Sorry but I've read all this and I personally think that decals belong to model planes and vehicles. Anyone that uses decals for eyes IMO are cheating as this is someone else's work. OK if you are painting a plane but figure and bust painters should be above this and able to paint their own eyes. If you don't agree with me...fine. It's my opinion and I am sticking to it.
Is there "Cheating" in figure paint?
- Thread starter skeeterbuck
- Start date
Help Support planetFigure:
Tubby-Nuts2
A Fixture
Hi Jazz,
I truly think that all opinions are welcome and are respected! .. and as you say not everyone has to agree with them. .. However! ... A thought, just for your consideration. A modeller that has become disabled with a progressive illness, that effects there hands, and the ability to hold and feel items etc. Such as a brush!., who, where once able to do the eyes free-hand! ... but now cannot. Does that person have to give up this, 'Hobby', or is unable to show the rest of the hard work that they put into a figure, without being labelled a, 'Cheat' ! because he has had to use these decals ?? .. Then surely if decals only belong all those that do, AVF, Aircraft, are they also 'Cheats', because they have not painted the insignia by free hand?... and by the same ethos, those that use stencils, are they 'Cheats' ?
Would it not be fairer to say, .. that the whole subject is relative to those who still can, as opposed to those who cannot, or are physically unable ??.. without being labelled with the horrendous word of 'Cheat'. .. If a modeller is open and honest, when asked about such things.. such as,' I have some real problems with alignment',. So I used, decals as a template, and over painted! them. Then the viewer is aware of the methods used.
Mark
skeeterbuck
Well-Known Member
Thanks to all who have commented on this subject. I also want to point out that the title of this thread should read "figure painting" not "figure paint" That was my goof.
As to my original post, If you competing in a contest that have stated rules that's one thing. Also, I think that it goes without saying that someone passing off another's work as their own is despicable behavior.
What I was referring to is someone just shows you their figure or post on the forum showing their latest effort and it's looked down upon because of some item or technique that is used that others either don't use or don't know how to use. Let's face it all of use use shortcuts in one way or another. Nobody I know makes their own paint or brushes like the old masters did. Some paint with acrylic, some with oils, some with enamel. Is there a hierarchy in the type of paint you use? If you paint with oils, since that's what the old masters used, do you look down on painters using those new fandangled acrylics? Are they somehow cheating by not using techniques or tools that are not over 50 years, 75 years, 100 years or more old?
What wrong with using decals? Say you are painting a US GI in 54mm and you use a decal to represent the flag patch on their shoulder. There is no way, no matter how good a painter you are you could match the detail of a digital decal. As long as it looks like a cloth patch instead of a decal when you're finished. Why not use the new materials that are available today?
If you use pre packaged scenic material instead of scrounging through the garden or forest for these items, is this somehow cheating?
Also, how extreme do you want to go with this idea? If you don't sculpt and cast you own figures but instead use a commercially produced figure are you cheating because you're using the original sculptor's talent?
In the end, shouldn't it be about how the figure looks?
There are many members here whose work is so far ahead of mine that is I painted for another 50 years I still wouldn't be at their lever. I just don't have the God given talent that they have, but I surely don't considering them cheating by using their skill to produce the best figure they can, regardless of what medium, tools etc. they use obtain those results.
Chuck
As to my original post, If you competing in a contest that have stated rules that's one thing. Also, I think that it goes without saying that someone passing off another's work as their own is despicable behavior.
What I was referring to is someone just shows you their figure or post on the forum showing their latest effort and it's looked down upon because of some item or technique that is used that others either don't use or don't know how to use. Let's face it all of use use shortcuts in one way or another. Nobody I know makes their own paint or brushes like the old masters did. Some paint with acrylic, some with oils, some with enamel. Is there a hierarchy in the type of paint you use? If you paint with oils, since that's what the old masters used, do you look down on painters using those new fandangled acrylics? Are they somehow cheating by not using techniques or tools that are not over 50 years, 75 years, 100 years or more old?
What wrong with using decals? Say you are painting a US GI in 54mm and you use a decal to represent the flag patch on their shoulder. There is no way, no matter how good a painter you are you could match the detail of a digital decal. As long as it looks like a cloth patch instead of a decal when you're finished. Why not use the new materials that are available today?
If you use pre packaged scenic material instead of scrounging through the garden or forest for these items, is this somehow cheating?
Also, how extreme do you want to go with this idea? If you don't sculpt and cast you own figures but instead use a commercially produced figure are you cheating because you're using the original sculptor's talent?
In the end, shouldn't it be about how the figure looks?
There are many members here whose work is so far ahead of mine that is I painted for another 50 years I still wouldn't be at their lever. I just don't have the God given talent that they have, but I surely don't considering them cheating by using their skill to produce the best figure they can, regardless of what medium, tools etc. they use obtain those results.
