The_Inquisitor wrote:
I'm a lurker on dakka, not a poster, but I had to spill some virtual ink in response to this thread. I will share, said by someone that has been involved in art, scale modeling for most of my life and wargaming for multiple decades. I wanted to say something on the subject as someone who *actually uses* airbrushes extensively in my art/modeling, throughout the entire process, not only to 'blast' paint onto a model.

First an observation re: the poll: The poll is incredibly skewed to favor the clear bias of the OP (that became apparent throughout the discussion); hence I didn't vote. There is no where NEAR the spectrum of options there should be. 4/5 of the options clearly represent the type of myopic vision that has been pervasive in this little world of wargaming for decades. Even the "I think they are good" was followed up by "nothing I would pay for."

Second, I echo the sentiments of those who have been around long enough to have seen the response to other "technological innovations" that have been thrust upon the wargaming community as a whole. Whether it's drybrushing, washes, using inks, etc. etc. etc. it doesn't matter- it's always been the same. I never cease to be amazed by these reactions. But I think it's reflective again of the myopic view of many in this community, and their individual judgement of what it means to be a painter, hobbyist, modeler, wargamer, and what is 'right' about how you do it.

So, when I hear people say things like 'its cheating, you can do things faster/better than I can... it doesn't represent skills with a brush... What I believe is actually being said is. 'hey, I paint this way, and get these effects and with my limited set of tools, it takes some skill. Since you are not doing it my way, but using some short cut, you are effecively 'cheating' to get the same outcome.'"

However, art/hobby/modeling, etc. is not akin to playing chess, where there are a limited set of objectives and rules that you play by, and if you don't you are 'cheating'. I'm not sure if this is more pronounced in the wargaming world because most of the time, there's this pervasive overarching meta of 'playing a game' with everything, thus you have to play by some sort of rules (<<< this is just conjecture folks... don't get your proverbial shorts in a knot...). But you just don't see this in other modeling/art worlds.

In fact, in the modeling world, the idea is to get the best outcomes with the least amount of energy. You are hailed as brilliant for doing this if you can. In the wargaming community? Heckled as a heretic and unclean/unwashed, because you are doing something different that some sort of predefined 'rules' that apparently everyone has agreed to, but in reality no one has nor could ever define. Just amazing to sit and think about, actually.

Third, for everyone who has thought at all that airbrushing is cheating... Prove it. Show me how it's cheating... can you?

I have a challenge for you: let's meet up. I'll give you all the equipment I use, and I'd like you to show me how you 'cheat.'

I've done this when I demo airbrushing. I love the look on people's faces when I hand them the brush, then they commence to look like a toddler trying to ride a 2 wheeler for the first time. It makes me chuckle EVERY. TIME. when some pedantic prig of a painter says something like this, then tries to airbrush. They can't do it, they get rudimentary outcomes at best or they screw up the project. They can't control the paint, can't control the brush, can't control the air. Can't paint over time without spatter, drying, clogging, etc. etc. etc. Their models look like crap. They do usually 1 of two things: they retreat and become more entrenched in their myopic view about painting or the hobby, or humble themselves, realize that a larger world exists than themselves, and either have more of a respect for someone who can use an airbrush artistically or realize that they have a lot to learn.

Because it takes literally hours just to get competent, and 100s of hours to really get proficient with this tool. It's incredibly frustrating at times. And the process can repeat itself with any change in the formula- new paints, different air, different work environment (humidity, lighting, airflow), shooting for different outcomes, slighting changes in the build up of a project.

What I've noticed is that many of us who like to airbrush do it because we like the tool, and we are willing to put up with all this to gain some level of proficiency, and then we enjoy it. It's not because its necessarily easier. And I'm talking about using an airbrush for more than a glorified spray gun, to basecoat.

Lastly, airbrushing has helped me improved my brush painting significantly. I know how to control the qualities of paint, not only from an artistic standpoint, but how it acts in general. But the most important thing I've learned is that everything I can do with a brush I could do with an AB, and vice versa. It's more about being pragmatic when choosing which to use. Now, this said, to answer the questions post above: there are people who use an airbrush and IMO don't really 'finish' the project to the common standard that mainy figure painters would commonly expect. I've used AB/brush work for years on figures, and am totally stoked that Giraldez is promoting this idea, but you can't just blast the figure with a bunch of pain, and call it done. This is the main critique that people have. It's not the use of the AB; if anything its 'laziness' in finishing a project.

