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.

 Scottywan82 wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:

Spoiler:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Their tutorials have suffered alot. For example, the Dantes lacks anything to help a new player learn to paint, but go look at the old nagash one, it was great

I feel that GW has decided that the free YouTube tutorials be strictly for new painters (they even limit them to 10 paints in the tutorial). The more in-depth tutorials are what Louise was doing on Warhammer+. Nick Bayton is still at GW doing battle reports on Warhammer+, so we'll see if they have him pick up the Masterclass tutorials or if they get someone new or drop them altogether.

Yeah I noticed that. So few paints.

Yes, they should all be like this video...

Spoiler:

Agreed. The Underworlds tutorials were the best ones and even those have been stripped down now.

Did you look at the video I linked to? If you had you may have seen I was being sarcastic because Nick used 53! different paints in that video.

Article interviewing Louise on her choice to move on from GW:
https://twitter.com/WargamerCom/status/1646868199864934403

Why did you link to Twitter post that links to the article rather than just the article itself?

[EDIT]: Oh! So that's the connection between her and Guy.

Honestly for all GW's massive improvement on social and community interaction online - and it is a massive massive improvement over the Kirby days when was wasn't just silence but open hostilities - I can 100% appreciate that someone who wanted to get into the hands on community interaction; would feel limited under GW's current approach.

It is very corporate in style; not the hands on that one might expect or get from much smaller wargaming firms.


So yeah I can totally see how a creative person in a social community role would be grating to be just doing videos and pre-recordings and not really allowed nor able to actually interact with the community in a direct sense; likely outside of anything bit a handful of major in person events.


I can also see why a larger firm would want the approach they've taken; its not a bad move all round, there are sensible reasons for a separation at the top end.



Sounds like she made the right choice and perhaps her and a few others leaving GW like this and for those reasons might well make GW suites realise that perhaps if they are going to have community staff and community systems that build fanbases and such that perhaps they want to give them some freedom.
Right now they seem to have doubled down on the suit approach and that might well hurt them in the long run. At least in terms of internal staff and such; it won't hurt sales really since all these content creators are just going out into the wild and still spreading the word of GW products, paints and stuff

tneva82 wrote:

Spoiler:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

 Gimgamgoo wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

 legionaires wrote:
Since GW has gone to only table ready painting on YT, I hope she adds more of the old Table + that GW used to do. I pulled a lot of inspiration from those older videos.

The tabletop isn't even good and asks for some really....interesting asks.
Like repainting black when already painting black. Spraying it gold, then.....painting it gold. Just paint it grey. It makes basecating easier.

I think the issue is that GW's sprays don't match their paint pot colours. So if you use the spray basecoat as the colour, you can't touch it up later, hence the need for the ridiculous repainting.

I watched quite a few of the masterclass videos by Louise on W+ and quite enjoyed them. I hope she is replaced soon, as other than the 'free' mini, W+ doesn't have a lot going for it imo.

Then tgere is an easy way to solve that prime grey

Which would leave lighter shadows at non-black areas

Or is painting overall black undercoat over grey better than paint black parts of model over black undercoat? Dunno. Feels you are painting more black that way

A black shadow might also be undesirable. With a grey primer you can go more easily for a more realistic look instead of the dark moody look of a black primer (and very dark shadows) that, admittedly, is what most want from Warhammer miniatures.

Before I had to drop painting due to time issues (years ago) I had actually switched to priming everything grey (even GW minis). You have to work on the shadows a bit more instead of only rendering lighter (to your midtones) and lighter (highlights) like with a black primer but most colours cover better over grey than black and the process is not much more work (and my process for metallics never needed a black basecoat under the metallics). It's only the darkest blacklining that's already done for you by a black primer (but also might need to be touched up) but if you don't even need it that dark for your style then a black primer doesn't even save you that.

Easier coverage of all colours and a slightly different texture of the grey primer I had and how paint sticks to it made the process of painting basecoats of flat untextured areas really enjoyable. It felt more like painting instead of "removing the dark parts that I don't need anymore", if that phrasing makes sense. Also, if somebody wanted to replicate Louise's colourful and prismatic style then a lighter coloured primer (grey and maybe even white) would make that somewhat easier.

