contrast

[MathewBaich]

hey guys! If you could, could you help me on how much contrast is necessary to paint a mini that \"pops\"(like how far to go above the base color) but I don\'t want it to be super bright either, more dark and brooding than anything else. thanks

 

[matty1001]

I always paint with a base colour then either:
A) Highlight up as much as i need to, this gets the upper range colours, but has a not to dark shading colour.
B)Highlight up and shade down, this gets a huge amount of contrast and pop.
C) Shade down, this gets the opposite of A, the lower range colours.

Hope this helps, but i don\'t really understand your question TBH.

 

[Dragonsreach]

Originally posted by MathewBaich
hey guys! If you could, could you help me on how much contrast is necessary to paint a mini that \"pops\"(like how far to go above the base color) but I don\'t want it to be super bright either, more dark and brooding than anything else. thanks

As far as you need to go.

I\'m sorry but it\'s one of those \"there is no right answer questions\", basically I\'d suggest tring to find a reasonable/good painter in your area and doing a side by side for comparison.
It would be far easier than trying to work \"out of the blind\".

 

[Ritual]

I would also like to point out that there\'s no conflict between high contrast and dark and brooding. The \"dark and brooding\" comes more from which colours you use than how much you highlight them.

 

[MathewBaich]

ok, thanks for the tips guys.

 

[Krause]

It depends on the mini and on the style of the painter. It is a case of taste.

For example:

a - A manga mini will have a lot of contrast
b - A historic mini will have almost none.

A good example are skin tones. There are people who will do darkflesh to pale flesh. And other will use almost no contrast on skin tones and so creating a more real effect.

In my case, I was a \"darkflesh to pale flesh\" type, now I use much less contrast, \"dwarf flesh to bone.

My advice is to paint 2 igual models and compare what you like more. If you are painting an entire army, I advice you to test it first or you may change your mind when you alredy painted a big part of your army.

I hope this helps you a bit. There is no sientific awnser to that, just style

 

[Highbulp Billy]

I\'ll just add that if you\'re painting a mini specifically to be photogrphed or displayed on the web etc, you probably need to highlight at least one step further than you normally would for it to show properly.

However, I agree that this is one of those areas that really comes down to trial and error to find the level that works best for you.

Good luck

 

[EricJ]

I would definately agree step 1 is deciding exactly what type of effect you want on your minis. Step 2 is probably then finding and studying minis which you feel are great examples of that effect. Then step 3 is practice practice practice. Be bold with it, try news things, even if you\'re worried it won\'t work. You learn much more by trying something and failing than never trying it at all.

 

[Legacy Account]

Originally posted by Krause

b - A historic mini will have almost none.

That is utter rubbish! Good miniature painting is completely reliant on contrast - even historical stuff. 54mm and larger models may use slightly more subtle variations in contast, but just go and check out Fredy\'s gallery to see what total codswallop that statement is. You are basically suggesting that historical mini painters just apply a basecoat!

This is a perfect example. The blue on the tunic is almost black in the deepest recesses, and goes up to a bright, electric blue on the most raised parts of the model. That\'s quite contrasty!

 

[hakoMike]

Originally posted by Spacemunkie
That\'s quite contrasty!

I\'ve learned a new word today! (and yes, it is quite contrasty.)

 

[Krause]

Originally posted by Spacemunkie

Originally posted by Krause

b - A historic mini will have almost none.

That is utter rubbish! Good miniature painting is completely reliant on contrast - even historical stuff. 54mm and larger models may use slightly more subtle variations in contast, but just go and check out Fredy\'s gallery to see what total codswallop that statement is. You are basically suggesting that historical mini painters just apply a basecoat!



This is a perfect example. The blue on the tunic is almost black in the deepest recesses, and goes up to a bright, electric blue on the most raised parts of the model. That\'s quite contrasty!

What I wanted to say is that there is usally less contrast then in fantasy minis. And in general historic minis have a more real contrast. Many fantasy minis have \"extra\" contrast.

And no I am not saying that they only apply basecoat. They normally do more layring/blening, but smohter. There is less diffrence between the darkest and lightest color, like in reality.

But if you compare a good fantasy painter with a good historical painter you will understand my statement. You even picked a good example for a historical mini, which is very well painted like most historical mini i see. He looks very real.

I just advice you to read the posts more carefully before making up statements and interpetations of facts that are not mentioned.

You have to agree that historical minis have the less contrast (more subtle, not less work/effort etc...) of the minis you see on the net. (of course only well painted stuff counts, like your example)

I apologize for the potencial wrong interpertations of my intial post.