NMM - A daft and pretentious practice

[Roachman]

Originally posted by montka
You have read me like a book.

I\'ve just put together a fine looking Khorne Champion, with the intention of painting him as my first experiment in SENMM, (which, as I have said, can look stunning when done correctly, and is viewed from the ideal angle). But I feel I am selling out my principles - without an army to lead, he is pointless and pathetic.

Hmmm... so you think you can not make his point of reference for light subtle enough to keep him from clashing with an army? I would definitely have to put my favorite model ever in SOME sort of army... If you want to do him as a diarama, well, that\'s a different matter, but I don\'t see why he can not be part of an army if you want.

Like someone said earlier, if your lighting point is more or less straight up, then it ought to fit in fine with an army painted with metalics reflecting the direct overhead lighting. I dunno, typically the \"artistes\" like an offset lighting though, don\'t they?

Yeah, I begin to see the quandry here, now I let my head wrap around it.

 

[lizcam]

Originally posted by montka
May I highlight the fact that, as I said above, I think that NMM models can look amazing. My main point was that they are only really worthwhile in armies, and when in armies the use of metallic paint is most appropriate.

I think for me that the issue is not how it looks on the table but only if I have enjoyed painting it and if I learned something from the experience. If it looks good on the table or in a photo that can be useful because it gives me feedback to improve and the compliments help encourage me to continue, but that\'s it.

 

[Ritual]

I\'m not sure there are any photos of armies on the Rackham Store site, but here\'s one of the unit boxes with a quite decent looking unit, if I may say so!

Just imagine ten times as many minis and you\'ll get the idea!

The NMM is painted in a way to reflect a far away light source, so that they will look good from which ever direction you look at them. The reflections will not change, like they do on real metallics, but then, it won\'t do that on any of the other, regular, highlights like they would in real life.

 

[montka]

Very nice picture, but I think a hundred of them would look dull. Humans from all cultures love gold and silver ornamentation. It is simply more beautiful than yellow and grey, in the right proportions.

 

[Roachman]

Heh heh,

Yeah, even like on that box cover, you can see they were highlighting up and a touch to the left of the observer, and yet the shields are at different angles.

So if you let yourself get all absorbed in light effects, it then gets frustrating that working in three dimensions you are just never going to be able to get it all right and still be playable unless you do them all with high noon lighting, which is less than pleasing aesthetically to begin with, so why bother....???

I like the NMM effects I have seen, and putting them on an army leader seems like a fine idea to me even if it does not match the army lighting though because honestly, who is going to notice? Then, when you are posing your army with its NMM painted hero for the Golden Demon award, you can go ahead and arrange the lighting such that it matches the winning fig and uereka, best of both worlds... :drunk:

Now I just feel silly.

 

[Roachman]

It occurs to me that you could use white pearlescent to highlight metalics in much the same way you would highlight non-metalics to get the same effect, which.. might be redundant but... meh.

 

[Swordwind]

What we have here is someone who is insecure about thier hobby. As though the big boys will laugh at him for it. When it can be used in a game and therefore slightly less geeky, its an army. When its a stunning piece of art its a toy soldier.

Let me guess. You play 40k and nothing else right? Field of battle. Thats a good one. Whatever happened to the ROFL smiley?

 

[Roachman]

Hey, I\'ll fess up. It bugs me to tell people I play with dolls.

Cut the dude some slack eh?

 

[Einion]

Originally posted by montka
Models should belong to armies, or they are pointless shinies.

Oh what a shame, my entire collection is pointless shinies *bawl*

Einion

 

[AinuLainour]

This is CoolMINIorNot not CoolARMYorNot :drunk: (just checking that your on the right forum to bash display miniatures on).

 

[skeeve]

Originally posted by montka
I didn\'t see any armies by following that link, only a lot of single minis. Sorry to be a pain but I would like a direct link.

People who were there might remember it . Fully NMM Necron army on Adepticon 2005
here is link

http://www.adeptusminneapolis.com/nigel.shtml

What you don\'t realize that some people paint to play, some others paint to paint.
And those second care little what you think about coolness of armies.

 

[johnboyjjb]

What? You guys put them together and make armies out of them? And there is actually a game that can be played?

 

[No Such Agency]

I\'m late, but to this non-army painter, it seems the question has finally been answered:

(The answer is: \"people who are snobby about their own variety of painting, over others\")

 

[lono]

I\'m the cockney cock puncher! I punch left, I punch right, I\'m like connect four in cock punching terms!

And I\'ll be extending my mid-digit due to the severity required in this much needed cock-punch!

 

[Bill]

Any single mini is \"pointless and pathetic\" without an army? ??? That means that nearly every mini ever shown on CMON is pointless and pathetic. Your pedantic arguments about the army thing \" yeah, they\'re nice but 100 would look dull\" are bollocks - you hardly explain why metallics makes an army somehow better. Learn to appreciate the PAINTING side of the hobby dude!

 

[Torn blue sky]

LMFAO I might have had something to say, but Lono\'s comment caught me off guard.
...I think I just pissed myself a bit...

 

[squidders]

I\'ve seen the mona lisa and there are no metallic paints nor are there another 100 enigmatic smiling women in the gallery. It\'s still a fine painting and I would still like to own it.

I see many of the good minis here in the same light.

maybe there should be a \"Cool Army Or Not\" site somewhere hehehe.

 

[tomusannonymous]

i personally prefer nmm, its a lot more work, but it doesn\'t leave your mini\'s weapons all sparkly, looking like rough metal.. lately i have hardly touched the metallic paints :|~

 

[Roger Bunting]

If you think about it, along the arguement that painting metallics in nmm doesn\'t look good as it\'s painted from a static light source, then there\'s no point in doing any shading or highlights to metallics, as the lights in the room will create a natural effect. Hell, if they are metal figures, leave the area that will be metal completely bare, no need to paint them...

Good nmm or metallics, to me, aim to have the same aim, to control the look of metallic areas on a mini, one, perhaps letting a little natural light affect it still.

I, for one, paint (or rather, will paint, when I\'m feeling better) for both gaming and to produce well painted \"trinkets\". I see merit in both. I also see no problem with using either technique for both. An army, painted well in either technique will look good.

 

[Ritual]

Originally posted by Roachman
Hey, I\'ll fess up. It bugs me to tell people I play with dolls.

Cut the dude some slack eh?

Then you should stop playing with them and only paint them for display! I never play with my minis!