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.

Some common misconceptions I read about Contrast paints and Army Painter products in this review:

The Army Painter's Quickshade Inks are actually the equivalent for the Citadel Shade range (or Citadel's old washes) and have the same properties as them. I wrote an in-depth review with a lot of comparison images between Citadel Shades and Quickshade Inks a while ago here: https://taleofpainters.blogspot.com/2019/04/review-army-painters-complete-warpaints.html

Contrast paints are comparable to the two Nighthaunts technical paints: A similar medium like a wash that helps the pigments to settle in the recesses, but more opaque pigments. They'd probably be more similar to Vallejo Game Colour Inks, and I will definitely compare these with Contrast paints on the blog once they're out.

The new Contrast primers are probably light grey/bone glossy primers. The gloss makes the surface smoother, which will reduce the surface tension of the Contrast (or wash) paint, improving the flow so the pigments can settle better in the recesses. Try this effect with your Citadel Shade paints and/or Quickshade Inks by adding a coat of gloss varnish to your model, it will reduce the amount of pooling especially on larger flat areas.

The Army Painter Colour Primers come in 22 colours and you can achieve very nice results with them, just make sure you shake them for at least a minute, and spray in long, sweeping burst at a distance of no more than 20 cm - a bit closer than most other primers. Otherwise the pigment will dry in the air and the finish will be fuzzy. And better apply two or three thin coats instead of one thick coat. More advice here: https://taleofpainters.blogspot.com/2019/05/review-army-painter-colour-primers-and.html

 stahly wrote:
Some common misconceptions I read about Contrast paints and Army Painter products in this review:

The new Contrast primers are probably light grey/bone glossy primers. The gloss makes the surface smoother, which will reduce the surface tension of the Contrast (or wash) paint, improving the flow so the pigments can settle better in the recesses. Try this effect with your Citadel Shade paints and/or Quickshade Inks by adding a coat of gloss varnish to your model, it will reduce the amount of pooling especially on larger flat areas.

The primers aren’t really glossy, just matte like normal.

Having looked through more examples/experiences... I'm not sure. I'll have to try it for myself, because the potential seems there and despite claims otherwise do not see another product that actually behaves the same way. It definitely does not give the same result as just watered-down paint does. I am more concerned about issues like what Coenus mentioned with it bleeding into other areas.

I also feel like I need the quote about "GW black knights" who auto-dislike products. A bunch of 'this is nothing but watered down paint, anyone who disagrees is a GW fanboy' alongside a bunch of 'this could be great for convenience/inexperienced painters.' Regardless of how good or bad the paints turn out to be, the former position seems less reasonable.

I will cautiously try them. Nothing compares to seeing results in the flesh.

These paints seem to really shine in combination with existing paints.
https://twitter.com/Jollivettangui/status/1127619193120202752

Tangui Jollivet / Melcor TWHaegemonia.@Jollivettangui wrote: So for those Who doesn't go to #WarhammerFest2019 that the models I've take with me. The red metalic armor it's contrast over gold. The flesh of the possessed is only contrast paint. Those Tau are mostly contrast paint, except edge highlight or the lense. Aske anything!

IMO with these new paints, there is no excuse for unpainted armies

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Having looked through more examples/experiences... I'm not sure. I'll have to try it for myself, because the potential seems there and despite claims otherwise do not see another product that actually behaves the same way.

Previous GW Washes did exactly the same, but they were never advertised as 1 Layer to get the job done but in addition to regular Citadel paints.
But lot of people used it that way and were therefore angry that GW removed them after while to promote their current Base/Layer/Shade system

I am really surprised that people forgot about those in such a short timeframe or just never believed those guys on the internet that White Primer + Citadel Wash allows very good results very fast, as GW told them they are not meant to be used that way.

GW 2019: this is the best Paint ever, there has never been something like this before and painting armies will be much fast now
People jumping the hypetrain as 1 Layer over white primer was impossible until that day

GW 2011:




I could understand it if a different company would have made them in the past, but it was GW itself who did it. Therefore I won't understand the hate against people who say that this is nothing special. It is not, it was done by GW before but killed again for unknown reason (maybe they did not sold enough other paints any more) and now re-invented after people already have found alternatives


It is really good that GW brings those old Washes finally back, as my last bottle Asurmen Blue is getting empty and there is no similar dark blue Wash out there, with a wider range of colours.

But it is nothing new or special, more like correcting a bad mistake (killing their best painting product) and I do not jump on the hypetrain because I am not sure if they will stay longer or be removed again like the last time.

I'm wondering if these will make painting the Alpha Legion metallic scheme any easier, using them to wash/ink a light metallic base coat.

I'm staring down the barrel of painting all of the 'grunts' for at least two horde armies in the near future.

In fact, I've already started. Calling it a horrible experience is putting it mildly. Even applying basic shading to over a hundred GEQ, then turning around to do it with Termagants and Hormogaunts, is not my idea of a fun time.

From the results shown here, I am whole heartedly on board with these paints. I can't wait to get my hands on them.

