Welcome to Librarium Online!
Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!
Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!
I see people talking about it, but why do it? It seems too difficult to do when you could just use the normal metallic paints.
NMM when done properly looks amazing...
The advantage to NMM is that you can present the lighting effects the way you want them to appear on the blade. They will look that way no matter what true lighting you have around..
With metallic paints, you are stuck relying on a true light source to provide the lighting effects, and well, we have seen how reliable that can be..
Me, I use metallics, but only because NMM painting takes a lot of skill to make it look good.
One of two things happens when painting NMM.. It either looks Amazing, or it looks like poo.. There is no middle ground...
You will not get that effect using metallic paints.
The effect you have to rely on with Metallic paints..
See the difference? Matallic paints work just fine for presentability, but for artistic value, NMM is the best way to go.
Last edited by minus_t; April 26th, 2009 at 07:48.
I guess I'm too much of a traditionalist because I prefer the look of actual metallic paint. Well painted metallics can look just a phenomenal as NMM. It takes just as much skill and talent to pull off too in my opinion.
Last edited by BDJV; April 26th, 2009 at 07:44.
prefer metallics myself, I think NMM always looks silly
Last edited by minus_t; April 26th, 2009 at 07:47.
OK guys, easy on the swearing, please.
Bad or awful are equally valid words to use.
Personally, I think that if either technique (metallic or non-metallic) is done well, then it will look good.
The main benefits NMM has over metallics are:
No need to worry about 'real' lighting affecting how your model looks
Looks more 'painterly' (almost no real, canvas paintings use metallic paint, aside from gold leaf)
Easier to stylise
The main benefits of metallics over NMM are:
Easier to do fast, as they highlight themselves under light
Looks significantly better at battlefield level
At the end of the day, I don't think very many people would ever suggest that you should only EVER use metallics, or NEVER use them, they are both simply tools and techniques, that give you different finishes.
Kind of like using Green Stuff or Milliput. Both do similar things, but are better at certain aspects.
minus_t's painting log! Now with: More Wolves and Blue Robots!
Last updated 09/01/11
"Never before has another man made me want to go out and buy vasaline"~The Paint Monkey
"All I can remeber is Hazard stripes and -T's dusty brushes. ~danjones87
In addition to everything -t has said, because he speaks wisely;
From experience I more commonly see NMM used on show-pieces, and not in battlefield armies. The technique requires a lot of skill and therefore I would say a lot of time to pull it off well, and this is where the advantages of speed using metallic paints comes in for those with a relatively large number of models to paint.
Sure, the effect looks great but I don't think you'll have the time if you're painting a horde army or something. I've only seen truly talented painters use NMM on every model in their army.
I think MNN is more fitting for clean armour, like elf, or if you what a magic look, gold works fine as well. Also you can use NMM i really crazy colours like red, green, orange, it can look cool if you paint 40K swords and stuffs like that. his I have don on my eldar dire avenger, and on a green sword. Its also possible to paint say Ultramarine armour with NMM technique. i have not tried this but I'm sure it will work. I may not look as real mettal, but you get a interesting effect.
Keep the paint diluted and thin :)
(first rule in Zentradis book of painting)
I like the look of NMM. It looks painted, often well-painted. This (often) quite cartoony manner fits some armies and models better like stated earlier, but for my own painting I vastly prefer using metalics.
It has a very realistic look and it can easily be made to look dirty and worn, just like I think of the 41st Millenium.
I like NMM precisely because it takes time, I am not a fast painter and am still learning techniques but I have found that I really enjoy painting NMM. Sure it can be a little tedious at times, but I just like the finished product (not everyone agrees, but I don't think that it looks complete rubbish), and it makes me persevere more than I have with armies painted with metallics. My metallic paints also go a bit gluggy and weird sometimes and annoy me.
I don't think that it is a better technique though. If you can paint metallics well then it can look just as good, often better.
Although I think SENMM (like the chrome on the shield) looks phenomenol and some of the most amazing minis I have ever seen are painted with that technique, it seems inappropriatte on many miniatures particularly fantasy, I just don't see chrome (or super shiny silver and gold) as having a place on a battle field. This might be because I can't do it even a little bit.
While I still stick to metallics for my metal effects I think NMM looks amazing when done well.
Search for "Confrontation Miniatures" on Google and have a look at their stuff, their official models are all (that I've seen) painted with NMM (But their sites gallery thing is down at the time of this post =P)
Some day I hope to be able to pull off wicked looking NMM ^^
Your fluffraping hurts my eyes. - TehDarkPredator