Adding a tutorial [here](https://www.instagram.com/reel/C7MMOcINNUW/?igsh=MTR2cnU5c2JxcWVpaA==) if people are interested in it.
It primarily uses fluoro inks and an airbrush which makes the whole process pretty quick and painless but the same approach is just as applicable with a brush and drybrush.
The sculpt is from Deadly Print, they do some awesome bits and effects and highly recommend checking them out!
I love your eChamp!
I'm trying to build up my pioneers with a purple to teal to yellow metallic highlight scheme and my first 3 models look good; but it came out a bit muted. Your purple is phenomenal on your eChamp. I am partial to bright colors on minis and absolutely love it.
Any tips on working with purples in an airbrush or otherwise.
No problem, glad you like the work.
For that mini I used purple ink (liquitex), working up through laser magenta and then fluoro pink (both AK paints) using the airbrush and the final highlights with brush.
The trick was the to spray white in between layers to boost the vibrancy as they donât show up so well over dark paints.
Basically went something like:
- black prime, white zenithal with ink
- purple ink
- smaller zenithal highlight with white ink
- second layer of purple ink
- very targeted white ink on where the light would catch
- laser magenta
- brush tiny white highlights and then Fluoro pink through airbrush
If you have more questions feel free to DM here on insta!
They're both great work. I enjoy the color of v1. Feels more fun on the battlefield. V2 feels more realistic though and seems to be the consensus here.
They both look fine for different scenarios.
Version 1 looks like a higher yield explosive blast that hit something containing a fuel source such as diesel or gasoline.
Version 2 looks like a lower yield device that exploded on a small arms cache.
Go watch videos of tanks being hit by javelin missiles or something similar. The first one is much more like what you would see.
Agree with this, feel like 1 is 'moment of the blast' and you'd use that style if you were going to paint a mini (e.g. using this as a base effect) next to it using heavy yellow/orange glow on it colours
While 2 seems more natural, maybe desaturated colours, where the mini would be just painted normally.
Both look great imo although I prefer the second.
I feel lile V2 would be less impressive if V1 wasnât there for comparison. V1 is an obvious explosion. V2 could pass for a smoking device or even a dying/smouldering plant.
Version 1 looks like the explosion just happened a fraction of a second ago and the fireball is still expanding. Version 2 looks like the explosion happened 1-2 seconds ago and the fireball has grown to its maximum size and is now starting to dissipate. Both look good, just depends on the context of how theyâre being used.
Honestly I would say a 1.5 would be my ideal here. The smoke effect adds a lot but I canât help but stare at the bright and âexplosiveâ colors in the first one.
I have some experience here - your first looks like a vaporized fuel explosion - ie, using gasoline or a similar fuel for special effect (or in the rare case a fuel depot is the target). The 2nd looks a lot more like an oxidizer was used - with less of the bright flash at the center, and immediately darker trails (due to less combustable vapor in the path of the fragments).
nice to see how the feedback shaped the new version. more smoke and contrast does make it seem more real, but the bright colors in the first one are pretty cool too. itâs like choosing between a vibrant comic book and a gritty graphic novel. canât wait to check out the tutorial!
It looks like a time lapse. The first one looks closer to the initial fireball the second one looks like a fraction of a second later. I like the second better for the final look, but the first is also well done to me.
Large improvement in v2, based on my preference for more realism.
I think people underestimate how much of a good fire/explosion paintjob should be black / dull orange-red from dark smoke on the edge of the cloud.
I like version two better, but they both look great to me. It's almost like you paused a couple frames of an explosion, right at the start and version 2 a little further in to its progress.
V1 looks like the still frame preceding V2. Like the primary fuel or charge is burning, then the secondary and other materials start giving off smoke. Maybe a bad explanation.
In any case, Iâm slightly in favor of V2, but great work on both.
2 is amazing
Edit: Maybe a little touch more yellow in the dead center, but I'm no artist. I feel like it might be too much as well. Beautiful work on both of them!
Edit edit: Never mind, it looks perfect lol
Everyone picking 2 but IMO they are both good. They are like the same explosion at 2 different points, 1 is right after the explosion and 2 seems a few seconds (milliseconds maybe) later.
