The \"NMM Controversy\"

[Alchemist]

I\'m pretty new to this so forgive me if this has been discussed to death already. In the 3-4 months I have been painting and searching the internet for tips, I\'ve noticed that there is no more controversial topic among miniature painters than \"NMM\", aka Non-Metallic Metals. Some swear by them and never would touch metallic paints, while others say both approaches have their place. Everyone seems to agree that NMM are more difficult to paint than regular metallics, although I have also seen it argued that doing metallics well is a whole \'nother ballgame.

So what\'s the deal? Why are NMM as popular as they are? Are they \"better\"? And if both have their place, what is it? If a painter is versed in both, in what situations might he or she use NMM and in what situations would it be regular metallics?

Please illuminate me on this whole NMM Controversy!

 

[DIablofollower]

Well this is definitely one of those topics that a whole book can be written on and although I am not one of the great painters out there by far, I have been around for quite a bit and will do my best to shed some light on this for you.

I think there are a couple of reasons as to why NMM has gotten so popular in the last few years. First of all, in general it does take a bit more time, skill and precision to paint as well as over all understanding of the reflections you are trying to paint. So with that said seeing NMM that has been well done and executed tells you a lot about the fact that the artist who has painted it is generally quite skilled. Second of all, and I think this is probably the more important reason is that for NMM to look good it has to be well done. If the time isn\'t taken to paint NMM carefully then the area painted will just look gray or yellow. On the other hand when it comes to painting with true metals, they give the painter the opportunity to not have to be as careful because of the fact that they automatically give the desired reflections. So all in all the second reason that NMM is so popular is that generally there is more time and care put into painting it as apposed to metallics therefore making it look neater.

I wouldn\'t say they are \"better\" but would argue that they look better on some minis than true metals would. For example on miniatures such as the Eldar or elves of any kind, I think NMM looks better. Which brings me to your next question, that if both have their place what it is. This is going to vary from person to person based on personal taste. But in my opinion NMM fits better on minis that have a general clean or \"good\" feel to them. While metallics work for more rustic or dirty looking minis.

Hope this helps and more importantly makes sense.

 

[ScottRadom]

Well I am perfectly willing to throw my hat into this thread.

I hate NMM. I won\'t say it can\'t look good or that it takes less skill. It\'s difficult to do, and I know I can\'t do it and haven\'t ever even tried it.

As a primarily gamer oriented painted I just think it looks super goofy on the table. Diablofollower makes an excellent point in that it just works better for some ranges than others, but in general I turn my nose up at NMM.

Every model I paint in metalic colors reminds me that painted nice metal is not easy. I struggle most every day trying to practice better metalics then I have previously.

I will say that another thing about metalics is that to paint a table quality mini with metalics is much easier doing the old school drybrush a couple times and give \'er a wash. No such easy method for NMM.

As to why the technique is so popular.... I think you touched on it in your post. Painting NMM well is easily recognized as a sign of painting prowess. Painting Metals may perhaps be perceived as following the herd?

But in your searches I urge you to read two articles here on metalics that I quite like.

Matt Sterbentz\'s article on true metalics using citadel washes. Well written and a great place to see the effort put into metals using basic techniques to get advanced results.

Then there\'s the sickeningly comlex article by Automaton. Read that over and then forward it to someone who tells you metals are the easy way out! YOWZA! that is an article and a half!

But why not try both techniques and see which is more pleasing for you to paint, and then admire when finished?

 

[Backstabbeth]

I am not a fan of metallic paints. not because they cant produce excellent results, they do if used properly. Simply because I have never been able to make them work for me to my satisfaction. I have usually ended up with a mini, that may be nicely painted, but just looks like a mini with metallic paint on it. I prefer NNM because i dont get that feeling of regular paint and THEN metallic paint. its all just integrated.

However I recently commented on a post where i thought the metallics were done exceptionally well. let me see if i can find it.
ah yes, here we are Link to thread

the bottom line is that it is all subjective. I see several pros use both techniques effectively. i dont realy see the \'contreversy\' to be honest, just people who have different opinions. its really a coke v pepsi thing IMO. And i dont think EFFECTIVE application of one or the other is measured in difficulty, but moreso the vividness and detail the bring to the model.

anyway, i think its good to learn both, i honestly dont think either are going anywhere any time soon

 

[Aliengod3]

This is like republican and democrat for politics. Everyone has their view on what is better. To me it is just another technique that I would like to master and then never use it again since I like true metallics. One main problem I have, as do others, is that NMM is a technique that was developed mainly for simulating metallic items on canvas type paintings. The canvas is a flat surface, 2D, so I believe that NMM should be left for 2D surfaces, not 3D surfaces. Even though this is my belief I do not think using the technique should be frowned upon because I have seen some very well painted minis using the technique. Yellow One and Alexi Z have painted some unbelieveably great minis using the technique.

