New Trends - Weathering and Battle Damage

[Brother Merrick]

This thread has completely fallen to pieces so why the hell not...

“I have forced myself to contradict myself in order to avoid conforming to my own taste.”

 

“The individual, man as a man, man as a brain, if you like, interests me more than what he makes, because I've noticed that most artists only repeat themselves.”

 

-The Great Marcel Duchamp

 

And with that goodnight.

 

M

[GAR]

I totally love pineapple sherbert

 

GAR

[LunchBox]

Anyway, back to the point...it's just frustrating to see people accept mediocrity, when they clain to be aspiring painters. Alex (Starks) takes his craft very seriously, and he has helped a lot of people realize their potential. He dedicates hours upon hours to painters that are through asking how, and start asking why, and when. Thus, I can see his frustration, and unwillingness to carry on, when lesser efforts are rewarded.

[lmyrick]

I think, as others have said better than I can, that the end result is what is important to the judges at mini painting competitions, not how you got there or how long it took you to get there. And for me, that's what it's about also. In a tabletop miniature I want to see something exciting and interesting, especially in a game like 40K. I want to see minis that show a feel for the game, for the dark, violent, torn, war-ravaged universe that is 40K. I think all the techniques mini painters use can play into creating this, but sometimes mini painters can get caught up in what are subtle, really almost imperceptible differences in color blending etc., thinking that that is the important thing, this stretching of technique, when really I think it's about the final outcome, how it looks on the table, how it looks on it's base. I've seen fairly quickly painted minis that used a simple 3-shade 'Foundry' style of painting that have far more life than some very subtly shaded/blended/glazed minis that I know took much much longer.

 

I've seen your work on these boards, Lunchbox, and like some of it. But I also think glazing can often be overdone, and when it's the primary coloring technique on a mini, can leave it with a washed out, dull look that I think some judges might look at and think doesn't fit well with 40K. I'm not saying that, but I can see how some judges might, and would give the awards to other painters who might not have taken as much time as you, but ended up with a more interesting, exciting miniature in the end. In other words, sometimes lesser efforts (and I use that term loosely) equal greater results.

[GAR]

The point that Lunch and Starks are trying to make, if I am correct, is that the end result is what matters.

 

If you base color a model, slap about 5 layers of ink wash on and then drybrush it a little and call it heavily weathered, then to some it changes the whole meaning of well done and weathering. Our assertion is it is still crap with a cool new name.

 

The point of advanced techniques is to achieve a certain look of feel. Glazes, washes, blending, layering and drybrushing all have their place.

 

Well done glazing and drybrushing excuted well together do wonders for adding a gritty feel to things, where as plain jane variety drybrushing just looks like drybrushing, ie there is nothing special about it.

 

A like for like example I like to go back to is Sky Earth NMM. A couple of years ago everyone was doing it, and those who said they did SENMM, no matter how badly done, were praised for their artistic ability. Whereas to those who really knew how to control the light reflections and gradations were appalled that a crappy blue and brown crisis suit was given high praise.

 

Simply what is wrong is wrong, changing the name does not fix it. Those, like myself, who want to improve and dedicate vast amounts of time to what others are doing, rightly or wrongly, do get bothered when something done badly is held up as the new standard or trend.

 

Those that use substandard technique/techniques and then pat themselves on the back for it are not doing any of us any good, because then others use the same techniques and the real zealots, like me, wonder why we even bother.

 

True, artistic liscence does have a lot of freedom that is inherent in a purely subjective pastime, but what can be viewed objectivly is how succesful someone was in getting thier point across. A marine splattered in blood and mud really does not say anything other than he is dirty and could have been in a japanese anime. But a marine behind a wall or on top of a rocky outcropping, with mud and scratches and some damage says more, it means something.

The figure is more than just some guy stadning on a 1 inch base, it has to or should have something about that makes you see what he is thinking, looking at or doing. That is the intangible that seems to escape so many. It took me years and years to get it. Now that I get it, I see things I did'nt see before and havce a much deeper appreciation for the painting masters that are out there.

 

 

Anyhoo, I hope this makes sense into what Lunchbox and Starks are trying to say or justify.

 

 

 

GAR,

[lmyrick]

Those that use substandard technique/techniques and then pat themselves on the back for it are not doing any of us any good, because then others use the same techniques and the real zealots, like me, wonder why we even bother.

.....

 

Anyhoo, I hope this makes sense into what Lunchbox and Starks are trying to say or justify.

GAR,

 

Malarky. They're having a good time, and many many of them are producing nice, high quality minis. If the three of you want to sit around and pat each other on the back and tell yourselves how much above the rest of the masses you are and how no one really appreciates the awesome incredible work you do, please continue. But please don't expect everyone else to drop to their knees and praise you and hand you awards for it. If you don't feel appreciated and you get pissed when judges give awards to someone else, maybe you should focus on something else.

