"Kingdom Death Pinup Twilight Knight (painted by me)" Topic
28 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
Please don't call someone a Nazi unless they really are a Nazi.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Nude and Semi-Nude Figures - NSFW Message Board
Areas of InterestGeneral
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Ruleset
Featured Workbench Article
Featured Profile ArticleNeed larger bases for large models or dioramas?
Current Poll
Featured Book Review
|
blooddave | 23 Mar 2014 10:20 p.m. PST |
Photo blocked by adult filter: "picture" Photo blocked by adult filter: "picture" |
tkdguy | 23 Mar 2014 11:15 p.m. PST |
|
alizardincrimson2 | 24 Mar 2014 8:35 p.m. PST |
|
Glenn M | 25 Mar 2014 7:28 a.m. PST |
It's a good start, the eye needs cleaned up badly though, take a fine brush and some flesh and work that eye back into shape. It could use lined a bit, thin down a dark brown and take a fine brush and paint the color changes, where her face meets her hair, where her armor and skin meet etc. It will make a nice color contrast and make it more natural than it is currently. |
blooddave | 25 Mar 2014 10:37 a.m. PST |
I hear ya. This is my first attempt at a "nice" paint job. I usually just basecoat, some simple highlights, all over wash, and done. Get it on the table and fight! Obviously, in an 8+ inch photo you can see all the things you can't see on a 1.5 inch miniature. That eye is about as good as it's going to get. I realize now that I need better brushes. I started this mini with a new Army Painter bush, and by the time I was doing the edge highlights, the tip had curled. I'm looking into 1 or 2 nice brushes now. I still expect the vast majority of my painting will be fast and dirty – fight! But I learned a lot painting this mini (for example, I had never done any blending before I did her cloak) and I have 7 more like her from the KD pinup box. Hopefully by the time I finish the 8th one I'll be able to put it next to this one and see a huge improvement. |
Freak from Vienna | 26 Mar 2014 4:34 a.m. PST |
No, they eye is not about as good as it's going to get. You just need to figure out what works for you to make it better. So many possibilities! 1. Touch up the fleshtone around the eye afterwards 2. Use finer brushes (000 or even 5/0) 3. Don't use a brush, use a toothpick for the pupil. 4. Or a pinning needle. And that's just four that immediately come to me. I'm sure I've heard people trying other tricks. You need to figure out whhich trick is right for you, and the eyes will get better. |
Glenn M | 26 Mar 2014 6:28 a.m. PST |
I do my eyes first, paint it black, then paint two stripes of white along the sides vertically, it can be as sloppy as you want. Then clean it up when you paint the face, there are a lot of options, but this works for me as it is fast and easy and even though it is far from accurate, it works well at this scale. |
blooddave | 26 Mar 2014 3:26 p.m. PST |
I meant that eye on that model. Because it's done. I'm a firm believer that when a project is done, it's done. Don't go back and tweak it – start the next thing. Apply the lessons learned to the next thing. Otherwise, you never finish anything. |
Muerto | 27 Mar 2014 2:43 a.m. PST |
I agree in general with the sentiment, but only a Sith deals in absolutes – that's a $12.50 USD 'boutique' miniature, so maybe an exception. Still, it is your $12.50 USD 'boutique' miniature to do with as you please. Good upon you for throwing your first serious paint job out for criticism! Some was even constructive. If I may add something hopefully constructive, after blocking-in colour you could try a little black-lining (or dark-brown- or dark-grey-lining) with thinned paint, a very fine brush, and smooth strokes to demarcate the areas more sharply. The belts and straps would benefit from this. |
OSchmidt | 27 Mar 2014 5:12 a.m. PST |
Dear Blood Dave. The figure paint job is fine- good in fact. Forget all this talk of lining and shading. They just make the figure look like it's been working double shift in a coal mine and hasn't taken a shower. Quite refreshing to see female figures that look like they took a bath recently. the simple fact is that at the distance you've posed the figure in the photograph it would be about 12 to 15 feet. At that range in real life you won't see much more detail than what you have. So it looks fine. |
Muerto | 27 Mar 2014 6:30 a.m. PST |
OSchmidt, did you really just imply that one should not always strive to improve? Not experiment with new techniques? That one should settle after a first attempt to do something? |
OSchmidt | 27 Mar 2014 11:09 a.m. PST |
Dear Muerto Depends. What's improvement and how will it contribute to the aesthetic composition of the picture. One might for example say that the Impressionists should have learned to keep the colors within the lines and complete the art course they got from the back of the matchbook cover. One might say that modernist painters should have taken a few courses in art. Does Munch's "The Scream" suffer for want of "technique or Improvement" Do we quibble because Ingres' "Odalisque" has a body that can only exist if she has a disjointed femur and a back with about four extra vertebrae? Of course not. The artists used these points as a form to convey an impression, a sensation, and to tell a story. One of the best examples of this is Gerome's "Truth Rising from her well" or Grunewald's Altarpiece. Titian's women, nor Tintoretto's for example, have no lines or blotches. Why should miniatures need them?
