NMM. Why?

[Dedwrekka]

I know this has been said before, but...Why is NMM so popular?

I mean, I can understand it for certain cituations, but why has it become a requirment for above average miniatures. I don\'t pretend to be anything but average, but why is it a must have on almost every winning entrance to most major competitions?

 

[Baltius]

It\'s true that NMM is very prevalent in Competitions in the US, they see things differently in the UK. Generally, NMM is seen poorly in the UK. I personally like a well painted miniature NMM or real metals, doesn\'t matter as long as it is well done. I think NMM is seen as a difficult technique, so in competition the perception is that more work was put into a NMM piece than a piece that was painted with metallics.

 

[finn17]

Grey?

I think NMM is a brillaint technique when well executed but, it is only one technique amongst many. In my opinion well painted metallics are as good as well painted NMM any day.

NMM is the \'flavour of the month\' in some people\'s eyes. I suspect that is because although it is not a new technique, it is relatively new in the mini painting world. It has also received a boost from the success of Rackham, whose painters favour this technique.

IMO the problem with NMM is that for every well executed example, you tend to see 50-100 or so, failed attempts.

A classic exponent of this technique is Arjay, whose chrome effects are legendary. However, how many dull grey swords, axes etc are described as NMM on this site?

As far as I am concerned NMM is only NMM if the end result looks like metal. If the end results look like stone, plastic or cardboard then those techniques should rightly be called NMS, NMP and NMC. Or, even more accurately, S, P, C.

 

[ZaPhOd]

I agree Finn! Too often, people who cannot do NMM see people who try to do NMM and think, well, it is NMM so it must be good! Not so. This is not only misleading to the viewers but also to the artist. I mean, if my NMM does not look good, I would want people to tell me how to make it look good.
The thing about NMM, is that is it supposed to look like metal! Doing 3 layer progressions for NMM simply won\'t cut it IMO. That is the only difference with metallics and NMM. Quick washed metallics look okay, but sloppy NMM looks like crap!

 

[Jericho]

I still think the miniature is judged on the merit of its execution, not the selection of its techniques. If someone does NMM for the sake of NMM and does a shitty job of it, I\'ll be sure to let them know about it

The thing that bugs me is when mediocre painters try to use NMM exclusively all of a sudden without grasping the theory of it first.

I mean, how many times have you seen GW\'s plain old barded steed with a horizon line halfway up the little collar bit (which is on a 45 degree tilt!) for no reason whatsoever? I don\'t think I want to know...

 

[U4-Welcome]

Message original : Jericho
I mean, how many times have you seen GW\'s plain old barded steed with a horizon line halfway up the little collar bit (which is on a 45 degree tilt!) for no reason whatsoever? I don\'t think I want to know...

Oh, that\'s because he\'s actually in a valley surrounded by tall mountains.

Meh, I do NMM because I find it fun, and because I\'ve never managed to get good metals with metallics (I always find the pigments aren\'t ground finely enough, but then why can others do it ? ???)

 

[Flashman14]

There are examples of that kind of thing - figures deep in foilage and shrubbery whos shield reflects a barren desert landscape ... heh! Talk about missing the point!

I would like to see more examples of thoughtful SENMM - like maybe dungeon lighting with only torches reflecting off armor - (like the one hovering at number 1 right now only darker and not in a diorama settin)

Also I\'d like to see just other stuff being reflected - a Medusa!! Cool!! Another city scape! Neat!! the painter himself!! Wow!

 

[PF]

Message original : Flashman14
Also I\'d like to see just other stuff being reflected - a Medusa!! Cool!! Another city scape! Neat!! the painter himself!! Wow!

Another city scape:
http://www.coolminiornot.com/index.php?id=9849&c=All&m=All&nm=none
I suppose most of you knew it but it is always good to see again good works

 

[barkel]

NMM shmenMM!

One of the biggest disadvantages of NMM is that it is usually done from a certain vantage. So, if you happen to be looking at the mini from the wrong angle it might not look right, or even good. This is the main reason I don\'t like the highly reflective NMM styles (SENMM).

I dig the \"realistic\" NMM approach. Not every sword has to reflect the world around it. Eventually some savant is going to have a guy holding a shield that is reflecting his enemy who is holding a shield that is reflecting him back, with his shield reflecting the enemy, reflecting him, reflecting his enemy, et cetera.

Personally I dig the metallics. This has a lot to do with the fact that I can\'t get the blasted NMM to work for me. I like it, but it never, ever looks right when I attempt it. I have gotten quite good with metallics, however.