[GAR]

Malarky. They're having a good time, and many many of them are producing nice, high quality minis. If the three of you want to sit around and pat each other on the back and tell yourselves how much above the rest of the masses you are and how no one really appreciates the awesome incredible work you do, please continue. But please don't expect everyone else to drop to their knees and praise you and hand you awards for it. If you don't feel appreciated and you get pissed when judges give awards to someone else, maybe you should focus on something else.

 

What does any of this have to do with patting ourselves on the back or feeling like we are above the masses??

 

I don't recall trying to point out how much better we are than you or how unworthy the rest of you are? Why the personal attack?

 

My point is about techniques and results. Figures for gaming are one thing, and I say anything goes.

 

But high quality figures should look high quality, and slapping a wash and drybrushing dirt or rust instead of any highlighting or shading, or even good color choice do not make figures high quality. Bad weathering to cover up bad paint jobs do not make it better, in my opinion.

 

Let me cite one more example.

 

A couple of years ago I was giving some paint instructions at a Grand Tournament and I met a fellow from Philidelphia, who told me " Yeah, you have some mad skills, but my speed painting is tons better."

 

I asked him to give me some pointers because I was curious as to what he was talking about. So he got a marine that was primed black, drybrushed it gold, painted the trim and eagle in red, then washed it all with black ink. Then he drybrushed some brown around the feet and shins, then spotted a couple spots on the head and shoulder pad with boltgun metal and called it done.

 

This took all of about 10 minutes to get done, mostly due to having to wait for the washes to dry. SO he explained to me that the black made it look weathered and the brown was mud. And then the boltgun was battle damage. And he said that the best part of his method over mine was it took him no time at all to get a figure done, and that his GT army had been done in 2 nights and looked more realistic than the other armies there. Then he gave me contact information if I wanted to get his advise in the future on my projects.

 

That was it. No effort to highlight or shade or anything. In my opinion this did not look weathered, it looked like he took all of 10 minutes to do, which it did.

 

This is the kind of stuff I am talking about.

 

I have seen really nice looking figures done relativly quickly. They are not golden demon quality, but are very well done and an army of them looks really incredible. A nice clean paint job goes a long way.

 

But I have also seen armies that are assemble, spray painted, dipped and drybrushed with brown or black and called Pro-painted or ultra-detailed because of the weathering. They look sloppy and shoddy like the painter was in a rush to finish it and decided to do some "weathering" to cover up blatant errors.

 

And then there is everything in between.

 

I think to narrow it down, things have to be looked at on an individual basis. True to your point, there are some really good looking models out there, but also to my point, there are some really bad looking models out there.

 

Just because the painter says it weathered, does not improve the quality of the model.

 

And lastly, it has always been about having fun, this hobby like so many others is about having fun, and when I stop having fun is when I pack it all up and put it on Ebay.

 

But I must admit from the time I picked up my first white dwarf, I had always aspired to go to a Golden Demon contest to look at all the nice minis there. I never in my dreams imagined I would be good enough to compete, but here I am many years later and I have 2 demons of my own.

 

I don't claim to be of such incredible talent that anyone should bow down to me or heap praise upon me just for existing. I think hard work and attention to detail and listenign to advise of much better painters than myself has helped me to improve tremendously.

[Starks333]

I was going to leave that as my last post on these forums, but now you had to go this route, especially considering GAR pretty much explained everything flat out, and once again you come in with your completely blind point of view, and turn it into something thats about us and not the subject

 

 

they're having a good time, and many many of them are producing nice, high quality minis.

 

you cannot gauge high quality until you know what makes it, or how it works, because you simply dont have the understanding behind what creates it, thus what "appears" to be high quality, once you learn more, suddenly isnt so high quality...because your "vision" now includes what is actually better, so your range of actually knowing what is good and what is not, increases

 

want proof? the standard in figure painting over the years, look how its changed in fantasy/sci fi, now we are getting amazing paint jobs that make the "amazing" paint jobs of yesteryear look average

 

and all it is? is using already created art fundamentals, because great painting already existed

 

want more proof? what you liked or thoguht was amazing when you were a kid, looks plain and uninspiring as you look back, why is that? because aging involves learning(not always the good kind but i digress)

 

 

If the three of you want to sit around and pat each other on the back and tell yourselves how much above the rest of the masses you are and how no one really appreciates the awesome incredible work you do, please continue.

 

if you wanna label people as an elitist, you are just as much one, remember we didnt say anything about the groups of people who "get it" and "dont get it" that was you(others), there are no groups because labels are ridiculous, so if YOU want to think that we think we are better(which you do to call someone an elitist) go for it

 

next, we have awards, we have appreciation, so get over the whole "we think we're good and not appreciated" crap because if you havent figured it out yet its not about us, we are doing our thing regardless

 

But please don't expect everyone else to drop to their knees and praise you and hand you awards for it.