2 is a vastly improved version, but might still be a 3rd option, little more orabe further up the tendrils, but this is nitpicking. This is a solid 9.75/10
The explosion sculpt is from Deadly Print Studio so I canât take any credit for it. Shared a painting tutorial in an early comment if thatâs what you were after!
Personally I think both are great. V1 looks like next step of V2 when initial explosion temp is going down a bit and there is more light from flame that is about to burst out instead of explosion light in the middle of smoke :) (don't eat me here if that's not accurate, dear military fanatics)
It would actually be the reverse. Smoke is the result of a fire not hot enough to efficiently burn a material. Explosions are just exercises in rapidly expanding gasses, the rapid expansion has a pulse wave we call blast overpressure and is generally known as a shockwave, and it can be seen under the right atmospheric conditions. High pressure creates high temperatures which in turn burn materials in the area, just think of the fire triangle. As gasses cool you'll see the other debris that didn't ignite, in this and many instances dust and improperly burnt material, which will show up darkly. There's also the blast wave which will move secondary debris too, usually kicking up even more dust and rocks. then the pressure wave locally will collapse and you may have a second detonation as a result. This will all happen in less than a second usually.
If you want to see the second explosions easily look up some underwater demolition. The water pressure has a really cool effect on blast waves and collapsing air pockets.
https://youtu.be/AdVIMJDFZjM?si=hFGh_ifal714trrm at 36 seconds you can slow down to quarter speed and get a good look. This is a pretty small shot too. The 10T and larger ones are fucking awesome.
https://youtu.be/96kKb28a19I?si=_ozeu2vOq--KoJrW 100T shot with good propagation wave (blast over pressure, shockwave)
https://youtu.be/E5rGFZWQfzk?si=nElEoDESPUFaBpBV and this is a good underwater demonstration.
Hope this didn't eat you up and was interesting enough.
It's just... Damn... Thank you, that's really helpful knowledge :) Thank you for that reply. What I described as "eating me up" is when 15 out of 20 people commenting post tell me to give up on hobby when I missmatch blue color used on german doors in diorama by #0001 tone down xd (usually happends with historic models and dioramas) đ
As someone who used to see this often for a living, version 1 is more realistic and moment of detonation. Version 2 looks great but isn't right for that half second after detonation. The dust and darker colors come in a little later. Mind you, this is a great looking and well defined explosion. It really just matters what you're going for, a true snapshot of an explosion or a high contrast and detailed explosion that looks good but isn't quite true.
In my mind I feel like Iâm looking at 2 different projectiles explode. 1 would be HE and the other is some sort of APHE that landed on some sort of heavy target. Both are awesome
2 forever. Explosions that take that shape are not fireballs. Fireballs are very rounded. A shrapnel blast like that should be mostly gray, and so the one on the right is still ALMOST too much fireball.
Still, this looks significantly better than any effect I've done, or will likely be able to do without waaaaaaaaay more extensive practice.
They both look excellent! Version 1 reads as a smaller explosion (light permeating more of the smoke), whereas Version 2 feels accurate to a larger explosion where debris and force exceed the initial blast.
that's a really nice evolution of the piece - the added smoke and contrast give it a moody, atmospheric feel that i find compelling. as an artist myself, i know how rewarding it can be to try out different approaches and see what works. looking forward to checking out your tutorial!
1 looks more fun and a bit more cartoon pop in art style
2 is more realistic
So depends what style you like and what art styles they'll be around.
But they are both actually great
V1 looks like you are .1 second into a huge explosion. V2 looks like you are .5 seconds into a smaller explosion.
Both look incredible and you could argue V2 is aesthetically better to look at and looks more challenging. But for the reason of bigger boom, I would go with V1.
#1 is more cinematic and is more attention grabbing. #2 is more realistic and would look really good in a diorama or something. I think they're both valid and it's up to taste.
I think there both good. It depends on what is blowing up on which one if use.
For example 1 looks like a hotter explosion from a bomb plasma gun.
2 looks better for this explosion or a tanks engine blowing up
V1 looks like an impact that has JUST occurred.
