was older warhammer 40k miniatures easier to paint?
by today standard yes, back in the day maybe, nowadays there is so many tutorials, resources and products that didn't exist back in the day that makes painting at a basic level very easy.
That's actually quite a complicated question, as >>98646588 says the paints, tools and techniques we have now are better.And there are some caveats. So yeah, most 90s-00s plastics didn't have the egregious amount of detail that modern GW kits do.But then old metal miniatures, particularly lead miniatures from the 80s, often have unclear details, so the challenge there is almost using your paintjob to delineate parts of the sculpt.
It depends. A lot of the models were simpler and therefore easier to paint, but there were also a lot of models with awkward and weird mold quirks that sometimes made it hard to tell what the detail you're painting even is.
>>98646444'eavy metal is not easy
>>98646634>But then old metal miniatures, particularly lead miniatures from the 80s, often have unclear detailsHonestly, that's an issue with plastics even into the early 2000s. Like how the trim on the old Chaos Marine kit isn't very sharply defined, particularly on the legs
>>98646444Not really. It really depends on the version and how much you add decoration.Your pic is the easy mass/board game version. But when you take the multipart kit, it gets more detsiled. Or like >>98646634 said the lead ones have more details as the plastic ones but much harder to see when painting.
>>98647384But i would agree the the newer models have more options to get more details.
>>98647246The Lord of the Rings plastics had this problem really badly and it has only gotten worse as the molds have been worn out.
>>98646588Huh, good point, that's not something I really considered. Still, while the difference may not be particularly significant in case of relatively simple factions with clean designs like Space Marines or Necrons, the modern sculpts for factions like for example Sisters of Battles, Genestealer Cults or some Chaos units are so full of small details that I'd say they're definitely harder to paint any decently than the old stuff. Or at the very least much more time consuming
>>98646444I wouldn't say newer models are more difficult to paint but instead more time consuming. Old models didn't really have that many little details on them so you could realistically patch paint 20 dudes in a single afternoon while new models have so many little belts, pouches and trinkets that they take way longer to paint. Looking at you Cadian shock troop.
>>98647246Fuuuck I remember exactly what you mean and I always hated painting those bits
>>98646444Yes. But, it still depends on the type of model though. Compare assembling and painting old metal imperial guardsmen from the 90s with painting stuff like mechanicus models. You could assemble and paint a whole squad of old metals in the time it takes to even assemble a unit of new models.Meanwhile eldar models look basically the same as the 90s stuff, but take longer to assemble and have cooler poses. Painting the new stuff is just as easy/difficult as the old eldar.
>>98646444Easily, old models were hand sculpted and/or designed by people whom understood mini painting.Nuhammer models are cadslopped out by people whom don't and are invariably covered in tons of greebles and have hard to reach bits that make painting a nightmare. Looking at you plastic sisters, whom take 3 full days per squad.
>>98650685That sounds wrong. I think the nu-designers just like to throw more decorations on the designs. Because more decorations means more coolness. They dont understand that they made now every mini a busy design and too much to paint.
>>98647246Always hated the weird lip that ruins the shoulder pad on these Missile Launchers
>>98651047It is wrong. The head sculptor for gw was a eavy metal painter and has done some of the most iconic miniatures in the range.That's just a nomodels.
>>98646444>was older warhammer 40k miniatures easier to paint?At the time, no.Mainly because the tools for doing so were far less developed than what we have today. Paint? You were stuck with citadel basic acrylics or stuff like Testors. Brushes? Again just citadel synthetics or whatever you could find at a local art store (assuming you had one). Airbrushes? Far more expensive, lower quality, harder to find. And of course there was no such thing as Youtube tutorials, so you were basically on your own or at the mercy of Redshirts.Another issue was that since the models have far less detail, to make them look decent took a lot more freehand work.Lastly, they were simply much, much smaller. It's just easier to paint minis that have a larger scale.If you tried to paint one today using modern tools, methods, and information, you'd have a much easier time, though you'd probably get frustrated by the poor sculpts having parts melding into one another because of primitive mould tech.
>>98651173Niggertard. Here are some of the worse offenders, the plastic Sisters. Deep, flowing robes with areas impossible to reach with a brush when assembled, heaps of greebling from random rosaries to holy icons to medallions, etc ell over the girls themselves, plus the new addition of icons on the guns, and open sided magazines that display the unfired bolt rounds. Oh, and studs. Studs every-fucking-where. Painting them is a nightmare of constantly finding new details that need to be painted. If the head designer is a gd winner then he has a weird way of showing it.
>>98654953Almost all that you mention there are also problems with metal sisters. Honestly the only one that also isn't a problem with metal sisters is the robes.>person with 90 metal sisters
>>98654953>>98655025>Deep, flowing robes with areas impossible to reach with a brush when assembledOnly one not problem. You can reach all the parts of the robes with a brush>heaps of greebling from random rosaries to holy icons to medallions, etc ell over the girls themselvesYep metal sisters are full of random holy icons and small details. Don't get me even started on the metal Canoness>plus the new addition of icons on the gunsBoltguns don't have any icons. But heavy weapons and special weapons all have expect the regular meltagun>and open sided magazines that display the unfired bolt roundsYep they have them>Oh, and studs. Studs every-fucking-whereYes metal sisters also have them everywhereRemember most of the metal sister range was released back in 1997 during second edition. And rest of the lineup was released in 2004 during third edition.