Clearly, the photo posted by winterdyne demonstrates what I am speaking about, in comparison to the other photos posted. Most of the other pictures show projects that IMO aren't finished because they are not adequately detailed. I say this as an individual who has painted many commission pieces over the years.

And this is where I now say there are things you can do with a brush that are just much simpler, accurate, faster, easier than with an AB. So, does that mean because I didn't mask it off a section and painted it with my AB, or because I can feather out highlights and shadows much more quickly and accurately with brushes than an AB, that I'm cheating?

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Buttery Commissar wrote:
In stores, presentation was often paramount, but in back rooms, garages and pubs around here, according to most of my friends in their 40s and 50s, you'd be lucky if you found someone who understood the merit of even painting metallics rather than leaving the blade bare metal.

And again I'll say that the very act of posting armies online requires a level of interest and competence with technology that means we very rarely see the very baseline of modern painting.

Again it just depends where you live. A large portion of the gaming community in the last 90's revolved around the local store and so most people I know had forces that were painted. We would play larger games at home with unpainted models, but lacked terrain and whatnot so most my games back in those days were at the store that required painted models.

These days the local store doesn't have the same policy. I don't game there any more, but when I've passed through I see hordes of unpainted plastic more often than not.

 The_Inquisitor wrote:
I'm a lurker on dakka, not a poster, but I had to spill some virtual ink in response to this thread. I will share, said by someone that has been involved in art, scale modeling for most of my life and wargaming for multiple decades. I wanted to say something on the subject as someone who *actually uses* airbrushes extensively in my art/modeling, throughout the entire process, not only to 'blast' paint onto a model.

First an observation re: the poll: The poll is incredibly skewed to favor the clear bias of the OP (that became apparent throughout the discussion); hence I didn't vote. There is no where NEAR the spectrum of options there should be. 4/5 of the options clearly represent the type of myopic vision that has been pervasive in this little world of wargaming for decades. Even the "I think they are good" was followed up by "nothing I would pay for."

Second, I echo the sentiments of those who have been around long enough to have seen the response to other "technological innovations" that have been thrust upon the wargaming community as a whole. Whether it's drybrushing, washes, using inks, etc. etc. etc. it doesn't matter- it's always been the same. I never cease to be amazed by these reactions. But I think it's reflective again of the myopic view of many in this community, and their individual judgement of what it means to be a painter, hobbyist, modeler, wargamer, and what is 'right' about how you do it.

So, when I hear people say things like 'its cheating, you can do things faster/better than I can... it doesn't represent skills with a brush... What I believe is actually being said is. 'hey, I paint this way, and get these effects and with my limited set of tools, it takes some skill. Since you are not doing it my way, but using some short cut, you are effecively 'cheating' to get the same outcome.'"

However, art/hobby/modeling, etc. is not akin to playing chess, where there are a limited set of objectives and rules that you play by, and if you don't you are 'cheating'. I'm not sure if this is more pronounced in the wargaming world because most of the time, there's this pervasive overarching meta of 'playing a game' with everything, thus you have to play by some sort of rules (<<< this is just conjecture folks... don't get your proverbial shorts in a knot...). But you just don't see this in other modeling/art worlds.

In fact, in the modeling world, the idea is to get the best outcomes with the least amount of energy. You are hailed as brilliant for doing this if you can. In the wargaming community? Heckled as a heretic and unclean/unwashed, because you are doing something different that some sort of predefined 'rules' that apparently everyone has agreed to, but in reality no one has nor could ever define. Just amazing to sit and think about, actually.

Third, for everyone who has thought at all that airbrushing is cheating... Prove it. Show me how it's cheating... can you?

I have a challenge for you: let's meet up. I'll give you all the equipment I use, and I'd like you to show me how you 'cheat.'