I don't mind people trying to strike out on their own, good or bad. But the more it happens the more companies will make it harder for them to do it.
I bet Games Workshop now has a few-year non-compete agreement in the "artist" contracts now. But sometimes you can feel when they are kind of
headed for the door. More and more corporate channels only want hands and voice-overs in their video, so you don't know who the personality is.
Miniature Market has a Social Media rep that randomly shows up in their videos, she wears a dice costume and pushes the current products, just
get the feeling she is just using Miniature Market media as a testing ground and springboard to going out on her own. Good for her, not so much
for the next person that will lose the flexibility and trust of the company because they don't want to build a following only to have it cut into pieces
when a personality leaves again.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Why did you link to Twitter post that links to the article rather than just the article itself?

[EDIT]: Oh! So that's the connection between her and Guy.

Copied the wrong one. Not sure why it's such a big deal.

It's completely understandable, these folk know that they can be doing the same job for a lot more money away from GW. I can't blame any of them for wanting more money, but they are kidding themselves if they think they have more control of their creative output.

They are still completely beholden to GW. They now all have a race to put out content for the latest GW releases, whilst its still relevant. Most of these 'hobby' channels are just gw product advertisements, they rush content out to show off current releases. They put out a video for something more 'creative', like star wars legions or historicals and they watch their views drop. Then its back to speed painting 40k models.

Meanwhile GW have just saved paying a full time wage, can sling an interns hands under the camera for a quick painting video and for the cost of a single plastic kit and postage can have thousands of people advertised to via these 'content creators'. Its probably of some annoyance when someone leaves, but I'm sure GW are not loosing too much sleep or profit from them leaving. Ducan bringing out his own paint line is probably the one thing thats raised more than a single conversation at head office.

Creative control isn't just the models but how they paint, what products they use and what they can do with the model before it gets painted. With GW it's the stuff on the box and thats about it, with an exception for Masterclass which is what Louise hosted.

 Genoside07 wrote:
Good for her, not so much for the next person that will lose the flexibility and trust of the company because they don't want to build a following only to have it cut into pieces when a personality leaves again.

I would suggest that if a personality is bringing enough value to the company that their loss would be a problem, then it would be in the company's best interests to make it worthwhile for that personality to stay, rather than making it harder for their replacement to do their job effectively...

 Mallo wrote:
They put out a video for something more 'creative', like star wars legions or historicals and they watch their views drop. Then its back to speed painting 40k models.

Evidence?

 gorgon wrote:
As a creative professional, I think you're being too dramatic here. Or maybe too naive? When you for work someone else (especially a larger organization), it's not about your personal creative expression or brand-building. You're loaning your creative talents to the organization in support of *their* business, and in exchange you receive compensation. Constraints come with the job. In some ways the job *IS* the constraints...you can't really pull them apart. You're working in a certain industry on a certain product or for a certain client as directed by a certain creative brief. All these things provide the shape of the creative space in which you work.

It's certainly legit to feel like you want a 'larger space' or more personal recognition. And usually what creatives do in that case is strike out on their own, which is what the subject of this thread did. It's just how things work.

GW may have been driven more by the creative studio decades ago, but that's no way to become or run a multinational corporation. When the business gets that big and complicated, you really do need all those other folks in other fields of expertise. And you build the business together. Sure, it's a different kind of gratification than doing whatever the hell you want to do in support of no one but yourself. But the paychecks are usually a lot steadier.

What a load of rubbish - I can't think of another company in the gaming sphere that doesn't credit the people who work on a product where appropriate. Kinda hard for someone to highlight specific products on their CV when there is no evidence of what they've done in the end result.

Hell, if Wizards of the fething Coast are willing to credit artists on Magic cards, then GW can credit the artists, designers and miniature painters who contribute to a given book.

Yeah, not getting credited correctly is a big deal.

When my name got left out of the credits for The Lathe Worlds the guys at FFG just about fell over themselves trying to apologise to me, and I got very nice hand-written messages in my writer's copy as a result. I was appreciative.

 Dysartes wrote:

 gorgon wrote:
As a creative professional, I think you're being too dramatic here. Or maybe too naive? When you for work someone else (especially a larger organization), it's not about your personal creative expression or brand-building. You're loaning your creative talents to the organization in support of *their* business, and in exchange you receive compensation. Constraints come with the job. In some ways the job *IS* the constraints...you can't really pull them apart. You're working in a certain industry on a certain product or for a certain client as directed by a certain creative brief. All these things provide the shape of the creative space in which you work.

