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.

They look great apart from the bleeding aspect. I almost always use Contrast primarily to save one step in the painting process, but if I have to add matt varnish after Speedpaint, that just adds the extra step back in, as well as meaning I have to worry about ventilation, humidity, etc.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

BigOscar wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:
A fairly unbiased review of the new Speed Paints from Squidmar:

I like squidmar but not convinced that's a particularly fair review, as he's kind of ignored the intended purpose and audience for speed paint and only looked at it from his perspective.

Sure, I guess its interesting to see how useful they are for a top quality painter, using an airbrush, but that really isn't what they are aiming to be. He did a little bit on using them to quickly paint with just a brush, but that really has to be the main focus for a review of them imo.

I disagree, I think he gave them a decent go. He didn't spend a lot of time talking about airbrushing them, and the conclusion was basically "yep, they airbrush fine", which is a reasonable thing to review because a lot of people these days like airbrushing with contrast paints or inks.

Most of the time he spent talking about how they were to paint with a regular brush vs contrast which will be the reference point for most people. The gist seemed to be that they were more runny, pooled in the cracks more and were harder to control than contrast paints. Kind of like they're a thinned down ink, whereas contrast paints have more body.

Maybe you didn't like his approach to the review, but I found it really useful to get an idea of what to expect from them given I already have some experience with GW contrast paints.

From the sounds of things I'm not going to like them as much as GW contrasts... which would be unfortunate since they're sooo much cheaper and come in dropper bottles. I'll probably grab a couple of pots to try, maybe not a whole set.

Guess it comes down to what you want them for, whether it's as a contrast paint cheap alternative, to be used exactly how you currently use contrast paint, or to view it as what it's selling itself as, a speed paint deigned to get armies painted quickly to an acceptable level.

For me, a paint labelled speed paint, the main focus should be on how well it speed paints. That review didn't really address that fir me, I found ourt a lot more from the first minute of the goobertown review of that front. It looks like it actually slaps on pretty well, offering decent coverage and depth of colour when used that way. It looks like i could slap a ton of that turquoise over my night haunt army and gave a solid starting point to paint them very quickly.

Obviously there is value in knowing whether it'll be useful for advanced painters who want to use it for specific, non speed related techniques, but in my opinion at least, I want to know if it does the job it sets out to do first and foremost

 Shadow Walker wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
and were harder to control than contrast paints.

Harder to control? All videos I saw gave me the opposite impression.

That's literally what Squidmar said. I haven't watched a lot of reviews so maybe other folk think differently.

I did flick through Goobertown's review, which on the surface looks like a more comprehensive review and he said they were on par with contrast paints. But I noticed Goob only tested them on highly detailed models where slopping them on without trying to control them works well.

Dana Howl gave a review that I haven't watched through, that's not a channel I normally watch but I flicked through the results where they tried to paint a space marine in contrasts vs speed paints and to be honest both looked terrible




Automatically Appended Next Post:

BigOscar wrote:
Guess it comes down to what you want them for, whether it's as a contrast paint cheap alternative, to be used exactly how you currently use contrast paint, or to view it as what it's selling itself as, a speed paint deigned to get armies painted quickly to an acceptable level.

For me, a paint labelled speed paint, the main focus should be on how well it speed paints. That review didn't really address that fir me, I found ourt a lot more from the first minute of the goobertown review of that front. It looks like it actually slaps on pretty well, offering decent coverage and depth of colour when used that way. It looks like i could slap a ton of that turquoise over my night haunt army and gave a solid starting point to paint them very quickly.

Obviously there is value in knowing whether it'll be useful for advanced painters who want to use it for specific, non speed related techniques, but in my opinion at least, I want to know if it does the job it sets out to do first and foremost

I like both Goober and Squidmar, but in this case I think Goober's might be a bit misleading because he only painted models that have a very high density of detail, the sort of models where you could paint them with with a regular old ink straight out of the bottle and get pretty good results.

I'd be cautious extrapolating Goober's results to a Nighthaunt army, as many (most?) Nighthaunts models have much more flowing detail and more open curving surfaces which will be more prone to tide marks, staining and pooling in undesirable places.

BigOscar wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:
A fairly unbiased review of the new Speed Paints from Squidmar:

I like squidmar but not convinced that's a particularly fair review, as he's kind of ignored the intended purpose and audience for speed paint and only looked at it from his perspective.