Chuck
I agree where is the line drawn? Do you have to make your own base after all thats kind of cheating otherwise. Unless you deliberately decieve its not cheating to use help I often use a decal for an outline on shields because while I could draw it freehand I could also walk everywhere but there is a time/labour saving device that makes it quicker and easier
Steve
Steve
Ferris
A Fixture
Bit of a silly discussion really, I think.
What we do is a hobby, a pass-time. There are no rules, except to enjoy ourselves, so it's impossible to break them and impossible to cheat.
If you participate in contests, there are the contest's rules and we should stick to them or be rightfully called cheats.
That's all there is to it.
Adrian
What we do is a hobby, a pass-time. There are no rules, except to enjoy ourselves, so it's impossible to break them and impossible to cheat.
If you participate in contests, there are the contest's rules and we should stick to them or be rightfully called cheats.
That's all there is to it.
Adrian
Tubby-Nuts2
A Fixture
Bit of a silly discussion really, I think.
Adrian
I fully agree with the essence, of, what you are saying!.. There would be no argument from my 'Camp'! .. However, in all 'Genres', of this hobby, be it, Figure's, . AVF, Aircraft, Railways! .. there will always be that division between the 'Purist', (or) Traditionalist, .. against the 'Hobbyist'. .. and friction, criticism will always be present!... a shame really!
Mark
kagemusha
A Fixture
Personally, I find it dismissive to say this is a "bit of a silly discussion". I think this is a valid topic and, judging by the responses, a lot of other members thought so too.
Yes, this is a hobby/pastime to most of us, even so, do we not all have standards we judge others work by. I believe that it is those standards that we use in our own works, that result in how we view the works of others.
As Mark said, there are purists/traditionalists, who will always view the use of certain techniques as 'cheating'. Whilst the majority of us will use whatever it takes to achieve the results we desire.
Contests are a very different arena to hobbyist pieces. As such, contest rules are there to create a 'level playing field'. Which only works for those with the skills to paint heraldry/patterns that many of us will never be able to achieve with a brush.
For myself, I have found this a thought provoking discussion, which is why I took part. Had I have deemed it 'silly', I would not have bothered to post at all.
Ron
Yes, this is a hobby/pastime to most of us, even so, do we not all have standards we judge others work by. I believe that it is those standards that we use in our own works, that result in how we view the works of others.
As Mark said, there are purists/traditionalists, who will always view the use of certain techniques as 'cheating'. Whilst the majority of us will use whatever it takes to achieve the results we desire.
Contests are a very different arena to hobbyist pieces. As such, contest rules are there to create a 'level playing field'. Which only works for those with the skills to paint heraldry/patterns that many of us will never be able to achieve with a brush.
For myself, I have found this a thought provoking discussion, which is why I took part. Had I have deemed it 'silly', I would not have bothered to post at all.
Ron
Ferris
A Fixture
You're right Ron, silly indeed sounds a bit dismissive, which was not my intention.
I just think this type of discussion has a tendency to polarise and thought I'd add a 'relativistic' point.
Now going back to paint something... I'm in the mood to break a rule or two!
Adrian
I just think this type of discussion has a tendency to polarise and thought I'd add a 'relativistic' point.
Now going back to paint something... I'm in the mood to break a rule or two!
Adrian
kagemusha
A Fixture
Now that's a man after my own heart.......rules.........their made to be broken......much more fun
Must admit.......you caught me off guard Adrian.....didn't sound like you at all
Ron
Must admit.......you caught me off guard Adrian.....didn't sound like you at all
Ron
harrytheheid
A Fixture
My collection consists of pre-painted commercially available figures, (99% of these are from First Legion); a significant amount of pre-painted commercially available figures that I've converted and/or repainted myself; figures I've commissioned someone else to paint for me when work commitments have dictated that I simply don't have the time available to do them myself; and a significant number of kit figures or castings that I've painted myself. In addition, I've occasionally used decals to enhance figures when I've felt unable to reproduce what I want myself.
Now, I don't enter any of my collection into competitions - but I do derive an enormous amount of pleasure from my figurine collection and participation in this hobby. Am I now being told that I'm a "cheat" because not everything, down to the dirt under the fingernails, or the dandruff on the shoulders of every single individual figure in my collection was painted on by myself?
Just a thought.
Now, I don't enter any of my collection into competitions - but I do derive an enormous amount of pleasure from my figurine collection and participation in this hobby. Am I now being told that I'm a "cheat" because not everything, down to the dirt under the fingernails, or the dandruff on the shoulders of every single individual figure in my collection was painted on by myself?
Just a thought.
Gra30
PlanetFigure Supporter
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2005
- Messages
- 1,541
I have enjoyed this thread immensely, it is amazing how methods have progressed in the hobby.
