Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by willmontgomery

  1. I guess Midnight Blue is a bluish-grey-black? That would make sense, since it belongs to the "Grey Blues" triad. But the color names would have led me to expect that Nightmare Black would be "closer" to black than Midnight Blue is. On the other hand, I don't know that "closer" even makes sense in this context. Nevertheless, it seems that Midnight Blue starts out more desaturated (if that's the right term, intending to mean less visibly blue) than Nightmare Black does. Thanks for the photo.
  2. There are a number of not-quite-blacks available among Reaper MSPs: Brown-Black: 9136 Walnut Brown (and 9064 Brown Liner, which I understand to be similar, but thinned for use as a liner). Also 9040 Dark Shadow and 9070 Mahogany Brown. Green-Black: 9236 Green Shadow (sometimes identified or even labeled as "Black Green") Grey-Black: 9289 Noir Black (and presumably 9065 Grey Liner, although this does not have as many people talking about it as Brown Liner) There are others, but this is where my questions arise: Red-Black: What is the difference between 9001 Red Brick and 9235 Red Shadow? They look quite similar on my official Reaper swatch hardcopy (from the LTPK, examined in indirect / ambient daylight). Unfortunately they are nowhere near adjacent on that page (to really put them side-by-side). Purple-Black: 9022 Nightshade Purple looks darker / blacker (on the swatch hardcopy) than 9237 Violet Shadow. And Violet Shadow looks (to me) like it has more red in it -- in fact, it looks a lot like 9239 Monarch Purple. However, the (unofficial) "paint swatch poster" classifies Violet Shadow immediately above Nightshade Purple, rather than above 9238 Regal Purple. This suggests to me that to someone else's eye there might _not_ be more red there. Blue-Black: What is the difference between 9019 Midnight Blue and 9280 Nightmare Black? Is Nightmare Black simply darker / blacker? And then there's 9229 Worn Navy (probably not as dark, or else why call it "worn"), and 9265 Deep Twilight (presumably a blue-purple-black), and 9066 Blue Liner (but I think I understand the liners). I realize that the colors simply are what they are, independent of any attempt to classify them. Unfortunately, in order to appreciate them in person I would need to buy them, in which case the information gained thereby would have come a little too late to help with purchasing decisions. And I cannot trust my various computer displays to faithfully reproduce subtle distinctions, and the official swatch hardcopy only goes so far. So I ask here, for anyone who may have seen the colors in person.
  3. I bet it has more to do with when an order was packed than when it was placed. Case in point: my order of the 9th contained Ginger Cookie. Obviously I don't know exactly when that order was packed, but -- according to tracking -- it was received by USPS late on the 12th, so probably it was not packed until the 12th.
  4. Surely there must be a paint selection that you've been eyeing. Or one that you use all the time and can always use more of.
  5. I get this too -- albeit only in the store, and not literally always even there. I use Firefox most commonly. Now I'm afraid that this will sound snarky, but what I do is simply _not_ hit the Back button in the Reaper store. When I want to click through to an item in the store, instead of left-clicking on the link, I right-click on the link to bring up the pop-up menu, and I select "Open Link in New Tab". I look at the item's page in that new tab, and when I'm done, I can close that tab and just return to the previous tab, without ever using the Back button. I could try to learn when the store thinks it's searching (which seems to be when previous pages expire) and when it's not (because sometimes "Back" does work), but I find that simply opening new tabs enables me to avoid studying this question. And I can buy things with no problem -- even from various tabs opened and closed along the way -- everything goes into my one cart, through the magic of browser cookies (I guess). Regarding your other problems... sorry, but I don't have any of the other issues that you describe.
  6. Yeah, on one of my displays White Sand looks like a very faint coral pink, and that could have fit with the name. But everywhere else it looks like you describe, so I guess that tells me something about my laptop display.
  7. White Sand (61110) looks slightly pinkish on at least one of my displays. Is that in fact white with a bit of red? It does not appear on my paint flyer... Also Maggot White (9282), also not on my paint flyer... is that in fact white with a bit of green?
  8. My preliminary feedback is: Please, Ma'am, I want some more.
  9. You can just hit the quote and edit out the stuff you don't want in there. Depending on what sort of device you're using this may be easier said than done, but it is possible. I've never had a problem pasting into my posts, maybe a problem with your settings? It's working fine -- exactly as I expected -- here on this laptop (using Firefox). So I guess my issues were limited to my desktop at home (using IE).
  10. Oh, and Pingo, thanks for your input too. I didn't mean to ignore your post; you happened to post after I had started to compose my reply to Wren, while I was called away to feed the cat. I think you have basically explained why there isn't really a Cool Light Browns triad (labeled as such) sitting there waiting for me to see it / lay it against other swatches / feel it. I find color appreciation to be a lot like music appreciation: there's so much more going on, that I totally would have missed if I hadn't begun to read about it / study it (a little). Just this morning it occurred to me that I learned something about major and minor chords in my Intro to Music course back in school, including how they tend to "feel". And of course there is a lot of mathematics "in" music (with frequencies). But I don't think I ever learned whether minor chords are classified by frequency, and they tend to have their mood as a matter of coincidence / mysterious human psychology, or whether they are classified by their mood in the first place. Now that we have the internet -- which we didn't when I was in school -- I can find out about this (now that it occurs to me to wonder). And I did have a class in Art History, although I confess that I approached it more like Art Appreciation (but that's a whole other story). The point is: I learned about artists, and I can still recognize certain ones, but I don't think I learned about color at all. Yesterday I was looking at an analysis of a Titian, and the discussion of the warm and cool zones within the composition was a revelation. Previously I had only ever looked at subject matter and technique.
