Dark Side of "The Dip"

[Curryman]

I'm a big fan of the famous "Dip" technique. I use it a lot because I need to get a lot of minis painted fairly quickly for my website reviews. Well, I just discovered (to my sorrow) that this super-easy method can have a super-big flaw that leads to blotchy, ugly-looking minis that may be ruined forever! If you're a Dip user you owe it to your minis to check out this article:
http://thescreamingalpha.com/2009/08/07/the-dark-side-of-the-dip/



Melodramatic enough lead for you? I always wanted to do one of those.

[Captain Blood]

Well, I just discovered (to my sorrow) that this super-easy method can have a super-big flaw that leads to blotchy, ugly-looking minis that may be ruined forever!

And you are surprised, why?

I've always thought that sticking one's figures into a tub of stain gloop and expecting them to look any good was a poor substitute for actually painting them...

If people don't have the time / artistic ability to do a connoisseur paintjob on their minis, fair enough.
Personally though, I'd rather see a good, clean, 'one-layer' basic paintjob any day, than a figure covered in sticky brown slop encouraged by companies wishing to sell tins of the stuff trying to convince people that it looks like 'shading'.

As ever, each to their own I know. I'm sure some people like the effect.

[white knight]

Well, while I never used the dip, I imagine it might be something I'd try if I ever was to paint a large army of skeletons or mummies.

[Curryman]

@Captain Blood I respect your opinion, Cap'n. I realize the dip is somewhat controversial and not to everyone's taste. But to answer your question, I was surprised because I used to get really good-looking results and then started getting grimy, gunky results. It took some little experimentation to trace the problem, and since I know a lot of people use the technique, I thought it would be worthwhile to share my results. As always, YMMV.

[Plynkes]

I'm a little sceptical too. I'm willing to be converted by examples of good results, but up to now I have yet to see the dip method produce much but grimy and gunky-looking figures. I have seen a fair few examples on TMP over the years, and so far I'm not convinced.

Lazy fellow that I am though, I'll happily eat my words and jump ship to this method in an instant if you show me it can work well.

[white knight]

I thought it didn't look too shabby in this thread:
http://secretsofthethirdreich.com/forums/index.php?topic=1438.15

I think it's not a magic solution though and will work better with some colours and textures than others.

[Captain Blood]

@Captain Blood I respect your opinion, Cap'n. I realize the dip is somewhat controversial and not to everyone's taste. But to answer your question, I was surprised because I used to get really good-looking results and then started getting grimy, gunky results. It took some little experimentation to trace the problem, and since I know a lot of people use the technique, I thought it would be worthwhile to share my results. As always, YMMV.

I respect your opinion too Curryman. I really like your reviews 

I just think there's an element of The Emperor's New Clothes with the whole current vogue for dipping, washing and inking as a substitute for painting.

Of course the people that make all these products have an incentive to persuade everyone that they're the best thing since sliced bread.
And I know there are plenty of excellent painters who use these things to good effect...

But dipping? Actually dipping figures?   

[Cosmotiger]

It's ideal for smaller scales. I've used a brushed on form of the Dip on 20mm figures, and it looks better than my attempts to paint in the shades and highlights, IMO. 

In 28mm, as WK says, it's ideal for mass painting skeletons and mummies.  It's not so ideal for more colorful figures in 28mm, though.  That's when you start to see the "grungy" appearance.  It has it's place, but it's not really appropriate for every figure.

[Hammers]

And you are surprised, why?

I've always thought that sticking one's figures into a tub of stain gloop and expecting them to look any good was a poor substitute for actually painting them...

If people don't have the time / artistic ability to do a connoisseur paintjob on their minis, fair enough.
Personally though, I'd rather see a good, clean, 'one-layer' basic paintjob any day, than a figure covered in sticky brown slop encouraged by companies wishing to sell tins of the stuff trying to convince people that it looks like 'shading'.

