Golden Demon Quality

[Loose Loser]

Since I never saw Golden Demon competition in person I was wandering the quality of painting in 90s, specially young bloods winners ( as that's my painting goal ). I saw photographs of them in WD and they were very nicely painted. Photographs are one thing and seeing in person is something else. Question is little abstract but some comparison in sense of using colours and washes, tidiness and brush work.

 

[dieselmonkey]

Since I never saw Golden Demon competition in person I was wandering the quality of painting in 90s, specially young bloods winners ( as that's my painting goal ). I saw photographs of them in WD and they were very nicely painted. Photographs are one thing and seeing in person is something else. Question is little abstract but some comparison in sense of using colours and washes, tidiness and brush work.

I'll be honest, the technical quality of painting has improved massively since the 90s. I was actually a GD runner up in 88-90 (not finalist), but my painting would be seen as piss poor by today's GD finalists. Techniques, both in materials and brushwork have moved on hugely in the last 30 years. If you look closely as some of the older stuff on display in Warhammer World you can see the sheer difference in technical ability to the newer pieces in there.

 

[Loose Loser]

Thank you for reply. Do you have photos of your miniatures?

Yes, I did notice that plastics of today are sculpted so they catch washes and all with ease. I did paint some Nurgle Gutrot Spume and no matter how difficult it looks to paint it was effortless work compared to old metals. Not to mention that washes stick an flow like in dream. Where on old metals could be sometimes real nightmare. Not to mention 200+ colours from the pot and airbrush. Pigment load is another thing in today's paint. But what I saw, no matter how well painted today miniatures are, most of them ( painters ) are lacking charm that 90s GD had and I saw few pre 90s GD that are painted, converted and based on artistic, more romantic level. But I drifted away.

I mean, don't want to trash someones work because even to enter you had to be on your best of abilities but maybe miniatures are those that lack something. It's no problem to sculpt it in ZBrush with 1000 details and all. Don't really know where I'm going with this haha but it seems that I like older miniatures and charm that they had. Today's miniatures are more frame capture of some heroic over the top SFX fantasy movie. Drifted again.

 

[dieselmonkey]

Thank you for reply. Do you have photos of your miniatures?

Sadly not, they were all stolen from the display cabinet at the Nottingham store back in about 1991.

The main difference, in my eyes, as regards modern vs old sculpts is that newer sculpts are (in general) both far more 'realistic' looking and way more technically proficient, including textures etc that are designed to pick up washes well. Older sculpts were never designed with that sort of thing in mind, and they had a deliberately cartoonish, caricatured design that to me gives them more individuality, personality and 'soul', and it's just a design style I find much more appealing.

Having said that, the current, modern wave of GW sculptors have putting out some truly incredible models in the last five years since Kirby was ejected. All of the Necromunda and Blackstone Fortress stuff is full of personality and life, for example, and there are plenty of other wonderful new sculpts out there.

 

[Loose Loser]

That's a shame and unbelievable to me that someone would stole miniatures but then again what have I heard that people stole, unfortunately compared to those, stealing miniatures even make sense.

I do agree that there is very nice new models. They started to put humor again, but sometimes it doesn't work hehe like halfling BB team. Even there is technically beautiful miniatures I rarely got feeling that it's about army or characters. They got so many models now days that it's hard to say in general and I speak in general hehe So I will just said that 4th edition WHFB miniatures are the best!! Who is with me? haha

But I do hope that I will reach GD Young Bloods winner hehe

edit: Was thinking ( that's rare ), in comparison with video games and movies. Now days movies and video games ( talking of those high budget ) are to crisp and there is no mystique so to say. Remember watching movies like Terminator on VHS and similar movies and when you watch remastered, well, fog isn't fog, explosion isn't explosion etc. everything is on palm of a hand, you can clearly see things that you couldn't before. remember Robocop on VHS, I mean, half of it you need to imagine, now you could tell did someones Nike air bubble burst or not. No room left for imagination. Big Box games? Cover art that swallow you instantly then you start playing game and you could see barbarian in 16x16 pixel sprites, now days if it's not in your face, you don't know what is it. Even I drive FWD cars it seems I like to drift hehe but I think that's more less what I think about it. Today.

 

[Tex]

Since I never saw Golden Demon competition in person I was wandering the quality of painting in 90s, specially young bloods winners ( as that's my painting goal ). I saw photographs of them in WD and they were very nicely painted. Photographs are one thing and seeing in person is something else. Question is little abstract but some comparison in sense of using colours and washes, tidiness and brush work.

I'll be honest, the technical quality of painting has improved massively since the 90s. I was actually a GD runner up in 88-90 (not finalist), but my painting would be seen as piss poor by today's GD finalists. Techniques, both in materials and brushwork have moved on hugely in the last 30 years. If you look closely as some of the older stuff on display in Warhammer World you can see the sheer difference in technical ability to the newer pieces in there.

I agree entirely.
I hope not to bore you if I share my experience and pov.
In 2000 I've been lucky enough to get a bronze at GD: you can see my entry here http://forum.oldhammer.org.uk/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=3151
The pics are bad as the lighting is totally wrong, but in all honesty I can tell you that the minis still look NICELY painted: all solid colours are well blended, with very smooth transitions (that's a priority of mine: I'm the slowest possible painter because my minis must look perfectly blended even from an inch away ); by contrast, the metallics are just drybrushed on, with some Scorched brown wash to finish them off
After the GD, all awarded painters where invited to the Nottingham HQ for some interviews, the photo shoot, a prize giving (looting the warehouse ) and a factory tour, that allowed me to closely examine some of the long admired armies and minis published in WD and on the miniatures boxes: at the time 'eavy metal PJs were setting the benchmark and many GD winners were quite proud to actually feel they were not far off that (or even better!).
Basically, at that time being able to blend two colours was enough to make you a painting god; if you were also able to sculpt some greenstuff you were the father of gods.
All that goodness looks like an amateur effort nowadays for all the reasons that dieselmonkey has already stated; I confess I must force myself not to strip and repaint my GD entries, as they don't remotely match my current (good, but VERY far from exceptional) level: consider that in the meantime I took a break from painting and, being so slow, in the last 21 years I painted only a few miniatures: since 2000 my style and skill have (considerably, to my eyes) evolved because the hobby itself has evolved, with real professionals constantly developing and showcasing new painting theories and techniques to test and make your own, with the help of a new universe of materials, mediums and mediA.