 

i find this one odd, because thats exactly what the people who think they are great painters but still only edge highlight do....weird, and then the real talent comes by and blows them away and they whine and complain that they got beat by someone better

 

want proof? canada GD when the french came, baltimore with natalya, chicago with jeremie.... *whine* they are professional artists its no fair they come from another country and take our awards *whine*...oh? but i thought you guys were good and deserved your awards? oh wait i forgot you dont actually know how to paint....

 

tell me why is edge highlighting so prominent?....perhaps because GW uses it all the time? and that people dont know any of way of painting? perhaps the problem is they dont realise they are copying a technique, not a style...its a technique created for simplicity, and ease of application without requiring you to have any knowledge of how to paint

 

 

 

"Academic training in beauty is a sham. We have been so deceived, but so well deceived that we can scarcely get back even a shadow of the truth." (Pablo Picasso)

 

Enjoy!

 

good thing you cant even realise what you are arguing, or you might actually make a good point

 

where in this entire thread have we discussed beauty?...competitions(unless beauty pageants) do not judge based on beauty, but technical level, level of difficulty(affecting technical level) and overall(which is where your "opinion" can come into play)

 

this isnt academic training in beauty, its academic training in science...the science of perception which is not subjective, it may be theoretical at times, but not subjective

 

the very fact you guys havent realised that everything MUST be caused by something is just a sign you dont understand....you cant have an end without a beginning...thus you cannot have an end result unless something causes/creates it

 

so yes, there is a reason why Billy likes tomatos or doesnt like them, do we know the answer? probably not, does that mean it doesnt exist? hell no......some simple reasons are texture, taste, smell and appearance...or its a mental related thing because you tell yourself you dont like it based on only part of it "appearance, or smell" thus make an uneducated "opinion" that blocks you from progressing, instead of basing it on facts "it tastes good"...

 

"but tasting good is an opinion" no actually its not, its just a generalized fact, because once again, you dont know WHY it tastes good...and imagine that, cooking, the study of it, is chemistry related(science), and cooking is all about what makes food taste good, and what makes it taste bad, so you can make it taste good so more people want to eat it

 

companies that manufacture chips and candies and foods, all do tests to create the most ideal outcome...the common thing for chips was a crunch test, to find what amount of pressure was required to create the most ideal crunch....and guess what this is part of marketing

 

 

does it mean EVERYONE has to think the same thing is good or bad? no...why? because like mentioned before, growing up in different places, around different people and so on changes YOU...your opinions are what change your thoughts from factual to non factual...instead of making factual comparisons you make opinionated assumptions

 

also if you havent noticed, FACT, has more than one side, its not a flat square, its a cube, with multiple angles...many facts can be viewed from a different way, this is where GOOD STYLE comes from...using facts, in a different way...you cant simply <DELETED BY THE INQUISITION> on a piece of paper and claim its your "style" because its "different" style isnt a start, its an end

 

 

 

and the quote supplied by brother merrick is again in support of this:

 

“I have forced myself to contradict myself in order to avoid conforming to my own taste.”

 

“The individual, man as a man, man as a brain, if you like, interests me more than what he makes, because I've noticed that most artists only repeat themselves.”

 

-The Great Marcel Duchamp

 

his "taste" is his opinion....this is why i encourage everyone i talk to(once they get there) to always try new things, to branch out, because your "taste" is what hurts you and prevents you from improving further...usually it means recreation...and many people fall into this area

 

why are people more important to understand than their work? because their work is affected by them, sometimes solving a personal problem makes the work better, because issues like lack of confidence reflect on the work with overpowering opinion, and thus failure to recognize facts and the ability to improve in those areas

 

am i immune to these such things? god no, but i do not deny them, which means i can actually solve my problems, instead of letting them sit in front of me preventing me from progressing for all my life

 

does anyone realize what dupont was trying to accomplish? everyone thinks its to show that anything can be art, but its not...its that everything IS art....art is a creation or idea....good or bad art, is improving the factual components of said creation or idea

 

“The chess pieces are the block alphabet which shapes thoughts; and these thoughts, although making a visual design on the chess-board, express their beauty abstractly, like a poem... I have come to the personal conclusion that while all artists are not chess players, all chess players are artists.”

[boreas]

I guess the whole debate depends on tastes. The real goal of painting is producing a "good" model. And "good can vary. The goal is not the apply techniques. Although having good techniques is extremely laudable, if the judge doesn't like the mini, it won't win. I can see this debate as similar to one that happens in other art forms. Litterature, for example. A play by Racine is extremely masterful, both in the human drama deployed and the way words are crafted to unveil that drama. Yet, most people don't like reading those.