If you put a lot of work into the metallics they will look every bit as good as NMM. The real clever painters are the ones who are so good you cannot tell which style you are looking at.

barkel

 

[ZaPhOd]

Originally posted by barkel
One of the biggest disadvantages of NMM is that it is usually done from a certain vantage. So, if you happen to be looking at the mini from the wrong angle it might not look right, or even good.

I disagree somewhat. It is still people that do not understand the concept and who cannot blend smoothly enough that are flooding everyone with anti-nmm thoughts. The thing about GOOD Nmm is that it shoul dbe difficult to differentiate between the styles. It should LOOK like metal!

 

[barkel]

Agreed.

post by barkel:
The real clever painters are the ones who are so good you cannot tell which style you are looking at.

post by ZaPhOd:
The thing about GOOD Nmm is that it should be difficult to differentiate between the styles.

-I agree completely. I don\'t hate NMM. I actually like it a lot. I just stink at it. I am far more skilled (If you can call my level \"skill\") with metallics.

My problem with NMM is not in it\'s execution, but in the reality of it. This being fantasy notwithstanding, I think a person heading to battle with armor polished to such a high shine that it reflects the NY skyline is a bit on the ridiculous side. It is interesting, and the Witch Elf to which I allude is stunning, I gave it a 10. But it doesn\'t look 100% believable.

Here are a few examples of NMM I think look smashing:

http://www.coolminiornot.com/index.php?id=39601&c=All&m=All&nm=none

http://www.coolminiornot.com/index.php?id=35602&c=All&m=All&nm=none

http://www.coolminiornot.com/index.php?id=38390&c=All&m=All&nm=none


And here are a few examples of metallics done equally well:

http://www.coolminiornot.com/index.php?id=38651&c=All&m=All&nm=none

http://www.coolminiornot.com/index.php?id=7678&c=All&m=All&nm=none

http://www.coolminiornot.com/index.php?id=21243&c=All&m=All&nm=none

http://www.coolminiornot.com/index.php?id=31079&c=All&m=All&nm=none

barkel

ps. Sadly, it was far harder to find examples superior examples of metallics than superior NMM.

 

[alexgrunt]

My 2 cents...

I\'ve done some minis using NMM... In fact, even my metallics are usually NMM with metallic glaze on (like this one).

Anyway, didn\'t you notice that NMM was nicer in photo than IRL? I mean, have you ever seen Rackham minis? The general reaction is saying something like \" Waoh, thank you Photoshop\"...

Now, as Barkel said, \"Sadly, it was far harder to find examples superior examples of metallics than superior NMM.\"
That\'s right, and it is due to the fact that the metal pigment isn\'t as fine as regular ones.

NMM is excellent for 2D painting, or flat minis, as no metallic can give the illusion of volume.
Well, that was my 2 cents...

 

[ZaPhOd]

Originally posted by alexgrunt
Anyway, didn\'t you notice that NMM was nicer in photo than IRL? I mean, have you ever seen Rackham minis? The general reaction is saying something like \" Waoh, thank you Photoshop\"...

No. That is just it and the point that most viewers do not understand. Great NMM looks friggin amazing in real life. It is far tighter looking, and the highlights etc are far sharper than normal metals. Again, the key is smooth blending and high contrast.

 

[Kendaric]

I use mostly NMM... But that\'s because I\'ve never been able to get a realistic look with metallics paints.

In fact both are very good I thin, as long as they are well executed. And it\'s true that a grey sword with always look ugly, while a simple coat of metallic paint can de the trick for a gaming mini.

So why is it so popular in competitions ?

With NMM you can make loads of effects.... Such as \"did\" in a sword without having to do it on the mini (Rackham is very good at it), you can add reflexions easily, for example I can\'t see how to paint chrome with metallics...

Well, it may also be for it\'s quite new in the miniature world and painters are not yet accustomed to it.... It was so some time ago at least, now it is SENMM\'s turn to become more and more popular...

 

[TobiWan]

I seldom see good NMM. Most stuff looks like stone or worse - but somehow a lot of people seem to like it...
Beat me for this but I even don\'t like the NMM on Cyril\'s scrap thrall. And I especially can\'t stand all this chrome SENMM.
If you do it right you can do a lot with metallics, too. I still wait to see some really good weathering done in NMM but up to now all attempts I\'ve seen were half-hearted. That\'s because it gets a lot of more work once you have to work irregularities into your smooth blending. Painting clean is often easier than painting dirty - if you paint \'dirty\' the right way, at least.

A pro I have for NMM is that it makes some rather dull areas seem more interesting on a mini... but you can do that with metallics, too.

Have a nice day,
Tobi

 

[Coyote]

I think there is definately a flavour of the month thing with NMM.

