|
Post by paulisper on Nov 4, 2018 19:41:29 GMT
Here's a question, which I would like feedback from the cognoscenti of the Fanaticus Forum on. Many years ago, under 2.2, I started painting up matched-pair armies for the Northern Cup and I'm now in the process of revisiting some of the earlier armies and bringing them up a) to full 3.0 spec and b) gradually adding in all options, as often I just bought and painted what I felt where the best 12 elements, to get them onto the table in time for the tournament. Now, the problem is that my painting style has evolved and improved down the years and I'm caught in a bit of a conundrum... So, do I: 1) Paint up the new elements in my new style and leave the previous elements as they are - The 'F**k it, can't be arsed' approach 2) Paint up the new elements in my new style and just touch up the bases on the old elements to make them match as much as possible superficially - The 'F**k it, I'm kinda bothered, but only from 3 foot away' approach 3) Paint up the new elements in the old style that the previous figures were done with and ensure everything is as consistent as possible - The 'F**k it, I am arsed, but will take the path of least resistance, even though it grates aesthetically' approach 4) Paint up the new elements in my current style and then repaint/touch up the old elements to conform with my latest techniques - The 'F**k it, I am 100% OCD and this will bug me to my grave if I don't do it' approach Looking forward to your feedback P.
|
|
|
Post by hammurabi70 on Nov 4, 2018 20:45:49 GMT
What answer do you want?
If you have the resources to do it I would say (4) on the grounds that this is how you want your troops to look now. If it was me it would be (1) for the reasons mentioned, although (2) might be very possible in order to generate some general level of conformity.
|
|
|
Post by Baldie on Nov 4, 2018 20:52:13 GMT
Having seen some of your armies I am sure a fantastic result will come from whatever you decide. This is the F*-# it someone else can decide approach.
|
|
|
Post by paulisper on Nov 4, 2018 21:11:34 GMT
Not sure.... I'm the master of procrastination p.
|
|
|
Post by menacussecundus on Nov 4, 2018 21:43:36 GMT
Sell the old armies as they are and paint up new ones from scratch. (The F**k it, let someone else sort it out option.)
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Nov 4, 2018 21:54:44 GMT
I would do the minimum needed to bring the older elements to a comparable quality as the new elements. Perhaps painting the weapons in a similar style or painting a fresh coat of flesh might be enough as you can add more at a later.
Below are two major projects I did; the French received the minimum paintwork; new weapons, shakos and clothing were highlighted. Restoring the French 18thcenturysojourn.blogspot.com/2017_03_26_archive.html
The Orcs received more attention as they were given new skin, weapons and leather equipment. The bases were redone with a different colour grass to offset the figures better. Restoring an Orc/Goblin army dbagora.blogspot.com/2011/03/two-15mm-dba-dark-age-armies-for-sale.html
My Sassanid (60+ elements) and Later Romans were also brought up to current standard. Bottom line, it is worth the effort.
|
|
|
Post by martin on Nov 4, 2018 22:31:18 GMT
Not sure.... I'm the master of procrastination p. I’m planning to master procrastination, but not just yet... To get a result I’m happy with I’ve painted up new figures in a similar style, then rebased the elements, mixing old with new, so newly added elements won’t stand out as obviously. Certainly an issue that v3 has thrown up.
|
|
|
Post by paddy649 on Nov 5, 2018 7:07:33 GMT
I am 100% OCD and this will bug me to my grave if I don't do it'. Looks like you answer your own question! I’d repaint and indeed have been repainting for many months to one degree or another. Sometimes adding 11 elements to an unused spare to make new armies for 3.0
|
|
|
Post by Cromwell on Nov 5, 2018 8:28:02 GMT
Not sure.... I'm the master of procrastination p. Doesn't that make you go blind?
|
|
|
Post by Simon on Nov 5, 2018 8:43:52 GMT
Throw a D4 and let the dice gods decide!
Simon
|
|
|
Post by scottrussell on Nov 5, 2018 9:31:45 GMT
Paul,
if you can faithfully replicate the basing technique, I find you can get away with almost any evolving variation in painting style. I must admit I feel your pain though. I have gone through agonies adding a single figure to make an army DBA 3.0 compliant when I have used up all of the sand or flock previously used, even though I am likely to use the army about once per year, in a friendly game!
Scott
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on Nov 5, 2018 10:15:40 GMT
Here's a question, which I would like feedback from the cognoscenti of the Fanaticus Forum on. Many years ago, under 2.2, I started painting up matched-pair armies for the Northern Cup and I'm now in the process of revisiting some of the earlier armies and bringing them up a) to full 3.0 spec and b) gradually adding in all options, as often I just bought and painted what I felt where the best 12 elements, to get them onto the table in time for the tournament. Now, the problem is that my painting style has evolved and improved down the years and I'm caught in a bit of a conundrum... So, do I: 1) Paint up the new elements in my new style and leave the previous elements as they are - The 'F**k it, can't be arsed' approach 2) Paint up the new elements in my new style and just touch up the bases on the old elements to make them match as much as possible superficially - The 'F**k it, I'm kinda bothered, but only from 3 foot away' approach 3) Paint up the new elements in the old style that the previous figures were done with and ensure everything is as consistent as possible - The 'F**k it, I am arsed, but will take the path of least resistance, even though it grates aesthetically' approach 4) Paint up the new elements in my current style and then repaint/touch up the old elements to conform with my latest techniques - The 'F**k it, I am 100% OCD and this will bug me to my grave if I don't do it' approach Looking forward to your feedback P. Hmmm... I love "Choose your own adventure" puzzles! a. I would start at "1". This would take a few days to weeks until the new elements were painted. Then I would put the army into battle array and stare at them for about 15 seconds until... b. I would take the first old element and start "2". After a few hours to days I would realise... c. I should've done "3". But then the new ones look so much better so I would move to... d. "4". Let's face it. We all end up at "4" eventually. Cheers Jim
|
|
|
Post by sheffmark on Nov 5, 2018 10:27:42 GMT
Of course there is always option 5: Wait a few years until your failing eye sight and shaking hands means the quality of your painting reverts back to the previous standard!
A D5 for Mr Wilson anyone?
Seriously though, I for one will not be moaning if one element looks slightly different, when you supply so many armies for the competition.
|
|
|
Post by paulisper on Nov 5, 2018 17:43:52 GMT
Hmmm... I love "Choose your own adventure" puzzles! a. I would start at "1". This would take a few days to weeks until the new elements were painted. Then I would put the army into battle array and stare at them for about 15 seconds until... b. I would take the first old element and start "2". After a few hours to days I would realise... c. I should've done "3". But then the new ones look so much better so I would move to... d. "4". Let's face it. We all end up at "4" eventually. Cheers Jim Jim, I think you have it... been wrestling with this one over the past 24hrs, as I look at reworking the bases of my Early T'Ang, and thinking 'I could fudge this and go with steps 1, 2 or 3, but would I really be satisfied.... really...?' It's gonna be a full on option 4 across the board, in all probability, and it's gonna hurt, but hopefully it'll be worth it in the end P.
|
|
|
Post by macbeth on Nov 6, 2018 1:21:01 GMT
I am now 3/4 of the way through bringing my stable of DBA armies up to the purple code. I try as best to replicate the painting style BUT I am looking more and more at re-basing the old figures because I have come so far in the basing style.
So I am somewhere between 2 and 3
Cheers
|
|