Sure, I guess its interesting to see how useful they are for a top quality painter, using an airbrush, but that really isn't what they are aiming to be. He did a little bit on using them to quickly paint with just a brush, but that really has to be the main focus for a review of them imo.

He recently had a video where he gushed over Contrast going through an airbrush. Might be he doesn't want to step on his own toes as it were.

It also found it bizarre he said Contrast is more matte than SpeedPaints when every other Youtuber and image I've seen shows the opposite.

 Arbitrator wrote:

BigOscar wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:
A fairly unbiased review of the new Speed Paints from Squidmar:

I like squidmar but not convinced that's a particularly fair review, as he's kind of ignored the intended purpose and audience for speed paint and only looked at it from his perspective.

Sure, I guess its interesting to see how useful they are for a top quality painter, using an airbrush, but that really isn't what they are aiming to be. He did a little bit on using them to quickly paint with just a brush, but that really has to be the main focus for a review of them imo.

He recently had a video where he gushed over Contrast for ten+ minutes. Might be he doesn't want to step on his own toes as it were.

I don't see why? I don't think he's getting paid by GW, so if he thought contrasts were great and speed paints were just as good I don't see how it'd be stepping on his own toes to say "hey guys, you know how much a love contrast paints, these are just as good as contrasts and a fraction of the price!"

Contrast paints have found a home amongst many higher end painters, though not used in the typical "slop it on" painting style for which they might have been originally intended.

Wasn't the bleeding also something some painters initially complained about with Contrast as well? Or am I misremembering?

 insaniak wrote:
Wasn't the bleeding also something some painters initially complained about with Contrast as well? Or am I misremembering?

I have never had any issue with it. I frequently paint over contrast. Most but not all of speed paints seem to have this issue but it’s not a massive problem as varnishing works.

I haven't had a problem with it, either. I just vaguely recall it being brought up when Contrast was released.

I don't recall bleeding being a problem, occasionally I've had the issue that paint rubs off the edges very easily.

Aeneades wrote:

 insaniak wrote:
Wasn't the bleeding also something some painters initially complained about with Contrast as well? Or am I misremembering?

I have never had any issue with it. I frequently paint over contrast. Most but not all of speed paints seem to have this issue but it’s not a massive problem as varnishing works.

It kind of defies the point of "speed paints" if you have to keep revarnishing the model.

Funniest thing in the Squid review was the mention on the start that some people love AP and bash GW without even using either once. Pretty much on point, it seems these days people preformulate opinion and even expert can't tell them they are wrong.

Not a fan of Goober review. If either video sounded bribed, it's him, all the oohs and aahs over AP when you can easily see blatant ugly dry marks in places where he didn't bother to control the paint and let it pool. Maybe the end result looks better if you carefully spread it with brush, but he didn't even try, and his results comment was really divorced from what he shown on screen. Also, bottle labels really not matching end result is unacceptable, slight deviation is fine but even rosy G review made a point how big fail the label on sand AP was. Even names are bad, malignant "green" is more yellow than half the actual AP yellows

Sigh, I really want to like AP because dropper and price are a big plus, but it really looks like it's only good at painting extremely textured surfaces you will only touch once. Still surprised no one managed to even come close to contrast a few years down the line, looks like 'just a heavy wash' sour grape comments claimed was really more than that, eh?

I really dont get the goobertown love.
I saw him airbrush the speedpain and i was floored by how he was handing it, just hovering over one area and letting it pool.

Im going to get the mega set because I have been airbrushing contrast and using it over a zenithal primse and it works great, I love it.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
I really dont get the goobertown love.
I saw him airbrush the speedpain and i was floored by how he was handing it, just hovering over one area and letting it pool.

That was the point, he wasn't trying to use it to tint the model, he was using it as a technique to apply it rapidly and still have it behave like it was applied by hairy brush.

I used to use washes in this way on my tyranids, just load up the wash in the airbrush and blast the model until it was covered with the same amount of wet wash as if I'd applied it with a hairy brush, let me wash a whole swarm in just a few minutes. It certainly wasn't a technique aimed getting a good quality paint job, it's a technique aimed at getting an army done super fast.

I have tried to paint a more nuanced picture in my review: https://taleofpainters.com/2022/01/first-look-speedpaint-by-the-army-painter-better-cheaper-than-contrast/

I also find that Speedpaints are a little thinner and a little more difficult to control, but they also dry a little smoother with less pooling. The Squidmar review is a bit one-sided and very much focused on his personal painting style, which doesn't really correspond to the idea of Speedpaint/Contrast.

 stahly wrote:

I have tried to paint a more nuanced picture in my review: https://taleofpainters.com/2022/01/first-look-speedpaint-by-the-army-painter-better-cheaper-than-contrast/

I also find that Speedpaints are a little thinner and a little more difficult to control, but they also dry a little smoother with less pooling. The Squidmar review is a bit one-sided and very much focused on his personal painting style, which doesn't really correspond to the idea of Speedpaint/Contrast.