 

In the same way, a NMM glazed, layered, inked... model can be quite a masterful example of techniques. But if the "public" (ie the Judges) don't like that kind of style (maybe because they like the gritty feel of WH40k) it won't win. Does it make the effort useless? No. The artist can be extremely proud. Should he have won only because his painting skills are better? No. Because ultimately part of competing is pleasing the judges, a bit like imposed figures in some disciplines. It shows them that not only can you do what you do best, but you can apply it in a way that can please others.

 

I personnally wish I could paint anywhere near your skill. You gentlemen are giants amongst men when it come to painting. Yet, with all your skills I still wouldn't paint in the clean NMM you do. Thats because I like gritty, war-torn and drama-filled models. Think of it like a competition between Rubens and Monet... Is one better? Would a given panel of judges choose a winner between the two of them? Quite possibly.

 

I'll just end by saying that lots of casual painters (like me!) use tricks like dry-brushing and washing overly to quickly produce table-top armies that look good from a distance. Those should never be compared to what you guys do. You've crossed the line from hobby into art. Only exquisitely made weathered models (like this) should be competing with yours!

 

Phil

[GumbaFish]

Well this has certainly spiraled downward from a pretty decent discussion into chaos. I really can't understand any of the elitist comments directed towards LunchBox, Starks, GAR, etc...Nowhere do I really see evidence of such in this thread, and if they were truely elitist they wouldn't be on here in the first place mingling with us peasants :( They all seem more than willing to help others along with advice and I don't see that as elitist at all. I think instead it comes from people misconstruing their high expectations and ambition as arrogance, when in fact it is merely frustration that their efforts are being marginalized by inconsistent judging practices.

 

In addition I think it was Starks who pointed out the importance of perspective in this whole situation. I think for the most part if you are not painting at a high level or understand what is involved in doing so then it is hard to discern what is quality work and what is flashy fluff. I think back to my own experience of playing guitar. I think I have been playing for 8 or 9 years now and I don't really push myself but I am pretty good, and certainly above average. It frustrates me beyond belief when I hear praise for guitarists that really are using cheap techniques that sound impressive to someone who doesn't know better. The difference is I can see and hear what they are doing and decide how much substance and skill is really there, just as competition level painters can probably notice the nuiances of different techniques they see on minis whereas most people just drool over a shiney painted mini. In anycase interesting discussion at first and it is unfortunate it has degenerated into something completely different.

[LunchBox]

Those that use substandard technique/techniques and then pat themselves on the back for it are not doing any of us any good, because then others use the same techniques and the real zealots, like me, wonder why we even bother.

.....

 

Anyhoo, I hope this makes sense into what Lunchbox and Starks are trying to say or justify.

GAR,

 

Malarky. They're having a good time, and many many of them are producing nice, high quality minis. If the three of you want to sit around and pat each other on the back and tell yourselves how much above the rest of the masses you are and how no one really appreciates the awesome incredible work you do, please continue. But please don't expect everyone else to drop to their knees and praise you and hand you awards for it. If you don't feel appreciated and you get pissed when judges give awards to someone else, maybe you should focus on something else.

 

 

OK...since you're going to call "us" elitists, or snobbish anyway, then I'll stable my manners a bit. You said yourself you haven't been painting very long, then snap our heads off for wanting to achieve something. The fact is, you really don't have much to say on this issue, because you don't understand the logic, motivation, and dedication behind it. Nobody picks up a brush for the first time and cranks out top level work. Simply put, you lack the basic understanding of techniques employed by good painters. Turn your anger into fuel, and learn something, rather than whining about what you THINK "we're" trying to say. You've missed the point completely. Furthermore, I didn't mention judges or competitions in my original post, so why you're hung up on that, I can't tell. My post was in regards to the community's response to people painting miniatures in such a fashion; which does sometimes include judges' opinions. Also, I stated in the very first post, "*Please note that I'm talking about "competition level" painting. Using these techniques to crank out a gritty looking army is a good idea, and not really where I'm going with this.". Since you cannot figure out what we're talking about here, perhaps you should stand quietly on the sidelines.

[barek]

Elitism??? :D ???

In his first post mr Lunchbox was expressing concern.

That is not the same as being arrogant or something like that.

If I want to become good at something I'd better pay attention to what someone who is clearly ahead of me thinks, does or feels.