The development of techniques and methods available does go along the similar lines of when etched brass first came into AFVs, some at the time said that was cheating compared to when the market was limited and traditional methods had to be utilised to hand make the parts.
There is a wealth of afv extras now, the kits are virtually miniature in scale replicas, some accessories even come already painted, sorry but to me that is cheating and a step too far.
This will open another debate but I am only giving my opinion.
3d printing to me is cheating or should I say to me tnot held in the same esteem as traditional sculpting. I am not saying the results aren't spectacular and in places surpass hand methods but this does fall into the category of decals for me where you are not actually getting your hands( In his case brushes and tools) dirty, it is more of a technical application.
But, all said and one the comment of enjoyment is the bottom line and agreed there are no rules (unless competing) as it is hobby. Everyone enjoys viewing and doing different aspects, a bit like those who love photography and those that appreciate a traditional painting instead.
Just my opinion of course.
Best wishes
The development of techniques and methods available does go along the similar lines of when etched brass first came into AFVs, some at the time said that was cheating compared to when the market was limited and traditional methods had to be utilised to hand make the parts.
There is a wealth of afv extras now, the kits are virtually miniature in scale replicas, some accessories even come already painted, sorry but to me that is cheating and a step too far.
This will open another debate but I am only giving my opinion.
3d printing to me is cheating or should I say to me tnot held in the same esteem as traditional sculpting. I am not saying the results aren't spectacular and in places surpass hand methods but this does fall into the category of decals for me where you are not actually getting your hands( In his case brushes and tools) dirty, it is more of a technical application.
But, all said and one the comment of enjoyment is the bottom line and agreed there are no rules (unless competing) as it is hobby. Everyone enjoys viewing and doing different aspects, a bit like those who love photography and those that appreciate a traditional painting instead.
Just my opinion of course.
Best wishes
Tarracus
A Fixture
This is an old discussion. In fact it started 10.000 years ago. Here's a nice example of using cheating with using airbrushes:
(Cave paintings in Patagonia about 7.000bC)
(Cave paintings in Patagonia about 7.000bC)
M
Mark S
Guest
...and they probably used other peoples hands.....they may have been Homo Erectus but I reckon they couldn't lie straight in bed.
Tubby-Nuts2
A Fixture
This is an old discussion. In fact it started 10.000 years ago. Here's a nice example of usingcheating withusing airbrushes:
View attachment 134117
(Cave paintings in Patagonia about 7.000bC)
Ahh! .. Now!.. . If I could put forward another theory on this post!... which is. The incessant nagging about modelling, from their respective wives' due to the mess on the kitchen table. .. even, 10,000 yrs. ago!.. This nagging, was surely enough to drive them, (The Modeller), up the bleeding wall!... So,.. clearly the source of, 'Air/Pressure', .. was from there respective wife,(s) 'Exhaling', (Vocalisation).... So I feel that this 'Patagonian', artwork, is less about 'Cheating',.. but more about 'Escape'. ..
I guess we should count ourselves lucky !!
Regards,
Mark
I use an airbrush to basecoat everthing it gives the smoothest finish, sometimes I preshade under the basecoat as wel, then I crack on with the brushes.I sometimes blow
a highlight on a helmet for a bust etc its just another tool, ive tied to airbrush a full larger scale figure with the ab and its tough, as for the eye decals In theory they are sound brilliant but are not easy to use so if you can and feel you need to ive no problem with that after all as it was earlier put its your figure do what you want, but if you require kudos from others though decal for eyes and cammo is not the best route to follow saying that having tried to use these thing id like to see them used effectively I found them thin devoid of colour so youd need to colour before of after use, it depends very much why you paint, if its for a show then im a bit of a purest and id be more enclined to vote for a figure with hand painted insignia over the use of a decal , but woudnt blink at seeing decals used on an AFV its a strange duality , you are your own hardest critic im sure so if it sits well with you thats fine but id see it as a bit dishonest not to disclose when asked, but not everybody likes to disclose thier techniques ,mind you if you fib on theyre use thats a bit naughty , ive looked a the way garage kits are painted with airbrush , pastels and oil wash, not cheating just differnt, they use pigma pens and coloured pencils, I think its the end result that really matters not so much how you got there , I enjoy the challenge of difficult bits , learn to love the bits you try to avoid and after a time you should master them, Mick
a highlight on a helmet for a bust etc its just another tool, ive tied to airbrush a full larger scale figure with the ab and its tough, as for the eye decals In theory they are sound brilliant but are not easy to use so if you can and feel you need to ive no problem with that after all as it was earlier put its your figure do what you want, but if you require kudos from others though decal for eyes and cammo is not the best route to follow saying that having tried to use these thing id like to see them used effectively I found them thin devoid of colour so youd need to colour before of after use, it depends very much why you paint, if its for a show then im a bit of a purest and id be more enclined to vote for a figure with hand painted insignia over the use of a decal , but woudnt blink at seeing decals used on an AFV its a strange duality , you are your own hardest critic im sure so if it sits well with you thats fine but id see it as a bit dishonest not to disclose when asked, but not everybody likes to disclose thier techniques ,mind you if you fib on theyre use thats a bit naughty , ive looked a the way garage kits are painted with airbrush , pastels and oil wash, not cheating just differnt, they use pigma pens and coloured pencils, I think its the end result that really matters not so much how you got there , I enjoy the challenge of difficult bits , learn to love the bits you try to avoid and after a time you should master them, Mick
renarts
A Fixture
It then begs the question...are we judging peoples ability or the piece itself?