It depends on the effect you want. There is nothing in the case of the figure in question to criticize. You have to ask what is the artists "vision" what was he striving for. As I said, many wargame figures from people besotted with technique"are completely ruined by the heavy blotching and lining which makes them look like chimney sweeps or cesspool cleaners before they took a bath. The figure in question with proper understatement conveys vividly the smoothness and creaminess of feminine flesh contrasted with the hard and spiky details of her outer clothing and equipment. It is a picture itself between the female "luxuria" and the male "superba" of the gear and weapons that makes the contrast that first intrigues us. So are you saying that art is ONLY there for the exhibition of technique and NOT there for a transcendent aesthetics? Only as a demonstation of how fine you can draw a line and the ulterior meaning of the figure doesn't exist? Blood dave made a very handsome composition. The only fault I can see that is glaring is the eye. But I can't get the magnification to work to the point where I can see it clear and the raggedness of the pixels takes over. What if it's not a mistake? What if what the artist was striving for was a tear, just brimming from the lower eyelid. Or what if in fact the eye is missing, that it was struck out in some long ago fight. Consider then the tragedy of such a beautiful face with such a disfigurement. The set mouth, the pensive jaw might then be a questioning-- a recapitulation and evaluation of life, a whistfulness for a time long gone. If this is the case then putting the figure next to a small tree with a mirror on it would be very powerful. Especially since she would be looking at the glass with her non-existent eye. The simple set would tell an entire story with a few simple and very powerful elements, and yield a treasure trove of speculation. The power of art is not in how fine you can draw lines or what techniques you can use. It is in the composition of the aesthetics to transport and play on the emotions and the sensibilities. Art is more composition than technique, more emotional evocative than counting lines and blotches. Art is the transport of the individuals soul to a plain of meaning and questioning, of imagery and sensation. What then is an improvement? Depends on what you went. For a first effort it's excellent, and I think it's far more important for Blood Dave to hone his style and his aesthetics than to worry about the deadening hand of technique. |
OSchmidt | 27 Mar 2014 11:18 a.m. PST |
By the way, the figure is a picture of ambivalence. The pose of the legs is not strong or aggressive, but rather weak and retiring. Further the form of the face, the tilt of the head, and the expression and the hair remind one much more of a Madonna than a Medusa, and the artwork that first springs to mind is Botticelli's "Birth of Venus" the head is in the same angle and the hair and cape form a nimbus. I wonder if she's asking in her head that aching question "Do you still think I'm pretty?" |
blooddave | 27 Mar 2014 1:14 p.m. PST |
She does kind of have that look on her face "Really?" |
blooddave | 27 Mar 2014 1:26 p.m. PST |
Oh, and I got the 8 figure set on sale for $80.00 USD, so it's only an $10.00 USD boutique miniature. :) Still the most expensive minis I've ever bought. The previous title holder was a metal Gripping Beast warlord for SAGA that cost $5.50 USD. I usually paint 15mm sci-fi / horror / WWII, plastic 28mm non-GW minis for SAGA, Dreadball and Deadzone, so I am more used to $0.50 USD – $2.00 USD per mini. As an aside, I dropped it on the floor on Tuesday night, and it broke. Doh! I managed to put it back together last night and touch up the paint chips. Also, the things you can see in that large zoomed photo, you really cannot see on the mini, even when it's a foot from your face. I learned a lot painting it. I had never done wet blending before (I did it on her cloak, mostly on the back). I realized my cheap ass brushes are not up to snuff and ordered some good ones. I see that my highlight colors need to be brighter, and my shade colors darker. I learned that Vallejo's "Sunny skin tone" is a bit too orange. I discovered taking a picture, and looking at it zoomed in, can show you where to do touch ups – places you might not catch just looking at the mini, but are super obvious in a photo. I'm going to finish off my Deadzone team so I can fight them tomorrow night, and when my good brush arrives try out what I've learned on girl #2. |
Muerto | 27 Mar 2014 2:00 p.m. PST |
