Adepticon Golden Demon 2022 Discussion

[CommissarRotke]

Not a rumor but AOS won the Golden Daemon!!!

Gavin Garza won with a 'simple' model! Hopefully heralding a new skink spear unit

[Black_Templar_Lad]

9 minutes ago, CommissarRotke said:

Not a rumor but AOS won the Golden Daemon!!!

Gavin Garza won with a 'simple' model! Hopefully heralding a new skink spear unit

This model fills me with so much joy. Even though it's the flawless execution of the paintjob that won the day, it's just seeing out of this mass gathering of some of the world's best miniature painters, entries full of complex conversions, bases crafted by the very gods and dioramas telling an entire story, huge models so complex in detail, and it's this tiny, unaltered Skink that triumphs.

It just shows great art can be made even on the simplest of canvases, inspiring for anyone to attain, and that makes me happy. 

[CommissarRotke]

6 minutes ago, Black_Templar_Lad said:

it's this tiny, unaltered Skink that triumphs.

It just shows great art can be made even on the simplest of canvases, inspiring for anyone to attain, and that makes me happy. 

This is exactly my thoughts as well, and I'm glad the people who voted thought so too! Really feels like the Essence of Warhammer; like a model that you'd show anyone who didn't know what miniature games were.

[Rhetoric]

4 hours ago, CommissarRotke said:

Not a rumor but AOS won the Golden Daemon!!!

Gavin Garza won with a 'simple' model! Hopefully heralding a new skink spear unit

It’s an astounding paint job on a great sculpt. Before the awards went out I saw pictures of that mini in the case on social media and you can tell how perfect the work is.  Congrats to Gavin and a solid win for US of A painters.  Although my favorite painter in the world isn’t American

[KingBrodd]

1 hour ago, Still-young said:

I’ve seen quite a few people around the internet salty that the Slayer Sword winner was ‘just’ that skink but man, it’s such a well executed paint job. On such a small model too. So, so good. 

I have no idea how people can complain that a simpler model painted to perfection isnt good enough. Not everything needs to be a Primarch or Archaon. Like you said it's a Skink, its tiny and the amount of detail there is staggering!!

[Maogrim]

1 hour ago, Still-young said:

I’ve seen quite a few people around the internet salty that the Slayer Sword winner was ‘just’ that skink but man, it’s such a well executed paint job. On such a small model too. So, so good. 

True, but after seeing that fantastic dark chrome Sigvald that came second I can unterstand the salt a little. That thing looked like straight from some 80s Heavy Metal album cover. 

[Flippy]

1 minute ago, Maogrim said:

True, but after seeing that fantastic dark chrome Sigvald that came second I can unterstand the salt a little. That thing looked like straight from some 80s Heavy Metal album cover. 

After some discussions I firmly believe that Sigvald only lost due to the face issue; while the whole model is splendid, the Sigvald's face kind of disappears.

[Gitzdee]

It can become a bit stale/boring to see another Ghazkull or Mortarion for the 100th time. I agree that the models are awesome and have a lot for painters to work with. But it is refreshing to see something different from time to time.

Edited March 30, 2022 by Iksdee

[Enoby]

For those wondering, Sigvald looked like this:

It's an incredibly impressive and technically brilliant paint job, no doubt - I would say it shows more raw skill on this model than number one (this isn't to say the painter is more skilled, just model vs model).

However, as an entire piece, Sigvald seems to be less well composed than the Skink. It's technically incredible but it's very grey/metallic, whereas the skink is classic colours and clean.

While I think Sigvald is overall more impressive and more technically demanding, the Skink looked better as a whole piece. 

[Wordy9th]

Subjective I know, but that Sigvald with a skin tone that wasn't the same colours as the rest of the model would definitely have stuck out more to me.

I'm more confused by the 40k large entry winner, the streak'n'grime dreadnought!

[silverstu]

27 minutes ago, Enoby said:

For those wondering, Sigvald looked like this:

It's an incredibly impressive and technically brilliant paint job, no doubt - I would say it shows more raw skill on this model than number one (this isn't to say the painter is more skilled, just model vs model).

