog, I've had the nozzle split on me, I've had those annoying little paint explosions, I'm forced to use a pallet and mix highlights which inevitably leads to wasted paint, they always separate on the pallet (Game Color is particularly bad at this) and this puts up a red flag as the true quality of these paints IMO, Model Color hates to be handled it rubs off easily.

So you can see when you add all this up I prefer pots, like many of GW's colours, I can supplement the lack of more natural tones with Foundry paints, I don't waste paint so getting more paint per pot is a moot point if you forced to mix and use a pallet. There is more to value than price/quantity ratio because if there wasn't we'd all be using artists acrylics like Daler Rowney System 3 that comes in 125/250/500 mil pots that work out a lot cheaper than any specialist model paint v model paint comparison.

Also these new FW paints are £3.75, 20 mil, Airbrush Paints as is specifies in the newsletter they just sent me, single pots of Foundry are £3.50 for 20 mil though you can get bundles and triads that do bring the price down. Though I would urge people to try as many styles/paint ranges as they can and make their own judgement about what best suits them, price is only one factor of many.

 Peregrine wrote:
So, question for the people who think that they're too expensive and won't buy them: is it a case of literally being out of your budget, or do you just object to the principle of paying more than some specific amount for paint? I can understand the first problem, but the second just confuses me. Paint is such a small expense compared to everything else in the hobby that I don't really see any difference between brands. If I have to pay more for a single pot of paint that is exactly the right color I'm not going to hesitate at all before making that investment.

The problem is consistency. Price is one thing, but the consistency of the quality of the paint, as opposed to the choice of colors.

Abaddon Black is a case in point. Like painting with Elmer's glue. Other colors in GW's "New and Increasingly suspect" line are about as bad. They get away with it, and try to shovel that .... Base/ shade/ wash schtick, but at the end of the day, they are only fooling themselves.

Not only is it another nail in the coffin that they do not know who their consumer base is, they continue to pull this sort of gak, and tell you it's raining. Paint is not as small an expense as you think. One thing, your palette, determines the price. If your like me and have around 10 projects running at the same time, the last thing you need is a gremlin in the paint jar. If I'm painting a platoon of say, Catachans, a Green, a black, a couple of flesh tones, and some red for starters, then you get into the metals, then you get into the leather shades, then boots, then.... ( You can see where this is going)

If you buy a paint that your believe was previously good, then turns to be craptastic, ( Such as GW's range of paints) you then end up not only buying the "New" color, you have to go back and try to find a new pot of a similar texture/ color to shore up the gak that you ended up putting yourself through. SO then you see a new range come out from the exact same company, the only thought you get to come to the table is- Fool me once, shame on you, Fool me twice, shame on me.

GW is now known for this with paint as well. They do this almost as much as their annual price hikes, and repricing Codex's and giving you less for more.

Unless they put the product out there ( In this case, Paint.) that is a consistent quality to what one needs to put some paint on a model, and call it a day, they can continue to price thir public out of the games.

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:
It's no different than buying anything else: if all items in question are equal, why should you pay a premium just for the name on the pot?

But they usually aren't equal. If I want a specific color then the fact that a similar color is cheaper from some other company doesn't help me much. Obviously you shouldn't pay for the name on the package, but if, for example, you're trying to duplicate the FW paint scheme for your 30k army I don't see why paying a few dollars more to get exact paint matches is such a big deal.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grot 6 wrote:
and try to shovel that .... Base/ shade/ wash schtick

What's wrong with that? The base/shade/layer method is a perfectly reasonable way to get tabletop-standard models. It's not a very useful system if you're an experienced artist and have your own methods, but for the average GW customer it's a straightforward approach that takes all the guessing and art talent out of making decent looking models and lets the system do all of the work. TBH it's one of the few things GW does right.

Paint is not as small an expense as you think. One thing, your palette, determines the price. If your like me and have around 10 projects running at the same time, the last thing you need is a gremlin in the paint jar. If I'm painting a platoon of say, Catachans, a Green, a black, a couple of flesh tones, and some red for starters, then you get into the metals, then you get into the leather shades, then boots, then.... ( You can see where this is going)

Now compare that cost to the price of a whole army, and remember that once you buy those paints you're going to keep most of them around for years. It might seem like a big expense up front, but over your entire time in the hobby it's only a fairly small percentage. And the difference in price between paint brands is an even smaller percentage.