If blooddave and the others will excuse me: Setting aside that the assumption that the original poster was striving for an effect from the schools of modern art is drawing a long bow at best, and specious at worst, and that most of us miniature painters "looking from the gutter to the stars" are making an attempt at photo realism, we can disregard the assertion that the attainment of technique is somehow a hindrance to an artist in the modern and Renaissance schools. Indeed, even neoplasticism, which makes no attempt at anything representative, requires the artist to master the technique of applying an even field of colour with solid demarcations. Pointillism requires the artist to have a solid grasp of drawing and geometry, even if the work is not of rigidly demarcated regions. Otherwise, The Canal in Flanders does not look like a canal. It further requires an understanding of graduation of colour for shading, otherwise the canal does not have convincing reflections, and the streets in Quai de l'Ecole are not lit warmly by the street lamps. Cubism requires that you can draw a nose before you can put it askew. Fauvism requires that you can draw the face before you can play with the colours. It is almost trite to say, but you cannot paint surrealism until you can first paint the realism underpinning it. Indeed, if your goal is abstract expressionism, then yes, technique could be viewed as a handicap. Even that will draw controversy though – Pollock spent untold hours working to get those drips of paint going a certain way. The only art movement I can think of at this time where no technique is needed is in fishing plastic bottles from the garbage, and sitting them on an upside down toilet. Not much relevance to miniatures though. But, looking to your specific examples: The Scream, in looking for simply an emotion, a reaction to the pressures of modern society, is not looking for realism. It is, however, executed from a basis of educated spacial relations, a technique one must learn. The figure is central, but not too large to take away from the context around it. Munch also studied at an art school; he didn't just pick up brush and draw The Scream one day. Using Ingres, Titian, and Tintoretto as examples of not needing to learn technique is, to be blunt, absurd. The same is true of stating that about Gerome – look at the flesh of Truth – it is all technique in shading and colour theory. blooddave could do far, far worse than look to that, above all your examples, for inspiration on improving his technique. I will myself. And finally, to address your strawman So are you saying that art is ONLY there for the exhibition of technique and NOT there for a transcendent aesthetics? Of course not. But the technique must, except in the worst excesses of The Emperor's New Clothes, underpin the aethetics. OSchmidt, you strike me as the sort of person I would enjoy arguing with at a pub until the wee hours, where we could attempt to blind each other with our rampant intellectual egos. |
OSchmidt | 27 Mar 2014 2:09 p.m. PST |
Dear Blood Dave I paint in oils exclusively. Good brushes are an asset and I find they last better with oils than with acrylics. You can also do SO much with oils. They can blend the best and by how much you thin them they can go from a wash to a past and you can always get the intensity you want. By the way, I don't dull them down, I leave them shiny, though thinning with mineral spirits takes a lot of the shine out of them. One othere thing I found with oils, THEY LAST. I have miniatures I've painted thirty five years ago and the colors are still as vibrant and intense as when I first painted them. They last longer, wear much better than acrylics and keep their tone far longer. The oils come out of the tube as a paste and for really intense area you thin just a little. It's a bit to work with, and they do take a long time to dry. They also can be expensive, but they last FOREVER!. I've never had a tube dry out on me, but as I said, everyone has to find his own most comfortable media. I also only lightly undercoat the figures with white. I do most of my painting of historicals in the 7 Years War. My heart felt a pang when you said she fell and broke. What's it made of? Pewter shouldn't be that delicate?! By the way, if you want to get into oils a cheap way is to prowl the garage sales and flea-markets. I had a large box of oils that I acquired on my own, but about a year ago I found this woman at a garage sale divesting herself of her mother's hobby (she had died). I got a 8" by 10" by 8" box filled with tubes of oil for $5.00 USD. Most of them cost up to $20 USD in the store. Anyway, I liked the figure very much. Although I am a historical minis painter mostly, most of my "Historical minis" are Imagi-natin figures . I base my figures on large stands and always try and do little dioramas on the stands. The stands are very big, a whole regiment of 30mm figures is on a stand 4" by 9". I have one with two NCO's seated at a table playing