  11. Wren, whether or not you want the awesome responsibility, you are officially my first mentor, since in addition to your reply, it appears that you may have written the new LTPK. Also, I don't know if there is any way to quote only a selected portion of someone else's post. If so, the Help did not say. And apparently you cannot paste text from your clipboard into a post? Anyway, I am focusing now on "I think of Driftwood Brown as neutral leaning to cool... can easily be lightened with white, Linen or similar options." From my reading, it certainly seems that lightening with white is pretty reliable, and not too likely to go somewhere unexpected in terms of the result not seeming to be the combination of the parts. What I didn't know was whether that was a "good" way to approach the "problem" in this particular case. I even wondered if a Cool Light Brown was perhaps an impossibility, since there didn't seem to be one in the MSP line (unless I was seeing it but not recognizing it, which is where color swatches and computer monitors come in). By the way, I do have the swatches on the back of the LTPK guide, but they go only up to 9270, so I have no way to see the real Neutral Bone Colors, Vampiric Skintones, or Gory Reds (which is a shame, since those are all variations of similar triads). Linen White/9061 strikes me as a yellow white, and a warm-ish white (and I guess that is probably not a coincidence). Would I likely have better luck with Ghost White/9063 (a cool-seeming blue white)? That is, should I anticipate that the difference would be visible (even if subtle)?
  12. Actually, no. Before getting the LTPK, I don't think I had painted anything since elementary school. And that was back in the '70s.
  13. I am new to painting minis, so I have been trying to read and learn about color. Plus I need to practice with brush in hand, but that's a separate issue. MSP includes triads called "Warm Deep Browns" and "Warm Light Browns", as well as "Grey Browns", which are actually labeled "Cool Browns" on Reaper paint swatches (like on the back of the guide in the new LTPK). These "Cool Browns" seem deep to me, analogous to the "Warm Deep Browns". Logically, it seems that there could also be "Cool Light Browns", which presumably would be analogous to the "Warm Light Browns" but cooler. Presumably they would be more grey (judging from the apparently interchangeable labels "Grey Browns" and "Cool Browns"). MSP does not include a triad with such a label, so I am trying to figure out what it would look like, and/or how to mix it from other paints. But I do not have (and thus cannot look at) lots of actual paints; all I can look at are paint swatches on my laptop screen, or my desktop monitor, or my iPad display, or on my LTPK guide, not all of which even enjoy (or can enjoy) the same lighting environment. Anyway, should I be thinking about lightening the existing "Cool Browns", or darkening something else, or cooling the "Warm Light Browns"? Should I be thinking about adding brown to something, or adding grey (or possibly blue) to something, or some indirect approach? If I had all the paints at hand, I could experiment. But at the moment I am approaching this as an academic exercise, and I would prefer not to buy every single MSP just to learn more about color (specifically paint color, which I have heard is not exactly the same as spectral color -- "Blue and Yellow don't make Green"). Finally, maybe the "Terran Khakis" are the "Cool Light Browns" that I am thinking of, but I am not sure. On this monitor they look brown-ish, and cool-ish, but I swear that they seem different on other displays. So I figured that I should ask what other people think/see.
  14. Thanks for the replies. Of course I did look at the images in the store, but since they're Bones, you cannot always make out details -- even details that are present -- when they are in their pristine, unpainted state, depending on the line of sight / light. For the same reason, I didn't think that posting photos of my copies would necessarily help. However, the fact that I thought photography would not necessarily provide answers does imply that my figures are not egregiously miscast. And all but one of them have already been mentioned among the "usual suspects" in this thread. What I wasn't sure was, after Reaper had taken up the issue with the manufacturer, whether their belief that the problem would probably not recur applied only to future sculpts, or also to future casts of KS1 sculpts. I think I have my answer, from the replies: the problem -- to the extent that one actually exists -- is understood to be in certain molds, not primarily in the casting technique that was applied for KS1. My only figure that I am unsure about -- in terms of whether it might genuinely be miscast -- is the Arachnid Archer. Mine has a flat "pig snout", not a humanoid nose. Unfortunately, her mug shot in the store really doesn't show off her features to best advantage. However, I will probably need more of her anyway -- regardless of whether she needs rhinoplasty -- so it would actually be good news if my KS copy happens to fall toward the miscast end of the quality continuum, since that would suggest that the additional copies might be somewhat better. Anyway, I am not at all a dissatisfied backer; I even think Juliette is not too bad. And thanks again for the replies.
  15. If I now order a Bones figure of the same type as one from the KS that (in my opinion) has lost facial detail, can I have reasonable confidence that the one I would receive would have better facial detail than the KS one? Or are all figures associated with a given KS1 mold going to be pretty much the same, even now and in the future? That is, was the (alleged) loss of facial detail a property of the mold, or a property of the casts that were made for the KS? Note that I am asking only about figures that were _not_ discontinued.
  • Create New...