It's certainly legit to feel like you want a 'larger space' or more personal recognition. And usually what creatives do in that case is strike out on their own, which is what the subject of this thread did. It's just how things work.

GW may have been driven more by the creative studio decades ago, but that's no way to become or run a multinational corporation. When the business gets that big and complicated, you really do need all those other folks in other fields of expertise. And you build the business together. Sure, it's a different kind of gratification than doing whatever the hell you want to do in support of no one but yourself. But the paychecks are usually a lot steadier.

What a load of rubbish - I can't think of another company in the gaming sphere that doesn't credit the people who work on a product where appropriate. Kinda hard for someone to highlight specific products on their CV when there is no evidence of what they've done in the end result.

Hell, if Wizards of the fething Coast are willing to credit artists on Magic cards, then GW can credit the artists, designers and miniature painters who contribute to a given book.

I think D&D books still credit artists too and most companies in this specific niche industry also do that.
My 9 to 5 is has a creative professional for a huge multinational and yes its facelesss has Gorgon says but its a completely different industry.
On my own free time I work in the miniature industry has a different type of creative guy too and here you are credited has the sculptor or artist or even painter etc...

What Im saying here is that different industries have different ways of working and crediting their creatives. I expect GW in the context of the industry that its part off to actually credit artists.

 Mallo wrote:
It's completely understandable, these folk know that they can be doing the same job for a lot more money away from GW. I can't blame any of them for wanting more money, but they are kidding themselves if they think they have more control of their creative output.

To add to points made above, they are also now free to actually engage with their viewing public. They can, you know, talk to them online; interact with them. Take polls, get feedback, give people more of what they want. This interaction is insanely invaluable but also for many creative people making tutorials and such; its also a part of what they actually enjoy. It's something GW won't really allow outside of conventions and even then those are only a few days a year and you'll have a good part of the day made up with structured parts and then some rough freedom for interacting with a handful of people.

But yeah she can also use different materials and paints and brushes. She can also paint models in different "not studio theme" styles. Go into way more detail, way less, go totally off the rails with a funky vibrant scheme of pink space marines or rainbow seraphon or whatever.


Yes she's still got to work toward certain creative elements to keep the money coming in; still likely producing content related to GW. But that isn't really a punishment to someone who already enjoyed working for GW and enjoys their products and output. That's the ok part of the job they had and they can keep doing it. They are just more free to do it their way now and that will steadily include "off brand" things - at least off brand from GW's perspective.



In the end GW's loss is that their Warhammer+ is changing to more corporate video style for their tutorials and they are losing online personalities as part of their program. They are also refusing/reluctant to directly engage online outside of things like their Twitch stream or facebook comments - both of whcih are more shout-outs than actual interaction.
Now granted GW makes up for this as they have staff in their local stores who 100% do interact in person. However it feels like they are missing a trick to not openly embrace online interactions in a way that can help promote services like Warhammer+ and create popular artistic personalities and such - even though they might lose them here and there too.









Also I do agree its a shame we don't know more of GW's creatives. Many of their sculptors are totally unknown to the market save for a handful from the early days. Granted some of this might be more complex - a model from GW might be the result of a designer, artist, manager, another designer chipping in, some collaborated parts on their server of bits and designs in 3D - so it might not be as straight forward. But it is an area GW could do more in.

Louise is now part of the special guests at salute for anyone interested.

 Gimgamgoo wrote:

 Mallo wrote:
They put out a video for something more 'creative', like star wars legions or historicals and they watch their views drop. Then its back to speed painting 40k models.

Evidence?

Peachy mentions it during his conversation with Pete the wargamer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3W-ypkOXu94

 Mallo wrote:

 Gimgamgoo wrote:

 Mallo wrote:
They put out a video for something more 'creative', like star wars legions or historicals and they watch their views drop. Then its back to speed painting 40k models.

Evidence?

Peachy mentions it during his conversation with Pete the wargamer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3W-ypkOXu94

Yeah its pretty common knowledge that GW stuff gets more attention.
Heck some channels regularly do "anit GW" videos complaining about something to generate viewership spikes and you can see their regular videos on viewer numbers way under; then they do a "GW kills kittens" video and boom the numbers jump up.

 Overread wrote:

 Mallo wrote:

 Gimgamgoo wrote:

 Mallo wrote:
They put out a video for something more 'creative', like star wars legions or historicals and they watch their views drop. Then its back to speed painting 40k models.

