| Raf's Skavenhorde so far | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: 6th July 2005 - 03:41 AM (1,009 Views) | |
| RobotRaf | 10th July 2005 - 05:39 AM Post #16 |
![]()
|
do you have pictures you could post? |
![]() |
|
| scrivener | 10th July 2005 - 06:11 AM Post #17 |
![]()
*toot*
![]()
|
That be one sweet pimpin' army you got there. The green and purple contrast nicely, and it must stand out on the battlefield. The old skaven colour scheme, yeah, they were wacky I've got a pic here, hope it's not a breach of any rules posting it up , so the following image is copyrighted by GW, and courtesy of the 'Eavy Metal Painting Guide 1994.![]() It's nice sometimes to look back at the old 90's painting style and laugh at it, like the way I laugh at mullets and stonewashed denim.
|
| |
![]() |
|
| Warlord Kamatz | 12th July 2005 - 05:22 PM Post #18 |
|
Stormvermin
|
Erm, I can't say that I like the colourscheme or the paintjob, or I would be lieing... It's a fun idea, but it isn't good worked out, if you get what i mean. I can't see any good highlights, and everything looks patchy, as if there was only applied one layer of paint. the idea behind it is funny, but it isn't worked out. Kamatz |
|
Completed paintingvows: -August | |
![]() |
|
| RobotRaf | 12th July 2005 - 06:23 PM Post #19 |
![]()
|
Kamatz, oh...ok. can i see some of your models so i can learn how to do things right? this is my first army so maybe you can help me out. *s'nkeep has requested that you avoid excessive quoting, more so when 1) the post is right above yours 2) your comments dont require him to bequoted... thanks* |
![]() |
|
| scrivener | 12th July 2005 - 06:42 PM Post #20 |
![]()
*toot*
![]()
|
I can sorta see what kamatz is getting at actually. There are some highlights, but there's not really any shading, especially on the banners and skins where the colours are kinda flat. overall, everythings very clean. Though I'm not sure how a grubby look will work for the color scheme, the simpler way to 'dirty' up the models and get some shading in is to give them a heavily diluted wash. Bit of chaos black, water and a dab handwash soap or liquid dishwashing detergent mixed in usually does the trick. To get an idea of shading effect, check out the dipping guide thread. The pictures there do show the before/after shading effect thing to give an idea of shading. I like the army as it is :), but just in case you're looking at doing strong shading effects in the future. |
| |
![]() |
|
| Verl | 12th July 2005 - 06:44 PM Post #21 |
|
Unregistered
|
Please to be showing us your illustrious models, Lord Skaven Criticizor the Great *s'nkeep has shorten the quote* |
|
|
| RobotRaf | 12th July 2005 - 07:08 PM Post #22 |
![]()
|
im well aware of that. Im just not a big fan of skaven armies that look like a pile of dirt. which i realize is what alot of people are going for but i wanted something different. As far as highlights, theyre there. The pictures were taken outside on a sunny day. If you were to hold up one of the models in person youd notice alot more. Im also not a big fan of the dipping technique, though i am impressed by the results. Models come out too shinny and a huge part of the fun of this hobby for me is the time it takes to paint. Though again, i was impressed by the results especially the skinks. |
![]() |
|
| Kill-Kill | 13th July 2005 - 03:41 AM Post #23 |
![]()
[insert cool member title here]
|
Save that term for Swingu. But I really like your models. Kind of the Brettonians of Skavenblight.... |
|
<font color="darkred">Your words are just bloody fallacy, A house of cards, painted white. Tried to recreate Normandy, But you made up the reasons to fight</font> Mik was here! <font color=pink> <-thanks </font> | |
![]() |
|
| Warlord Kamatz | 13th July 2005 - 07:55 AM Post #24 |
|
Stormvermin
|
He wanted comment, i gave comment, that it wasn't positive is not my fault. He asked of I liked it, and i didn't. what's the problem? My first models looked like that too. As soon I have a decent digital camera, I'll put some photo's online. If you don't like them, say it! Kamatz |
|
Completed paintingvows: -August | |
![]() |
|
| Swingu | 13th July 2005 - 09:36 AM Post #25 |
|
Chieftain
|
Pretty basic technique but at least it's tidy Some shading would help a lot. Too bad that green and purple don't go together very well - not that's a bad colour combo, but the shades tyou used are making the army look a bit off. Now that you have mastered getting the paint where you want it, time to learn some techniques - so far I'd give 3 points out of 10... *mutate* Before you demand me to show my stuff to prove I know what I'm talking about - click the WWW button under my post
|
![]() |
|
| RobotRaf | 13th July 2005 - 11:10 PM Post #26 |
![]()
|