[lmyrick]

OK...since you're going to call "us" elitists, or snobbish anyway, then I'll stable my manners a bit. You said yourself you haven't been painting very long, then snap our heads off for wanting to achieve something. The fact is, you really don't have much to say on this issue, because you don't understand the logic, motivation, and dedication behind it. Nobody picks up a brush for the first time and cranks out top level work. Simply put, you lack the basic understanding of techniques employed by good painters. Turn your anger into fuel, and learn something, rather than whining about what you THINK "we're" trying to say. You've missed the point completely. Furthermore, I didn't mention judges or competitions in my original post, so why you're hung up on that, I can't tell. My post was in regards to the community's response to people painting miniatures in such a fashion; which does sometimes include judges' opinions. Also, I stated in the very first post, "*Please note that I'm talking about "competition level" painting. Using these techniques to crank out a gritty looking army is a good idea, and not really where I'm going with this.". Since you cannot figure out what we're talking about here, perhaps you should stand quietly on the sidelines.

 

That's all very funny considering you're the one who has expressed anger...you said several times it pisses you off. Nowhere have I expressed anger.

 

The fact is, you really don't have much to say on this issue, because you don't understand the logic, motivation, and dedication behind it.

 

That's actually the funniest part. You have no idea what I do and don't understand, mostly because you can only hear yourself talking. And I do understand quite clearly what you're talking about: you're whining because some techniques you don't employ are appreciated by others in the community. But really, I'm finished with this conversation. And I don't think you're elitist, actually, I was trying to be polite when I said that. Elitism is not necesarrily a bad thing. I think you're pompous.

[LunchBox]

OK...since you're going to call "us" elitists, or snobbish anyway, then I'll stable my manners a bit. You said yourself you haven't been painting very long, then snap our heads off for wanting to achieve something. The fact is, you really don't have much to say on this issue, because you don't understand the logic, motivation, and dedication behind it. Nobody picks up a brush for the first time and cranks out top level work. Simply put, you lack the basic understanding of techniques employed by good painters. Turn your anger into fuel, and learn something, rather than whining about what you THINK "we're" trying to say. You've missed the point completely. Furthermore, I didn't mention judges or competitions in my original post, so why you're hung up on that, I can't tell. My post was in regards to the community's response to people painting miniatures in such a fashion; which does sometimes include judges' opinions. Also, I stated in the very first post, "*Please note that I'm talking about "competition level" painting. Using these techniques to crank out a gritty looking army is a good idea, and not really where I'm going with this.". Since you cannot figure out what we're talking about here, perhaps you should stand quietly on the sidelines.

 

(#1)That's all very funny considering you're the one who has expressed anger...you said several times it pisses you off. Nowhere have I expressed anger.

 

The fact is, you really don't have much to say on this issue, because you don't understand the logic, motivation, and dedication behind it.

 

That's actually the funniest part. (#2)You have no idea what I do and don't understand, mostly because you can only hear yourself talking. And I do understand quite clearly what you're talking about: you're whining because some techniques you don't employ are appreciated by others in the community. But really, (#3)I'm finished with this conversation. And I don't think you're elitist, actually, I was trying to be polite when I said that. Elitism is not necesarrily a bad thing. I think you're pompous.

 

To underlined point (#1): Nowhere have I expressed "anger". I've used words like "concerned", and "frustration", but I'd be happy to re-visit the issue if you'd like to cut and paste my posts showing me where I "expressed anger", and where I said it "pisses me off". I, unlike you, have read every word of this thread, multiple times. This would have been a handy thing to do before taking such liberties with what you thought I was saying.

 

As I mentioned before, I'm a 7th grade science teacher. I'm used to prepubescent immaturity, especially during the developmental stage in which kids are so psychologically egocentric, that they literally are unable to see the past themselves, and their own experiences. In reference to the underlined bit above (#2), I'll give you an example from class. When we talk about physics, I can teach all the laws of motion by using the automobile. Sure, the kids know what I'm talking about, but it's not as relevant, because none of them are old enough to drive. As a result, what I'm saying makes sense, but they really don't get it because they lack the context required to really understand how the automobile applies. If I bring a bicycle into class, they get it, because they've all ridden a bicycle.

 

Finally, in regards to the 3rd underlined passage (#3), here's a tip: Log out, then watch this thread, so we can't see your name at the very bottom of the board where it shows who's looking at the thread. Oops!

[Starks333]

im gonna go back to one of your earlier points lmyrick, since i didnt see it earlier

 

I've seen your work on these boards, Lunchbox, and like some of it. But I also think glazing can often be overdone, and when it's the primary coloring technique on a mini, can leave it with a washed out, dull look that I think some judges might look at and think doesn't fit well with 40K. I'm not saying that, but I can see how some judges might, and would give the awards to other painters who might not have taken as much time as you, but ended up with a more interesting, exciting miniature in the end. In other words, sometimes lesser efforts (and I use that term loosely) equal greater results.

 

how can you claim to understand the whole discussion, and yet not know that what you just described as a problem for glazes, is in fact nothing to do with the technique but instead the colours used?