 

[Loose Loser]

Thank you for reply. Oh man, bronze 20 years ago? OK, I'm going to sleep now. Great minis and I think anybody always likes to hear story or two.

 

[Loose Loser]

Fantastically painted. Really take that much time? No wonder but then again precision is precision and the colour blending is something else, I mean, fantastic. I aim for young bloods quality so please don't tell me that you were 17 in 2000 hehe and that Orc Boss, one of my favorite miniatures, had him long ago.

As I was thinking ( not that rare anymore ) I do like some of new miniatures if not half of them hehe Dark Eldars, I mean who ever designed them should get a medal. Those from 3rd edition didn't looked good to me except some of grotesques models since they were more toward Cenobite Pin Head. New Necrons looking great also. Now that I started naming few I realized that there are plenty good new models so I'll stop since this is oldhammer forum hehe

 

[symphonicpoet]

I suppose at least some of us are here precisely because the new sculpting and painting styles don't appeal to us. Even if technically proficient there's just something about an airbrushed miniature that feels . . . cold to me. Plastic, if you'll excuse the pun. I know it's popular to say painting has improved, but I don't really buy it. I think it's more a matter of the style having changed. There were skilled professionals painting stuff for GW then as now, and even if amateur sci-fi and fantasy modeling have improved as the hobby has grown, I don't think you can make that same argument about the graphic arts or the larger modeling community. The style has absolutely changed. And techniques and materials have changed. But . . . quality? I don't buy it. I've seen Brian Ansel's collection on display at Foundry. I've seen contest winners locally and nationally in any number of styles; new, old, fantasy, historic, styrene, white metal. I've gazed in awe at model railroads, giant naval models, dioramas . . . There's just no way I'm willing to buy that the new stuff is actually better than the old. I'll believe different. I'll accept that it's more popular right now. But better? No.

 

[Loose Loser]

On that, I saw few techniques that are used today on miniatures that were on models or army tanks, air plains and Ma.K. models or some other mecha in 90s or even 80s, those were very realistic with rust and all, chipped parts like they doing it today on space marines and vehicles. But then artistic style of wargaming miniatures specially GW of 90s didn't "allow" in sense that there would be no sense in doing it. Now days with characters that are more toward Magic The Gathering and similar ( kinda GW lost sense how their goblins look like before ) it's almost encouraging to paint models like that with all those techniques. For airbrush, I don't like it, not one bit. Not that it's "cheating" or anything, but models look very dry and thin. I did some drawings with airbrush more then 15 years ago and back then I didn't like that dryness and year ago I saw airbrushed then brush work over, some those AOS flying steam dwarfs, no, didn't look good at all. Of course from painter to painter but, dryness is always there if not heavily covered.

 

[Tex]

Fantastically painted. Really take that much time? No wonder but then again precision is precision and the colour blending is something else, I mean, fantastic. I aim for young bloods quality so please don't tell me that you were 17 in 2000 hehe and that Orc Boss, one of my favorite miniatures, had him long ago.

As I was thinking ( not that rare anymore ) I do like some of new miniatures if not half of them hehe Dark Eldars, I mean who ever designed them should get a medal. Those from 3rd edition didn't looked good to me except some of grotesques models since they were more toward Cenobite Pin Head. New Necrons looking great also. Now that I started naming few I realized that there are plenty good new models so I'll stop since this is oldhammer forum hehe

Thanks! It takes ME that much time I'm sure many would do the same in a few sessions!
I was 24 in 2000: I had been painting miniatures for 10 years after having indulged in military modelling since I was around 9 IIRC.
In 2000 I was gobsmacked when I realised that the winning youngbloods where little kids, way younger than the age limit for their category!
All in all, one of the biggest advantages offered by the internet to a painter is the opportunity to compare his/her work with thousands others' and constantly learn new skills from those who are better than him/her: in "ancient" times this opportunity was limited to a few local fellow hobbyists or - where miniatures where quite an exotic thing, such as here in Italy - to the pages of WD.

 

[Loose Loser]

I remember seeing in WD young bloods entry ( I think he was winner ) age 14 with Priest of some sort. Painted in quality that I stride for. In 2000 I was 17 and I remember how my miniatures looked haha more like Jackson Pollock's sneeze then anything that you could see in WD. I wasn't familiar with low number brushes and as I draw and similar I wasn't familiar with brushes almost at all ( only big numbers for washes on paper ). Since then I did get familiar with small number brushes and even I didn't paint very often, miniatures looked far better then last attempt as minds work in background, subconscious level because drawing and painting once you develop skill it's all about thinking game where goes what and most of that emerging from back of the head.

edit : of course that goes to what you said, that now days you could go on web and watch all other miniatures how they are painted and all, but I think no matter how accessible these images are, one should be careful because too much looking tend to put the spirit and talent in sleep or slow it down as mind starts to think about other people work, that could end up in being counterproductive or lack of steam so to say. That was my contribution of 2nd grade sentence.