PDA

View Full Version : does GW photoshop pics of their minis?



kkdm
07-02-2010, 12:48
seriously, is it possible to paint minis like this?

Chaos and Evil
07-02-2010, 13:23
does GW photoshop pics of their minis?
Yes they do.

is it possible to paint minis like this?
Yes it is. :angel:

Tonberry
07-02-2010, 13:42
They copy+paste images of units to make pics of big armies, sometimes not very well.

Occulto
07-02-2010, 13:44
It's not just the big armies.

One example I can think of, is the Red Corsairs army in the 40K rulebook. They've taken a pic of a squad, rearranged them, taken a second pic, then spliced the two together.

That's an army of two squads, Huron, Terminators and a Predator.

Lord Malorne
07-02-2010, 13:47
OP: yes and yes.

Thud
07-02-2010, 14:00
@OP: Check out your fellow countryman Hortwerth's stuff. ;)

Radium
07-02-2010, 14:07
seriously, is it possible to paint minis like this?

Yes, I've held several 'Eavy Metal minis in my own hands, and they really look like that. They are really that good (and there are people even better than that, check the top 10 at CMON).

Wil Grand
07-02-2010, 14:16
Go down WHW and you can have a look in the cabinets at them.

To echo some folk above, yes, I've seen a few cut and pastes to enlarge the number of armies in back covers, adverts etc. You can usually tell at a glance when it's done, not just if it's a bit dodgey looking but the 'Eavy Metal paintjobs generally are a lot better than the studio versions of the same colour scheme. Is it 'Eavy Metal? Yup, then they must be cut and paste. Easy.

There was also some C&P's done in the old catalogues where Chaos stuff needed to be shown in different sections on square and round bases. Clearly the same models and the bases they were pasted on were repeated under the feet of other miniatures.

Ultimate Life Form
07-02-2010, 14:19
I've been wondering exactly that very recently.

We all know that it's pretty much impossible to keep minis, especially metal minis in top shape forever. Some day, usually the first time you touch them, color WILL chip off at the edges. That leads me to believe that unless they have a huge staff of slaves in their basement that keeps repairing damages like the medieval monks that spent their lifetime copying books, the minis MUST have damaged areas, and these are most likely photoshopped in pics I would assume.

Howver unlike some other of GW's business practices I don't feel cheated by photoshopped pictures because we all know the paintjob isn't part of the product. I can understand they want their minis to look good and I too prefer a pic of a giant, flawlessly painted stunning army over that of a tattered horde of miserable wretches.

Chaos and Evil
07-02-2010, 14:28
I've been wondering exactly that very recently.

We all know that it's pretty much impossible to keep minis, especially metal minis in top shape forever. Some day, usually the first time you touch them, color WILL chip off at the edges. That leads me to believe that unless they have a huge staff of slaves in their basement that keeps repairing damages like the medieval monks that spent their lifetime copying books, the minis MUST have damaged areas, and these are most likely photoshopped in pics I would assume.
Actually a small part of the GW Studio deals with repairs to the studio miniatures.

mrtn
07-02-2010, 14:28
ULF, have you never heard of varnish? And good primers? I've had chipping on a handful of my minis, out of at least five hundred.

A good example of photoshop armies are the new beastmen, the promotional poster for example.

Tonberry
07-02-2010, 15:22
I've been wondering exactly that very recently.

We all know that it's pretty much impossible to keep minis, especially metal minis in top shape forever. Some day, usually the first time you touch them, color WILL chip off at the edges. That leads me to believe that unless they have a huge staff of slaves in their basement that keeps repairing damages like the medieval monks that spent their lifetime copying books, the minis MUST have damaged areas, and these are most likely photoshopped in pics I would assume.

Howver unlike some other of GW's business practices I don't feel cheated by photoshopped pictures because we all know the paintjob isn't part of the product. I can understand they want their minis to look good and I too prefer a pic of a giant, flawlessly painted stunning army over that of a tattered horde of miserable wretches.

