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.

 Peregrine wrote:


They can do the exact same things as conventional brushes. The problem is not the tool, it's the "artist". Far too many commission painters have embraced a style I call "look at me, I have an airbrush!": lots of exaggerated shading (which may or may not correspond to areas of light and shadow on the "real" thing), giant blobs of white on every possible light source, etc.

I recently started calling this Obviously Airbrushed. When I see it, it's so obvious that the artist sprayed color in one spot and called it OSL or shading and collecting the profit. That's fine for people who want to buy it, and it's better than what I can do with an airbrush, but I am unimpressed.

I don't bother as much now when I see a commission painter posting new models. Most often it's the same skill, the same over-the-top shading, with a black background to hide the fact that's the model is half done, and the Obviously Airbrushed points all over the place.

I see other people in this post have the same complaint. I'm glad I'm not alone.

As for my use of an airbrush, it's a great way to prime with Vallejo Surface primer, which I bought specifically because I didn't want to go outside during winter. It's also great for basecoats, and large areas that just need one color. I have a cheapo $20 airbrush and my dad's old diaphragm compressor and that works well enough for those tasks. While I admit the Infinity models look amazing, I would rather use a brush, more time, and have subtler shades (and of course, worse results because of the artist being me).

When airbrushing looks good, it looks great.

When it doesn't - eurgh. It looks lazy and sloppy.

Yes. I'd echo that to be fair.

I suppose that if I still did 2D artwork that I would again invest in an airbrush.

They are freaking awesome tools.

I disagree that an airbrush can do anything that a regular paint brush can do.

If that was the case, it would never have been invented, and once it was, the traditional paint brush would have long ago fallen out of favor.

While it is true that a good artist can take pretty much any medium, and use it to mock another (such as faking watercolor with pencils, or faking pencil with paint, etc) these represent exceptions to a rule - a RULE - which indicates that the rule CAN be broken, but that the rule represents a norm for a reason.

Pity an airbrush is so far down my list of priorities. It would certainly come in handy.

MB

Yes an airbrush is "just a tool" but so is the classic brush, it is how we execute or choose their use that makes it awesome: the artist, their eye, their skill.
Do not blame the tool for the artist's result.

It is me and only me that determines "good enough" regardless of my paint method (that really is when a model is finished, you could tweak forever).

Block painting, colour gradient, zenithal highlighting, eggshell smooth large round / flat surface painting: these are the main purposes I use an airbrush for.
Fine detail, edge highlighting, dry-brushing (rough surface highlighting) shading is what I typically use a brush to paint.
The technical ink pens I still like to use on occasion to "cheat", I could use a very fine brush for a similar result, but this is faster and makes a crisper edge.

I know that any number of you could perform many of these techniques with the opposite tool with fantastic results.
I have a fine brush with a slight hook at the tip I do my best painting with because I have had it so long and am used to it, I baby it because I will not be as good for a while till I adapt to a new tool.

Airbrush is not a debate really, as airbrush becomes more common in use we are getting better at spotting the difference between a competent air-brush artist and a proficient one.

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

HairySticks wrote:
I would still use a rattle can primer ~ theyre solvent based paints and are more durable than most acrylic airbrush paints.

You could spray solvent based paint, but theyre a pain to clean out of the airbrush when a rattle can is cheap and disposable.

I've had access to an airbrush for years and still choose rattle can primers over airbrush ones for this reason.

Tamiya Liquid Surface Primer, Mr. Surfacer, and Alclad primers are all solvent based are only slightly more involved that something like Vallejo Surface Primer. A respirator or a spray booth is definitely a good idea to use with them and you need to thin them with lacquer thinner (Mr. Surfacer and Tamiya at least, the Alclad primer is ready to go out of the bottle), but they clean up just fine so long as you the proper cleaner (denatured alcohol works well and Alclad makes their own airbrush cleaner which works well too).

One rattle can costs less than a large bottle of Vallejo Surface Primer, but the Vallejo stuff will last much longer making it cheaper in the long run. Of course, if you use a high quality rattle can (such as the ones offered by Tamiya) the price is much higher, although worth it. Still, the main draw to using an airbrush to prime a model is the degree of control you have over the application of the primer.

I wont argue with any of that.
But I still favour a rattle can for priming my models. I've got a large bottle of vallejo polyurethane primer that I dont really like.
I prefer the finish off grey automotive primer, and never suffer with detail loss (I recommend warming your can under the tap as you shake it)
I would easily buy a tin of grey automotive primer and the appropriate thinner from the local car body panel specialist ~ Might even have some out in the shed for my hvlp guns. But dont want to have to clean primer out of my expensive airbrush nozzle.

Its a Harder and Steenbeck Evolution CR plus 0.2mm nozzle, the spare is a evolution silverline with a0.2mm nozzle. ... neither of these are for priming, although I cant argue with you that airbrush is more cost effective, for me it beats buying a priming airbrush.

I wont put it in my illustration airbrushes... the models are lucky il even put base coat paint in them as they werent bought for painting models, just are useful.

Rattle cans still have a place.

 Talizvar wrote:
Yes an airbrush is "just a tool" but so is the classic brush, it is how we execute or choose their use that makes it awesome: the artist, their eye, their skill.
Do not blame the tool for the artist's result.

