Is it just me....

[The Milkman Of Baal]

Looking through the Codex and painting guide it seems to me that the guys over in the gw painting team seem to have not really done a very good job on painting some of the guys up, I appreciate that the pics are of the 2nd company which is used in shield of baal exterminatus, but surely they could of done a better job? Just my thoughts tis all, what do you guys reckon?

[Leviathus]

Though about that too... Until I heard that the hobby team probably painted that and NOT the 'Eavy Metal team. I also imagine they have to paint like madmen to keep up with GW's release schedule.

[sockwithaticket]

It struck me, too. Some of them really are very poor with the edge highlights being rather messy and inconsistent if you look closely. I think it stems from having to paint up a hell of a lot of the new models in a short space of time. The accelerated release schedule plus GW's restrictions on the in house team to do the base, shade, highlight trifecta don't leave an awful lot of room for artistry on grunts.

The flesh on Captain Apahael is particularly horrible.

[Mr Smith]

I assumed it was just a staff member's army as opposed to the studio models.

[Charlo]

If it's in the painting guide, I imagine it's supposed to be an achievable standard that a novice could strive to.

[Fahlnor]

I've noticed this in a few of the Codexes. Look at the Grey Knights - that's the first time I noticed it.

 

I think they're using staffers' models for photos.

[SnorriSnorrison]

Yeah, flicking through the codex today....looking at the veteran units(both) made me think "hey, I could paint like that as well, what the..." Then I realised it wasn't the 'Eavy Metal team painting those up.

 

Dunno. I feel the paintjobs of the HM Team are what draws most people into the hobby and keeps them at it, it's at least what has brought me into it. Then you see the works of others in your codex and it's clearly inferior, it makes you wonder why GW puts less quality in it when it comes to what I believe to be their most important asset - the paintjob. Right after some really good miniatures.

 

 

Snorri

[Bartali]

I've not got a problem with GW's codex painting, It's a good standard.

 

It doesn't inspire me, but then that's what other people are for :-

 

http://massivevoodoo.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/the-last-light.html

[The Milkman Of Baal]

That's what got me back into this hobby was the painting side, I like to spend as much time on a scout as I do a chapter master, then when they're done all I want to do is use them! Most of the units I bought is the amazing job the hm team does, I mean to be honest you can go on to you tube and be shown how to paint really anything to a higher then table top standard. It was jawaballs who taught me how to properly paint ba.

[Bukimimaru]

I dont know... I'm far from a pro painter, soit's kind of nice seeing all the models in the codex done to a standard that I might actually achieve. I used to get pretty lathargic looking through my old codex at some of the models and thinking "man, my army will NEVER look this good".

[frozenjordan]

I ran into an issue with trying to start painitng death company and the guide tells you to use blues instead of greys for the highlights....think i may have to start over because I don't think the blue's look so great.

[Vel'Cona]

I have noticed that the pics in the "panoramic" multi-page spreads show some pretty mediocre models, by GW standards. Good evidence: for those of you with the IG (AM blech) codex, check out the two page spread of the green/khaki army. Those models are painted at a standard that is well below what we've come to expect from GW. I think the difference is a bit glaring, especially when I see the 'Eavy Metal pages in the new Skitarii/Cult Mechanicus codex and compare them to the rest of the book. That said, seeing armies arrayed that I could almost realistically paint does help my ego a bit!