 

[laurence]

Controversial topic.

Being pretty versed in the paintage of NMM, TM\'s (true metals) and now SE-NMM (which I\'m doing on my latest mini) I thought I might share my thoughts on this topic.

I attribute Rackham minis for really contributing to the popularity of NMM in contrast to the GW/Historical style metallic painting. When Rackham was releasing all their early sculpts (awesome sculpts) they were all presented painted with NMM\'s by incredible painters. At this time everyone was doing it. Guys and gals like Jennifer Haley, Cyril Abati, Arjay, Alexi Z etc really mastered this NMM technique further fueling the popularity of this technique. Then came along guys like Allan C and Nano, who painted metals with metallic paints using loads of washes and glazes to create amazing effects. That caused a lot of painters to think that metals were actually really cool, and consequently, many painters switched over to TM\'s.

I think that both techniques are equally challenging and fun to paint. It comes down to the choice of the painter and the style he/she are striving to achieve. And sometimes where you thought that NMM\'s would suit the mini, you may discover that TM\'s would have worked better and vice-versa.

I\'ve run out of stuff to say at this moment. So I\'ll just finish by saying that I love both techniques equally and I\'d never discriminate against a mini just because it\'s been painted using NMM or TM\'s.

 

[mattsterbenz]

I like both and use both equally.

Here\'s my thoughts on the subject:

Metallic paints in general just look \"gritty\" and dark. This is because we cannot highlight metallic paints, we can only shade them. And because of this we are forced to shade even darker than we would normally. This produces a very dark result. These can be advantageous by using them on figures such as orks, space marines, tanks, etc...

NMM produces a much smoother, brighter result. It\'s therefore better to use on figures such as elves and other clean fantasy type models. Also, you cannot paint lighting effects/reflections in metals, so you must use NMM if you wish to use those techniques.

One thing that I do not like about NMM is seeing a very dirty, gritty model (such as a space marine with chipping all over it) and then seeing bright, reflective NMM. It just doesn\'t make sense to me to have both of these on the same figure.

On the contrary, I do not like seeing figures with very bright, smooth painting and then have dark, dirty looking armor/metals.

-Matt

 

[Neil H]

As a \'hater\' of NMM the worse thing about it is when you see the piece in the round, they look way better in 2D photo form and often come over as flat and dull.

I\'ll stick to Metallic paint, just follow Jakob\'s style.

Just my opinion.

Neil

 

[Ritual]

I don\'t really see where the controversy is. NMM is a style (rather than a technique) that gives a cerain look. If you want to achieve a clean, comic-book illustration type look, then NMM is a good choice.

Metallics, on the other hand, creates a different look and will be the best option to create a number of other visual styles.

The idea that NMM would in some way be more difficult and demand higher skills than metallics to pull off is just nonsense. It takes just as much skill to do metallics that really look like metal and not just something that\'s been painted with metallic paint. Because metallic paint does not create instant life-like metal. It takes a lot of work to make it look good. As seen from some of the responses in this thread, this seems to be one of the reasons why many chose NMM. Even though NMM also demands a lot of work, it seems people are more willing to accept that than accepting that metallics take a lot of effort. ???

Also, it\'s a false assumption that NMM would be the choice of the \"top painters\". I have been to a couple of high end painting competitions in Europe (World Expo, this summer, for instance) and metallics is definitely the most commonly used.

One thing about NMM is that it is most effective when minis are photographed. Well done NMM looks great in photos, whereas it looks slightly less great in real life. Metallics, on the other hand, is harder to photograph as it\'s more difficult to control how they will catch light and how they will reflect it.

@mattsterbenz
Of course you can highlight metallics! Get yourself a bottle of VMC Metallic Medium and use it for highlighting.

 

[nels0nmac]

For me I prefer ( and use ) NMM. Painting either to a hard standard is difficult for either style. As earlier pointed out some figures work well using the grittier TM style ( Chaos especially or medieval knights, and generally from what I have seen, larger scale minis - 54mm + can look better in TM.

The reason I chose NMM is because it helped me understand directional lighting and highlighting accordingly. This helped me improve my NMM but also all the other non metallic areas of the mini as well. Now that I have reached an OK standard I could apply that knowledge to TM as the understanding of lighting is pretty much the same for both.

I like the control you get with NMM. I find it easier to get different colours for different effects. My main \"beef\" with TM is that at some point when holding the mini to view it there will be times when the light will reflect off an area you have lovingly painted and all you will see is the reflected light, not all your hard work. A minor point and one you could argue is more akin to real life.
With NMM painting it doesn\'t matter what direction you view it from you will always see the same highlights and shading; which is also the same way that non metallic parts of a model will be painted.