It is me and only me that determines "good enough" regardless of my paint method (that really is when a model is finished, you could tweak forever).

Block painting, colour gradient, zenithal highlighting, eggshell smooth large round / flat surface painting: these are the main purposes I use an airbrush for.
Fine detail, edge highlighting, dry-brushing (rough surface highlighting) shading is what I typically use a brush to paint.
The technical ink pens I still like to use on occasion to "cheat", I could use a very fine brush for a similar result, but this is faster and makes a crisper edge.

I know that any number of you could perform many of these techniques with the opposite tool with fantastic results.
I have a fine brush with a slight hook at the tip I do my best painting with because I have had it so long and am used to it, I baby it because I will not be as good for a while till I adapt to a new tool.

Airbrush is not a debate really, as airbrush becomes more common in use we are getting better at spotting the difference between a competent air-brush artist and a proficient one.

I use rapidiographs (a type of technical pen) to do lining.

I can get a vastly finer and more regular line of of them than can an artist with a paintbrush (without resorting to extreme and time-consuming techniques), and with the rapidiograph, I can load any color of ink into them that I wish. Although doing whites, yellows, or other typically "lighter" tints of ink are really hard on the nibs.

They (Rapidiographs and technical pens in general) are an underutilized tool by most miniature painters.

MB

HairySticks wrote:
I've got a large bottle of vallejo polyurethane primer that I dont really like.

Luckily for you, there are more primers out there than just Vallejo.

Rattle cans still have a place.

Agreed, which is what I've said multiple times on this thread already. Aerosol cans and airbrush primers each have their strengths and weaknesses, no one way is better than the other.

These are fascinating threads - for multitudes of reasons.

I have been painting minis for years (decades) and only got into using an airbrush a few years ago.

As many have said - its just another tool, and like any tool depends on how you use it.

I have gone through several, and tons of paints, tests, needles, cleanings and endless tests and frustrations.

if I had to do it all over again?

I would have bought one YEARS sooner.

But each to their own.

Dave: Pretty much what you said applies to me but insert models in general before figures.

I wish I picked up an airbrush a decade before I did.

 Talizvar wrote:
Dave: Pretty much what you said applies to me but insert models in general before figures.

I wish I picked up an airbrush a decade before I did.

I could say that about so many things. Airbrush, W&N brushes, Olfa knives, Dremel tool, drill press, proper lighting, razor tweezers.... Hell, a CUTTING MAT!! A nice chair, hahaha. For fifteen years I had a sweet chair for my PC and a $10 folding chair for hobby

I use an airbrush, yes I do like it.

It saves me time when doing large scale projects like 20-30 infantry all the same color. Works great on vehicules but when all is said and done, I still need to finish the model with a paintbrush.

Like my teacher said: An airbrush is not a magic wand. It is a device to save time. If you can't mix colors, have poor color theory, it will not make an atrocious piece into a wonderful piece. It is you, the painter, not the airbrush that does the work.

 Erik_Morkai wrote:
I

Like my teacher said: An airbrush is not a magic wand. It is a device to save time. If you can't mix colors, have poor color theory, it will not make an atrocious piece into a wonderful piece. It is you, the painter, not the airbrush that does the work.

I can only half agree with you (and I guess your art teacher) ~

An airbrush is not there to save time. Not atall.
Its there because it makes a mark that a paintbrush cannot. Often times it can take longer to thin some paint, set up an airbrush spray a bit and then clean the thing out. That it wouldve to just make a mark with a paintbrush.

Colour mixing I would agree with you, but you have to bear in mind that colour mixing with an airbrush is a totally different ball game. Often its considerably more complex than regular brush work, done in multiple layers of different transparent paints. Layers so thin that you cant do it with a paintbrush. You get increased range of blending methods. And it doesnt replace brush wet blending or layering .. its just good to have another effect in the toolbox.

...at the end of the day its just a tool with a mostly different result to a paintbrush.
I like both. I'm a painter... not a paintbrusher or an airbrusher. Its about paint. Not application method.

HairySticks wrote:

 Erik_Morkai wrote:
I

Like my teacher said: An airbrush is not a magic wand. It is a device to save time. If you can't mix colors, have poor color theory, it will not make an atrocious piece into a wonderful piece. It is you, the painter, not the airbrush that does the work.

I can only half agree with you (and I guess your art teacher) ~

An airbrush is not there to save time. Not atall.
Its there because it makes a mark that a paintbrush cannot. Often times it can take longer to thin some paint, set up an airbrush spray a bit and then clean the thing out. That it wouldve to just make a mark with a paintbrush.

Colour mixing I would agree with you, but you have to bear in mind that colour mixing with an airbrush is a totally different ball game. Often its considerably more complex than regular brush work, done in multiple layers of different transparent paints. Layers so thin that you cant do it with a paintbrush. You get increased range of blending methods. And it doesnt replace brush wet blending or layering .. its just good to have another effect in the toolbox.

...at the end of the day its just a tool with a mostly different result to a paintbrush.
I like both. I'm a painter... not a paintbrusher or an airbrusher. Its about paint. Not application method.

Saves me time... If you have a tone of stuff to work through, then it really does help, but it depends on what you are tying to do with it, whether you are doing a ton of little fine details, or laying down blue on 30 infantry models...