 Gael Knight wrote:
These paints seem to really shine in combination with existing paints.
https://twitter.com/Jollivettangui/status/1127619193120202752

Tangui Jollivet / Melcor TWHaegemonia.@Jollivettangui wrote: So for those Who doesn't go to #WarhammerFest2019 that the models I've take with me. The red metalic armor it's contrast over gold. The flesh of the possessed is only contrast paint. Those Tau are mostly contrast paint, except edge highlight or the lense. Aske anything!

Spoiler:

Ok, if the black can give a similar effect over a metallic base coat to the red shown here? Iron Hands all the way baby

Edit- I'm trying to not get too hyped, but this could also work great for Lucius AM. Especially with the new primer. Honestly part of me hopes that these paints don't live up to the hype, because I could easily get sucked into a lot of stuff that I would normally avoid.

GoatboyBeta wrote:

 Gael Knight wrote:
These paints seem to really shine in combination with existing paints.
https://twitter.com/Jollivettangui/status/1127619193120202752

Tangui Jollivet / Melcor TWHaegemonia.@Jollivettangui wrote: So for those Who doesn't go to #WarhammerFest2019 that the models I've take with me. The red metalic armor it's contrast over gold. The flesh of the possessed is only contrast paint. Those Tau are mostly contrast paint, except edge highlight or the lense. Aske anything!

Spoiler:

Ok, if the black can give a similar effect over a metallic base coat to the red shown here? Iron Hands all the way baby

Yes! I haven't found a method I like yet for my iron hands. Maybe this? We will see.

Seems some Scrote decided to steal some of the demo pots, and has put them on eBay for a ridiculous price.

What an arse.

Voss wrote:
@Red Corsair- it doesn't. I wasn't questioning the drying time, which seemed reasonable. I was questioning the part about 'a tenth as thin' and 'lots of layers' for something described as a one coat system.

It's not billed as a one coat system. It's 3, base, contrast and seal coat. Because its such a thin layer. Not really understanding why that's an issue, it goes on liberally, but pools in the recesses and drying thin, so it is delicate but that isn't necessarily bad. Thin is good because you can build up more layers of blending.

 kodos wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Having looked through more examples/experiences... I'm not sure. I'll have to try it for myself, because the potential seems there and despite claims otherwise do not see another product that actually behaves the same way.

Previous GW Washes did exactly the same, but they were never advertised as 1 Layer to get the job done but in addition to regular Citadel paints.

The images you posted make it obvious that they are NOT the same. The washes give a transparent ”ghostly” look, that the contrast paints do not.

Messiah wrote:

 kodos wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Having looked through more examples/experiences... I'm not sure. I'll have to try it for myself, because the potential seems there and despite claims otherwise do not see another product that actually behaves the same way.

Previous GW Washes did exactly the same, but they were never advertised as 1 Layer to get the job done but in addition to regular Citadel paints.

The images you posted make it obvious that they are NOT the same. The washes give a transparent ”ghostly” look, that the contrast paints do not.

And you can add, different Primer Colour, (and yes pure White VS Beige makes a huge difference), different Primer surface, and different colour of the Wash to the reason why they colours do not look identical.

But the overall behaviour and principle behind it is the same.

and those models:


do not look different than those models I have seen in the past painted only with Washes
the exact colour is different but the overall look is the same as it always was with Primer+Wash

Messiah wrote:

 kodos wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Having looked through more examples/experiences... I'm not sure. I'll have to try it for myself, because the potential seems there and despite claims otherwise do not see another product that actually behaves the same way.

Previous GW Washes did exactly the same, but they were never advertised as 1 Layer to get the job done but in addition to regular Citadel paints.

The images you posted make it obvious that they are NOT the same. The washes give a transparent ”ghostly” look, that the contrast paints do not.

While I am sure they are not the exact same paints, your exaggerating a bit. Any glossing on the old ones happened in the deeply pooled recesses and goes away as soon as you dull coat the models. Your dull coating the new stuff anyway if you want the paint to last. I imagine these are more pigment rich.

I am excited for new paints, variety is never bad, and these will be another tool. But it is strange that folks are acting like the new paints are that much different. I think people are not realizing that a lot of the more decent looking models folks have shared still have an edge highlight. Those two tau models for example would not look nearly as impressive without all the armor panels being edge highlighted.

 Red Corsair wrote:

Voss wrote:
@Red Corsair- it doesn't. I wasn't questioning the drying time, which seemed reasonable. I was questioning the part about 'a tenth as thin' and 'lots of layers' for something described as a one coat system.

It's not billed as a one coat system. It's 3, base, contrast and seal coat. Because its such a thin layer. Not really understanding why that's an issue, it goes on liberally, but pools in the recesses and drying thin, so it is delicate but that isn't necessarily bad. Thin is good because you can build up more layers of blending.

One coat of the contrast paint. As opposed to multiple layers. Or shades/washing/highlighting on top of base and layers.
This isn't complicated.

I wonder though, could these help with NMM?
Like after doing the blending, putting the grey over to harmonize it?