 

"washed out", is heavy desaturation, aka a colour thing, and i can show a half ton of figs on coolmini that arent washed out, and use the same techniques

 

a matte finish is important for subtle blending, because gloss can ruin subtleties(more so on 28mm than larger scale, for obvious reasons) but level of gloss varies by paint brand, RMS happens to have a very dull finish and is very heavily greyed colour(this is why it sometimes feels bleh)

 

as for your reference to 3 colours, yes you can get a fantastic effect sometimes with 3 colours, one highlight, one shadow, and one base...but not always, because this effect relies on colour contrast, which is exactly what subtle painting relies on, they are just used differently

 

judging is subjective because the judges are not educated enough to make objective comparisons or sometimes let their opinions get in the way(this will always happen now and then), its just that simple

 

opinion is impossible to completely ignore, we are not saying it should be, nor should it be expected to be...but a little knowledge will help eliminate the large gaping differences in choices, and create more consistency, so people know what is expected of them

 

the great thing about facts as i mentioned is they have many angles....the fact that 3d figure painting has rules does not mean it has no freedoms, its simply a little more restricted...kinda like gravity restricts us, yet we can still do mostly everything, just need to find a specific way to do it

[Dark Sensei]

Starks

 

judging is subjective because the judges are not educated enough to make objective comparisons or sometimes let their opinions get in the way(this will always happen now and then), its just that simple

 

Well, this is a subjective opinion too, isn't it ?

I think everyone will agree that some judges (especially) the ones that are the provious winners are not that much uneducated (and of course, it varies greatly according from the places and years). The two other judges are what they are and stick to :

- What GW expects from them

- Who are their friends

- Their real painting lvl

- Their tastes...

Needless to say that the "previous winner" sticks to the last 3 ones in various quantities...

 

And NO, nothing is simple about judging, even more about judging a judgement. Even with probe and capable judges, giving a though after opinion upon a work is an imperfect discipline of the highest level that NEVER turns entirely right.

We're talking about something that's not rational here, remember ? For instance, how do you judge http://fr.youtube.com/watch?v=yGYQtNAHbX4 ? Can you give it a note, will it be higher that the opening of Jean Giles requiem (in quite the same style) ? If you liste to both of them, you'll have an unqualified though respectable opinion... How good Purcell didn't stop his job just because he didn't receive a petty price ?

 

So well... You are not participating in GD anymore, so you said ? Ok, lets see. As an amused observer of such claims (and I have seen quite a bunch), I never saw any painter's ego letting him stick to such boastfull proclamation.

Now, if you want my opinion (and well, this is it anyway), I think its a silly (though pose-full) decision for well, you're a very decent painter and bring pleasure to everyone in participating. Though you are decorated or not is a detail and I think you're the less designated to talk about it (even in an indirect way though this false weathering discussion).

Luchbox and you should carry-on just the way they did, help others, give advises, humbly look for some and work. This is the way hobby works and the hobby is our reason to be here.

Elitism is the most excelent thing ever when everybody says you're an elite and the most vain and infatuate thing when you beleive it. Just my point but I see it all the time, every week from people that stopped progressing because painting is just a way for admire themselves...

 

 

want proof? canada GD when the french came, baltimore with natalya, chicago with jeremie.... *whine* they are professional artists its no fair they come from another country and take our awards *whine*...oh? but i thought you guys were good and deserved your awards? oh wait i forgot you dont actually know how to paint....

 

Lol, I remember the discussion. Its way quite a funny (though common) one. Just a few words to say that Natashinka or Bragon became pro just because they were good and have the will to do it. In a same way, we arrogant frenchies have been spanked by the Spanish team (and others) quite a load of times and (surprisingly) took it not so bad (hmmm there are always funny exceptions of course). I remember there were discussions about the integrity of some judges... Well no real clue. Spaniards were just better IMHO.

 

DS

[GAR]

A little off topic here, but I was at 2 of the US GD where a large contingent of international painters/Slayer Sowrd winners showed up.

 

To be honest at first I was a little intimidated, but after the initial shock, I was very pleased they were there. Because now I was competing with some of the best in the world. To me this raises the bar for me and where I want to be, as a painter, to be at least competitive with some of the world's best.

 

Now it is true that based on my placing, if those painters had not been there I would have had done better, but what is also true is my entries did better than some of those same painters in different categories. So all in all it helped me to know I was very close to where I was wanting to be, I just need to master that intangible to help "get me over the hump" and get the big prize.

 

Anyoo, I guess my point is sometimes we get discouraged when people do something( use shortcuts or the wrong technique/style) to try and get ahead when we see or better or more obvious method that would yield better results. its like trying to use a broom to mop the floor, sure it can work, but it work better if you just used a mop. Or using a tennis racket to play baseball with, true you can hit the ball with the racket, but it would be better to learn how to swing a bat and knock it out of the park. it may take a little longer, but the end result would be much better.