If you look in last month's WD with all the new Tyranids, there's several pics of Deathleaper with a big chip on his mantis claw thingy.

jullevi
07-02-2010, 15:42
'Eavy Metal painters are indeed insanely good if given enough freedom. For proof, take a look at their CMON galleries:

Darren Latham (http://coolminiornot.com/artist/razza/orderby/Descending)
Joe Tomaszevski (http://coolminiornot.com/artist/Brokenblade/orderby/Descending)
Keith Robertson (http://coolminiornot.com/artist/Durham%20red/orderby/Descending)

(I am not sure if others have personal galleries).

Bookwrak
07-02-2010, 16:09
seriously, is it possible to paint minis like this?

Of course it is, people do it all the time. Do you think it's impossible to apply nice looking colors with a brush, but totally easy to apply nice looking colors with a computer? :p

scarletsquig
07-02-2010, 18:19
GW's painting skills are a lot better than their photoshop skills.

WD is one gigantic example of how to badly overuse gradients and the "impact" font.

Ironbreaker
07-02-2010, 19:17
They copy+paste images of units to make pics of big armies, sometimes not very well.

That's true.
In the Ork codex, one of the Boyz in the Snakebites group shot is missing half an arm. :p

spetswalshe
07-02-2010, 19:30
"How could you possibly make one of these crystal skulls except by some form of magic?"

"In a factory, from glass...?"

ard boy stu
07-02-2010, 20:10
That's true.
In the Ork codex, one of the Boyz in the Snakebites group shot is missing half an arm. :p

lmao not noticed that until know :p

Thoume
07-02-2010, 21:10
That's true.
In the Ork codex, one of the Boyz in the Snakebites group shot is missing half an arm. :p

The one on page 80? His slugga arm is hidden behind a branch :p

Edit: on topic, the speed freeks army on p84 is a good example of photoshop copy+pasting, as well as the spread in the 3.5 ed. imperial guard codex, illustrating how big half a regiment is...

Inquisitor Engel
07-02-2010, 21:11
We all know that it's pretty much impossible to keep minis, especially metal minis in top shape forever. Some day, usually the first time you touch them, color WILL chip off at the edges.

Dude, I've never had this problem - seal your minis when you're done.

scipunk
07-02-2010, 21:21
I wentt to last years GD in Toronto where 'Eavy Metal team brought their minis. They do paint like that.

As for chipping of the paints.....these models are for cabinet storage mostly not for gaming, thus models are handled less and less. Plus a couple of coats of varnish would assist with the job.

sigur
07-02-2010, 22:20
They definately photoshop and have done so for a long time. They paint incredibly well but the minis don't look just like in the pictures. They don't look really worse, only not the same.

Baggers
07-02-2010, 22:41
They do paint well, but I am not surprised if they don't photoshop. I've seen the models in real life and they look better in the photos, apart from the WE which are better in real life.

Oh and the studios models do get broken. I've heard some funny stories.

lord_zyplon
08-02-2010, 04:24
They definately photoshop and have done so for a long time. They paint incredibly well but the minis don't look just like in the pictures. They don't look really worse, only not the same.

Agreed completely. Seeing the Studio's Armageddon Steel Legion army in person at Games Day, it looks vastly different. It was all color, though - I guess it's lighting?

grissom2006
08-02-2010, 08:52
Yep they do only got to look closely at the Datasheets for Apocolypse.

And yes they do paint models that well.

IJW
08-02-2010, 10:01
I've seen the models in real life and they look better in the photos
Probably because in the photos they are properly lit in a softbox... ;)

As a photographer, I can tell you that correct lighting makes a massive difference to how a model looks. They'll be using PS as well, but looking better than in real life will owe a lot to the photography itself.

Hrafn
08-02-2010, 10:55
Probably because in the photos they are properly lit in a softbox... ;)

As a photographer, I can tell you that correct lighting makes a massive difference to how a model looks. They'll be using PS as well, but looking better than in real life will owe a lot to the photography itself.

