"Painting, figure, both or other?" Topic

I have read many post on here as well as blogs where people give the created for a beautiful painted figure to the figure itself. Basically, good figures are easier to paint. Personally, I question that logic.

Is it the figure or the painter? When a figure line is not the hot item, but we see great painted figures from that line, then the out come is always attributed to the painter. But, if that same painter paints the hot item, the awes go the figure. Why? I know a painter that does a great job with 15mm WWII tanks and armour. He did vehicles from a variety of manufacturers, but always claimed that Battle Front was the best and always stood out from the rest. I asked him which tanks in his box where Battle Fronts. He started to pick up tanks to show me, and his first five choices where all Command Decision tanks. It didn't take him any longer to paint one over the other, and in the end, even he the painted couldn't tell the difference.

Several times in my life I have purchased figures that people claimed were great figures and therefore easy to paint, and from the painted stuff that I saw in magazines related to this hobby, I believed that press. But, when I purchased the figures, first, I didn't care for them all that well. Second, I didn't find them any different to paint that any other figure I have ever purchased. Third, they never looked like the ones in the add, but they did look like everything else I have painted.

I not sure what you will say, but I believe that quality of the painted figure always belongs to the painter. Sure, for the painter, one line figures may be easier to paint that another, but that could do more to personal likes and dislikes rather than anything else. My example above I found the figures harder to paint for the simple reason was I was disappointed by what I had purchased. Hey, I did better in History classes than math classes because I like or enjoyed the one more than the other. And, in some History classes I did better than others because I liked the teacher better.

What do you think?

you dont paint a T. Meier figure, you just color it.

Is it the song or the singer of the song.
My vote is painter, but who cares what I think

Is it the actor, or the way the part was written?

I agree with painter. An excellent painter can make a poor figure look better than it it is, and a poor painter can make an excellent figure look worse.

Absolutely the painter and what he sees on the figure. I remember reading Henri Lion's insight in his book "My Way" (about how HE approaches painting- these were 54mm and above). He would surround himself with articles made of the part of the figure he was painting. (Like having leather boots, belts, harness, etc. lying about his painting area and by tactile touch, sights, smells, etc, he claimed that his fingers translated the impressions to the figure by means of brushwork.

Am a firm believer that the best work a person does is when they are inspired and HAVE an idea what they want the figure to look like in the minds eye before starting.

I have lots of figures I have found appealing, yet I gravitate to those that are easier in MY mind's eye, to try to duplicate, as it makes my painting session more enjoyable. "How close did I come to that standard?" I ask myself. Most of all, "Was it fun or more like a chore?"

If you are not able to imagine what a figure will look like upon seeing the unpainted version, put it down and go to one where that mind's eye image does appear. IMHO, you will paint more and enjoy it more if you can. Having to crank out that 3rd unit of cavalry just seems like a chore- almost to the point you will accept defeat on the game table instead of filling out your planned TO&E!

This is a hobby and if you aren't enjoying it, you must be doing something wrong! The challenge is to make YOUR armies/figures to look like what YOU originally saw them as imagined from inside your mind's eye.

Dye4minis, I agree with you and could not said it any better. Having painted 90, 75 and 54mm display figures in the past you summed up my feeling exactly on my painting war game figures. I paint them the same way as I painted my larger figures as I just can't seem to want to do it any other way.

Thanks, John. Sometimes I just sit and look at some figures. Many may call it "painter's block". For me, I just can't visualize how I want them to look yet.By just staring at them helps me overcome that situation.

With some minis, it takes more time as there are reasons of detail to be considered for how to approach them. Other figures are straight forward and I find myself more concerned with base, mid and highlight shades I will use (and if at all want to go to that much effort for the end result).

Life is too short waste your time on minis you just don't like or cannot seem to arrive at an acceptable image in your mind's eye. Problem these days is that there are not enough retail stores to first see what you are buying.

Valliant efforts have been made on manufacturers websites to present unpainted images of ranges but many examples are of painted units. Like it was mentioned above, a paint job can make an outstanding sculpt look good or bad….but an inspired paintjob shows what can be done despite the quality of the figure. What is an inspired paintjob is in the eyes of the beholder- so is the concept of "how can "I" make it look" with bare metal images.

Sharpen the image of what your mind "sees" and see how much better you will paint!

v/r
Tom

What they said. A bad miniature -- lacking detail, having unrealistic proportions, etc. -- can be helped by a skilled painter. A good figure can be made worse by a painter with lesser skills.

You can improve your skills by painting frequently. Paint good and bad miniatures and monitor your experience.