However, as an entire piece, Sigvald seems to be less well composed than the Skink. It's technically incredible but it's very grey/metallic, whereas the skink is classic colours and clean.

While I think Sigvald is overall more impressive and more technically demanding, the Skink looked better as a whole piece. 

Yes I'd agree with that- the technique is superb but the composition seems off and overdone, to my eyes the application of technique almost obscures the model. The painting on the skink however really celebrates the model. But again a lot of that is subjective. [and its all waaaaay above my painting skill level!].

On the Horus Heresy I do wonder wether it will free them up a little from the marine fix in 40k and give them space to develop other things. Mind you I did think the trailer they released looked more like Epic with BFG than just 30k...

Warhammer Old World is going to be the 4th system I think I read so fantasy still balances out AoS and WOW, 40k and 30k. 

I am looking forward to seeing some new AoS in the future- especially the Syvaneth, even though Kurnothi aren't apparently part of them, there is so much scope for cool designs there. 

[Nos]

10 hours ago, Enoby said:

For those wondering, Sigvald looked like this:

It's an incredibly impressive and technically brilliant paint job, no doubt - I would say it shows more raw skill on this model than number one (this isn't to say the painter is more skilled, just model vs model).

However, as an entire piece, Sigvald seems to be less well composed than the Skink. It's technically incredible but it's very grey/metallic, whereas the skink is classic colours and clean.

While I think Sigvald is overall more impressive and more technically demanding, the Skink looked better as a whole piece. 

Very interesting situation.

The Skink is remarkable and in terms of composition and paintwork on the model it's basically perfect.

In terms of technique though, the work required to capture reflections, the light sources and the nature of NMM is far more complex. 

Which- I dunno. Is Golden Demon about what looks best? Or is it about sheer technical ability? Ideally both of course, but in this instance it feels like a real divide between the two.

But it is surprising to me how often technically brilliant model painters mess up composition. For example the Sigvald is extraordinary but I think the cloak being essentially as complex as the armour hurts the overall effect. Something less complex would have allowed the truly incredible armour to be more to the fore. Essentially the pillar, top of the cloak, armour, shield and face all look to he indistinguishable from each old other.

For me the Sam Lenz GD should have beaten the Skink. Pretty much a perfect combination between technique and composition and on a bigger (harder) scale *and* with freehand, which for Me is the absolute pinnacle in mini painting when it's at this level. It's one thing to paint on a sculpted surface, but to paint your own stuff at intricate levelile that is a mix between applying and sculpting with paint.

[Marcvs]

3 hours ago, Nos said:

For me the Sam Lenz GD should have beaten the Skink.

 

aren't they in different categories? (Large and Single)

[Rachmani]

I think they're talking about the Slayer Sword which the Skink won.

[RuneBrush]

13 hours ago, Nos said:

Very interesting situation.

The Skink is remarkable and in terms of composition and paintwork on the model it's basically perfect.

In terms of technique though, the work required to capture reflections, the light sources and the nature of NMM is far more complex. 

Which- I dunno. Is Golden Demon about what looks best? Or is it about sheer technical ability? Ideally both of course, but in this instance it feels like a real divide between the two.

But it is surprising to me how often technically brilliant model painters mess up composition. For example the Sigvald is extraordinary but I think the cloak being essentially as complex as the armour hurts the overall effect. Something less complex would have allowed the truly incredible armour to be more to the fore. Essentially the pillar, top of the cloak, armour, shield and face all look to he indistinguishable from each old other.

For me the Sam Lenz GD should have beaten the Skink. Pretty much a perfect combination between technique and composition and on a bigger (harder) scale *and* with freehand, which for Me is the absolute pinnacle in mini painting when it's at this level. It's one thing to paint on a sculpted surface, but to paint your own stuff at intricate levelile that is a mix between applying and sculpting with paint.