I'm intrigued by the white one... I have a slough of unpainted Space Marines that I bought and built as White Scars, but never painted. Mainly because white is a giant pain to line and highlight.

Voss wrote:

 Red Corsair wrote:

Voss wrote:
@Red Corsair- it doesn't. I wasn't questioning the drying time, which seemed reasonable. I was questioning the part about 'a tenth as thin' and 'lots of layers' for something described as a one coat system.

It's not billed as a one coat system. It's 3, base, contrast and seal coat. Because its such a thin layer. Not really understanding why that's an issue, it goes on liberally, but pools in the recesses and drying thin, so it is delicate but that isn't necessarily bad. Thin is good because you can build up more layers of blending.

One coat of the contrast paint. As opposed to multiple layers. Or shades/washing/highlighting on top of base and layers.
This isn't complicated.

Mate, your the one hung up on their tag line not me. You keep bringing it back up lol. It has the pigment to saturate the area in one coat, sure, that doesn't mean your not going to paint on top of it. All the good looking examples shared so far have been edge highlighted.

EDIT: I think your misunderstanding my initial post you quoted. The layer of paint is 1/10th the thickness doesn't mean you need to add another 9 layers. It just means the layer is very thin. You seem to think I was suggesting it took multiple passes when I was simply touting the impressive quality it has due to it's pigment content. Thin layers is always better, you can always seal you dudes when they are done to protect them. The recomended seal coat is the only other layer I was suggesting was necessary, because you don't want the layer to become damaged.

Ok, anyone who is familiar with my posting history will know I'm not reluctant to give GW both barrels if I feel it's warranted, but I don't get why we've apparently got a tag team going on of people who seem highly motivated to decry the new product without, I'm sure, having tried it?

I mean, sure, it isn't revolutionary and there are ways of getting similar results already, but why is it a problem that more people will have access to a product that could give them the ability to paint more models to a higher standard than they may have felt they otherwise could? There's not just a technical element to these paints but a market visibility element too, and I'm not going to knock anything that might give me an ability to do something new/better/more quickly, and if it doesn't then I'll just not buy any more.

Was thinking of whipping up an Imperial Fist army( got the minis, just need to paint them ) but getting the yellow just right was a pain in the ass. And then there is loads of genestealers that need a lick'o'paint too...

This could be just what the doctor ordered.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
IMO with these new paints, there is no excuse for unpainted armies

There are always reasons (not excuses, reasons) to have unpainted armies. It's either foolish or insulting to claim that these paints are some kind of instant magic wand solution.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Seems some Scrote decided to steal some of the demo pots, and has put them on eBay for a ridiculous price.

What an arse.

Arse, probably. Ridiculous price? 40 pounds for six nearly full bottles. Isn't that pretty close to the retail price? If the shipping to US was not so silly...

T

Seems GW are already aware. So I don’t expect them to be up for long!

timd wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Seems some Scrote decided to steal some of the demo pots, and has put them on eBay for a ridiculous price.

What an arse.

Arse, probably. Ridiculous price? 40 pounds for six nearly full bottles. Isn't that pretty close to the retail price? If the shipping to US was not so silly...

T

We haven't seen the retail price yet have we? Using Hexwraith Flame as an equivalent price, six bottles would be £28.50.

 Agamemnon2 wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
IMO with these new paints, there is no excuse for unpainted armies

There are always reasons (not excuses, reasons) to have unpainted armies. It's either foolish or insulting to claim that these paints are some kind of instant magic wand solution.

No, they are excuses.

Hey look a new range that does exactly what 2 other previous ranges did before GW killed them.

The red over gold seems to give a very similar effect as using the old FW inks, which hopefully means I can stop trying to find the red FW ink to keep doing my 30k thousand sons.

And the old washes with the original talent in a bottle devlin mud, I had a mate at the open day who said they look and feel a lot like the old washes some even smell like them.

As for why some people seem down on them I guess saying your reinventing the wheel and then rolling out your.new.round wheel will do that.

I will pick the new undercoats up if there not more expensive than the current.overpriced cans and some of the contrasts to do a comparison with the old washes which I still have quite a lot of

So what if GW decided to bring back a similar formula from before as their new set of paints ? Are we really arguing about that here ?

I'll definitely test those whenever I can, then I will see if they're suiting me or not. That's all that matters, in the end.

 Ghaz wrote:

timd wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Seems some Scrote decided to steal some of the demo pots, and has put them on eBay for a ridiculous price.

What an arse.

Arse, probably. Ridiculous price? 40 pounds for six nearly full bottles. Isn't that pretty close to the retail price? If the shipping to US was not so silly...

T

We haven't seen the retail price yet have we? Using Hexwraith Flame as an equivalent price, six bottles would be £28.50.

I was using the USA colonial tax price. $7.80 x 6 = $48.60, which is 36.01 pounds, only 4 pounds over the US retail price assuming the prices are the same as the Hexwraith paint..

And, its gone: " This listing was ended by the seller because there was an error in the listing"

T