 

[Ritual]

Originally posted by nels0nmac
The reason I chose NMM is because it helped me understand directional lighting and highlighting accordingly. This helped me improve my NMM but also all the other non metallic areas of the mini as well. Now that I have reached an OK standard I could apply that knowledge to TM as the understanding of lighting is pretty much the same for both.

This is a good point! I used to be very much in the NMM camp, and while getting the hang of how to \"light\" the metal areas I realised that this was a universal thing, and not something that had to do with just NMM. Nowadays, I use mostly metallics, but the knowledge about lighting and placement of shadows/highlights I have from painting NMM is invaluable.

Originally posted by nels0nmac
I like the control you get with NMM. I find it easier to get different colours for different effects. My main \"beef\" with TM is that at some point when holding the mini to view it there will be times when the light will reflect off an area you have lovingly painted and all you will see is the reflected light, not all your hard work. A minor point and one you could argue is more akin to real life.
With NMM painting it doesn\'t matter what direction you view it from you will always see the same highlights and shading; which is also the same way that non metallic parts of a model will be painted.

Actually, IMO, the \"trick\" of doing really good metallics is to learn how to control just the things you mention here. By using both metallic paints and matte paints and using the NMM way of \"lighting\" the objects you can achieve this.

 

[Ghaffasa]

For some extremely nice metallics, you should have a look at Jakob Nielsen\'s chaos knights. Simply mind-blowing.

I\'d say properly painted metallics are at least equally, if not even more difficult to pull off than NMM.

NMM can also look amazing if executed correctly though.

 

[nosirrahkcaz]

Im not a great painter first of all but Im on the NMM bandwagon at the moment as the key to a great NMM object is blending, so therefore I think it helps me become a better painter as I really have to take time and work on that particular aspect to get a decent result. I also lean towards NMM because when i was in the military you never see bright shiny metallic objects, anything that reflects light that is metal has been dulled down with coats of paint or \"blueing\" so I think you get a more militaristic paint job that way. Either way both can be painted to get a great result as many have already attested two and its truly just a preference thing. Try both see what you like the best and go for it.

 

[Einion]

Originally posted by Neil H
As a \'hater\' of NMM the worse thing about it is when you see the piece in the round, they look way better in 2D photo form and often come over as flat and dull.

That pretty much sums up my view too.

Even when done to a super-high standard I think NMM for shiny metals generally (as in more often than not) looks wrong in the round, especially if you\'re actually rotating the mini in your hand or moving your viewpoint from side to side.

The exception for me is heavily-oxidised metals like weathered brass/bronze, which don\'t look metallic IRL any more.

Einion

 

[supervike]

We haven\'t seen this argument in some time!

I love painted minis. I don\'t care if they are metallics or NMM. They both trip my cool meter.

Although I don\'t understand the \'purist\' part of the equation either.

I mean, you don\'t use wood infused paint to paint a chair!

 

[Alchemist]

Thanks everyone, this has been very helpful. It is weird, after trying NMM on a couple figures I have wanted to go back to TM, but felt mildy guilty, as if it wasn\'t the proper artistic thing to do. I\'m glad to get feedback that this is bogus

And ScottRadom, I am familiar with the Automaton article--it is very helpful! As with many mini techniques, there is a slight Wizard of Oz effect...\"You mean, that\'s all you have to do?\"

 

[matty1001]

Tried both, enjoy both, will continue to use both.

Peace and love...

 

[Alchemist]

Although I don\'t understand the \'purist\' part of the equation either.

I mean, you don\'t use wood infused paint to paint a chair!

I\'m not sure this analogy works because when you paint a chair you are covering the wood grain--unless you are staining it, which is a different matter--which is very different from painting pewter (metal) to look like iron or steel (metal). In other words, you paint wood to make it look like something other than wood while you paint metal to make it look even more metal-like, and/or another kind of metal.

Now staining wood is different and more analogous to the technique I\'ve seen of polishing metals on a mini rather than painting them.

 

[Trevor]

Also, you cannot paint lighting effects/reflections in metals, so you must use NMM if you wish to use those techniques.

I\'m pretty sure you can, there are some minis in TM metal with firelight effects on them out there and I put brown tones and blue tones in the sword on my Gandalf last year to represent sky and earth reflections (not entirely successful, but thats a different story).

I think this will be the next big thing, I can think of a few likely candidates to give it a go...

 

[Aliengod3]

Originally posted by Ritual
Of course you can highlight metallics! Get yourself a bottle of VMC Metallic Medium and use it for highlighting.

I have metallic medium, have not used it though, do you just mix it with the color you want to highlight with or do you highlight directly with it?