If NMM doesn\'t look realistic, then neither does highlighting and shadowing a miniature. Solid colors would look most realistic wouldn\'t they? After all a blue shirt doesn\'t have black folds, a dark blue underside and light blue creases.
Painting a miniature is all about enhancing the illusion of lifesize lighting effects on a miniature. Painters do this on a 2d canvas. We do it on a 3d canvas. That\'s the difference. There is nothing wrong with using shaded metallic paints. But there is also nothing wrong with trying to portray those tricky reflections with NMM.
The art form is all about guiding the observer\'s eye to what you wish to emphasize on a miniature. For example, if you have a conan miniature holding up a sword, and looking up, the sculpt already leads the observer\'s eye on a vertical axis. This can further be emphasized with a vertical reflection of light on the sword using NMM, and topped with a star beam at the tip to finish the composition and have the observers eye stop at that tip with oohs and aahs.
As others have pointed out, execution is key. But there is a learning curve, so not every execution is going to be perfect.
Choosing between metallics and NMM is not a choice made between good or evil, it\'s just a style and painter\'s preference. Neither is more realistic than the other. How do you define realistic on a miniature? Would it be more realistic to put on a miniature knit shirt on a mini rather than painting pewter? Or is \"realistic\" simply an unreal illusion geared for an observer?
The difficulty of the technique aside, these are all decissions an artist has to make. Who\'s to say what\'s right or wrong? Personally, the only judgement I can bring is based on how pleasing to the eye the finished painted miniature is.