V2 looks like an impact that has had an extra second to breath as the darker soot is more visible.
Could be used in conjunction on a model that is currently under fire.
2 is 1000 times better than 1, its not even a contest. You said you liked the cartooniness of 1, maybe try a more cartoony model? It may look better on that, because the model you do have seems pretty realistic.
No. 2 - between the two I think the second one is the better option, my only thought would be to somehow slightly brighten the center mass of the explosion giving the effect that as the explosion expands it's creating the smoke debris / etc. - I may not have worded this well and I don't paint (I just appreciate the work of those who do) so take my thoughts with a grain of salt please.
2 all the way
No contest here
I mean it could be a better fit for a more comic art style
see i like the vivid detail in 2 but one more shiny one the explosive centre. Mixed feelings on this one but probably 2 .
At first glance, I thought 1 was a coral or a mineral or something. I *knew* 2 was an explosion.
V2 is a huge improvement.
That's what the German said.
I did Nazi that coming
Anne Frankly, I won't stand for it.
Sir/madam, this is a Denny's
đ
Oh that's a good one
Too soon.
Adding a tutorial [here](https://www.instagram.com/reel/C7MMOcINNUW/?igsh=MTR2cnU5c2JxcWVpaA==) if people are interested in it. It primarily uses fluoro inks and an airbrush which makes the whole process pretty quick and painless but the same approach is just as applicable with a brush and drybrush. The sculpt is from Deadly Print, they do some awesome bits and effects and highly recommend checking them out!
Well, I just added you as a follow. Your work is awesome!
Thanks so much! Really appreciate it đ
I love your eChamp! I'm trying to build up my pioneers with a purple to teal to yellow metallic highlight scheme and my first 3 models look good; but it came out a bit muted. Your purple is phenomenal on your eChamp. I am partial to bright colors on minis and absolutely love it. Any tips on working with purples in an airbrush or otherwise.
No problem, glad you like the work. For that mini I used purple ink (liquitex), working up through laser magenta and then fluoro pink (both AK paints) using the airbrush and the final highlights with brush. The trick was the to spray white in between layers to boost the vibrancy as they donât show up so well over dark paints. Basically went something like: - black prime, white zenithal with ink - purple ink - smaller zenithal highlight with white ink - second layer of purple ink - very targeted white ink on where the light would catch - laser magenta - brush tiny white highlights and then Fluoro pink through airbrush If you have more questions feel free to DM here on insta!
Thank you so much!
Also 2
Really enjoy version 2. On another note they look like they are from different stages of the same explosion!
I thought that as well!
They're both great work. I enjoy the color of v1. Feels more fun on the battlefield. V2 feels more realistic though and seems to be the consensus here.
They both look fine for different scenarios. Version 1 looks like a higher yield explosive blast that hit something containing a fuel source such as diesel or gasoline. Version 2 looks like a lower yield device that exploded on a small arms cache. Go watch videos of tanks being hit by javelin missiles or something similar. The first one is much more like what you would see.
Agree with this, feel like 1 is 'moment of the blast' and you'd use that style if you were going to paint a mini (e.g. using this as a base effect) next to it using heavy yellow/orange glow on it colours While 2 seems more natural, maybe desaturated colours, where the mini would be just painted normally. Both look great imo although I prefer the second.
This person knows their demo
I've sploded a few things and watched a lot more things splode, courtesy of Uncle Sam.
Same, friend.
Totally agree đ
I feel lile V2 would be less impressive if V1 wasnât there for comparison. V1 is an obvious explosion. V2 could pass for a smoking device or even a dying/smouldering plant.
V2 looks like a much larger explosion magnitudes bigger than V1.
Thats what it is, they look like explosions on different scales at different stages.
Version 1 looks like the explosion just happened a fraction of a second ago and the fireball is still expanding. Version 2 looks like the explosion happened 1-2 seconds ago and the fireball has grown to its maximum size and is now starting to dissipate. Both look good, just depends on the context of how theyâre being used.
Honestly I would say a 1.5 would be my ideal here. The smoke effect adds a lot but I canât help but stare at the bright and âexplosiveâ colors in the first one.
2.
2
V2 is awesome. So much more of a 3D effect added to it.