I've done this when I demo airbrushing. I love the look on people's faces when I hand them the brush, then they commence to look like a toddler trying to ride a 2 wheeler for the first time. It makes me chuckle EVERY. TIME. when some pedantic prig of a painter says something like this, then tries to airbrush. They can't do it, they get rudimentary outcomes at best or they screw up the project. They can't control the paint, can't control the brush, can't control the air. Can't paint over time without spatter, drying, clogging, etc. etc. etc. Their models look like crap. They do usually 1 of two things: they retreat and become more entrenched in their myopic view about painting or the hobby, or humble themselves, realize that a larger world exists than themselves, and either have more of a respect for someone who can use an airbrush artistically or realize that they have a lot to learn.

Because it takes literally hours just to get competent, and 100s of hours to really get proficient with this tool. It's incredibly frustrating at times. And the process can repeat itself with any change in the formula- new paints, different air, different work environment (humidity, lighting, airflow), shooting for different outcomes, slighting changes in the build up of a project.

What I've noticed is that many of us who like to airbrush do it because we like the tool, and we are willing to put up with all this to gain some level of proficiency, and then we enjoy it. It's not because its necessarily easier. And I'm talking about using an airbrush for more than a glorified spray gun, to basecoat.

Lastly, airbrushing has helped me improved my brush painting significantly. I know how to control the qualities of paint, not only from an artistic standpoint, but how it acts in general. But the most important thing I've learned is that everything I can do with a brush I could do with an AB, and vice versa. It's more about being pragmatic when choosing which to use. Now, this said, to answer the questions post above: there are people who use an airbrush and IMO don't really 'finish' the project to the common standard that mainy figure painters would commonly expect. I've used AB/brush work for years on figures, and am totally stoked that Giraldez is promoting this idea, but you can't just blast the figure with a bunch of pain, and call it done. This is the main critique that people have. It's not the use of the AB; if anything its 'laziness' in finishing a project.

Clearly, the photo posted by winterdyne demonstrates what I am speaking about, in comparison to the other photos posted. Most of the other pictures show projects that IMO aren't finished because they are not adequately detailed. I say this as an individual who has painted many commission pieces over the years.

And this is where I now say there are things you can do with a brush that are just much simpler, accurate, faster, easier than with an AB. So, does that mean because I didn't mask it off a section and painted it with my AB, or because I can feather out highlights and shadows much more quickly and accurately with brushes than an AB, that I'm cheating?

eosgreen wrote:
"masking" doesnt take much time lol

 Buttery Commissar wrote:
You're sort of disagreeing and agreeing with me at the same time whilst trying to correct me, and I'm very confused.

 Buttery Commissar wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Buttery Commissar wrote:
In stores, presentation was often paramount, but in back rooms, garages and pubs around here, according to most of my friends in their 40s and 50s, you'd be lucky if you found someone who understood the merit of even painting metallics rather than leaving the blade bare metal.

And again I'll say that the very act of posting armies online requires a level of interest and competence with technology that means we very rarely see the very baseline of modern painting.

Again it just depends where you live. A large portion of the gaming community in the last 90's revolved around the local store and so most people I know had forces that were painted. We would play larger games at home with unpainted models, but lacked terrain and whatnot so most my games back in those days were at the store that required painted models.

These days the local store doesn't have the same policy. I don't game there any more, but when I've passed through I see hordes of unpainted plastic more often than not.

You're sort of disagreeing and agreeing with me at the same time whilst trying to correct me, and I'm very confused.
I'm talking about the people who you wouldn't see because they're not at the store, how could you or I possibly know what percentage of consumers that made up?
I only have a rough idea because I know the manager of what was the town's only FLGS in the 80s. So he did know counter sales vs appearances. JamesY up there was in a similar position (albeit I won't assume the same decade).

Strangely not all GW staff I talk to like or support the enforced paint to play approach in tourneys. But that's another topic.

 DalinCriid wrote:
Where is the "I'm using hairbrush, because I am poor" answer?

 tyrannosaurus wrote:
One I found particularly distasteful was the bashing of Kenny Boucher at Next Level Painting http://www.nextlevelpainting.blogspot.co.uk/ who received a lot of, in my opinion, unfair comments on his work. Granted, it is heavily airbrushed, but check out the gallery - this guy has skill.

 Peregrine wrote:

 tyrannosaurus wrote:
One I found particularly distasteful was the bashing of Kenny Boucher at Next Level Painting http://www.nextlevelpainting.blogspot.co.uk/ who received a lot of, in my opinion, unfair comments on his work. Granted, it is heavily airbrushed, but check out the gallery - this guy has skill.