Not to forget that colours vary widely according to your monitor and the general colour settings of your OS.

@The OP: If you by "photoshopped" mean digitally adjusted and corrected, then of course they are. Most commerciel (if not all) photos are, and in my experience its for the better. Speaking from an experience with photographing museum collections, which is really not that much different from photographing minis, I can tell you that digital adjusting and enhanceing do wonder for the items being photographed.

And to add to the sentiment: Yes, they can paint that good, and Heavy Metal minis aren't even near to what the real top dogs can do..

frozenwastes
08-02-2010, 12:00
Another thing to remember is that painting miniatures for photography is different than painting for personal viewing. The use of non-metallic metal techniques and off figure source lighting are two examples where if you view them in person and the lighting you are viewing them in doesn't match the assumed source of light in the techniques, your brain can register that something is "off." In a professional miniature photography studio, where all light is difused, the only thing to cue your brain as to assuming where the light is coming from is the miniature itself.

sigur
08-02-2010, 18:12
Another thing to remember is that painting miniatures for photography is different than painting for personal viewing. ...

Very good point. Still, in the case of 'Eavy Metal painters, this doesn't matter that much in my opinion because they use NMM or sorts of highlighting that rely too much on light sources rarely (thank god).

Earl_UK
08-02-2010, 18:24
Photoshoping is essential in any published work to maintain the required quality. obviously GW do it for box art as this makes the product have more eye appeal and also provides a panting referance for people.

Some of the minis on CMON are absolute works of art, my faves are the Khorne Dreanought, Sister of Battle vs Ork Dreadnought and the Valten Mounted.

Suicide Messiah
08-02-2010, 21:53
Heavy Metal minis aren't even near to what the real top dogs can do..

You are joking right? Razza and brokenblade routinely show the top dogs how its done over at CMoN. Just go and have a look at everone elses p*** poor attempts at NMM. Of course, they are both men and dont put every mini on a massive rock for no reason which explains why they arent quite as high in the ranking system as they should be.

MarcoSkoll
09-02-2010, 00:24
Go down WHW and you can have a look in the cabinets at them.
Has to be done: http://xkcd.com/331/

Grimbad
09-02-2010, 00:27
There is some really abysmal photoshop around the klawstompa on p22 of Apoc Reload. They seem to have lazily drawn a loop around it, dragged the whole thing and some of the surrounding sand with it over to the right a little, and not cleaned up after themselves. This leaves a border of sand around the stompa, which is superimposed on front of a deff dread. The stompa also has two left klaws. And it seems they did this just to cram in a tiny mob of burnas... in the very back of the ork horde. That's where flamer units belong, right?

Hrafn
09-02-2010, 07:55
You are joking right? Razza and brokenblade routinely show the top dogs how its done over at CMoN.

What part of "Heavy Metal minis" did you miss? :eyebrows:

Did I happen to say "Heavy Metal mini painters"?

Did I happen to say that Heavy Metal Mini painters and "top dogs" couldn't be the same?

So, no, I'm not joking. :rolleyes:

Suicide Messiah
10-02-2010, 12:59
Ah, apologies then.

mattjgilbert
10-02-2010, 13:25
Are the models really painted like that by people= yes
Do GW use photoshop = yes, but for things like backgrounds (not to "paint" the models)

Zark the Damned
10-02-2010, 14:19
(pedantry alert) No, GW does not 'Photoshop' anything. Photoshop is a noun, not a verb.

They do digitally alter photos and copy/paste minis and units in pics for publication. They don't necessarily use Photoshop for it though.

yabbadabba
10-02-2010, 14:33
There is one major difference between the models painted by the Studio and the models painted by anyone on CMoN. Time. While the painters on CMoN might self impose time limits for whatever reason they are under no obligation to stick to them. The GW Studio have time limits imposed and this will always limit the quality of the paint job.

Chaos and Evil
10-02-2010, 14:54
(pedantry alert) No, GW does not 'Photoshop' anything. Photoshop is a noun, not a verb.