If you buy a paint that your believe was previously good, then turns to be craptastic, ( Such as GW's range of paints) you then end up not only buying the "New" color, you have to go back and try to find a new pot of a similar texture/ color to shore up the gak that you ended up putting yourself through. SO then you see a new range come out from the exact same company, the only thought you get to come to the table is- Fool me once, shame on you, Fool me twice, shame on me.

But that's an entirely separate issue. I'm asking about the price issue alone, since people seem to feel that GW/FW's paint prices are inherently unreasonable, independent of whether or not they're good paints.

 Peregrine wrote:
Paint is such a small expense compared to everything else in the hobby

I guess it depends how much you are spending on "everything else", but I would tend to disagree that paints are an insignificant hobby expense. A good sized Citadel paint set could easily cost over £100. The ultimate set costs £325. That might be less than you'd spend on a decent army, but it isn't an order of magnitude less. For ~£200 you could buy a couple of battleforce boxes, which might be all the army you'd ever need.

I don't really see any difference between brands.

Well you should. GW paints are literally twice the price of competing brands (20p/ml for GW, versus 10p/ml for Coat d'Arms and Vallejo). That's a difference of 100%. Without getting into semantics, a difference of 51% should be "significant" in anyone's book, as you can't reasonably call a majority an "insignificant" portion. A difference of 100% is officially a "whole lot" of difference.

 Smacks wrote:
I guess it depends how much you are spending on "everything else", but I would tend to disagree that paints are an insignificant hobby expense. A good sized Citadel paint set could easily cost over £100. The ultimate set costs £325. That might be less than you'd spend on a decent army, but it isn't an order of magnitude less. For ~£200 you could buy a couple of battleforce boxes, which might be all the army you'd ever need.

But how much are you paying for the alternative paints? If we grant your "twice the price" assumption* you're still paying £50 for the alternative paints, which makes the total investment in GW paints only £50. That's one tank, or two squads (as long as you don't need conversion parts). If you're getting a ~2000 point army that £50 is a pretty small percentage of the cost, and if you buy multiple armies it gets even smaller. And no, you aren't getting an army with a couple of battleforces, unless you only play 500 point games in a group where nobody plays competitively or brings powerful options.

*We shouldn't automatically grant that assumption because a large part of it is based on other companies selling larger packages. That's relevant for the most common colors in your army that you're going to use a lot of, but much less relevant for detail colors. For example, the two shades of yellow I use to paint hazard stripes are a one-time expense because the amount I use is so tiny. I don't really care if I could theoretically get twice the volume for the same price because I'll probably finish all of my painting projects and find a different hobby before I use up the smaller volume. So in that case the other brand is more expensive.

IWithout getting into semantics, a difference of 51% should be "significant" in anyone's book

Why? Let's use a really extreme example: I need a cup of water to paint. I can buy a package of plastic cups at the grocery store for $0.99, or I can buy the package next to it for $1.99. That's a huge percentage difference in price, but when I add up the total cost of building and painting my army the difference is negligible. The issue ceases to be one of practical effects on my budget and becomes moral outrage about paying "too much" for something.

Are you literally trying to argue that people's personal decision on whether an item is worth their money or not is wrong?

That's how it's coming across and while it's well established you'll start a fight in an empty room, telling people their personal decisions are wrong is scraping the barrel, even for you.

Wait, did this really just happen?

 Peregrine wrote:
I don't really see any difference between brands.

 Peregrine wrote:
But they usually aren't equal.

Anyway, there really isn't anything to argue about here, no matter how hard you try to find something. You asked a relatively harmless question and myself and others gave pretty sound answers. Perceived value is important to a consumer and plenty of people feel that GW lacks that aspect in their products, especially their paints. Given what has been discussed in regards price per volume, it's a fair assessment when people are trying to minimize impact on their bottom line while getting the best return for their money.

That's the beautiful thing about the myriad of options available to us these days: we can choose what we want and don't want. Peregrine, if you want to buy Forge World paint, go right ahead! You don't deserve to be chagrined about what you choose to spend you money on. You should try to keep that in mind.

Above and beyond any other aspect of them, at least these new FW paints aren't going to dry up shortly after you open them,

I'd pay GW even more of a premium if they went back to these design of bottle (or even a functional dropper bottle)