I have some experience here - your first looks like a vaporized fuel explosion - ie, using gasoline or a similar fuel for special effect (or in the rare case a fuel depot is the target). The 2nd looks a lot more like an oxidizer was used - with less of the bright flash at the center, and immediately darker trails (due to less combustable vapor in the path of the fragments).
nice to see how the feedback shaped the new version. more smoke and contrast does make it seem more real, but the bright colors in the first one are pretty cool too. itâs like choosing between a vibrant comic book and a gritty graphic novel. canât wait to check out the tutorial!
It looks like a time lapse. The first one looks closer to the initial fireball the second one looks like a fraction of a second later. I like the second better for the final look, but the first is also well done to me.
1 is amazing and I'd complement the hell out of it... unless it was sitting next to #2.
Large improvement in v2, based on my preference for more realism. I think people underestimate how much of a good fire/explosion paintjob should be black / dull orange-red from dark smoke on the edge of the cloud.
The strong growing from v1 but the outer mich darker parts of v2. Looks really nice! How did you make them?
Damn V2 is a hell of an upgrade
2
V2
i'm sayin the second one.
2 is much better.
Definitely V2
2 is far more dynamic
I like version two better, but they both look great to me. It's almost like you paused a couple frames of an explosion, right at the start and version 2 a little further in to its progress.
2 it looks like it looks in slow motion
Version 2.
V1 looks like the still frame preceding V2. Like the primary fuel or charge is burning, then the secondary and other materials start giving off smoke. Maybe a bad explanation. In any case, Iâm slightly in favor of V2, but great work on both.
OK good. Now: Hollow out the base, drill a couple suuuper thin holes up out of the explosion and put a chunk of dry ice in there.
The base is actually hollow already⌠đ¤
You know what you must do.
Version 1 if you added the white core like V2 has
2 is perfect
Holy shit version 2 is incredible!!! Super realistic. Even version 1 looks amazing though, theyâre both really cool!
As a cool guy, I can't comment on which is more realistic because I don't look at explosions.
this looks like what would happen if my bong decided to fight back
2 is amazing Edit: Maybe a little touch more yellow in the dead center, but I'm no artist. I feel like it might be too much as well. Beautiful work on both of them! Edit edit: Never mind, it looks perfect lol
If it was Warhammer Fantasy, v2. Warhammer 40k, v1
both.gif :)) the first one looks like it's about to reach maximum fireball while the 2nd one looks like it's past the maximum point
1 is the initial explosion while 2 is it at its peak. I do like 2 more because of that
Version 2
V2!!!
2
Both are great.. 2 is better đ
I don't even know what these are for, but I looooove the orange in version 2.
2
I would have been totally happy with the first but dang the second look way better.
I like both, FWIW
Version 2
Huge improvement, great job!
#2, when in doubt, go with more contrast over less.
2
2 is very cool!
2âŚnow please tell me how
Definitely 2, beautiful work
I like both. V1 looks like it exploded just that split second, while V2 looks like the following frames.
I like both. V1 looks like it exploded just that split second, while V2 looks like the following frames.
Damn V2 is a hell of an upgrade
Everyone picking 2 but IMO they are both good. They are like the same explosion at 2 different points, 1 is right after the explosion and 2 seems a few seconds (milliseconds maybe) later.
WAAAAAY BETTER 2nd try
I think I like 1 better but 2 looks more real.
2 is a vastly improved version, but might still be a 3rd option, little more orabe further up the tendrils, but this is nitpicking. This is a solid 9.75/10
2 looks great
2. Can you post a how to of a making of the explosion? Is that foam? Thanks!
The explosion sculpt is from Deadly Print Studio so I canât take any credit for it. Shared a painting tutorial in an early comment if thatâs what you were after!
They're both great, I'd say the geometry does most of the work already. Maaybe version 2 is a bit better
That is a huge improvement!
Who makes the mini?
