Seriously annoyed with Army Painter primer

[Cherno]

I never had a problem with the black TAP primer, but had horrible results with the matte spray varnish (frosting extravaganza). I've been using brush-on varnish ever since, it's not as matte but it's far safer to use.

[Dewbakuk]

Me too. Cheap, plentiful, dead matt (at least the Halfords ones in the UK are).

I can't understand why anyone would want to go to the extra expense of something like Army Painter, just for the sake of a 'wargames branded' product.

For primer, I use Halfords car primer, can't beat it.

I have used Army Painter sprays to apply a base colour to figures though (in contrast to what I said before as I'd forgotten). If you're undercoating then car primer is king, for a colour however, the Army Painter range is much more natural in tone than car colours are, plus car colours are rarely matt.

But it makes me sad, that the whole philosophy behind this product range is aimed at encouraging people to set low standards in their wargames figure painting... With a vested commercial interest in ensuring it stays that way...  

I believe everyone can become a better painter. You just need to work at it.

Totally agree that anyone can improve. I'm not a great painter but I'd say I'm reasonable, It's unlikely I'll improve very much however as I just don't want to. Nothing to do with Army Painter products, I just find painting extremely tedious when painting multiple figures. I quite like painting a single figure but units bore me senseless and I don't paint singles that often

I'm not alone either, the quantity of professional painters out there shows that there are plenty of gamers who don't want to paint. Not everyone can afford to have figures painted however, so Army Painter gives them a viable alternative, if not the prettiest.

[OSHIROmodels]

Halfords for me as well (although the white hasn't got the best coverage).

Now, if they brought out a dark green and a dark drown I'd by happy as a pig in ...

cheers

James

[Orctrader]

...I've been using brush-on varnish ever since, it's not as matte...

DR is as matt as matt can be - with some help.  LINK

As for primer, I use brush-on.  Don't find it tedious at all.  Rather therapeutic.

So, with both primer and varnish I brush it on.  Sprays I use hardly ever.

[Daeothar]

In over 2 decades of using spray paints, purely for undercoating, I have only had one bad experience, and I suppose that could have been prevented, if I only had sprayed with less humidity in the air.

I started out with GW cans, but quickly switched to another brand hat wa carried by my local art supply shop. Only marginally cheaper, but went on well, and in a small range of colours (at a time when GW only had white and black). However, this was the brand that went all grainy on me...

I then started using cheap matt black from a discount store, which actually works really well.

However; only very recently, I discovered a new product, about which I am now cautiously elated! I eyed the Montana line of graffiti spray cans before, but was put off by the shipping costs and the scattered stories of their paints eating plastics. But eventually, I bit the bullet and ordered a test can from the 'Montana Black' line (the colour was orange by the way). They're really cheap, at € 3,50 for a 400 Mg can, and it has a really high pigment content, as they're designed to cover in one go (those graffiti guys are apparently the hasty types. Must be the nature of their activities...)

Added bonus is that they also have different types of nozzles, so one can change them out to achieve a different effect (ranging from narrow to wide). Also, they have lines with lower pressure cans, and glossy paint.

And the best part is; the range I ordered from, has nearly 200(!) colours! So the undercoat is immediately a basecoat!

Of course I first tested on pieces of sprue, to see the behavious of the paint, but it did not damage the plastic at all. The Black range is quite high on pigment, so the paint can be thick. Be advised to not to spray too thickly, because I suspect the paint can fill up small detail really fast! I did one vehicle so far, and I'm quite chuffed with the initial result.

I will experiment a little further, but so far, this stuff has me impressed, not least because of the huge assortment of colours...

Linked, for her pleasure: http://www.montana-cans.com/products/Cans/Montana_BLACK/27

[Captain Blood]

Yes, I tried Montana, but it certainly didn't provide a matt finish. More like semi-gloss / silk, even though it was supposed to be a matt paint... But yes, it's a fantastic range of colours...

[Daeothar]

It does indeed end up a bit satin. But then, nothing a light spraying of Dullcote can't fix...

One thing though; even though it is an acrylic paint, I found it to be drying slower than other brands. In fact, even though it did not catch fingerprints, I had the feeling it felt a bit sticky till about 24 hours after coating. I suppose it would be paintable in the meantime nevertheless...

