Judging Painting for Dummies, Part One

Posted by Ranillon on 8. November 2009 21:58

One of the things I’ve learned over the last few years is that it is actually harder to judge good miniatures painting than I had originally thought.  I think that is partially because the best way to become a good judge is to actually paint yourself – by going through the process you learn what is easier and what is harder. 

However, I think just as important a factor is that most people haven’t really sat down and figured out what good painting looks like.  Sure, they can see a particular miniature and instinctively come to the conclusion that it’s “good” or “bad”, but they often can’t deeply explain the exact reasons for their decision.  They just “know”.  The problem is that without a clearer, more conscious understanding of the process of painting you can get fooled into thinking some effect was hard just because it is “spectacular” or, at the other extreme, that another job is mediocre because it strikes them as “uninteresting.”

Such misunderstandings can be potential issues for two basic reasons – One, it can negatively impact your assessment of your own abilities (I know from experience that it is easy to think you are a better painter than you actually are), and; two, more rarely, if you are ever asked to judge miniatures painting in a contest you may produce results that will leave those in the know scratching their heads.

So, with this article I want to get into the basics of judging miniatures painting.  To help me do so I am going to grab some examples from the recently posted Chicago 2009 Grand Daemon painting competition (you can see them at the Games Workshop site right here).

One proviso before I begin – while there are general benchmarks most anyone will use grading painting when it comes to miniatures is something of an art rather than science.  So, consider this to be my own personal opinion as to what matters the most.  With experience you might come to subtly different conclusions, but I doubt there would be a significant divergence between those and what you’ll read here.

The Basics of Miniatures Painting and Judging

Generally speaking I would say that there are five different aspects to pay attention to when judging a painting job:

1) Color Selection and Application:  What colors did the painter use and in what patterns?  Does it fit the model and draw your attention to its most important aspects or does the painter seem to be color blind?

2) Neatness:  How orderly and neat is the painting job?  I don’t mean whether or not the overall scheme is blocky or unimaginative, but rather does the painting make the model look “real” or is there bleed over that makes different aspects of the model muddled?

3) Layering and Blending:  How many layers did the artist apply?  Do they transition well or seem jarring?  Are the curves and edges of the model distinct, yet natural looking?  Does the shading on the model transition nicely from light to shadow or is the lighting haphazard?

4) Conversions:  Is the model just straight out of the blister or has the individual converted it into something different?  How complicated are the conversions and how naturally do the fit into the overall concept of the model?

5) Basing:  What sort of base is the model on and has any work been done on it?  Is the work well done and natural?

Another consideration when judging squads or entire armies is how well the individual models fits into an integrated whole.  An army should, well, look like a unified army and not some odd polyglot of colors and shapes.

Not everyone will see these five (maybe six) criteria as all being worth same.  For instance, conversions are often seen as being less important than the actual painting and may only be used to determine tie-breakers between different otherwise similar painting jobs.  So, when it doubt spend time on painting rather than conversions.

Likewise, there is a degree of personal taste involved.  For instance, many people are impressed with a complicated and detailed base on the model, but I personally dislike anything fancy.  It's a strictly personal quirk, but when I see a figure on an extravagant base I can't help but think it is a bit silly -- what, does that knight bring that rock with him on which to pose wherever he goes?  Does that Sentinel has that dead ork glued to its foot so he's always stepping on it when he moves?  Especially cinematic poses also break my suspension of belief -- that's not a Space Wolf in the midst of vicious battle with a Tyranid genestealer, but rather a stiff bronze statue in the middle of some village square.

More to come -- including numerous examples!