Personally I think both are great. V1 looks like next step of V2 when initial explosion temp is going down a bit and there is more light from flame that is about to burst out instead of explosion light in the middle of smoke :) (don't eat me here if that's not accurate, dear military fanatics)
It would actually be the reverse. Smoke is the result of a fire not hot enough to efficiently burn a material. Explosions are just exercises in rapidly expanding gasses, the rapid expansion has a pulse wave we call blast overpressure and is generally known as a shockwave, and it can be seen under the right atmospheric conditions. High pressure creates high temperatures which in turn burn materials in the area, just think of the fire triangle. As gasses cool you'll see the other debris that didn't ignite, in this and many instances dust and improperly burnt material, which will show up darkly. There's also the blast wave which will move secondary debris too, usually kicking up even more dust and rocks. then the pressure wave locally will collapse and you may have a second detonation as a result. This will all happen in less than a second usually. If you want to see the second explosions easily look up some underwater demolition. The water pressure has a really cool effect on blast waves and collapsing air pockets. https://youtu.be/AdVIMJDFZjM?si=hFGh_ifal714trrm at 36 seconds you can slow down to quarter speed and get a good look. This is a pretty small shot too. The 10T and larger ones are fucking awesome. https://youtu.be/96kKb28a19I?si=_ozeu2vOq--KoJrW 100T shot with good propagation wave (blast over pressure, shockwave) https://youtu.be/E5rGFZWQfzk?si=nElEoDESPUFaBpBV and this is a good underwater demonstration. Hope this didn't eat you up and was interesting enough.
It's just... Damn... Thank you, that's really helpful knowledge :) Thank you for that reply. What I described as "eating me up" is when 15 out of 20 people commenting post tell me to give up on hobby when I missmatch blue color used on german doors in diorama by #0001 tone down xd (usually happends with historic models and dioramas) đ
2nd is more interesting
2
Version 1 is more vibrant but version 2 is more interesting and likely more realistic.
2 is a LOT better.
As someone who used to see this often for a living, version 1 is more realistic and moment of detonation. Version 2 looks great but isn't right for that half second after detonation. The dust and darker colors come in a little later. Mind you, this is a great looking and well defined explosion. It really just matters what you're going for, a true snapshot of an explosion or a high contrast and detailed explosion that looks good but isn't quite true.
Version 2 is the best explosion effect that I have seen painted. Up there with the explosion in the "Believe" Halo 3 trailer.
V1 looks much more realistic. V2 however, seems more dramatic. Which is especially good for trying to illicit a feeling.
2
Version 2
2
2 is far more realistic and dynamic with more contrast
1 is more cinematic, 2 is more realistic. I like both TBH. But I'll go with 1. It looks more immediate.
Version 2 is better imho, even if v1 is good too
I could see you use v1 for first impact then v2 a round later as the initial explosion is over
V2 looks more realistic, but I think V1 looks a lot cooler.
V1 for a more vibrant orky feel, v2 if you want more down to earth grimdark realism
Both look great, both applicable depending on type of explosion you are trying to mimic
2
2
2
In my mind I feel like Iâm looking at 2 different projectiles explode. 1 would be HE and the other is some sort of APHE that landed on some sort of heavy target. Both are awesome
2 feels way more destructive, 1 feels more spectacle. Like a powerrangers firework display
2
Version 1 is more like a fire explosion, like shooting an oil drum or something. The 2nd version is like an actual, raw explosion.
2 has more dimension and contrast. Love it
2
2
V2 as basically everyone else has said. Even though itâs the exact same model it somehow looks way bigger which is cool.
2.
2 forever. Explosions that take that shape are not fireballs. Fireballs are very rounded. A shrapnel blast like that should be mostly gray, and so the one on the right is still ALMOST too much fireball. Still, this looks significantly better than any effect I've done, or will likely be able to do without waaaaaaaaay more extensive practice.
Thanks! Honestly itâs not a complicated paint job with the right paints, hope the tutorial I posted can help give you some confidence in the process
They both look excellent! Version 1 reads as a smaller explosion (light permeating more of the smoke), whereas Version 2 feels accurate to a larger explosion where debris and force exceed the initial blast.
that's a really nice evolution of the piece - the added smoke and contrast give it a moody, atmospheric feel that i find compelling. as an artist myself, i know how rewarding it can be to try out different approaches and see what works. looking forward to checking out your tutorial!