Evidence?

Peachy mentions it during his conversation with Pete the wargamer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3W-ypkOXu94

Yeah its pretty common knowledge that GW stuff gets more attention.
Heck some channels regularly do "anit GW" videos complaining about something to generate viewership spikes and you can see their regular videos on viewer numbers way under; then they do a "GW kills kittens" video and boom the numbers jump up.

For sure but then again it's also very dependent on the type of content right? So Duncan and Peachy are specialised in tabletop fast simple paint jobs... GW being the biggest wargaming company it makes sense to cover that. For a high quality professional painter with high end tutorials, the mini itself is not the most important factor but rather the technique... But yes your are right, GW sells more than anything.

Matt from Miniwargaming said similar things repeatedly: they reached a size where they can try out other wargames like Flames of War, Bolt Action, SW:Legion, Middleearth and so on, but they have to keep a constant stream of 40K/Aos to generate the important views/ numbers.

 Overread wrote:
Honestly for all GW's massive improvement on social and community interaction online - and it is a massive massive improvement over the Kirby days when was wasn't just silence but open hostilities - I can 100% appreciate that someone who wanted to get into the hands on community interaction; would feel limited under GW's current approach.

It is very corporate in style; not the hands on that one might expect or get from much smaller wargaming firms.


So yeah I can totally see how a creative person in a social community role would be grating to be just doing videos and pre-recordings and not really allowed nor able to actually interact with the community in a direct sense; likely outside of anything bit a handful of major in person events.


I can also see why a larger firm would want the approach they've taken; its not a bad move all round, there are sensible reasons for a separation at the top end.



Sounds like she made the right choice and perhaps her and a few others leaving GW like this and for those reasons might well make GW suites realise that perhaps if they are going to have community staff and community systems that build fanbases and such that perhaps they want to give them some freedom.
Right now they seem to have doubled down on the suit approach and that might well hurt them in the long run. At least in terms of internal staff and such; it won't hurt sales really since all these content creators are just going out into the wild and still spreading the word of GW products, paints and stuff

I would suggest from my perspective of knowing little of value about anything, GW could do a hell of a lot worse than keeping Peachy, Duncan & Louise (and anyone else) up to date on new releases, providing preview copies of stuff etc. They sort of get the best of all worlds, they have their own corporate, controlled, media channels and they also have skilled people who are known and popular working on the latest things they release

 Scottywan82 wrote:


Agreed. The Underworlds tutorials were the best ones and even those have been stripped down now.

Yeah, those were the last to go - it's a shame as there had been "Parade Ready" tutorials for all the warbands (except one I think) up until the most recent one, but then that went the way of 10-paint Battle Ready also.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

 Gimgamgoo wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

 legionaires wrote:
Since GW has gone to only table ready painting on YT, I hope she adds more of the old Table + that GW used to do. I pulled a lot of inspiration from those older videos.

The tabletop isn't even good and asks for some really....interesting asks.
Like repainting black when already painting black. Spraying it gold, then.....painting it gold. Just paint it grey. It makes basecating easier.

I think the issue is that GW's sprays don't match their paint pot colours. So if you use the spray basecoat as the colour, you can't touch it up later, hence the need for the ridiculous repainting.

I watched quite a few of the masterclass videos by Louise on W+ and quite enjoyed them. I hope she is replaced soon, as other than the 'free' mini, W+ doesn't have a lot going for it imo.

Then tgere is an easy way to solve that prime grey

Then you end up doing two coats of your base colour rather than one. Spray black, roughly paint over black bits in black with a single coat, is faster than spray grey, neatly paint the black bits with two coats of black.

If you then put another colour on another part of the model, it won't matter if you're painting over an arm that's half primer black, half pot black. Yes, they're slightly different, but they still look the same once you put red over it. That's not necessarily going to be the case if the arm is half black, half grey.

Not that they often prime black at all on the GW tutorials - they normally use some variant of grey (Wraithbone, Grey Seer or Mechanicus Standard Grey) - it's just when black is the primary colour on the mini.