>>98654953>If the head designer is a gd winnerThe current Miniatures Design Lead is Darren Latham, who was an 'Eavy Metal studio painter from 1999 to around 2010. He's also won 3 GDs fwiw, but you'd kind of expect the full time GW painter to know what GW want from their painting competition. Hell, I think he's judged them in the past too
>>98655025>>98655050The metal sisters are still easier to paint imo, I use mone as Celestians. There's little extra bits like the boltgguns being moulded in contact with the body so you havnt got that awkward void where you can see the corset and inside of the gun but have to be really careful not to smear paint on the wrong side, or all the extra holy symbols - some sisters have 3 rosaries and holy icons dangling from all over, AFAIK the metal sisters typically held one each.
>>98646444Chaos was. Lot less busy on the armor unless you put more on it yourself.
>>98655025>90 metal sistersSounds like a music band
>>98646444So long story short, it was not that easy.
>>98656161Metal models are easier to paint because they dont have cavities.
>>98654953>T-35someone must have dug a -really- deep hole on holy Terra.
>>98647389My battle for Macragge dudes are old enough to vote now. Feels bad man.
>>98646444I think the more profound change is the ease with which high level painters can show their results on the internet, show how they did it, and drag standards up towards their level. Its a night and day differenceIts not that everyone is trying to get Golden Daemon results, but every beginner to intermediate painter knows that its realistic and practical to get results that would have seemed elite by the standards of someone who had been engaging in the hobby for the same amount of time as they have back in the 2000s, before infinite Youtube tutorials. But its harder to do, so painting becomes harder than it was.
>>98646444They were easier to paint to a medium level of quality, but much harder to paint to a very high level of quality. You can see it right in your own pic. That kneepad features freehand checkerboard that conforms consistently to the curvature of a rounded plate. Holy shit! That's no easy feat. Of course, they could have just painted that kneepad blue like the other one, and made a very serviceable model, but it wouldn't be notable for its quality without the freehand work.By comparison, modern minis that have physically modeled detail over almost every surface don't let you take the easy option of just painting simple flat colors over large portions of the mini, but they also don't require that level of freehand painting to achieve good results.
>>98659802Yep there's definitely paint inflation going on.
>>98646444Were older warhammer 40k miniatures easier to paint?Was it easier to paint older warhammer 40k miniatures?ESL
>>98654953>person who spouted modelling buzzwords like Cadslop cannot paint for shit.I shouldn't be suprised at this rate. Have no idea why you are complaining about "detail" when you just ruin it with thicc coats anyways.
>>98646444In my experience, no.I was just a worse painter.
>>98646444I like that the stances are more "simple" on older models. I hate on newer models they tend to be in weird jumping or running stances that makes conversion and such more aids.
>>98663642Simpler poses also look better on the table IMO, they fit in everywhere and they all blend together into a uniform mass instead of making it extremely easy to notice the same pose repeating across your army (or even within units sometimes).
People who complain about games workshop's modern miniature design, what would you actually like to happen?Do you already have complete collections of all the old minis you actually like? Are there any successful modern minis that you think could serve as an example for how modern miniature design should continue?
>>98666194Just keep the fancy designs with dynamic poses and tonnes of detail to commanders and other super special models and leave the basic units relatively simple and fast to paint.Maybe you could also make the miniatures for skirmish games somewhat more complex, since much less of them is needed to play
>>98646444Having just painted the new Stormvermin followed by the old 5/6th edition plastic Clan Rats, the answer is definitely yes, at least when it comes to basic plastic troopsMany of the new kits are great, the new Stormvermin mog all the older ones, but the downside is everything takes significantly longer to paint
>>98658769Kek. It's actually for my Barbarossa/Winter War Soviets, it's a piece of shit but I love the multi turreted land battleship jank. Actually I am fond of most pre-war soviet tanks, I've got a platoon of T-28's and a couple of T-26's with more to eventually buy. The idea is to have a full range of armoured support for my company, if I have to play BA then I shall do so with accurate orbats.>>98663600Aight son, show us some of your models. You DO have models, right? Painted models?Fwiw as well, those Sisters were speed painted as part of a larger project.Pic semi related, an adventuring party with a preslotta Saurus as the lizardman barbarian.
>>98646444Yes and "no."Yes in the sense that most of the plastics were easier to paint.No in the sense that the more detailed metal sculpted models most likely were harder to paint as they had more detailing. I think STL sculptors have learned to not cram excessive details into all their polygons as their miniatures are to be painted. But there is such a thing as a model being too simplistic in going too far with the "less is more" saying. But I sometimes wonder what Warhammer model hits the sweet spot between detailed and "less is more" done right.Maybe the Cadian shock troopers before the kneepads were an example of that, but I'm not saying they were well proportioned models either.