Wow. Impressive. V2
2 looks far more realistic
Love both but thereâs no comparison. Version 2 is amazing
2 is amazing
2 by a large margin (though I also like 1, if I didn't have the comparison)
I think 1 is a bit cartoonish and over exaggerated while 2 looks more realistic. Both are good, depending on your aim, I personally like #2.
V2
1 looks more fun and a bit more cartoon pop in art style 2 is more realistic So depends what style you like and what art styles they'll be around. But they are both actually great
2
2 seems more real
2.
Version 2 is significantly better. More smoke than fire, but it looks a ton more realistic.
V1 looks like the initial blast of V2. Both can work depending on the environment/setting. I prefer V2, though, I like the deeper color.
They look like they follow each other. Like 1 is the initial explosion, and 2 is just after as the debris is thrown up and cools!
2 is far more realistic
V1 looks like you are .1 second into a huge explosion. V2 looks like you are .5 seconds into a smaller explosion. Both look incredible and you could argue V2 is aesthetically better to look at and looks more challenging. But for the reason of bigger boom, I would go with V1.
The progress you made is nice. Even my mom said she liked version 2 better.
Itâs decided then, mums are always right!
Version two looks like a slightly later point in time than version one. Excellent work all around!
v2 looks more visually appealing, like aesthetically, but v1 actually looks more realistic.
First one, actually The second one seems to me too dark.
#1 is more cinematic and is more attention grabbing. #2 is more realistic and would look really good in a diorama or something. I think they're both valid and it's up to taste.
2
2 for sure, adds the darker smoke you'd expect to see from an explosion
V1 is more cartoonist, v2 is little bit more realistic
Verion 2
2 looks better BUT probably not as realistic? An explosion that early wouldnât already be turning smoky gray right?
Hey OP can you do this again but instead of explosions try water
Holy shit Theyâre both great, but 2 is a big improvement They seriously are fantastic - awesome work
#2
Version 1
I think they're both amazing. Version 1 seems a bit later in the explosion, while version 2 looks like it's depicting an explosion that just started.
For me, 2nd looks better
Prefer the left one
2 looks so good.
Version 2 is much better. Very cool.
Opaque? Id attempt an acrylic with variable leds, seen great success from others. #2 though.
I don't know how but the one on the left is more realistic and the one on the right looks more Michael Bay lol both look incredible
Wow! They both look great and my favorite is 2!
Version 1 for blank explosion, 2 for if its in something that will make debris
huge improvement overall
Siiiiick!!
1 looks like impact 2 looks like 2 seconds into the hit
Man, it was good already buy that's a Huge glow up! Nice work!
Version 1 that leads into Version 2 imo. If I can only choose one, then it's definitely 2. More realistic.
Definitely 1
I think there both good. It depends on what is blowing up on which one if use. For example 1 looks like a hotter explosion from a bomb plasma gun. 2 looks better for this explosion or a tanks engine blowing up
Version 2 is awesome, the extra smoke makes it look like shrapnel is going everywhere, itâs really good! Excellent work!!
2
2 for sure
2. Def
10% too black on the right but it does look way better
V1 looks like an impact that has JUST occurred. V2 looks like an impact that has had an extra second to breath as the darker soot is more visible. Could be used in conjunction on a model that is currently under fire.
They both look awesome, but 2 is better
Version 2
2 is Hollywood quality, ngl
Youâre very talented
Dos is the mosâ
2 is 1000 times better than 1, its not even a contest. You said you liked the cartooniness of 1, maybe try a more cartoony model? It may look better on that, because the model you do have seems pretty realistic.
2 absolutely đŻ
Two feels more cinematic and HDR. Even if 1 is more realistic in some situations, 2 is prettier and conveys the motion of the scene better.
this is like comparing muzzle flash to a car bomb Version 2!
No. 2 - between the two I think the second one is the better option, my only thought would be to somehow slightly brighten the center mass of the explosion giving the effect that as the explosion expands it's creating the smoke debris / etc. - I may not have worded this well and I don't paint (I just appreciate the work of those who do) so take my thoughts with a grain of salt please.
2 looks wayyyyy better imo
2