As ever, each to their own I know. I'm sure some people like the effect.

I don't use it but I must say that evidence shows that it can produce good enough results. I do however agree that I don't trust it to work consistently well and did not do so long before I read this article.

[Cosmotiger]

The Dip is inconsistent, and will eventually turn to glop in the container. So basically, it has the same qualities as Game Workshop's paint. 

[Curryman]

Ouch! Saucer of cream for Mr. Tiger... 

[Luckyjoe]

Forgive me for a little threadomancy, but I finally got around to putting up some pics of my dipped figures on my blog. The first figs I dipped were HO scale people, got a pretty nice effect overall, especially on the guy with the pick, but I left too much of the dip on the figures and ended up with shading where I didn't need it. The second time I dipped some Last Night On Earth zombies. I was more careful with them and used a piece of tissue paper to wick away excess dip right after dipping. I think those came out pretty good. If you're interested here are some pics:

HO scale people - As you can see, there is too much dip at the hem of the lady's skirt.
http://ljshobbyspot.blogspot.com/2009/07/dipping-ho-people.html

LNOE Zombies - I think the dip worked much nicer with these
http://ljshobbyspot.blogspot.com/2009/08/dipping-some-last-night-on-earth-lnoe.html

This is one of my best results:


I've been reluctant to try the dip method; I had a can of minwax sitting on a shelf over a year while I worked up the nerve to try it. But then I looked at some of my recently painted stuff and decided it probably couldn't make them look worse. 

Luckyjoe

[Commander Vyper]

I thought it didn't look too shabby in this thread:
http://secretsofthethirdreich.com/forums/index.php?topic=1438.15

I think it's not a magic solution though and will work better with some colours and textures than others.

Personally not keen on dipping at all. I don't think it works for figures of more than one colour, the shading's all wrong. Skellies and lizardmen and other single block colours maybe.

I don't think you can lump dipping in floor vanish or wax with techniques such as paint or ink washes, ink line work and glazes. These products and techniques have been around for a long time and are as much part of a painters arsenal as blockwork, linework and wetblending.

Sticking your figures on drillbit and dunking them in a pot of gloop is a whole different ballgame and not one for me, though I do accept it has in place for quick and dirty wargamming armies but not for individual pieces.

The Commander
 

[number9]

I've watched conversations go 'round and 'round on painting forums about the potential of dipping figures in minwax polyshades. I would say the consensus is that it yields no better or worse results than dipping a figure in ink, or dipping a figure in a finely prepared vallejo model color wash. It that sense it is only a single means to an end; to cover a figure in one general shade of color and hope it all falls into the crevices attractively. The end result isn't entirely a function of the material, but the technique. Basically everyone can agree there is no magic solution to make awesome looking painted figures where there is no real time, technique, or practice behind the effort.

That said, I use minwax polyshades for a variety of purposes in my painting, and while I abandoned dunking my models long ago, I'll heartily brush the glop on when my goal of time and quality necessitates it. All the miniatures painted below were first base coated normally, then "dipped" in tudor satin or antique walnut, dullcoated when totally dry, then highlighted very simply. The only extra effort made was on metallic areas which were painted in many successive NMM layers.



It isn't perfect, but it isn't a pile of trash I'd say was "ruined" by the dip, and it was all accomplished a fair bit faster than my usual method, excusing of course curing time for the minwax (I was sleeping so it doesn't really count, does it?) . There are properties to minwax polyshades and other like materials that do not exist in acrylic paints. Why limit ourselves if we can find value in those properties?

[Bako]

The Dip is inconsistent, and will eventually turn to glop in the container. So basically, it has the same qualities as Game Workshop's paint. 

Now now, I've used GW paints for some time. Though I do admit they are a tad thick, bit that's nothing a little thinning doesn't fix.

I used to do the 'paint on' dipping back before it really was all that popular, but have since then moved on. I still use thin washes and whatnot, but never like then.