Non Metallic Gold - Photo Effect Painting

[Martin Antonenko]

Dear people!

Here we have one of these "photo-effect" paintings of "high-gloss metal tones" - and a sbs as they are created - by Khian Morales from Mexico ...:




















In the fifth and sixth pictures from above you can see why many of us who watched such NMM's live have the association of a tank with faded winter camouflage.

You can SEE that on the painted object, but not PHOTOGRAPHY, because the painting is made especially for photography.

Here you can finally see something of it!
Extremely stunning!
Cheers

 

[Nap]

Hi Martin

Thanks for this , something I was going to post

Certainly impressive with a high gloss finish

Nap

 

[Malcolm]

Make it look so easy
just a matter of practice, and patience, and more practice
thank you

 

[DEL]

Just doesn't do it for me. No doubt about the skill involved but I see it as a 2D technique for canvases and paper.
I've seen some technically superb examples but as you rotate the piece it doesn't always work in the round.
Like I say just a personal view.
All that being said I plan to use the technique on a flat by Jupiter,

 

[housecarl]

Just doesn't do it for me. No doubt about the skill involved but I see it as a 2D technique for canvases and paper.
I've seen some technically superb examples but as you rotate the piece it doesn't always work in the round.
Like I say just a personal view.
All that being said I plan to use the technique on a flat by Jupiter,

Can't agree more, Del.

 

[kagemusha]

Just doesn't do it for me. No doubt about the skill involved but I see it as a 2D technique for canvases and paper.
I've seen some technically superb examples but as you rotate the piece it doesn't always work in the round.
Like I say just a personal view.
All that being said I plan to use the technique on a flat by Jupiter,

For me it never works for the reasons you say Del...however...using the technique on a flat would make a kind of sense...although the work involved is seemingly over complex and lacks any 'depth' IMHO

Ron

 

[housecarl]

There is no denying the skill, for me it just doesn't work in 3D.
Here.
Here.

 

[Ferris]

In his new book for Andrea, Kirill Kanaev explains in full how he does this kind of NMM of which he is the absolute master. He explains it from a physics view and addresses how to ensure it looks right from all directions. If it doesn’t, the painter’s skill is not complete yet.

It is impressive to see how Kanaev can do this realistically without an actual example to follow. He paints from physical understanding of reflections, regularly tested by visual inspection.

Problem with this technique is that any mistake is detected by the eye/brain. If it’s not perfect, it’s off. The traditional technique is much more robust and therefore easier (which is why I stick to it).

Adrian

 

[Lucas Ferron]

For me it never works for the reasons you say Del...however...using the technique on a flat would make a kind of sense...although the work involved is seemingly over complex and lacks any 'depth' IMHO

Ron

I don't think I agree with this. No matter if we're using TMM or NMM we always reinforce the lights and shadows because 'natural' metallic reflection will look off in our smaller scale figures.
Also, if you check some really good NMM out there (like Pisarski's, Kanaev's or Masclan's, to name a few) it'll look great even while rotating the figure.
My point being you either haven't come across a really good NMM or you're not applying the same level of strictiness in your critique of TMM.

 

[kagemusha]

I don't think I agree with this. No matter if we're using TMM or NMM we always reinforce the lights and shadows because 'natural' metallic reflection will look off in our smaller scale figures.
Also, if you check some really good NMM out there (like Pisarski's, Kanaev's or Masclan's, to name a few) it'll look great even while rotating the figure.
My point being you either haven't come across a really good NMM or you're not applying the same level of strictiness in your critique of TMM.

It's perfectly fine if you don't agree...that is your right...and your personal point of view...as was mine.
What I would say is this...TMM painters...myself included...will reinforce the hi lite's and shadows...simply because...no acrylic/lacquer or solvent 'paint'...even if it is quoted as being 'buffable'...has enough 'metal' in it to offer the reflective properties of real/actual metal...therefore...and similar to NMM...we are trying to put in what is missing in the paint itself.
My 'critique' of NMM is purely based on what I have seen in reality...i.e. not in the pages of a book...or on a screen.
I freely admit that the skills of such painters is self evident...and way beyond my capabilities...but...my personal opinion remains unchanged.