 

Personally I am hoping no one stops entering competitions or keeps trying to advance. We all grow the hobby and one another by pushing, practicing and sharing with one another. I love to see what people come up with and then to try to get what they did and why.

 

Anyhoo, enough for now. Thanks! :tu:

[Brother Weasel]

does anyone remember that painting minis is somethign fun to do?

 

don't worry about what other people are doing. Paint your minis, have a good time, learn the skills that intrest you.

[Chaoswolf]

I agree and disagree in equal amounts. While I like and can appreciate the amount of time/skill that it takes to paint up a marine to a 'white glove inspection' standard, I don't think it's totally realistic. On the other hand, I think that the marine that just fell in and then climbed out of a mud puddle is taking things a bit too far, too.

 

I think that weathering/battle damage/rust is a much more realistic* way to paint marines, or heck, any of GW's minis. Marines might be antiseptically clean while on the battlebarge en route to the battle zone, but once they're 'boots on the ground' for anything longer than 5 minutes, they're going to get dirty. Taking 5 during a firefight to wipe the dust/grime/whatever off of your armor isn't conducive to a long life span.

 

This actually brings up an interesting question:

If marines spend hours each day polishing thier armor, why is it that everyone and thier brothers are ready to string you up for even mentioning using a gloss coat on them? The whole point of polishing something is to make it clean and SHINY.

 

 

*= Yes, I know that we're talking about toy soldiers in a fantasy setting.

[mario]

This actually brings up an interesting question:

If marines spend hours each day polishing thier armor, why is it that everyone and thier brothers are ready to string you up for even mentioning using a gloss coat on them? The whole point of polishing something is to make it clean and SHINY.

Most probably because it doesn't look that good. For the same reason that highlights make a miniature look more realistic even though we do not highlight stuff that is 1:1 scale. Smaller scales need exaggerated lighting (in comparison to a flat basecoat) to look normal. If you use gloss varnish then you get something that looks like a miniature that is shiny, not a marine in shiny armour.

 

If you really wanted to use gloss varnish you could try toning it down (mix matte varnish in it for a less shiny look) and apply it only near your brightest highlights, on metallics, or areas that are supposed to represent really shiny stuff (like eye lenses and gems). It should work better if used in moderation, and in addition to other techniques; not as a crutch (just to bring the thread on topic again). :D

[Honda]

1. Merry Christmas everyone!

 

2. I just wanted everyone to know that I read all the way through this thread. What was the prize again? :rolleyes:

 

3. I've enjoyed this thread immensely for a number of reasons. First off, I highly admire the work of the "elitists". I learn from watching them do their thing and anything that helps me make my army look better on the table is a good thing as far as I am concerned. I go everywhere for inspiration.

 

4. I would consider myself more an "impressionist" when it comes to my figures. By that, I mean that I strive to get my guys to the point where someone wants to pick them up and look at them closer. Now, I primarily attempt to do that by making a favorable impression through posing and painting, but I consider myself an "army" painter vs. a figure painter, so no one is going to say, "OMG, you need to get to Chicago, there's a sword waiting for you!".

 

My goal is to have an army that makes a favorable impression and that takes a different approach to painting. I also understand my current limits and work within them to the best of my ability. I would love to win a sword, but realistically, that isn't what motivates me at this point. I do intend to get better as I go, but I would prefer to go to Adepticon or some gaming convention like that and get best army or players choice (or whatever they call it).

 

5. The one comment I would make regarding judging is this. You are playing to a pre-selected crowd. Depending on what that crowd is looking for that day, will determine who wins and to be honest, technique will get you very far, but at the end of the day, it is the combination of technique and "sizzle" that wins everytime...and there are a lot of reasons for that, but mostly because you are being judged by those who have their own filters and perspectives and it all comes down to how their filters judge your entry.

 

Example: I learned this the hard way when in a local competition, my better painted unit lost out. Want to know why? Because I entered a scout squad and I think you have to be nuts not to wear a helmet, so every one of them had a helmet. According to most GW canon, scouts don't wear helmets and that was the deciding factor (per two judges, one of which who argued quite strongly for my entry). So in the end, we move on and learn.

 

6. To further discount the idea that the "elitists" are that, Gar is my painting sensei. I am very thankful that I have a GD winner locally that I can show my stuff to and get solid and helpful comments on. He conducts painting clinics locally to help elevate those who want to learn how to be better. He is a classy guy and has probably forgotten more about blending than I'll ever learn, but he still takes the time to help out. He doesn't have to do that because as far as painting goes, he's a noble and I'm a peasant. I am proud to call him friend.

[mario]

Here is another try at getting my point across.

 

The problems with the "elitist" view start when these people, and I should probably write we as I strive to better my work too, become too myopic and forget that other people have their own opinions and their own way of progress. How boring a place this world would be if we all liked the same things for the same reasons at the same time. Would this discussion be any fun (or even an discussion) if every reply were just "I agree with you.".