[Galland]

Me too. Cheap, plentiful, dead matt (at least the Halfords ones in the UK are).

I can't understand why anyone would want to go to the extra expense of something like Army Painter, just for the sake of a 'wargames branded' product.

I'm sorry to say it, but most wargames branded products of this nature (paint, brushes, basing materials, diddy little plastic tubs of flock or scenic scatter) are invariably over-priced and of inferior quality to readily available alternatives.
Wargamers just like buying them because they like the reassurance that there are brands out there specifically for people like them.
Unfortunately it doesn't make them better products.

Snake oil.

I've looked at a few Army Painter products as they've come out, and they certainly aren't for me.
I do appreciate if you're going for rapid production line volume over quality, then the idea of a base colour spray, a bit of localised touching-in with block colours, and then a dip in woodstain, must seem like an attractive option.

But it makes me sad, that the whole philosophy behind this product range is aimed at encouraging people to set low standards in their wargames figure painting... With a vested commercial interest in ensuring it stays that way...  

I believe everyone can become a better painter. You just need to work at it.
The Army Painter pitch seems to me to be saying: 'Not everyone can be a good painter - but you can achieve quite adequate results using our 'system'. So why waste time trying to improve? Be satisfied with mediocrity... '

How negative...

This ^^

All to true. I cant say that I am especially good at painting, but its my hobby and it yields a great deal of pleasure. I also wish that I could crank out a bit more figures at a more rapid pace, however, the army painter system just makes me sad, its not my cup of tea really.
My son started with this, and I tried to argue against it, but alas, he is in the age of "dad is a idiot, moron, mongoloid dude from 5000 years ago", and hence dont listen to what I say at all. Sadly enough, he is rather good at painting, but extremely lazy and have no patience what so ever. The good thing is, that he didnt get that good results with the Army Painter system, and went back to his normal painting, hehe. I enjoyed that very much. Gloating can be such a great treat.

[DrVesuvius]

I really don't get why when people start slagging off Army Painter/Dipping techniques they always seem to miss the point.

Is painting your hobby?  Can you get just as good results with a traditional painting technique?  Good for you, but it sounds like Army Painter/dipping isn't for you.

Me?  I'm a gamer.  I want to get painted figures onto the table so I can play with them and I want to get a lot of them done quickly.  And after 25 years of trying all the different painting methods out there, I have to accept the conclusion that I suck dead donkey balls at painting.  I cold spend hours on a figure, and it will come out looking like dog vomit.  The chances of any improvement now, approaching middle age with eyesight not quite as sharp as it used to be, are pretty slim.

I'm the sort of gamer Army Painter/dipping works for.  I get as good a result as *I* could get with drybrushes, washes and whatnot, but in a fraction of the time.  And I'm pretty sure that my Quickshaded figures aren't going to rob anyone of any painting competition prizes, so why worry about it?

I agree that the actual Army Painter Quickshade is devilishly overpriced and that you can get almost the same result with cheaper DIY store equivalents. And my sympathies to the OP who sounds like he was just very unlucky with a bad batch of primer.  I'd definitely second the recommendation to use Dettol to strip the paint off the figures.  I've used it on both metal and plastic figures, even on soft toy-grade plastics and never experienced anything worse than a slight softening of the details on the soft plastic, which was unnoticeable after repainting.

Dr V

[McYellowbelly]

Halfords for me as well (although the white hasn't got the best coverage).

Now, if they brought out a dark green and a dark drown I'd by happy as a pig in ...

cheers

James

Look for their camoflauge colours, brown, green and khaki, very,very matt but only in small cans so far 

[Captain Blood]

Me?  I'm a gamer.  I want to get painted figures onto the table so I can play with them and I want to get a lot of them done quickly.  And after 25 years of trying all the different painting methods out there, I have to accept the conclusion that I suck dead donkey balls at painting.  I cold spend hours on a figure, and it will come out looking like dog vomit.  The chances of any improvement now, approaching middle age with eyesight not quite as sharp as it used to be, are pretty slim.

I'm the sort of gamer Army Painter/dipping works for.  I get as good a result as *I* could get with drybrushes, washes and whatnot, but in a fraction of the time.  And I'm pretty sure that my Quickshaded figures aren't going to rob anyone of any painting competition prizes, so why worry about it?

