Painted playing pieces

@Imperious-Leader

Suspended from Reddit, but probably Germany grey, Italy yellow.

@the-captain

They are classic 1/72 scale.

That is really impressive! Very nice

Thanks, Guys! I will try these Ideas out.

Hi Everyone,

Cody Dean here from Dean’s Army Guys. I wanted to share a custom Polish army I made for a client. I love getting to do unique armies for people where I can expand beyond the main 5 powers. Check it out! Email me at info@deansarmyguys.com for a quote on the custom army of your dreams!

CodyIMG_4394.jpg IMG_4393.jpg

@cavestone I also use vallejo paints. The key question here is are you brush painting, or using an airbrush, or both?

The Vallejo paints have a “Model Air” line that comes pre-thinned. You can buy a thinning product (from them) to add to the “Model Color” series paints, which are the exact same thing, just more concentrated and thicker.

If you’ve never used an airbrush, its a bit finicky–it requires regular cleaning and a without a good brush and compressor the paint will flow very inconsistently. The process will be very frustrating unless you use the pre-thinned paints because the brush can only blow paint that is within a certain set of thickness parameters that are difficult to achieve, especially if you are trying to mix the air in the brush’s reserve or in small quantities. That’s why having copies of both Model Air and Model Color is fine by me–unlike Warhammer 40K I’m using primarily earthy colors, greens, dunkelgelb and dunkelgrau… other AFV and camoflage colors and so i don’t need a collection of primary or bright colors.

But I recommend it. The airbrush creates a sublime, beautiful layer and slight mix variations can be used to create shadows, grades, etc. Then you go back over with your brush, adding highlights, lines, details. Then, back over again with a drybrushing…then back to the airbrush to blast Flory Wash all over it.

Can’t see your photos, you can’t post photos until you have a certain post count. I wouldn’t use water to thin paints, they are water soluble but the mix and viscosity is all wrong (though water is obv. cheap and easy to clean up)

As for oil-based paints, these require thinner to clean up, they are much more difficult to drybrush with and are not used for airbrushing. The days of the old testors paints is long behind us–even apple barrel paints are easier to work with and cheaper. The early painting methods were much more about glomming thick layers of paint onto lead miniatures and the modern approach with water based paint and a series of different techniques creates much better results.

@655321 decals very small decals and I bought 3 of those sets so there is that. Lol

4E43E286-8F3E-4AC1-84BC-E732B0B7EB2F.jpeg CA95B30E-914A-4105-9C05-22B533ECF2FF.jpeg

@barnee thanks, I was inspired after watching Midway to do them like that, and to differentiate them from fighters for my less observant friends. I liked it so much I did my Stukas and Japanese tacs the same way as well.

Thank you for the positive feedback! I forgot to say that in the previous post, and it’s very important that I do. It’s very encouraging and motivating to get good feedback, and we certainly appreciate it. The above mentioned four Essex class carriers are complete, a long with several other ships of the US Navy, so its time to update the thread. Just ships by FOlewnik in this post. More aircraft are almost done but I haven’t put magnets in them yet (so not really done), so no aircraft pictures this post.

We’ll start with the two “odd men out” of the HBG sculpt Baltimore Class Heavy Cruisers. Why “odd men out”? Because in the below picture we have on the left, the USS Unnamed Baltimore Class Cruiser Wearing Measure 31a, Design 9C, and on the right is the USS Columbus (CA 74), which wasn’t commissioned until June 8, 1945. The cruiser with the long name is wearing a design that was never used, but was taken from a period design found at https://www.wikiwand.com/en/World_War_II_US_Navy_dazzle_camouflage_measures_31,_32_and_33:_cruisers. The USS Columbus is wearing a Measure 12 Modified designed by FOlewnik to match the pieces we’ll be using for the US Atlantic fleet. These will get aircraft added, but at the time of the photographs the decals on the wings of the aircraft were drying.
DSC_0510a.jpg
DSC_0511a.jpg
DSC_0512a.jpg
Pattern_sheet,_MS-31a_9C_for_Baltimore_class.jpg

Next up are some metal destroyers from GHQ. Below on the left, the very brave USS Johnston (DD-557) painted in MS-3_/6D as it looked when it was “Sunk by Japanese Warships off Samar October 25 1944,” and next to it is USS Van Valkenburgh (DD-656) painted in camouflage Measure 31, Design 9d. All Wartime photos taken from Navsource.org, a great resource for US Navy history buffs.
DSC_0514a.jpg
DSC_0515a.jpg
DSC_0516a.jpg

Below, the real USS Johnston shortly before her final battle, and the official design sheet:
DSC_0516a0555715.jpg
Pattern_sheet,_MS-31-32-33_6D_for_Fletcher_class.jpg

A great wartime picture of the USS Van Valkenburgh, which is the same on both sides:
DSC_0516a0565603.jpg

Now on to these two. From GHQ, USS The Sullivans (DD-537) painted in Measure 1, and the HBG sculpt light cruiser USS Marblehead (CL-12) who always wore Measure 2 throughout the war. If I can get FOlewnik to put the Shamrock on the first stack of The Sullivans when he puts the scout aircraft on the Marblehead, as seen in the below wartime photograph, I’ll come back and edit the post.
DSC_0520a.jpg
DSC_0522a.jpg
DSC_0519a.jpg
DSC_0520a0553740.jpg
DSC_0520a0401208.jpg

The post previous to this post showed four Essex Class sculpts from HBG getting prepped and started with a base coat. Those are now completed and I had too much fun playing with them and the aircraft (that are complete so far) while I was taking photographs. I’m pretty sure I didn’t make any wooshing sea or aircraft noises or FOlewnik would have laughed at me. I was tempted though, and here’s why:
DSC_0524a.jpg
DSC_0525a.jpg
DSC_0526a.jpg
Above we have the first of the Long Hull Essex Class, USS Ticonderoga (CV-14) on the left looking as she did after her April 1945 refit from suffering a Kamikaze Attack on January 21, 1945, and USS Bunker Hill (CV-17) on the right. The Bunker Hill is wearing Measure 33, Design 6A, of which Navsource says, “Her port side camouflage pattern was the most intricate design applied to any carrier.” One glance can confirm that!
DSC_0526a021772.jpg

The final two Essex Class carriers are the USS Essex (CV-9) herself, and the USS Bennington (CV-20). The Essex is wearing a unique pattern, Measure 32v6, Design 10D, adapted from a destroyer pattern specifically for the long hulled Essex. The Bennington is painted in Measure 32, Design 17A.
DSC_0527a.jpg
DSC_0528a.jpg
DSC_0529a.jpg
DSC_0529aPattern_sheet,_MS_32a_17A_for_Essex_class.jpg
DSC_0529aUSS_Essex_(CV-9)_in_MS_32_6-10D_camouflage.jpg

Finally, some group pictures just for fun:
DSC_0531a.jpg
DSC_0532a.jpg
DSC_0533a.jpg
DSC_0534a.jpg
Thank you for checking out the post! If you liked it, please click the little heart. I’m trying to figure out why our post is only rated with a 2 when it seems it should be a bit higher if the other likes are any indication.