 NAVARRO wrote:
For sure but then again it's also very dependent on the type of content right? So Duncan and Peachy are specialised in tabletop fast simple paint jobs... GW being the biggest wargaming company it makes sense to cover that. For a high quality professional painter with high end tutorials, the mini itself is not the most important factor but rather the technique... But yes your are right, GW sells more than anything.

no, content does not matter
the problem is the YT algorithm for suggestions/feed

Warhammer is popular, therefore the feed will show Warhammer related videos to more people, not matter the content
Wargaming is not popular, even if you subscripe to a Wargaming channel, the feed will show you Warhammer videos instead

so content creators that make Warhammer videos, no matter if their content is related to Warhammer to get suggested to more people

Yeah its the issue that the search engine systems have switched over. We've moved from an age where search and algorithms worked to show us what we looked for; to telling us what we should be looking at.

It's a subtle shift that's been happening over time, but the result is that if you're not pandering to THE hot thing at the moment or the major element in your market (or even a market that's "viable" then you'll just get drowned out.

Heck its why titles on so many top trending videos all sound and look the same, but that's what the algorithm looks for and promotes and thus that's what people use and thus the algorithm looks for that all the more.

 Tyranid Horde wrote:
I wish her all the best, she's a great painter and personality.

Interested to see who she is replaced by at GeeDubs.

A hand with no face. A disembodied voice.

 BlackoCatto wrote:

 Tyranid Horde wrote:
I wish her all the best, she's a great painter and personality.

Interested to see who she is replaced by at GeeDubs.

A hand with no face. A disembodied voice.

Possibly from different people... who knows.

I lost a bit of interest. I prefer seeing the person doing the talking at some point. Much like I used to prefer reading WD battle reports with photos showing them standing round the table showing real people playing a real game (even if it was set up and rigged), I dislike the zoomed in battle reports showing no human interaction and just smoke machine shots of models in a purple light.

Other than the 'free' model and the few episodes of Blood Angels I've watched, the occasional Masterclass is all I really enjoy out of my subs. A corporate painting video is making me wonder for year 3 if I bother.

Perhaps someone mentioned this, but I'm curious if any or perhaps all of these individuals would have continued at GW if they were permitted to have their YouTube channel while also working at GW.


It seems like this 'no side job' policy at GW is the root of the problem.

 oni wrote:
Perhaps someone mentioned this, but I'm curious if any or perhaps all of these individuals would have continued at GW if they were permitted to have their YouTube channel while also working at GW.


It seems like this 'no side job' policy at GW is the root of the problem.

It's about the only thing that makes sense from a corporate perspective, if you don't lay down policies incredibly well you'll be on a slippery slope to all sorts of problems otherwise. GW has been burned by copyright/IP stuff before, they're understandably wary of anything not absolutely ironclad in their favour.

Tsagualsa wrote:

 oni wrote:
Perhaps someone mentioned this, but I'm curious if any or perhaps all of these individuals would have continued at GW if they were permitted to have their YouTube channel while also working at GW.


It seems like this 'no side job' policy at GW is the root of the problem.

It's about the only thing that makes sense from a corporate perspective, if you don't lay down policies incredibly well you'll be on a slippery slope to all sorts of problems otherwise. GW has been burned by copyright/IP stuff before, they're understandably wary of anything not absolutely ironclad in their favour.

People have their employment terminated all the time when they act a fool on social media. This doesn't seem any different to me. The WarhammerTV YouYube channel is not monetized, so I also cannot see an argument for direct competition. It seems very draconian.

 oni wrote:

Tsagualsa wrote:

 oni wrote:
Perhaps someone mentioned this, but I'm curious if any or perhaps all of these individuals would have continued at GW if they were permitted to have their YouTube channel while also working at GW.


It seems like this 'no side job' policy at GW is the root of the problem.

It's about the only thing that makes sense from a corporate perspective, if you don't lay down policies incredibly well you'll be on a slippery slope to all sorts of problems otherwise. GW has been burned by copyright/IP stuff before, they're understandably wary of anything not absolutely ironclad in their favour.

People have their employment terminated all the time when they act a fool on social media. This doesn't seem any different to me. The WarhammerTV YouYube channel is not monetized, so I also cannot see an argument for direct competition. It seems very draconian.

The competition sits on a sliding scale, if they e.g. use competitors colours in their side buisnesses, or recommend products that don't come from GW, or are painting stuff on commisison that's outside of what GW would allow and so on. Anything that leads to a variant of 'Hey this GW-person says brand XY paints are much better than GW, and cheaper too' or something like that. It is draconian no doubt, but one can understand where they're coming from.