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, I've not really gotten into 40k or other minatures games, aside from Battlefleet Gothic and Necromunda. I'd bought a few minis for both back in the day, and with Necromunda back, started picking that up again. I remember previously painting then building some of the more dynamicaly-posed minis, to get to the areas that are hard or impossible to reach once, say, they've got a boltgun clutched to their chest, and I'm wondering what other people think.

So, build the mini first then paint it, or paint it than build it?

It really depends on the model you are painting but;

Build then paint works for most rank and file units in my opinion. There are some common things you can hold off on, for example on a space marine painting the "backpack" or the gun separate is pretty common.

Partially build then paint then finish will work for large units and more centerpiece characters.

Here is what my Imperial Knight looked like prior to painting.

Cautionary tale - plastic glue and paint don't work well together so if you are gluing painted bits either use super glue or make sure you clear the paint from the plastic surfaces to be glued. The plastic glue can also damage the paint underneath.

Well, depend on the miniature. If building cause no unreachable areas, I build and paint next. If some part are quite hard to paint, I build as much as possible, paint, complete assembly and finish paint job.
The only part I never glue is the base : I cut the insert and use a brass rod for holding and pining once everything is done.

Depends on the model.
For instance my Rubicon Tanks I paint all the track assembly and wheels separate then glue on (mounting areas masked first) and paint turret separate.

Things like infantry I build and paint (sometimes leaving off heads or backpacks)

I generally fall into the camp of "if I can't see it, it doesn't matter if I can't get a paintbrush on it". So things like space marines, where quite a lot of painters prefer to do it with the boltguns off so that they can properly get at the torso and the back of the gun, I don't mind if those are a bit sloppy because you're not going to see them.

For a model where fully building it would make painting difficult of areas that you're going to be able to see, then I would do it in sub-assemblies.

And finally, I do a lot of magnetising on vehicles, so of course those bits all get painted separately.

It totally depends on the model, and sometimes what techniques you plan on using, especially if you're using an airbrush for zenithal or OSL. Painting in pieces can make a lot of painting much easier, so it's worth considering, but there will always be plenty of models where it isn't necessary or even advantageous.

I think partial assembly is the best, since it allows you to reach all the deeper areas a lot more easily (just be careful around the areas that are supposed to be glued together). But full assembly is also good.

As long as you are not one of the crazy ones that paint the model while it is still on the sprue.

If I am going to be honest, there is no model I can think of that is strictly paint then build. However, every model needs a production plan. Complicated models like Cawl or Knights ought to be built into sub-assemblies, painted, selectively stripped in some areas, and then undergo final assembly.

The only thing I'll 'build' then paint are one piece. Even then I'll probably keep them off the base.

Sub-assemblies all the way. Doesn't matter if you can't see an area, I'll know it's not done.

Yeah, sub assemblies. Generally I build everything but the arm holding the gun.

Perfectionist in me naggs me if im not doing the best job i currently can, so sub assembly for everything exepct the basic trooper.

This is allso the reason to why none of my armys are ever past the 500p stage, and why skirmish games/warbands better suits me.

 mrsevenplus7 wrote:
As long as you are not one of the crazy ones that paint the model while it is still on the sprue.

Ok, I'll bite. Why is painting on the sprue crazy? I find it easier to work with, and allows me to get the model painted easier as it gives me a larger area to hold onto while working with the smaller parts.

What do you do about the connection points? Once you remove from the sprue you then have to paint over these areas and risk damaging the existing paint while doing clean up.

Seems like a strange way of doing it to me.

 sockwithaticket wrote:
What do you do about the connection points? Once you remove from the sprue you then have to paint over these areas and risk damaging the existing paint while doing clean up.

.

Don't mind it a bit, Generally the connection points are on open areas, or areas that are hidden during assembly anyway. so a little touch up as I assemble is no biggie

But, That is just what works for me, Everyone has their own style that works for them.

Thank you all for the replies. It was kind of what I was thinking, "whatever works for you," but it's interesting to see how many people are fans of "partial assembly." Having started painting two models I'd already assembled, I noticed it can be a bit tricky to get a unified color scheme if the model is not yet assembled, if you're not sure what parts go with which pieces of outfit.