I think mostly this is because people weren\'t really doing anything with metallics. If you were lucky it was a basic shade and a basic highlight. It was boring, a non-entity on the model. With NMM it was interesting and new.

Now, people are responding by upping what is done with metallics. Still, they\'re stuck with the large grain size in metallics.

Paint manufacturers need to make better metallics.

In the end, think of it like that movie you saw as a kid. The special effects were great at the time. Then, you grew older and get more sophisticated. When you watch that movie again you notice all the problems with the special effects you didn\'t see at first.

Right now, NMM is like a new special effect. Everyone loves it, but people start getting more sophisticated and the shine wears off.

 

[calabdark]

i think one point for consideration is its really difficult to produce decent photos of metallics , you can have a mini painted using metallics that looks great in rl but a often seems to lose the depth and highlights in the pic, due to the highly reflective nature of metallics im guessing, yet its much easier to get a decent pic of a mini painted in the nmm technique. this thought is only in regards to minis displayed online obviously, but i wonder if its possible that some artists having struggled to get decent scores (i believe that theres quite a few people who are quite affected by their cmon scores) for their minis painted with metallics have fared better with their nmm minis, so are more inclined to post their minis painted with the nmm technique.
one other thing id like to mention in regards to the poor nmm attempts that people seem to complain about, i dont think many people can instantly paint good nmm and a lot of people do want to learn it, so you are going to get a lot of pics of not so good nmm, how is anyone supposed to learn the technique if they dont attempt it and post pics in an attempt to get some feedback, i know everyone goes on about its an advanced technique but at what point can you decide you are ready to try the technique. i think its a little harsh to look critically on people for posting their learning attempts.
oh well those are a couple of my thoughts on the subject.

 

[AAvH-Darkblade]

Originally posted by finn17
I think NMM is a brillaint technique when well executed but, it is only one technique amongst many. In my opinion well painted metallics are as good as well painted NMM any day.

NMM is the \'flavour of the month\' in some people\'s eyes. I suspect that is because although it is not a new technique, it is relatively new in the mini painting world. It has also received a boost from the success of Rackham, whose painters favour this technique.

IMO the problem with NMM is that for every well executed example, you tend to see 50-100 or so, failed attempts.

A classic exponent of this technique is Arjay, whose chrome effects are legendary. However, how many dull grey swords, axes etc are described as NMM on this site?

As far as I am concerned NMM is only NMM if the end result looks like metal. If the end results look like stone, plastic or cardboard then those techniques should rightly be called NMS, NMP and NMC. Or, even more accurately, S, P, C.

Hallelujah, sing it to the choir Brother Finn

 

[Dedwrekka]

I love to see the \'dull\' NMM and my main problem is with HRNMM (highly reflective Non-metalic metalics) and SENMM
My main problems with these NMM types are:

a) I cant do it very well
b) It\'s that reflective yet you almost never see a glint of light off the item from the sun or a light source.
c) here in the US NMM on a mini means almost instant success in a competition, over metalics.
d) I think it needs to be on a 2D object (or at least on armour that you can\'t see the other side of) to be of any wow-ing effect, but you see it on swords and almost everything.
e) It\'s used so much and yet it\'s still put into the \'that\'s so origional\' catagory when people see it.

Personaly I\'d like to see a metalic paint that is smooth and not so rough and grainy, but then again most of these mini\'s are wargamming minis and and metal would probably be beaten and re forged and broken that it might be that grainy.

 

[Chrispy]

Okay, here\'s my take. I\'m only saying this once so everyone might wanna bookmark this thread and call me on it later. :

I prefer NMM. And that\'s not because I belive it\'ll get me a high score/ win a competition/ because I\'m American/ because it\'s popular. As amny of you know, I\'m a freelance, trained artist and so it\'s a LOT easier to figure out NMM than metallics because I have to use it when I\'m painting anything or using pastels and the like. If I used mettalics, the instructor would be like, \"What the heck s this, and why is it so flat?\" it\'s also because I don\'t do too well with metallic blends even though I own metallics and have expiramented with them in NMM techniques (we need a name for that, MNMM just sounds stupid).

That said, NMM is better for some people than others and they just prefer it. Some for the reasons stated above, some also fr the following reasons:

Once learned, it can be mastered with anything.
It can be used in conjunction with on source lighting (another thechnique that doesn\'t seem to be causing as much as an uproar).
It can be slightly colored metal.
It can show rust and verdigris without changing from gloss to opaque.
It does not reflect, but that is a good thing since metal is not as shiny as, say, a silver color used for highlighting.

It\'s hard to say when the debate for NMM Vs. Metallics will end, if ever. But for right now, use what you want just don\'t violently impress your own thoughts on to someone else.


Wish I had a peace smiley...