I, on the other hand, think he should be criticized. His work is better than bare plastic but it's really not impressive and is a good example of how not to use an airbrush: massively exaggerated highlighting which seems to exist for the sole purpose of proving that an airbrush was used and has nothing to do with where light and shadow would be on the "real" thing, awful OSL/glow effects, etc. And let's not forget that he isn't some poor newbie getting bashed for trying to show off their cool toys. He's a commission painter running a for-profit business.

 Peregrine wrote:
massively exaggerated highlighting which seems to exist for the sole purpose of proving that an airbrush was used and has nothing to do with where light and shadow would be on the "real" thing, awful OSL/glow effects, etc.

Not everyone WANTS to create

 Peregrine wrote:
I, on the other hand, think he should be criticized. His work is better than bare plastic but it's really not impressive and is a good example of how not to use an airbrush: massively exaggerated highlighting which seems to exist for the sole purpose of proving that an airbrush was used and has nothing to do with where light and shadow would be on the "real" thing, awful OSL/glow effects, etc. And let's not forget that he isn't some poor newbie getting bashed for trying to show off their cool toys. He's a commission painter running a for-profit business.

 insaniak wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
I, on the other hand, think he should be criticized. His work is better than bare plastic but it's really not impressive and is a good example of how not to use an airbrush: massively exaggerated highlighting which seems to exist for the sole purpose of proving that an airbrush was used and has nothing to do with where light and shadow would be on the "real" thing, awful OSL/glow effects, etc. And let's not forget that he isn't some poor newbie getting bashed for trying to show off their cool toys. He's a commission painter running a for-profit business.

And since he seems quite successful at it, it would seem that at least some people like that style.

The fact that you don't is a reason for you to not hire him to paint your stuff. It's not proof that he's doing it 'wrong'.

 insaniak wrote:
And since he seems quite successful at it, it would seem that at least some people like that style.

The fact that you don't is a reason for you to not hire him to paint your stuff. It's not proof that he's doing it 'wrong'.

 Peregrine wrote:

Lots of people pay money for fast food hamburgers. That doesn't make it good food.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

sigasana44 wrote:
but if he use it just for to be "painted" to be played on the table, most people will hate it

Really, that's what people have devolved to? Hating someone elses models simply because they were painted to be played with? That's a bit sad.

If someone showed up with an army painted as well as that Trygon then they'd automatically be doing better than 90% of gamers I've played with.

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:
I like airbrushing when it's done properly and well. However the majority of people using Airbrushes nowadays do it because they don't like blending and do a half-ass job of it, which really shows.

In general, if I criticize someone for using an airbrush, it's their airbrushing techniques that grinds my gears more than the fact they used an airbrush. It's like Drybrushing in the early days of 40k; everyone too lazy to properly highlight just drybrushed the hell out of their models and was done with it, which looked really bad compared to decently highlighted models.

I had pointed out Next Level Painting because he does have a style that is striking and I would think is not to everyone's taste.
I would comment that his skill is obvious and much can be learned from him and his is willing to share, so that is worth noting.

 insaniak wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

Lots of people pay money for fast food hamburgers. That doesn't make it good food.

It does if you like fast food hamburgers.


You're trying to apply an objective grading to something that is purely subjective. You may not like it. It may not be technically 'correct'. But to someone who likes that effect, the fact that the highlighting isn't technically correct is as relevant as the fact that explosions in space don't make noise to someone who loves Star Wars.


Hell, when you get right down to it, there are very, very few painters who actually manage to get highlighting 'correct', and most of them are either not doing private commissions or would cost you several kidneys to get your hands on their work. Picking on airbrush artists specifically for that seems somewhat nonsensical, really.

 Goliath wrote:
My position is one that sort of bounces back and forth contradicting itself a bit because I'm a massive hypocrite.

NickAtkins wrote:
@Jonto81 those Rhino's look sweet - is that an attempt at the FW Alpha Legion scheme?

On-topic - Art is subjective guys, unless someone has come up with a scientifically measurable metric then a Crystal Brush winning masterpiece can't be said to be better than a 3 year olds first Space Marine, and an Airbrush can't be said to produce worse results than hand painting.

We should all bear in mind that there's no such thing as a right or wrong opinion.