If we are judging the piece, there is no cheat. The work is either medal worthy or not. If the person claims it as his own, then he is not cheating but guilty of art plagiarism or in an extreme case, art theft. Guilty of being a douchebag at the very least. But he's not cheating. If we are judging the person's ability, then we are missing something by judging only the finished piece. In order to fairly judge the ability, a need to see the process should be taken into consideration. If not, then it falls back to deciding to just judge the piece and not the work to get there.
In the other sense of the question. Since there are different categories in judging criteria (both in figures and in models) it makes it easier to spot cheating. i.e. if a piece is entered in scratchbuilding, and incorporates aftermarket or kit bashed pieces and or components, then that could be considered a cheat. As for finishing techniques, I see no cheat. Its either done sufficiently to be worthy of the accolade of a well done piece or it isn't. Regardless of the method and technique to get to that goal.
Gra30, I have to hand it to you. You slipped that whole 3d thing into the thread without it turning into a piss fest. Though I disagree that its cheating. Its not sculpting its manufacturing and has no relevance to cheating unless it is used as a scratchbuilt sculpture. (which is why, I think eventually you will see a category at shows for nothing but 3d printed pieces. And a change in the meaning and lexicon of terminology. i.e.sculpting, carving, additive sculpture, casting, etc. )
If we are judging the piece, there is no cheat. The work is either medal worthy or not. If the person claims it as his own, then he is not cheating but guilty of art plagiarism or in an extreme case, art theft. Guilty of being a douchebag at the very least. But he's not cheating. If we are judging the person's ability, then we are missing something by judging only the finished piece. In order to fairly judge the ability, a need to see the process should be taken into consideration. If not, then it falls back to deciding to just judge the piece and not the work to get there.
In the other sense of the question. Since there are different categories in judging criteria (both in figures and in models) it makes it easier to spot cheating. i.e. if a piece is entered in scratchbuilding, and incorporates aftermarket or kit bashed pieces and or components, then that could be considered a cheat. As for finishing techniques, I see no cheat. Its either done sufficiently to be worthy of the accolade of a well done piece or it isn't. Regardless of the method and technique to get to that goal.
Gra30, I have to hand it to you. You slipped that whole 3d thing into the thread without it turning into a piss fest. Though I disagree that its cheating. Its not sculpting its manufacturing and has no relevance to cheating unless it is used as a scratchbuilt sculpture. (which is why, I think eventually you will see a category at shows for nothing but 3d printed pieces. And a change in the meaning and lexicon of terminology. i.e.sculpting, carving, additive sculpture, casting, etc. )
Just stumbled on this discussion and just thought I'd throw my opinion into the bucket too. IMHO we come to the hobby in order to gain some satisfaction/pleasure from recreating a subject in miniature. There are no rules as to how we reach this goal apart from maybe "Enjoy the journey" so how we achieve a particular effect in miniature is really irrelevant, as long as we achieve the desired affect to our own satisfaction. If others are pleased by viewing your work then its just a bonus.
If we bring "cheating" into the discussion then where do we draw the line. I'm sure we all use premixed paints for example, isn't that a form of cheating because we don't grind our own pigments and mix the paint ourselves? Is the use of masking tape or blu-tac a form of cheating? Should we do everything freehand with the paints we mixed ourselves? Come to think of it, didn't someone else make that brush you're using?
Perhaps the points I'm trying to make are "Do what you like and like what you do" and above all else "Do it your way"
Thank you for listening
If we bring "cheating" into the discussion then where do we draw the line. I'm sure we all use premixed paints for example, isn't that a form of cheating because we don't grind our own pigments and mix the paint ourselves? Is the use of masking tape or blu-tac a form of cheating? Should we do everything freehand with the paints we mixed ourselves? Come to think of it, didn't someone else make that brush you're using?
Perhaps the points I'm trying to make are "Do what you like and like what you do" and above all else "Do it your way"
Thank you for listening
polyphemus
A Fixture
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2006
- Messages
- 1,230
What about optical aids?
Geoff
Geoff
M
Mark S
Guest
I feel for people with optical aids but really they should have taken personal responsibility and worn eye protection imo.
