Swiss renaissance pike men the work rate drops very quickly! I try and plan a week or two in advance of what I am painting each day so I know what has to be done. But it really does depend on what there is to paint. I spend around 8 to 10 hours a day in the studio, painting or fiddling with bits. I try and work on several orders at once so I don’t get too bored of a particular subject. I think the most important thing for a painter, apart from good quality, is having a realistic timeframe and planning well in advance what you have to paint. Noone wants to wait 6 months for their figures to be finished. WJ: What is your painting ‘style’? E.g. black undercoat and layered shades etc I use a black undercoat and layer up shades from a dark base colour. I like the black undercoat as it leaves a distinct black line effect on the models and the detail really stands out. I generally try and use four shades for each colour but sometimes I go over the top to get the results I want. I recently painted an Aragorn conversion and did 12 different shades on his tunic! I can use a white undercoat, but it generally takes too long for my liking. I also prefer the look of a black undercoat but it can take time and effort to get certain colours to stand-out. WJ: How do you think painting has changed in the last 10 years? To me it seems that it has been heavily influenced by the style of the GW painters, away from a super realistic enamel based approach to almost a ‘comic/animation’ style; deep, often black line shading, over highlighted features etc. But I could be way wrong, so what is your perception? No I would agree. The influence of the GW style is very pronounced. I suppose a lot of people have learnt to paint from GW publications or from playing their games in the past. I think also the new generation of acrylics, Vallejo and GW paints also has a lot to do with it. They are far easier to work with than enamels and give a far brighter finish.
I learnt to use a black undercoat from a White Dwarf article in the late 80s, so I guess there are a lot of others who did too! I would say my style is ‘comic’; I try to get a balance between realism and something that stands out on the tabletop. Let’s face it, most WW2 figures would look pretty dull if we painted them realistically covered in dirt and grime, with faded camo smocks and sun-bleached jackets. But there is a fine balance between the comic style and a realistic style. I think the GW style works very well for fantasy subjects but needs a little toning down for historical subjects. I like to think I have a good balance between the comic and the realistic. WJ: Do you have a favourite subject to paint? Not really. I like variation! I get a vastly differing selection of things to paint in my line of work. At the moment I have 6mm WW2 and Napoleonic, 15mm American War of Independence and a load of 28mm Fantasy figures! There are certain things I prefer to do. Fantasy subjects are easier as you are not so restricted so you can play around with colours and let your imagination run riot! I also enjoy painting 20mm WW2; I have done loads for myself in the past so I find it reasonably easy to paint. I also have a huge selection of reference material for that period so it’s easy to find colour pictures of what I want to paint. Now if you’d asked what I don’t like to paint, well …that list could go on for a while! WJ: What is the hardest camouflage pattern out there WWII wise, and how do you approach it? Hmmmm… WW2 camo, a thorny subject! I suppose Waffen-SS Pea Dot springs to mind first. When doing camo I paint and highlight the basic overall colour first. In the case of Pea Dot this would be a redbrown colour. I then add a dark shade of the camo colours and then highlight them. I try to highlight all the colours where possible so the overall effect blends together.
104
I think camo patterns are the hardest to get right. It’s really a matter of trial and error. At the moment I am trying to do some figures in Wehrmacht splinter pattern camo, using the technique described earlier and it works, but its quite time consuming. I think the best policy with regards to camo is to get a finish that ‘looks’ right o n the scale of figure. WJ: Does the whole pro painted label irritate you? I say this as you now often s e e figures on eBay that are ‘pro-painted’. True they are being painted for money, but they neglect to tell you the ‘pro’ was leaning on a lamp post wearing fishnets, and the painting bit related to dipping the figures into cans of enamel. (Digressing again I had a friend who painted his Napoleonic armies like that back in the seventies, dip one end in red, do a hundred or so, then when dry turn it over and dip it in white … a 5p paint job!) If I’m honest then, yes it does. I think it’s an overused and often misused term. It depends how you define ‘Pro-painted’ I guess. To me a pro-painted figure should be of a high standard and well based. To some it seems to be a title to get people to look at their figures. But at the end of the day I guess the figures will do the talking. What annoys me more with eBay are the crap photographs you see. How you can tell a figure is ‘propainted’ when the picture is taken 10 foot away in a dark room is beyond me!
WJ: Gloss or Matt – which finish and why? Matt. Why? Because gloss looks bloody horrible! Matt varnish really gives the model a nice finish. It lets the colours stand-out. I find gloss varnish just reflects the light and spoils a good paintjob. I guess its personal preference but I can’t stand glossy figures. I just don’t get it. When do you ever see shiny soldiers on a battlefield? Matt varnish all the way!!! WJ: How much do you think the base sets off the figure? I often think I can get away with an OK figure if the base is good, but a good figure looks far worse if the base is