Recently Browsing 0 members
No registered users viewing this page.
Hi!! my name is Katerina and I'm new to painting miniatures, I begun
with a miniature from NonSenseminiatures, the Barbarian, I buyed the
54mm because it's bigger and maybe easier to paint.
I asked some help to NonSense and he already made a base coat for me, I
would like to get some help for painting because I see too much
information and don't know were begin.
I already make painting but totally different
Also he gave for me a discount code Katerina10%, because he will sell my
By Al Capwn
I don't have a blog, and I am not veteran or post enough content to justify making one - so while these musings may be better served in that format, I will leave it here for anyone who is interested to view and chime in. It just so happens that my best friend happens to work at Rustoleum as a colorist; so lately I have been picking his brain since he has an extensive knowledge about pigments, paint make up, and the chemical intricacies therein.
As I have delved further and further into the hobby, I have been looking more into the deep subjects of color theory and how paint is made/composed. After reading James Gurney's Color and Light, as well as Michael Wilcox's Blue & Yellow Don't Make Green, I was really intrigued about what exactly paint is and how exactly color interactions work. Now I am guilty as the next person in owning WAY too many paints - not to say anything about minis!
While color mixing may seem irrelevant to some, understanding how paints function can help even those of us who own a complete gamut of convenience mixed colors. This post is about exploring more of the technical and "scientific" aspects of paint and color theory to hopefully assist others in understanding the what and why of paint.
Rethinking Paint Colors - Subtractive Color:
Up until recently, I have always viewed the primary colors as Yellow, Red and Blue, and with those you can mix secondary colors; Green, Orange, and Purple. While this is technically true after a fashion, the difficulty lies with pigments themselves. Pigments do not actually *contain* color. Instead, they absorb most of the light spectrum *except* a specific wavelength of color. As Michael Wilcox states, "Of all the pigments available to the painter, none can be described as pure in hue. There is simply no such thing as a pure red, yellow or blue paint." That means chemically, there isn't a paint pigment out there that returns a pure Red - unlike in say digital art where a specifically purely calibrated hue can be made, paint is limited by the properties of the physical pigments themselves.
As Michael Wilcox theorizes with a colour bias wheel (bottom-right), primary pigments almost certainly lean towards secondaries. This follows the concept of the Munsell Wheel (bottom-left). You may have heard of a split-complimentary color palette, and this is the reason why. Artistically, these have been described as "Warm" and "Cool" versions of the primaries, but scientifically, they are colors that absorb or reflect more of a particular wavelength. There are Violet-Reds (Cool Reds, often called "Crimson") and Orange-Reds (or Warm Reds, that lean more towards Orange), Violet-Blues and Green-Blues, and Orange-Yellows and Green-Yellows.
One the concepts to understand when mixing paints is that you are not creating a color, but rather you are effectively destroying colors and what remains is what is returned to the eye. Referencing the above color bias wheel, if you were to mix a Violet-Blue and a Violet-Red together, both containing pigment(s) that return a great deal of Violet wavelength, the little remaining Blue/Orange and Red/Green wavelengths in each pigment would cancel each other out, leaving the Violet behind. This would yield a more saturated or more pure hue of Violet. Conversely, mixing a Green-Blue and a Orange-Red ("Warm" Red) would be a very desaturated Violet, with more of a gray tone.
Keep in mind that this doesn't make a color "bad"; desatured tones by including more complimentary colors is a very useful tool! In fact, for making shadows, using a great deal of complimentary colors to desaturate is a great technique. The problem is when these colors come about unexpectedly; after all, you can have a very "intense" Red and a very "intense" Blue, but mixing them may not produce a very intense Violet if they are "moving away" from each other.
Now that is all being said, it is time to forget it...sort of. RGB is based upon the concept of Additive Mixing, or how colored light interacts. With additive mixing, fully saturated Red/Green/Blue light will produce White light. However, in paint pigments, it should be pretty obvious that mixing pigment primaries of Red/Yellow (or Green)/Blue together will not yield White. This is due to Subtractive Mixing, where pigments effectively destroy each other ala Thunderdome in Mad Max, and only the survivors reflect light back.
