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.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnaJFpDlRDc - 2:40 skip to for where he describes what he washed with.

Hello every one, hopefully you can help, wouuld i be correct to assume this person made his own washes using "catachan green"?, i cant find any catachan green washes any where, and he says black so i assume he made his own black one unless he means nuln oil.

I guess once you know how to do it, most people make there own washes out of their paint most of the time?


Thank you very much.

edit - And im not sure but i think he might be using water to make the wash and that's it....? Im probably wrong, but is this common?

Well, at its most basic, a wash can be regular paint that has been thinned down with water or similar so I would imagine that is what this guy is referring to. Catachan Green was an old Citadel paint colour now know as Castellan Green.

https://www.dakkadakka.com/wiki/en/Paint_Range_Compatibility_Chart

 filbert wrote:
Well, at its most basic, a wash can be regular paint that has been thinned down with water or similar so I would imagine that is what this guy is referring to. Catachan Green was an old Citadel paint colour now know as Castellan Green.

https://www.dakkadakka.com/wiki/en/Paint_Range_Compatibility_Chart

hmm, so maybe i should just start washing that way.


Thanks

Well, yes, you can and it means you aren't limited to the range of colour washes that are commercially available - instead you can wash with pretty much any colour you have a paint for but be aware you results may vary. The washes you make from regular paints are not going to flow the same way that 'actual' washes do so you need to be more precise with using them.

The GW washes, for example, have all sorts of things added to the pigment to ensure they flow and dry differently to paints. Simply thinning down a paint to a wash like consistency won't be the same thing.

Experimentation is the key.

Yeah. Im going to try do a dark colored pale skinned ( does that make sense lol ) GUO. Similar to this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0muoD8brBRo&t=10s But not sure how to go about it yet.

Well, I'd think that just thinning (that is, adding water or other solvent) just gets you to a "glaze."

If you want a "wash" you need to thin it (again, water, flow-aid, so on) but also make it more transparent by adding more medium as well.

But it really depends on how you conceptualize the difference between a glaze and a wash...

 H wrote:
Well, I'd think that just thinning (that is, adding water or other solvent) just gets you to a "glaze."

If you want a "wash" you need to thin it (again, water, flow-aid, so on) but also make it more transparent by adding more medium as well.

But it really depends on how you conceptualize the difference between a glaze and a wash...

Yea, i still do not understand glazes, every time i hear that word i think it means giving a more shiny or glossy effect.

 Stormatious wrote:
Yea, i still do not understand glazes, every time i hear that word i think it means giving a more shiny or glossy effect.

Yeah, what I usually take it to mean is "extra thinned paint to achieve an incremental layer effect."

A wash though is not made to layer though really, but I've seen people paint things by using washes as glazes though. So, it isn't a hard line. It's really more of a question of technique.

I still think if you want to get near what GW (and most other company's) "washes"/shades are, you want to add water+flowaid and medium to the paint, rather than just water. In the video you link, the painter seems to be aiming for this "shading" effect, which I think means you do want some medium in there, but likely less than what is usually in say, a GW "shade" because I do think he wants to "tint" the whole thing. So, really this is in a really nebulous area between a glaze and a wash. If you want less overall tinting add more medium. If you want more overall tinting, add less medium.

In the end, filbert is exactly right in suggesting that you just need to experiment with different combinations of things to see which suits your technique/expected results.

Washes are generally more translucent than thinned paints (they used to be called 'Inks'). Thinned wash can sometimes obscure blending too much - which actually works if you don't fine-gradient your paint jobs - but if you have a good gradient you achieved (typically via wet-blending) thinned paints can sometimes be overbearing.

 H wrote:

 Stormatious wrote:
Yea, i still do not understand glazes, every time i hear that word i think it means giving a more shiny or glossy effect.

Yeah, what I usually take it to mean is "extra thinned paint to achieve an incremental layer effect."

A wash though is not made to layer though really, but I've seen people paint things by using washes as glazes though. So, it isn't a hard line. It's really more of a question of technique.

I still think if you want to get near what GW (and most other company's) "washes"/shades are, you want to add water+flowaid and medium to the paint, rather than just water. In the video you link, the painter seems to be aiming for this "shading" effect, which I think means you do want some medium in there, but likely less than what is usually in say, a GW "shade" because I do think he wants to "tint" the whole thing. So, really this is in a really nebulous area between a glaze and a wash. If you want less overall tinting add more medium. If you want more overall tinting, add less medium.

In the end, filbert is exactly right in suggesting that you just need to experiment with different combinations of things to see which suits your technique/expected results.

Oh cool thanks for that.