They do digitally alter photos and copy/paste minis and units in pics for publication. They don't necessarily use Photoshop for it though.

Actually, the do literally use the computer program Photoshop in order to do their "Photoshopping". :D

Earthbeard
10-02-2010, 15:01
"How could you possibly make one of these crystal skulls except by some form of magic?"

"In a factory, from glass...?"

/thumbs up

Zark the Damned
10-02-2010, 15:15
Actually, the do literally use the computer program Photoshop in order to do their "Photoshopping". :D

From Wikipedia: Adobe Systems (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_Systems), the publisher of Adobe Photoshop, discourages use of the term "photoshop" as a verb (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conversion_%28linguistics%29) out of concern that it may undermine the company's trademark (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genericized_trademark)

mrtn
10-02-2010, 16:31
From Wikipedia: Adobe Systems (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_Systems), the publisher of Adobe Photoshop, discourages use of the term "photoshop" as a verb (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conversion_%28linguistics%29) out of concern that it may undermine the company's trademark (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genericized_trademark)

Why should we care about that? If they didn't want their trademark to be genericized they shouldn't have made such a successful product. :eyebrows:

Earl_UK
10-02-2010, 16:38
From Wikipedia: Adobe Systems (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_Systems), the publisher of Adobe Photoshop, discourages use of the term "photoshop" as a verb (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conversion_%28linguistics%29) out of concern that it may undermine the company's trademark (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genericized_trademark)

Then that is a perect reason to do so even more :)

Im going to do some photoshoping tonight :)

Bloodknight
10-02-2010, 17:03
Who cares what Adobe wants? They don't make the laws.

Do you google stuff? I wonder how Yahoo likes that. ("googeln (verb)" made it officially into the German language in 2001, I assume that it was slightly earlier in English as "to google") :)


(pedantry alert) No, GW does not 'Photoshop' anything. Photoshop is a noun, not a verb.

Or not. The interesting thing is that language changes (which makes the concept of prescriptive grammar pretty useless in the long run). One of the word formation processes involved is called Zero-Derivation which is, for example, much more common in English than in German ;)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-derivation


edit: I just noticed that you linked to the same article ;), which makes your argument a bit stranger than I thought.

Wil Grand
10-02-2010, 17:27
I think as soon as a thread comes down to language pedantry and links to either wikipedia or an online dictionary the thread ends - like a non-nazi version of Godwyns law, Grandian Law, perhaps.

Ujio
10-02-2010, 17:30
What part of "Heavy Metal minis" did you miss? :eyebrows:

Did I happen to say "Heavy Metal mini painters"?

Did I happen to say that Heavy Metal Mini painters and "top dogs" couldn't be the same?

So, no, I'm not joking. :rolleyes:

'Eavy Metal.

I actually thought you simply spelled it incorrectly in your first post.

'Eavy Metal. 'Eavy Metal. 'Eavy Metal!!!ahhhh!!1!!!1!one!!!

Bloodknight
11-02-2010, 01:07
I think as soon as a thread comes down to language pedantry and links to either wikipedia or an online dictionary the thread ends - like a non-nazi version of Godwyns law, Grandian Law, perhaps.

He just summoned a linguist...;)

Wil Grand
11-02-2010, 09:15
I'm a cunning linguist.

EldarWonderland
11-02-2010, 09:40
Welcome to Carry On Warseer :)

Solar_Eclipse
11-02-2010, 14:11
I love how we can get all pedantic about the use of "Photoshopping" as a verb rather than the noun form while we are also talking about a group of people called the 'eavy Metal team.

Oh well...

Coasty
11-02-2010, 16:23
Does 'Eavy Metal take a capital apostrophe?

/eavy Metal, maybe?

AndrewGPaul
11-02-2010, 16:39
Just be thankful it doesn't have an umlaut.

'vy Mtl?

Crube
12-02-2010, 16:31
This has veered wildly off topic


Thread closed

Crube
The Warseer Inqusisition