This, what we have now, is a harmless fight; a simple intellectual stimulation (Honda this is what is supposed to be your prize (I think (and hope))).

 

I like it way more than if we were a bunch of opinion zombies who all just want one and the same again and again.

 

What exactly is the problem with someone using a technique as a crutch? It doesn't hinder your progress and it would probably not pass when evaluated by someone with advanced knowledge on the topic. But to condemn or belittle a technique because is a specific scenario it doesn't fit your point of view (i.e. your opinion, your taste) is restricting someone's freedom to have another opinion, especially if the scenario itself does not prohibit the application of said technique.

Of course if there were some painting competition and someone were to break the rules by using some forbidden technique you would have every right to be angry, even if that entry did not win.

 

And on the topic of realism: We still need a huge amount of suspension of disbelief even if the way we (attempt to) paint miniatures realistically can be better than simple and/or edge highlights (or any other "inferior" technique). But that depends on the painting quality (which includes technical skill) and on evaluation criteria and not on a set of technique in isolation.

 

Context is the important word here. Anyone who knows a bit about advanced colour theory will know that contrast (or the lack thereof) depends on the impression of colours in context to each other and not in isolation.

[Starks333]

Here is another try at getting my point across.

 

The problems with the "elitist" view start when these people, and I should probably write we as I strive to better my work too, become too myopic and forget that other people have their own opinions and their own way of progress. How boring a place this world would be if we all liked the same things for the same reasons at the same time. Would this discussion be any fun (or even an discussion) if every reply were just "I agree with you.".

This, what we have now, is a harmless fight; a simple intellectual stimulation (Honda this is what is supposed to be your prize (I think (and hope))).

 

I like it way more than if we were a bunch of opinion zombies who all just want one and the same again and again.

 

this is whee the different views come in...a view isnt necessarily subjective, its like putting one person at each corner of a house...they are all looking at a house, but all a different side of the house...their view is still what they see in front of them, and is the same house

 

this discussion was never that people all must like or see the same thing....but that the things they are looking at, are the same(like a house)

[mario]

this is whee the different views come in...a view isnt necessarily subjective, its like putting one person at each corner of a house...they are all looking at a house, but all a different side of the house...their view is still what they see in front of them, and is the same house

 

this discussion was never that people all must like or see the same thing....but that the things they are looking at, are the same(like a house)

But the house looks different form each point of view. There is (in most cases) no front door on the backyard, and it could be pained in different colours so the person in from of the house would see something that is subjectively different from what a person viewing the back would see even if it is the same object. They would have a real problem were they coordinating a meeting place via mobile phones while standing on different sides of a house like that. Hell, we have an apartment block near where I live that is painted blue, yellow, and white on one side, and red, green, white on the other. Approach it from different sides and phone the other person and if you have not seen the block from a few sides you would think the other person is not just a few dozen meters from you.

Or think of a house that is brick on the front, steel on one side, glass on another, and wood on the back. Would two people at opposite sides really see the same material as the main element?

 

And to touch the "turtles all the way down" argument (just for fun and not in in detail as it wouldn't lead to anything useful in a discussion and probably start touching topics that are not really encouraged on these forums):

The same object that we see would be different because what each of us would see (even when standing right next to each other) would be a different set of photons zapping our photosensitive cells. And that is not even counting that the distribution of these cells is different for each person (e.g. a person with a type of colour blindness), thus being a subjective electron/photon interaction for every person, in each second, at every location. You can't just stop the regression at such a high level as house and say it's the same thing we see when most houses look different from each side. That's an arbitrary decision that does not support a logical argumentation.

 

All in good fun. :lol:

[LunchBox]

OK...here we go. I found 2 models from the contest I was referring to, and since they're posted on CMON, they're public. Both of these models have numerous gushing comments with high ratings.

 

Rating: 8.7

 

http://www.coolminiornot.com/pics/pics13/img49467cfe5fe2e.jpg

 

8.7...mould lines and all.

 

 

Rating: 8.0

 

http://www.coolminiornot.com/pics/pics13/img4947413513801.jpg

 

*The bottom of the left foot is bare primer.

 

 

This is what I'm talking about, folks. Look at the actual paint job, and not the weathering. Look at the painting, modeling and poses...stagnant, mould lines, obvious brush strokes, tide lines...the list goes on and on. Before weathering, these models would have received 5's...maybe 6's. But, to quite a few onlookers, these 5's and 6's get ramped up to 8's...and for what? A few dark squiggles, and a half dozen brown washes?

 

I don't personally care what people want to do with their own miniatures. However, I find it vexing that so many are accepting of this "cheap trick". It degrades our painting hobby, and the community suffers.