Golden Demon is always an interesting one on a number of levels.  There is a huge amount of subjectivity involved, but also seeing something in the flesh and looking at every angle can often change a model that looks amazing in a photo to a model that's covered in really obvious flaws.  The judges have numerous things they judge on in addition to painting - how well the model fits into GW's settings being one item.  The difficultly of the painting techniques doesn't really come into play because the model is judged on the overall piece, factoring everything in together.  A large model has more areas to hide mistakes in comparison to a small one, so there's a bit of a balance between large and small entries.  The piece also needs to catch somebodies eye from 3+ feet away right up to 3 inches - it's one heck of a challenge and many models have missed a prize by failing at this.  Quite often too, the photos don't do the model justice - I know that the official photos make my Imperial Knight look inferior to other pieces that were on display (to the point they didn't get printed in WD), but in the flesh there's a lot more nuance and textures to it.

I'm now going to be exceptionally unfair and nit-picky on the three models mentioned earlier, so I will first of all say that each of them deserves their respective golden demons!  Hat's off to them, they're painters who I follow on Instagram and their work is stunning.  I now will be the equivalent of a food critic.  The Great Unclean One is great (ba dum tish), but with the exception of the freehand banner doesn't have a "wow" factor.  The banner does the bulk of the work - it's the thing you look at first and if you removed it, the model would only stand out from a distance due to it's size.  Sigvald goes the other way, there's so many colours and beautiful transitions that you almost don't know where to look.  It's also missing the classic focal point you'd expect in a miniature composition - in fact the face is lack lustre in comparison to the rest of the model.  The skink I actually have struggled to find anything wrong with other than it's a "simple" model.  Every part of the model is flawless - the scratch built base does everything it needs to and you can tell the effort has actually gone into painting the piece of plastic rather than spent on something else.

OK, I do feel like I've kicked a puppy now.  Each of the pieces is a worthy demon winner make no mistake.  But when it comes to a "best of show" award like the slayer sword, I've yet to see anybody find something actually wrong with the skink, so can completely understand how it picked up the sword in this instance.  From what I've heard there were also loads of textures on the model that we can't see - the flesh had a satin sheen to it with more matt shadow for example.

[Chikout]

It's worth pointing out some things about the way GW judge golden demon. The first is that minis should encapsulate GW's setting, so a red ultramarine will never win no matter how well painted it is. The second thing is that they look for flaws to separate the positions when judging reaches the sharp end, so a model with a visible mold line will lose to a model that might have slightly less artistic ambition but fewer flaws. 

I don't necessarily think this is the best way of doing things but it has always been the way GW judges and most top level competitors know it. 

Kaha, for example,  has an incredible unique style which I personally love but it might actually hold her back a bit in a gw competition. 

[Popisdead]

It is very clean and in the vein (vane?) of classic Darren Latham/Joe Tomazewski from about 10 years ago.  Take the 'Eavy Metal style and push forward in that style.  

[Nos]

9 hours ago, Chikout said:

It's worth pointing out some things about the way GW judge golden demon. The first is that minis should encapsulate GW's setting, so a red ultramarine will never win no matter how well painted it is. The second thing is that they look for flaws to separate the positions when judging reaches the sharp end, so a model with a visible mold line will lose to a model that might have slightly less artistic ambition but fewer flaws. 

I don't necessarily think this is the best way of doing things but it has always been the way GW judges and most top level competitors know it. 

Kaha, for example,  has an incredible unique style which I personally love but it might actually hold her back a bit in a gw competition. 

I was at Warhammer World the other day and it was quite interesting. Certainly when I grew up The 'Eavy Metal style was what you aspired to, think it still is for most.

But as I've gotten older its more apparent is a particular aesthetic and increasingly not one I'm convinced best serves the new models with their increased dynamism and shape etc because its basically anti volumetric.

Like here's the 'Eavy Metal Gutrippaz in cabinet lighting:

And here's mine in poor lighting on my bookshelf:

In spite of their less than optimal lighting set up I think mine are superior and I would think that if someone else had done them too. More dynamic , not flat, richer colours, conciousness of lighting and textures and greater chromatic values and transitions. And I spent about an hour on each, I'd be surprised if the 'Eavy Metal team did theirs quicker.

Now of course an 'Eavy Metal Painter is more technically skilled at painting than me, but I'm increasingly of the opinion that the GW house style neuters alot of that talent.