Ron

 

[Lucas Ferron]

It's perfectly fine if you don't agree...that is your right...and your personal point of view...as was mine.
What I would say is this...TMM painters...myself included...will reinforce the hi lite's and shadows...simply because...no acrylic/lacquer or solvent 'paint'...even if it is quoted as being 'buffable'...has enough 'metal' in it to offer the reflective properties of real/actual metal...therefore...and similar to NMM...we are trying to put in what is missing in the paint itself.
My 'critique' of NMM is purely based on what I have seen in reality...i.e. not in the pages of a book...or on a screen.
I freely admit that the skills of such painters is self evident...and way beyond my capabilities...but...my personal opinion remains unchanged.

Ron

Ron, I think we're kind of coming from the same place, but I don't think I was able to explain what I think.
As you said, NMM and TMM (as well as pretty much every technique) aims to replicate the effect of specific (one or more) light sources. We don't simply basecoat and let the natural light does the work because the different scale means the natural light will look weird. So we paint those lights and shadows to 'sell' the ambience we want.

When you say that a NMM will look 'off' depending on the angle you're looking my understanding is that you haven't looked at a really good NMM in real life, because those will absolutely look amazing - and I'm one to say that my NMM is far from great, but I've had the opportunity to hold some amazing pieces in my hands.
Also, I'd argue that TMM tend to look even worse than NMM, because the natural reflectivity of TMM means that while you're rotating the piece you'll see 'natural' lights reflecting from the mini that won't match the overerall light source(s) painted on the mini. This kind of thing is much less pronounced in NMM.

Which is why you said you either haven't seen a really good NMM in hand (because you believe that NMM will look bad if you take it out of the 'perfect angle') or you're not being as strict in your critique of TMM (because TMM makes natural light reflections even more stark while rotating the mini, creating light reflections that do not match the overall piece).

Cheers!

 

[Lucas Ferron]

If I may, I remember Khian's post on facebook and took some screenshots.
Besides the great WIP and palette pictures there's a bit of an explanation on their rationale behind choices.
I added the pictures with the artist's comments in here:

It's also in this Imgur album: https://imgur.com/a/hD8BIZz

Cheers!

 

[kagemusha]

I accept what your trying to put across...it's a sound argument in favour of NMM...however...and again this is purely my personal opinion...in real life...the reflections we see in metals are produced by the surrounding area or objects therein.
Neither technique can truly represent this if there are no surrounding influences...i.e. a bust simply mounted on a plinth...with no context or obvious influences on the finish applied to the metals on said bust.
At the end of the day...it all comes down to personal perception...be it TMM or NMM...both have their advantages...it's up to the painter to make his/her interpretation...and use the technique that best works for them.

Regards

Ron

 

[Alex]

TMM : if you paint carefully the shadows and model the form, I can produce a very convincing miniature object looking like the real thing, no questions about it... and it is actually more difficult to do it with real metallics than with non metallic paints because you have to establish a smooth transition between maximum metallic light and deepest non metallic shadows.
NMM : actually much easier to do since you are dealing only with matte non metallic paints ; also much easier to photograph... will go with NMM whenever I feel it will suit the piece better. In real life, most NMM works look off including the ones from the painters you mentioned (saw them with my own eyes). At the end of the day, it is a matter of taste really.

 

[Steve Ski]

I'm way late to this party, but what a trippy concept, to be sure, forced reflections. Getting a convincing metallic look has always amazed me. Great post Martin!

 

[malc]

Good thread, so I thought I would stick my bit in.

I think both have merit and I like both but the TMM takes a lot of work to be cconvincing as I fined a well painted figure can be over powered by TMM.
I think that a mix of both works welland this is my preferred method.

Metallics such as swords and armour I would use a mix of both but cloth and embellished stuff (buttons ETC) i favour NMM.

 

[Babelfish]

Just my perception but I always think NMM works better on fantasy pieces than on historical subjects.

- Steve

 

[Venko]

I think TMM with NMM approach will be better, especially on live shows, because I don't like how NMM looks on live (for photography-looks very nice). Best of both worlds

 

[Ronaldo]

I think too much is read into it , I have a technique with T MM that works fine for me esp with brass and gold . used to get great results with umbral rub and buff till they changed the formula , moved to citadel and got good results till they changed the formula .
If you want to see how good TMM work look at Brian super snasdds work ,he has it down to a T.
As with all my painting sometimes I get it right