A more modern approach to color theory and pigments is CMYK or Cyan, Magenta, Yellow and "Key" (or commonly known, Black). Adding these colors into the standard primaries gives us the "Yurmby" wheel. If you have looked at a color printer, for example, the colors used are NOT Blue/Red/Yellow, but rather Cyan/Magenta/Yellow. This is because due to the subtractive nature of pigment/ink mixing. These colors present a larger printable gamut (i.e. range) of color; for example, without White, it is difficult to produce a Pink tone with Red vs Magenta. A thin Magenta will read more Pink than a thin Red.
Printers do not use White ink and instead leverage the paper for white, effectively printers are printing in an underpainting style. However, we as artists DO use White pigments and this makes things a bit more complicated as we do work with Tints (White) and Shades (Black).
Like most science, the direct answer regarding an accurate color wheel is: it is complicated. For observable light, there is a bit more consistency and repeatability. However, when working with "tiny wavelength absorbing/reflecting mirrors" of pigments, things become a bit more complex. Additionally, there are other aspects that that go beyond the basics, such as the effect of specular and perception of color. It gets really heady when you start dipping into Kubelka-Monk Theory and K/S.
Most paint is made up of 3 parts:
Pigment - particles that absorb and reflect certain wavelengths of light.
Binder - The 'medium' or 'glue' which holds the pigment in suspension and forms a film. For acrylic paint, this is the actual acrylic part.
Solvent - The liquid that allows paint to be viscous; as it dries, it allows the binder and pigment to harden forming the film. For acrylic paint, the solvent is water.
Adjusting the ratios of these can have some interesting, and sometimes disastrous effects in terms of the stability of the paint. For example, introducing too much solvent, and the binder and pigment lattice structure can break apart. This can cause "coffee staining" or splotchy spots where the bonds pull apart, leaving areas without a film at all.
The pigments in paint are held in a suspension. Like hot chocolate mix, there are tiny particles that are suspended in a liquid. Given enough time or evaporation, the liquid will leave these granules behind. If you have ever mixed a packet of Swiss Miss cocoa, you know that the mix can settle at the bottom - and that attempting to add dry powder to a liquid is more difficult than adding a liquid to a dry powder. This is another reason why mixing your paints is important because it is easy for the heavier pigments to tend to settle out of the binder/solvent solution.
Speaking of solutions, that is the main difference between paints and inks. Inks, specifically alcohol inks that use dyes, are a solution. The staining dye actually becomes homogeneous with the liquid. Just like dissolving sugar or extracting coffee/tea, there isn't any particulates that separate out. However, most dyes are not lightfast - a property that will be discussed in more detail further. Acrylic inks that use pigments are not "true" inks insomuch as they are composed just like an acrylic paint. The difference being the smaller size of the pigments and the viscosity of the binder/solvent being much thinner.
Outside of the 3 main components for paint composition, there are also some optional additives that some manufacturer's include in their paint. These can be things such as:
Extenders/retarders, which delay the setup of the paint film, allowing for more mixing to occur before drying. Thinners, which dilute the pigment to binder ratio, usually increasing translucency and viscosity - commonly this is done with water for acrylic paints. Flow Aid, which reduces the surface tension of paint, allowing it to flow more easily and level - Reaper is known for adding a bit of flow aid into their formulation. Opacifiers, which increase the opacity of a paint - usually some type of calcium or bicarbonate. Matting agents, which reduces the glossiness of acrylic medium. Fillers, which are commonly used in student or inexpensive paints to reduce cost and add mass without adding more pigment.
You can add some of these additives yourself to your favorite brand of paint to adjust the handling qualities. The most commonly added is solvent/thinner in the form of water to "thin your paints" to reduce the viscosity and lower the overall density of the paint, building up multiple thinner layers of paint films in a "layering" fashion.
After some interesting plumbing adventures the family and I are out of the house for the next couple weeks while repairs are made. Knowing that I'd need something to do in the evenings I had to make a tough call. I could gather up my painting supplies or I could grab one box, a knife, glue, and clippers. I obviously chose the easier route. So during our little forced vacation I'll be assembling the Robotech RPG Tactics starter box and giving you my thoughts on it. Not that I think anyone particularly wants to hear my thoughts on it, but if I'm going to build all this I'm going to talk about it.
Before we jump into it I do want to mention that if you've ever heard anyone talk about this set I'm probably going to say a lot of the same things. I do however think I bring at least one new idea that somewhat redeems this box or at least changes the way you think about it.