But also there's like I dunno 50+ units of Gutrippaz on Instagram also look better than the 'Eavy Metal ones. It's not a rarity. Likewise I took pictures of multiple new units like the new Kilkteams etc. I've seen dozens done by Instagram painters/in person  which are dramatically superior. I was amazed by how flat the Studio ones looked. 

It really feels to me now that 'Eavy Metal are being surpassed fairly frequently by people who paint following traditional painting principles like wet blending, sketching etc instead of 5 billion layers and using artistic supplies like heavily pigmented acrylics (still cheaper than GW paints), oils and Inks. Dozens of commission painters are producing better work thab the GW team at this point and at a faster rate. And the likes of Angel Giraldez and Sergio Calvo have transcended the layering technique if that still is your thing.

Likewise with Golden Demon- it feels like they reward the 'Eavy Metal style. Which is fine, it's their award. But as with above, it feels they're trapped within a mentality which doesn't reward classical painting skill if it's outside of their studio interpretation. But the best painters in the world might not win Golden Demon for that reason, and it would have nothing to do with how good a piece was.

When I was younger one of the best things about GD was the winners showcased a multiplicity of styles, from clean 'eavy Metal style to smoothe blends to inky scratchy finishes to everything in between. Style was still a key component. Feels less so now. John Blanche wouldn't win a Golden Demon for example. He's the Ur Text of Warhammer's visual language, but his work submitted under a different name wouldn't win a Golden Demon.

Edited March 31, 2022 by Nos

[Sleboda]

On 3/30/2022 at 3:53 AM, Maogrim said:

True, but after seeing that fantastic dark chrome Sigvald that came second I can unterstand the salt a little. That thing looked like straight from some 80s Heavy Metal album cover. 

I've been a judge for Golden Demon in the past. I can say that it's pretty much impossible to get the same appreciation for models in photos compared to in person.

While I understand the view that Sigvald was awesome, I think folks really should defer to the judges who were actually on site.

 

Plus, NMM should be an automatic disqualifier for painting awards in a 3D medium. In the last Demon I judged, the tie breaker for first place was that one model used NMM and the other didn't. I awarded the other (the non-NMM).

[Maogrim]

1 hour ago, Sleboda said:

I've been a judge for Golden Demon in the past. I can say that it's pretty much impossible to get the same appreciation for models in photos compared to in person.

While I understand the view that Sigvald was awesome, I think folks really should defer to the judges who were actually on site.

 

Plus, NMM should be an automatic disqualifier for painting awards in a 3D medium. In the last Demon I judged, the tie breaker for first place was that one model used NMM and the other didn't. I awarded the other (the non-NMM).

What's the problem with NMM?! It's a rather complex technique as far as I'm aware, though I've never been a judge on anything, mind you. 

And if I'm not mistaken the gold parts on the Skink are NMM as well. So by your own logic the Skink should have been automatically disqualified as well. 

[Sleboda]

30 minutes ago, Maogrim said:

What's the problem with NMM?! It's a rather complex technique as far as I'm aware, though I've never been a judge on anything, mind you. 

And if I'm not mistaken the gold parts on the Skink are NMM as well. So by your own logic the Skink should have been automatically disqualified as well. 

I'm happy to discuss the minutia of my opinion elsewhere if you like, but I don't want to distract here too much.

 

Basic idea is that while the technique takes amazing skill, terrific artistry, and is a wonder to behold in a static photo, it's like being the world's best airplane pilot and flying to a destination using passenger automobile. 

[Greyshadow]

I think that Skink model is just breathtaking. Congratulations to Gavin on his incredible work.

[RuneBrush]

9 hours ago, Nos said:

In spite of their less than optimal lighting set up

Without wanting to be harsh, the lighting in the cabinets in both the WHW shop and the exhibition hall is awful for taking a decent photograph and viewing a model behind glass does make it more difficult to see.

I do agree that 'Eavy Metal follow a fairly formulaic painting style now, that's because they're painting models to sell as part of an overarching range and a whole team paints an army rather than one individual - it'd be no good if you knew Max painted that model and Drew painted that one because they're painted in different styles.

4 hours ago, Sleboda said:

Plus, NMM should be an automatic disqualifier for painting awards in a 3D medium. In the last Demon I judged, the tie breaker for first place was that one model used NMM and the other didn't. I awarded the other (the non-NMM).