Thanks, this is good stuff. Reactivation is gonna piss me off, I can tell that now. But the finish is nice even on a Space Marine.

Well, I guess the point is, for a couple of quid for a pot just buy one and try for yourself on a couple of minis?

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

Contrast paints have found a home amongst many higher end painters, though not used in the typical "slop it on" painting style for which they might have been originally intended.

I really love this Sorastro video: uses Contrast in the way it was intended: just painting it on the model, but blends a few different colours on the model to get some amazing results with just a few highlights.



I think the biggest problem with the marketing for Contrast is that it's rubbish for things with large flat surfaces like, well, Space Marines. GW made a product that sucks for painting their poster boys.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
It certainly wasn't a technique aimed getting a good quality paint job, it's a technique aimed at getting an army done super fast.

But it fails at both. It looks like utter garbage and I bet it wasn't much faster than the SM picture ToP did, with paint brushed on while minding to not pool it excessively (which is sidenote much better praise of AP than any of the videos linked so far). At that point you might just chuck minis into bucket of wood stainer, it will be just as "quick" and certainly much easier and cheaper.

When I use contrast I just use it sparingly for some bigger area that's all gonna be one colour, like leather shoes or a coat or a tall furry hat.

Well, I'm building an Ultramarines army right now, so I guess I'll find out soon enough for myself if the Contrast paints I bought will do the job well or if I'll need to check out this new SpeedPaint.

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
Well, I'm building an Ultramarines army right now, so I guess I'll find out soon enough for myself if the Contrast paints I bought will do the job well or if I'll need to check out this new SpeedPaint.

Check out some of Juan Hidalgo's 'Eavy Contrast tutorials:

so overall the complains are similar to Contrust (need highly textured model to work well), while the are better on flat surfaces with less pooling
so painting a Rhino or similar vehicle should work much better with the Speed Paints than with contrast

and going with a Metal Base Coat will give you also better results

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
It kind of defies the point of "speed paints" if you have to keep revarnishing the model.

this really depends on your style of painting and what you think about "speed"

not a big problem if there is just one coat of paint on each part and you carefully ably the paint, and if you are using them as base for advanced techniques, using a varnish is not a big extra step if you can save time on the base coat
same as oil washes are great but need a varnish between steps depending on what your are aiming for

and going by some reviews, doing a varnish before you add speed paints on some parts of the model will give you a different effect so using a varnish between steps could be worth it anyway

Can you not just spray on the Matt varnish after the whole mini is done?

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
Can you not just spray on the Matt varnish after the whole mini is done?

I think he was refering to use varnish as a tool so that the ink flows more into the recesses and doesn't pool as much.

referring to this video:



this allows for different effects, as prime, speed paint some parts, varnish, speed paint the rest (or all parts again)

I find the complaint of People reviewing or not using them as intended....... interesting.
Just because it's marketed a certain way doesn't mean it can't be used for others. I love shooting contrast through to make my shadows.
Very interesting that people don't like it that way

 stahly wrote:

I have tried to paint a more nuanced picture in my review: https://taleofpainters.com/2022/01/first-look-speedpaint-by-the-army-painter-better-cheaper-than-contrast/
I also find that Speedpaints are a little thinner and a little more difficult to control, but they also dry a little smoother with less pooling. The Squidmar review is a bit one-sided and very much focused on his personal painting style, which doesn't really correspond to the idea of Speedpaint/Contrast.

Awesome - thank you for the review. I was set to buy the mega set, but that reactivation is a deal-breaker for the way I paint. Haven't seen it mentioned before in the YT reviews (though I haven't yet watched the newer youtube reviews mentioned here).
You saved me a good chunk of money.

A direct comparison between Speed Paints and Contrast from Pete the Wargamer:

Oathmark Revenant hero painted mostly with Army Painter Speedpaints

First good comparison (and test of practical use/drybrushing/zenithal/highlighting) of SP IMO. Makes them look good too, unlike gak blotches and muddy pools in other videos:



Note he didn't heard of reactivation/bleeding yet ran into the very issue doing tests...