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.

Hi, all.

I've been reading up on weathering techniques for vehicles, and I've found two schools of thought, as it were. The salt technique, and the sponge technique.

Both are used for weathering and showing ageing and damage and general rough handling, but my question is, is one technique better then the next?

I don't want to go down the road of base-coating, then salting, then base-coating again, then brushing if I can get the same result with a sponge, and I don't wan to waste my time if the sponge technique won't be as good as the salt technique.

Cheers in advance.

Tower75

Salt weathering requires an airbrush to pull off well.

I have seen folks do amazing stuff with spunges, Its just never worked for me.

Also have you looked at weathering powders?

An airbrush is being acquired tomorrow, lol. If I'm honest... No. I thought that weathering powders are likened to things like mud, or soot. Or am I wrong?

There are lots of things you can do with powders, Rust effects, oxidation, burn marks from exhaust.

You can even make washes from them.

Check out some of the tutorials from Awesome Paint Job, Secret Weapons Miniatures ect.....

If your getting an airbrush, Salt or the hairspray techniques would be the easiest to get great results with though.

 Tower75 wrote:
Hi, all.

I've been reading up on weathering techniques for vehicles, and I've found two schools of thought, as it were. The salt technique, and the sponge technique.

Both are used for weathering and showing ageing and damage and general rough handling, but my question is, is one technique better then the next?

I don't want to go down the road of base-coating, then salting, then base-coating again, then brushing if I can get the same result with a sponge, and I don't wan to waste my time if the sponge technique won't be as good as the salt technique.

Cheers in advance.

Tower75

Ranking one technique over another as "better" bothers me. It is not about what is better, it is about what produces the look you are after. The sponge and slat methods produce different effects. Here are a few examples of the sponge technique being used;





Here is an example of applying the salt method





Personally I think it is a matter of scale. I think the smaller the scale the more useful the sponge is, It is much easier to control. In both cases less is certainly more , it is very easy to over due these effects and go form cool to too much. There is another thing you can use as well. AK Interactive sells a weathering fluid that helps create worn effects, that is also very useful, and mimics a lot of what the salting does, but with a bit more control. I would still use the sponge over the fluid on small miniatures though.

Good luck, holla if you have more questions.

Ashton

I agree with Redfinger..... it's relevant to the scale of the model. I've done both, like sponge better probably because it's quicker... been using some of the AK products lately the Mrs. doesn't like her hair spray gone missing.

Cool. Cheers, guys. Appreciate the info, and pics. They look awesome!

A suggestion to get the most out of the sponge technique; add a tiny bit of Future Floor Wax (or an equivalent) to the paint you're going to use.

I've seen many people say you 'need' to use the paint a little thicker to make the sponge work; and they're not really wrong, it helps with the effect. I'm not fond of it because the 'chips' can be ever-so-lumpy because of it. not a huge issue, but I'm picky, what can I say?

With the FFW added the surface tension of the paint is increased; it will noticeably 'pull in' and 'crinkle' a bit on the edges if you try to spread it on the pallet - perfect for sponging. With it acting like this you can thin it down nicely and it should behave much better on a surface you sponge it to.

As for the sponge itself, make sure it's very porous and bubbly foam, if you can, and really tear it up; use some clamping tweezers to hold the shredded bit of sponge while you work. Dipped in the FFW treated paint it will leave wonderful (and easy) 'crackly' chip marks.

Hummm... maybe I should right up something with pictures... *Subtle starts to wonder off* ... Don't forget to test on a scrap item or useless object.

I have used both as well as a third method of just base color over hairspray and they all work well.

I find that sponging is good for smaller areas such as the edges and corners. As mentioned, the airbrush opens makes the salt method easier. I think the salt method looks a bit better though.

Prime in black.
Sponge on browns, red-brown, silver, and other rusty colors and let it dry well.
Paint on hairspray (spray is too -uncontrolled) and while still wet, sprinkle on salt. Large crystals like rock or kosher salt are best. Let dry.
Base coat, highlight, shade. Let it dry well.
Take hot water and stiff brush and scrub lightly until you have the desired effect.

You might want to throw on some weathering powders at this stage before locking it all in with some gloss varnish and then a oil wash.

I bought a bunch of Templars Rhino doors for cheap and practiced a few times before I started to attach my models. My Deff Dread was done with salt, whereas the Land Raider in my gallery was mostly sponging and trying to use washes for streaking.

Hairspray (with or without salt mask) ultimately has the greater potential, in terms of realism, since you're actually doing what you intend to represent - physically chipped layers of paint. That said, miniature painting is mostly about illusory effects (why we paint shadows and highlights on a three dimensional object), so sponged chipping can - and frequently does - look every bit as good. Like others, I think scale is a major factor in choosing between the two, as is the labor involved and comfort with each technique. On 28mm troops, the likelihood of noticing the step in height of a chipped topcoat as opposed to a (sponge) painted chip is pretty low. On larger models, especially ones with thicker coats of paint, though, the difference becomes more pronounced. Whether that's enough to make a real difference at arm's length, of course, is debatable.

Really, though, it isn't a matter of one technique being outright superior to the other. Try them both, practice each one, and see what you're more comfortable with. You may find that you need the more measured salt mask to keep yourself in check, since you tend to overdo it when sponging. You may also find yourself quite adept with a sponge and prefer the comparative ease of setup and application, versus decanting hairspray and airbrushing the topcoat. In practical terms, they're hypothetically equal, but most people gravitate toward one or the other. No way to tell which is right for you (if you even do have a particular leaning) without trying them both.