chess behind the firing line. In another a harem girl is flirting with a lieutenant. On smaller stands for the light infantry I really go to town. One stand 3"by 4 " has a large rock on one part with four Mohawk Indians firing out the front of the stand. The other two are peering over a short length of brush under two small birch trees. You can't see what they're looking at until you flip it around and there's a couple "en-flagrante delicto" behind he bushes. In another there's a large circular rock on one side. On the rock is a Daniel Boon type figure, holding his musket by his side with his hands to his brow as if peering at something a long way off. There are four light infantry figures firing and loading on the front of the stand, and behind and under a huge Oak tree Is another figure keeping score on a blackboard hanging from the tree. I'm making a milita regiment of 8 such stands as light infanry. It's a lot of work and I have to make a lot of conversions because the whole secene is the Militia at their Sunday yearly picnic and drill. One stand has tables groaning with food and a barmaid serving been to militiamen who are shoveling food into their mouths and drinking. Another table has a kappelmeister at a small keyboard and a circle of men singing. Another stand has a bunch of militiamen playing bowls and tenpins. Another has an officer and two ranks of militia men standing at attention with their flag while an artist paints their picture. Another has three men casually moving along while a local business girl beckons them into a tent. Another stand has four men doing a turkey shoot,. Another has a string quartet and a piano with a large Mezzo-Soprano and the Tenor singing in front of a stage set of the Colloseum and a pine tree (The opera is Mozart's Idomeneo, Rei De Creti). Another has people dancing a Minuet. Another has more peasant types with a central European bagpiper and drummer dancing Landlers and Czardas' Another has couples trysting by a pond. I Know, I know
that's nine stand. I have to make another militia regiment. Remember, composition of a scene can be a GREAT help to an artist. But they're not for everyone! |
Muerto | 27 Mar 2014 2:10 p.m. PST |
Also, the things you can see in that large zoomed photo, you really cannot see on the mini, even when it's a foot from your face. True that. I did a zoomed photo of a Relic Knight I painted and it made me want to cry. One thing I do agree with OSchmidt on: it is very handsome composition. |
blooddave | 27 Mar 2014 3:54 p.m. PST |
The mini is hard plastic, in many pieces. Most I was able to use plastic cement on, but the head and cape had to go on after much of the painting was done, because they blocked areas that needed paint. So they went of with super glue, and it's they that broke off. Photo blocked by adult filter: "picture" Photo blocked by adult filter: "picture" That 2nd pic is during the initial painting process, not after it broke. :) |
Tango01 | 27 Mar 2014 10:57 p.m. PST |
I liked it! (smile). Amicalement Armand |
OSchmidt | 28 Mar 2014 4:41 a.m. PST |
Dear Blood Dave Oh!!! Hard Plastic. No more need be said. I bought a box of the GW Amazons for an Amazon Army I was making. Beautiful figures but the whole thing was a gigantic pain in the ass to assemble. (I used simple Testors styrene modeling glue. I was able to get the right poses I wanted (after a huge amount of trimming and cutting, but I dropped one of the figures from table height and the sarissa and two arms broke off. These will NEVER survive the hard use figures get on a wargame table and I'm not going to be buying any more.. ever. They take longer to assemble than it does my oil paints to dry (when you're doing 24 at a time). Can't fault the sculpting though. |
OSchmidt | 28 Mar 2014 9:23 a.m. PST |
Dear Muerto But it is obvious that Blood Dave has mastered more than enough technique to portray what he has wanted to portray, and to provide a demonstration of expertise. I am NOT saying that technique is not known by "the masters" mentioned, obviously they own used their technique and used it to great effect. No one can do anything without "technique" I was addressing the specific trope of miniature painting that believe to be excellent everything must be lined and blotched. "Technique" is as varied as the media, and the degree into which an artist wishes to "pour his story" is dependent on technique. However, what I am arguing for is that there is not one standard of technique nor one absolute end point. I also can't see how you got that I was saying "the artist was striving for effect from the schools of modern art." I was arguing exactly the opposite and his execution of the project was obviously far more classic. As I said in my examples, It hearkens back far more to the Classic and Rennassance style.