I'm not quite as hard line on NMM as that.  I do feel that NMM does have a place in miniature painting and there are some artists out there who's NMM work far surpasses the technical limits you can achieve with metallic pigmented paints.  For me one of the biggest issues is that mediocre NMM looks awful but mediocre TMM looks OK.  People also spend too much time on NMM on competition pieces at the cost of the rest of the model so you get this weird disparity in quality.  But NMM is broadly a personal opinion - I know I'm not good enough at NMM to enter that into a competition so stick to my traditional metallics 😂

[Nos]

34 minutes ago, RuneBrush said:

Without wanting to be harsh, the lighting in the cabinets in both the WHW shop and the exhibition hall is awful for taking a decent photograph and viewing a model behind glass does make it more difficult to see.

I do agree that 'Eavy Metal follow a fairly formulaic painting style now, that's because they're painting models to sell as part of an overarching range and a whole team paints an army rather than one individual - it'd be no good if you knew Max painted that model and Drew painted that one because they're painted in different styles.

I'm not quite as hard line on NMM as that.  I do feel that NMM does have a place in miniature painting and there are some artists out there who's NMM work far surpasses the technical limits you can achieve with metallic pigmented paints.  For me one of the biggest issues is that mediocre NMM looks awful but mediocre TMM looks OK.  People also spend too much time on NMM on competition pieces at the cost of the rest of the model so you get this weird disparity in quality.  But NMM is broadly a personal opinion - I know I'm not good enough at NMM to enter that into a competition so stick to my traditional metallics 😂

Oh I quite agree, lighting is overexposed and diffuse there, but it's still more optimal than a dingy yellow low watt light at night overcast by a shelf was my point. Put the 'Eavy Metal ones on that bookshelf or your average dingy domestic lighting ie where most people see things and the colours are so flat and volumes so indistinct they'd look worse than in the cabinet, also GW paints gave a satin finish which hampers them further in natural light.

Everyone's models- or indeed literally anything you photograph- look most optimal in a favourable contrived lighting setting but it's not how most people are going to see them. By the same token though you can see that the models in that lighting painted by Mike McVey for example, or some of the guest exhibits, are profoundly better than the ones painted by the studio. The craft still comes through.

4 hours ago, Maogrim said:

What's the problem with NMM?! It's a rather complex technique as far as I'm aware, though I've never been a judge on anything, mind you. 

And if I'm not mistaken the gold parts on the Skink are NMM as well. So by your own logic the Skink should have been automatically disqualified as well. 

The Skink has NMM as do 95% of the winning entries in all categories.

NMM is a funny one because its artist 101 if you want to paint metal- until recently it was the only way to do so because metallic paint didn't exist and most artists still don't use it, because metallic pigments react to light in their own environment, like lighting from the room they're in, but *not* from the artifical lighting sources within the composition of the piece itself.

For mini painters accustomed to working with light sources in mind, NMM is just an extension of that mindset and it tends to be a pretty elementary part of their workflow, if you look at someone like James Wappel for example he cranks out armies with *reflective* NMM metal like he was painting brown boots and in just as short a time, but for most painters in the hobby who have grown up with base shade layer highlight and a notion of colour rather than form and value, lighting is another dimension entirely. One of the key issues you see with people starting NMM is they otherwise paint a model without any appreciation of light sources elsewhere but then apply an approach of painting highly reflective material. Same for OSL. Interestingly though if you go the other way and focus on lighting and texture elsewhere on the model and use basic metallic paint to block in metal, a more basic metallic finish dosent seem to register because it's not the focus.

You can do whats called TMM (True Metallic Metal) using metallic pigmented paints and associated theory around how it would react to the light sources you're working with on your model but it's pretty rare at Award Winning Display level currently. 

Most award winning painters are using NMM by default at this point as its a natural  extension of working with imagined light sources, and is a deep and rich subject that allows for a lot of experimentation- material, colour, texture. Bust and bigger scale painters have been perfecting that for years, as well as other subjects like texture etc, and the best small scale painters are cribbing off them heavily at this point. 

Edited April 1, 2022 by Nos