"Citadel Badab Wash = Liquitex Paynes Grey???" Topic

This article claims that Liquitex Paynes Grey is a concentrated version of Badab, and in a larger bottle:

"Liquetex Paynes Grey is also an absolute bargain compared to the other products currently available. A 12 ml pot of Citadel Badab Black will run you $3.00, or $0.25 USD per ml. A 2 oz (59 ml) bottle of Liquitex Paynes Grey costs around $4.00 USD or $0.06 USD per ml, probably half of that when you consider that you have to dilute the Liquitex product. This means that Liquitex is somewhere in the range of 8+ times more cost effective than buying the comparable Citadel product. I recently washed an Ork Trukk, and had I used the Badab Black, I probably would have gone through a whole pot of Citadel wash."
link

1) Do you agree? What has been your experience with either of those two products?

2) And, if you have used Badab, how do you dilute/thin it? With water? That's what this article seems to recommend:
link

Another one: link

Thanks.

CC
link

The main advantage with the Citadel Washes is the fact you don't have to dilute them; it saves me tons of time and I always get the exact same consistency/results. They are already so thinned down, I don't understand the need to dilute them.

So unless Liquetex Paynes Grey already comes diluted, I don't see the appeal for me.

Also I think the Citadel washes have a lot of additives to help with flow and suspension of pigments. Sure you can thin out liquitex Paynes Grey for a wash, but if cost is your main concern, buy a bottle of Ceramcoat or Folk Art Paynes Gray at walmart and spend even less…

Damon.

Has anyone ever tried doing a similar wash on an entire terrain board?

That's the only reason I have for wanted something in larger amounts. Being that the Liquitex seems to be a concentrate, I would need to dilute it somehow to get the same effect I got with the figures, right?

Thanks.

CC

I use washes made from powdered craft paint, Future, water and a touch of white glue on Hirst Arts projects. Works just as well on terrain as figures.

CC, the big advantage of using artists paints is that you will get more value for money on large projects. Keep in mind that thinning any acrylic is spreading out the molecules of pigment. Acrylic paint does not "dry", it polmerizes. In other words, the paint surface forms bonds to make a skin. If you are using a thinned out acrylic over a porous surface like stucco, the pigment is held in place in the pours of the material. On non-porous surfaces, some clear acrylic medium added to the mix will help. I am guessing that the above mentioned white glue would act in a similar manner.

All paint is made up of pigment, vehicle, binder, and filler. The cheaper the paint, the more filler and less pigment in the mix.

If you prefer to pay someone to fill tiny bottles with the same stuff you can buy in volume for much less, then go for it. Learning to use your materials can be a rewarding part of the hobby. Getting the right material for the job just makes sense to me. The small amount of time it takes to learn to mix and thin paint seems a small task compared to the long-term advantages it brings to your hobby tool box.

You can get a really good substitute for any of the GW Washes by taking an appropriately dark(er) color and mixing in water and matte medium (I use Liquitex). When using Reaper MSPs, the ratio that I tend to use is 1:2:2 (paint:water:matte medium) unless it's a really dark color like Brown Liner.

What you get is effectively a magic wash. Sure, the GW Washes are convenient and it's good that they are introducing new painters to these techniques. But, the washes are relatively expensive.

What's nice about mixing your own is that you have a much wider palette to use and you can be as subtle or not as you want.

The real key is the matte medium which gives the wash some body and what amounts "stickiness" for the recesses. You can also use matte varnish in a pinch.

With artist paints, you'll want to go a bit more dilute.

Ron