Right off the bat I've got to say it does have a nice box. It's fairly solid and the art not only on the outside but on the inside is a nice little addition.
When I first bought the box it was my intention to build the three configurations of a Veritech and stop. I already have too many projects and this was to be the reward after completing everything else. You better take a look at them before I start ranting.
It was during the build of these first three models that I couldn't help but notice problems, you know the very ones we'd all already been warned about. The instructions are not always clear, all you get for each model is a deconstructed picture that can leave you guessing. Then to make it just a little more fun some components that are shown as being multiple parts just aren't. There is nothing like searching a sprue for a piece needed to complete a part before you realize its already attached.
Then of course when it comes to "fiddly" bits these may be the fiddliest I've ever seen. There are a ton of parts that are tiny to the point of the simple act of removing them from the sprue breaks them. Remember this because we'll definitely be coming back to it.
Even the larger pieces have their problems though. Most of the bigger pieces are multi-piece parts for no real reason. Maybe they're there to lull you into a sense of false comfort right before you start in on the "fiddly" bits.
Now we come to the sprues themselves. They're not exactly horrible minus the times when you break a "fiddly" bit trying to remove it but they're not great.
After only assembling three I really wondered how they'd stand up to use on the tabletop. Even for display pieces they feel fragile. The detail is there but the construction and contact points are just bad, again we'll get back to that.
Confidence was not high after the first three figures. Then came about our impromptu vacation so I pressed on with the assembly and next up were the other Macross defenders, you know the cannon fodder, the Defenders and the Tomahawks.
This is where I hit my stride. Overall I assembled them quickly, with many of the same complaints, but by then I'd become familiar with the idiosyncrasies of the set. It's also where I had the revelation that completely changed my attitude.
You see these aren't miniatures and they really aren't game pieces, they're models. Models complete with all of the "fiddly" bits and needless multi-piece assembly you could expect. Once I started to think of them as models it bacame easier to accept the flaws and oversights. I couldn't exactly forgive or forget them, but at least they made a kind of sense. They're made like a Gundam model where the real accomplishment isn't in building it, it's in the fact that during the assembly you never threw it against the wall.
Armed with my new outlook I started work on the special Zentraedi models. Even with the new outlook there were issues. Here are some "fiddly" bits I broke while removing them from the sprue. See just how tiny some of them are?
Oh and remember those contact points I mentioned?
That's how a leg attaches, a leg, you know the thing that is meant to support the whole model.
Eventually I did complete the three special models however.
After reading all that it would be easy to think I hate this box. It'd be even easier to think I wouldn't recommend it. Even with all the issues however that isn't the case. I think under the right circumstances, I can recommend this to everyone they just have to meet certain criteria.
Firstly you need to be a fan, because you'll need that love of the source material to keep going. The box needs to be on discount (bought mine for about $50 and that seems fair). It also helps to know exactly what you're getting into; before buying I'd already heard plenty of horror stories (still ended up buying it and I'm glad I did). Finally you need to think differently about the figures themselves, honestly once I started thinking of them as models like Gundams or even highly detailed planes everything bacame easier. If you check all of those boxes this is probably right up your alley. Don't ask me about gameplay however I already know I'll never find someone to play with, I just wanted the models.
Hey! So I've been putting paint to minis for about two months, and I've yet to finish one up satisfactorily. So I thought I'd come here and ask y'all for some C&C for a struggling newbie.
The Tiefling is an NPC baddie for my DM, and I'm struggling trying to get more detail on his face. I tried adding highlights to his t-zone to make it less flat but getting detail in such a tiny space is driving me mad. I'm also not happy with the highlights on the tail. How do ppl do faces on minis without much detail to the sculpt?
I've been struggling with transitions and blending/glazing. On the mouseling the transitions are supposed to be glazing but it just comes out more of a wash with a heavy load of pigment where it settles. I've tried wet blending, but I don't know how to get that on smaller or more detailed/textured areas.
I'm a lot happier with my skelly boys, and I'm going to try NMM on the swords. I'm wondering how to reduce the shininess on the varnish (the middle one). I'm using Vallejo matte varnish, but there are still reflections under light.
Thanks so much if you've read down all the way here! I know I've got a long way to go, so I'm looking forward to any and all C&C.
Edit: Cut this down to just the ones I'm not happy with, and need advice on.
Who's Online 25 Members, 3 Anonymous, 40 Guests (See full list)