Ive seen those on the other thread you started, honestly i cant say i like them. Which is why i didnt post anything in your thread...though i appreciate and respect your opinion. The rat ogres look out of place and are essentially a shortcut, and the models are way too shinny. We have different tastes and styles its not a big deal. Whats important is that we have fun with this hobby, and if anyone sees models they dont think they like thats fine too, just take inspiration from the ones you do like. I was honestly asking Kamatz to show me better, if at least to see another set of painted models. Perhaps your comments might be better directed at Verl, who seemed to just be joking around. I wanted a brilliant colored, clean looking skaven army. Did i know alot of people wouldnt like it? of course. Could i make the colors darker, more reallistic, add more shading, and make the army look more like what everyone is used to seeing? sure i could. I know the techniques. I know how to paint. I chose not to implement them because i had a plan and a vision for the army, which i wouldnt have been true to if it ended up looking dark and grimey. In summation, to those who like the army, thanks for all your comments, opinions, and support. To those who dont, same thing applies as well. |
![]() |
|
| Swingu | 14th July 2005 - 06:32 AM Post #27 |
|
Chieftain
|
Now, don't take it as a critique - when I was writing my post, I was under impression that when you asked people to show their own photos as an answer to negative feedback, you were simply playing a crybaby. Your last response was adult enough to make me elaborate a bit more ![]() There are two things to consider when taking your stance on painting 1st of all - the overall look. That's pretty subjective, and while I'm not a big fan of the "De gustibus non disputandum est" quote, the problem of subjective aesthetical taste is not something I'd like to discuss on a WFB forum. But there's another thing that I think you need to consider when painting your stuff, and whih can be judged objectively - technique. My "3/10" applied to this one especially. Again - it's not my army, so don''t take it as an order to do anything - it's just some advice drom a guy who has been painting minis for more time than he would like to admit ![]() From your pictures I can see that the basic colours are nicely executed. There are no mistakes like flesh paint on the weapon or cloth colour on the face. Good. Still - all this stuff looks very flat. When I began my painting, I was wondering what's the point of shading. I mean, when the sun shines, the shades will appear - they do so on my clothes, so why not on the mini's? Point is that the recesses on the mini are, compared to normal things like your trousers, very shallow. So - there's a need to make them look deeper. While I'm a big fan of extreme shading and highlighting, I've seen some marvellous stuff that had a lot less contrast than my minis. I often judge painting on various WFB tourneys, including Grand Tournament Eastern Europe, I like to talk to people about their armies and give advice - and it really makes me happy when after a couple of months I see the same army I saw earlier, but with some additional tricks applied. Most of basic techniques are very easy and even basic shading/highlighting makes the mini look way better than just flat colours. So, if you want your minis to look better, consider putting some more work into them. If you want any specific advice, let me know. If not - it's ypur army after all ![]() |
![]() |
|
| scrivener | 14th July 2005 - 07:03 AM Post #28 |
![]()
*toot*
![]()
|
Heheheh, I really like Kill-kill's preemptive, and somewhat prophetic, strike. :lol: Ok, just expanding on Swingu's point though I'm sure you all know this already... Because of the way light works, the larger the object, the higher the light/dark contrast. Likewise, the further away the object, the more muted the colors. The reason why most players favour dimmer colours and dynamic shading/highlighting is to create the illusion that the model is a lifesize person. By applying the impression of shading normally found on large objects, you deceive the eye into thinking that it's got an eagle eye view of a life-sized person, and not a normal view of a small plastic model. Which is why, with lack of shading, when the eye attempts to visualize the model as a lifesize person, the lack of large object shading creates the impression that it's flat (since the flatter the object, the lower the shading dynamics). I personally consider shading more important than highlighting, since highlights only occur on such non-glossy objects like cloth, fur and skin in bright light, while shadows are everywhere. Not saying that you don't have shading, just noticed that the banners and the monks scroll are kinda flat looking from here. That said, I still like the colour scheme. |
| |
![]() |
|
| Tilara | 17th July 2005 - 07:56 AM Post #29 |
|
Grey Seer
|
I think what he was getting at is sometimes painting (be it models or whatever) can look really great up close but when you step back a little everything blurs together. I had a lot of trouble with that early on, I'd spend a long time working on making these nice smooth color transitions that looked great right up close but when you stepped back it just looked like a single flat color. Perhaps that's what is going on with your figures. The way I finally learned how to get shading and such to look 'right' for distance viewed figures was in collage. I majored in Design for Drama which included doing a lot of work in the scene shop, painting sets and props. That's another place where you're working on things that need to look good from a distance and are rarely viewed up close. Things that help