So it works for you, and you've made a considered decision to be happy with that level of painting. Fine.

Why slag it off? Because it's a product that encourages a quick and dirty approach to figure painting when many people, including many people new to the hobby, could probably do a lot better. Not you maybe, but others for sure. But they are sold this as an off-the-shelf solution to all their painting needs, and so they will never try. It's brazenly positioned as 'the way wargames figure painting is done these days', and so people are discouraged from trying to improve their skills.

Like many wargames products over the last few years, from glossy rules 'systems' to figure painting 'systems', it's just average sh*t, expensively packaged up and aggressively marketed in order to make money from things that people used to use creativty, skill and initiative to do themselves. But hey, that's the world we live in, so maybe you're right - it's not worth worry about.

As ever, it's all down to your point of view. For some people, no doubt it's a brilliant, labour-saving shortcut to adequately painted figures for wargaming. For me, it's a another nail in the coffin of wargaming aesthetics. But not everyone cares about such things. Fair enough.

[FramFramson]

I think it's also worth pointing out that even if you are a quick-and-dirty/dipping painter type, a basecoat or primer that kludges up or fills in details makes those fast drybrushes/dips/Devlan Mud talent-in-a-can washes come off much worse (since the more texture you have to work with, the better). So even fast guys can get good value from a high-quality primer.

[Coronasan]

Halfords for me too. White and grey.

[Mitch K]

I've never used the AP system or anything like it.

I have used halfords / duplicolour sprays to prime with, and they do work, but having tried a variety of approaches, I prefer to brush on Liquitex of W&N gesso to prime, and use W&N Galleria matt varnish, brushed or sprayed, on top.

Like we say in my job, it's only quicker if it works...

[DrVesuvius]

So it works for you, and you've made a considered decision to be happy with that level of painting. Fine.

Why slag it off? Because it's a product that encourages a quick and dirty approach to figure painting when many people, including many people new to the hobby, could probably do a lot better. Not you maybe, but others for sure. But they are sold this as an off-the-shelf solution to all their painting needs, and so they will never try. It's brazenly positioned as 'the way wargames figure painting is done these days', and so people are discouraged from trying to improve their skills.

Like many wargames products over the last few years, from glossy rules 'systems' to figure painting 'systems', it's just average sh*t, expensively packaged up and aggressively marketed in order to make money from things that people used to use creativty, skill and initiative to do themselves. But hey, that's the world we live in, so maybe you're right - it's not worth worry about.

As ever, it's all down to your point of view. For some people, no doubt it's a brilliant, labour-saving shortcut to adequately painted figures for wargaming. For me, it's a another nail in the coffin of wargaming aesthetics. But not everyone cares about such things. Fair enough.

For the record, I don't particularly disagree with what you're saying.  The AP Quickshade is overpriced, as is a lot of wargame paraphenalia that's spoonfed to a lot of gamers.  But if you think speedpainting techniques to get "just good enough" figures onto the table is anything new in the hobby, then you're sadly mistaken.  I read somewhere that back in the 70s Peter Guilder used blobs of yellow paint for faces and hands, covered with a brown wash (this was long before anyone was using modern inking techniques).  Absolutely frightful up close, but at wargames table distances with big battallions In The Grand Manner they're supposed to have looked superb.  People have been "dipping" figures for almost as long, it was certainly old hat when I first tried it around 2002, long before Army Painter came on the scene. If Army Painter had never happened, I'd probably still be using the same painting technique I am now, only with DIY store wood finishes.

BTW It's interesting to hear so many people recommending Halfords spray paints as a cheaper alternative.  I've just checked the price of both their primer and their camouflage ranges and they don't seem to be a massive saving over what I'm paying for the Army Painter stuff.  Now if we were talking under a fiver for 500ml, that would be a saving I could get behind.

Now generally I've been very happy with the quality of the AP primers I've used.  Maybe I've just been lucky.  Out of a couple of hundred figures primed there's only been one figure where I've felt the primer obliterated sculpting detail, and that was a Wargames factory Zulu War Brit, which aren't generally considered to be the best of sculpts in the first place.

I guess I'm just suprised to hear so much vehemence about what is at the end of the day, just another method of getting paint onto toy soldiers.