>>98647246Could have been a bad or old mould issue.
>>98646444yesdetails are chunkier and there are fewer greebles
>>98666246I think those stormvermin are a perfect blend of detailed and simplistic in 28mm miniature sculpting design.
anyone here know any re-casters that have these >>98646444 guys specifically? i want a whole squadron of 2nd ed stuff
>>98673247Unless you're in the 3rd world it'd probably be cheaper to buy job lots off ebay, plus you're not dealing with resin. I've ended up with a lot of plastic marines because it's been cheaper to get the random metal model I want with a sack of thickly painted plastics. A quick dip in some isopropyl alcohol and a scrub quickly takes care of the paint.
I miss simpler models. I dislike having an army composed of main characters. No regular, simple troops. Everything is full of nonsensical details, and takes forever to paint, assemble or mount in a unit with minimal cohesion.
>>98666222>Just keep the fancy designs with dynamic poses and tonnes of detail to commanders and other super special models and leave the basic units relatively simple and fast to paint.Wise.
>>98666222This is the smart and correct choice.
>>98646634>particularly lead miniatures from the 80s, often have unclear detailsI have an "old" metal mini (4th edition?), it's a guardsman with a meltagun or plasma gun, half his face was a blob of metal like an unfinished visor.>>98647246>Honestly, that's an issue with plastics even into the early 2000s.Black orc blood bowl team, shoes are somewhat formless, coming in 3 flavours with at least one of them changing the key feature at the back, and it's not clear if they're supposed to be recognised as a colourful or branded sports shoe.>>98650685>have scions>a little awkward to paint + snip from the sprue (unforgivable sin of top of head attached to sprue) but enjoyable and assembles neatly if you don't put on the wrong backpack>have navis breachers>assembly is shit, everything is small parts, not clear where the sprue starts or ends with the oxygen tank connectors, MINIMAL usage of (unshaped) hole fits for assembly including nothing to fit the arms onto but a flat surface, large gaps between pieces>"thin your paints!" does NOT let you paint their teeny tiny aquilas and their rubber ankles/elbows have an irregular connection with their boots and gauntletsJesus christ, what happened? Did they not train their new(er) sculptors? I have no idea how their painters made it ready for the storefront, you thin too much and it goes everywhere, you don't and you clog the details
>>98686682>inability to paint blamed on modelLmao.
>>98686682post your scions, then
>>98686682>Did they not train their new(er) sculptors?it's a thing I've found myself, too, not just with GW models but with proxy and alternatives; it seems there are lots of people modelling miniatures for 3d printing that have never assembled or painted a model themselves
>>98650685>>98686682>>98687013>excessively detailed CAD sculptsWhat's hilarious about excessively detailed 3D models is that they stuff too many greebles on every polygon of a model like they're sculpting for highly detailed video game assets when in reality 28mm miniatures benefit best from a "less is more" kind of design philosophy. I think 'most' 3D STL sculptors have gotten the message that less is more nowadays as it seems harder to find examples, but I know they're still out there. Truthfully excessively greebling detailing should be left for printable miniature busts if that makes sense meant to be detailed excessively to show off the miniature painter's sculpting skills.
>>98686682To add to this, I'm going to use my Sisters.old metalsister>gun held in contact with torso, no need to get at awkward gap>robes form a solid block between legs, easy to paint>armour hoses run over the shoulders with no interrupt>no buttons or studs present on robe>a couple of pouches on the belt>single visible holy icon in predictable spotNew sister>gun held away from chest meaning you need to paint covered faces, full detain on covered torso for reasons>billowing robes are hollow and flow around legs creating awkward spots that are visible but difficult to paint>iconography on gun>armour hoses run into armoured covers>robes covered in studs, buckles and buttons, INCLUDING the area covered by the gun>random assortment of pouches, charms, and greebles hanging from belt>up to three holy icons per sister hanging from belts, cassocks, gloves, guns, etcOne is easy to paint, a bit more detailed but you expect that from an elite army. The other is a nightmare to paint in numbers and she's just a basic line sister. I have to paint 30 of her minimal.>>98686888>>98686956Okay, post your painted minis. You do have painted minis, right?
>>98687438>You do have painted minis, right?Already posted >>98670461Gotta say though, those don't look like Tempestus Scions...
>>98687454That's because I'm not >>98686682 and do not have Stormies. I'm >>98666262 and >>98654953.His point stands though, line troops and other squads should not have a ton of greebles and hard to reach spots, or be posed 'dynamically' for that matter, they should be easy to paint enmasse. >>98666222 very much gets it correct.
>>98686956I'll do so when they're all done and in a /40kg/ thread where they'll be appreciated for the paintjob and not associated with ranting about not having fun in the hobby.Is that okay?My phone camera won't be good enough for you to see if I've not thinned my paints enough or where my file left a rough surface when shaving a sprue connection, so I'm sorry that you won't be able to critique my skill when I do post.
>>98646444Depends on the model. Anything Jes Goodwin did oozes soul and are fun to paint. Enough greebles to have detail, but not as frustrating as the current plastic kits which are still good, admittedly. Eldar stay winning.