I also think you are being way too harsh on miniature gamers by implying "looking from the gutter to the stars." The attributes of the gamer/painter suggest far more. Some gpainter can be true artists. Their creations are remarkable and moving. I also hold that no gamer/painter sets out to do less than their best, and that each gamer/painter has an "ideal" or an acme that he or she strives for. What they can accomplish may be far less, but that does not mean they are bad or slovenly. These are epithets applicable only when one is so by choice and design. Unlike the pure artist in the field of fine arts, where the object will be created for itself, the miniatures we make are objects for use, which have an alternate and ulterior use which must be accounted for, and which will have consequences as Dave found out. At the very least if Blood Dave was creating a painting of the figure in question, he could have had more space to work in as much detail as he wanted. But he was making it on an inch and a half high figure. Yes to have the time and place to discourse upon these topics convivially would be quite pleasurable. Otto |
OSchmidt | 28 Mar 2014 11:19 a.m. PST |
Dear Blood Dave Thanks for posting the pictures of the mini in assembly. I wonder if the figure could be finished without the cloak? It might have made an interesting piece. Did it have spare pieces. the sprue you showed did not look like it had. About the only thing I dislike abou the figure is the pointed tails of the cape-cloak. But that's a minor quibble.
I shall have to not be so dismissive of plastic models in the future. I don't really care for this style of figure, but with the cloak off I can see more of the details and I can see definite possibilities for building the figure partially for a base to use for conversions. For example, taking down some of the belts and boots and gauntlets and using he figure as a base for a female in 18th century costme. Plastic is very workable for this and body putty covers a multitude of sins. |
blooddave | 28 Mar 2014 11:46 a.m. PST |
I originally wanted to ditch the cloak, because the model has a lovely behind. But the hooded head looks pretty dumb without the cloak. There are other models in the set that have a, um, more exposed rear. :) |
Muerto | 28 Mar 2014 5:46 p.m. PST |
Hi Otto, The reference is to a tongue-in-cheek quote from a man who also made remarkable and moving creations:
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.― Oscar Wilde, Lady Windermere's Fan Some miniatures painters are indeed artists. To get nearer to there, I set out to try and hopefully eventually move beyond new techniques. Lining has its limits, but used judiciously it can help and I've learnt a lot from it. To answer your statement:
the miniatures we make are objects for use well, I'll quote you again: Depends on what you want (and you brought all the fine art stuff into it). As I fear we are now to some extent talking past each other, and have certainly derailed blooddave's thread, I'll leave off with responding to
Yes to have the time and place to discourse upon these topics convivially would be quite pleasurable. If I find myself where your profile says you are from, I shall send you a message and we shall push lead and (on my side) plastic across the table. blooddave, I look forward to seeing the others in the set (exposed backsides and all). |
jwebster | 28 Mar 2014 9:22 p.m. PST |
He Blood Dave Kudos for posting your first mini on TMP. You are one up on me. Of course you are going to get rude comments on this board, but what do you expect ? For painting inspiration take a look at coolminiornot.com There is some truly unbelievable stuff there and some articles and so on for improving your painting skills. I am never going to get to the level of those guys There are some other web sites with good examples and painting advice. It is a little shocking how much time some of those guys will put into a single mini Enjoy painting the rest of your girls John |
alizardincrimson2 | 29 Mar 2014 3:50 a.m. PST |
sorry blooddave that was unfair of me I suggest that among your new brush purchases you include a "script liner" excellent for details and cleaning up also the Reaper RMS brown liner is an excellent thing to have around good luck and most importantly ENJOY yourself |
OSchmidt | 31 Mar 2014 7:16 a.m. PST |
Dear Muerto Just ask, no need to rummaging around Profiles. I'm located in North Western New Jersey, United States. Otto |
|