are; - Sharp contrasts. Often on figures I do this with the highlights and one of the reasons I only use black primer. The black primer gets into the deep cracks and darkens the color painted over it. Then highlighting areas with a color that sometimes seems "too bright" gives a good visual depth when you stand back a bit. Even near-white highlights on the very smallest, highest edges helps too. Choosing your colors becomes important so you keep with the color scheme you're going for. Look at the blue pants on this figure. The dark folds of the cloth contrasted against the bright parts of the blue give it a lot of depth. The brighter blue almost looks 'too bright' for the color of the pants, but it work because that's how light reflects off surfaces. Look around you and you'll see the edges of objects are MUCH brighter than their base color becuase of how the light is reflecting to your eyes. Here is another example. Its a black cloak, but look at the model's right sleeve how the paint is a very light gray. - Texture. Not physical texture, but visual texture. If you have an area that is fairly large, a single even color across it is going to be seen is very flat from a distance, regardless how much physical texture might be there. For example, look at this figure. We know that the cloth hanging in front has a lot of texture on it, but it appears the artist painting it a solid white. If you move back from it a little more its just going to look totally flat. Now, look at the back of the shield and the red 'skirt' on this figure. See how they've been done in both black and red, kinda patchy? That won't look 'flat' when you move away from it, your eyes will pick up the subtle color pattern and the surface will look more three dimentional. - Shadows. Can be two things... either the really dark folds in clothes or painted on 'cast' shadows. Sort of works with contrast, but darker areas can create the illusion of depth even if it doesn't physically exist. Painted on shadows aren't very common to see but can make for impressive results. For example, there was that Golden Daemon duel between the Seriphim and the orc dreadnought... link was around here somewhere, I don't have it handy now. In that case the artist painted on the lighting effects. Shadows can be painted on in a similar method as well and can look really good if done properly. As I said, its not very common. Most people stick with just darker colors in the 'deep' parts of models. ...anyhow, I'd suggest going though a few pages of CoolMiniOrNot to look for other ideas on the "dos" and "don'ts". Like my art teachers used to always say, 'Draw what you see'. In this case, paint what you would see. If something is going to reflect light, you'll need to paint that a brighter shade of the color. As for your models in particular... Some of your detail just might not be reading through the camera. That first pic of the warpfire team is close enough that some highlighting can be seen, but it might be too subtle to read from futher away. Possibly going over with a VERY light drybrush of a brighter/lighter purple would help pick up the detail a little more. Also, you might be able to benifit from some black ink wash in some areas. I find it useful to get the 'deep' areas of the models darker. Try a mix of about 1 part chaos black, 5 parts water, and just a touch of dishsoap. (dishsoap breaks the surface tension of the water so it settles into the cracks better) Maybe try it out on one rank and file model see how you like it before commiting to do them all. Make sure to let it fully dry first as it usually dries lighter. Look at a couple of my nightrunners here. I gave them a pretty strong bath in a black wash like I described above. You can sort of see how spots of black ink stayed on the weapons both dull down the boltgun metal color and give them some texture from a distance. Also, a lot of the wash stayed in the rings of their tails which brings out the detail a bit more. This is somewhat of a 'before' version of washing them in black... I did more work before I inked them, but you can sorta see the differance, espcially on the weapons. Does that help? I don't think he was trying to be rude, just tell you what he saw. I can see in the closeups you've done some highlighting on them, but it just doesn't show up too well from far away... either its too subtle or its the camera, but either way it looks good for your first time painting a whole army. My first army didn't look as uniform as that! |
![]() |
|
| hakoMike | 17th July 2005 - 12:49 PM Post #30 |
|
More grey every day.
|
That is good advice Tilara. Your commend about stage makeup is one of the best descriptions I've heard. "No Such Agency" on coolmini gave me exactly the same critique on my painting a little while ago, and it works well. When you think your shades/highlights are way over the top, you probably have them about right. |
|
So old. So so old. My CMON Gallery | |
![]() |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Painting and Hobby General Techniques · Next Topic » |










I've got a pic here, hope it's not a breach of any rules posting it up
, so the following image is copyrighted by GW, and courtesy of the 'Eavy Metal Painting Guide 1994.

Some shading would help a lot.