In the early stages of a hobby, managing a collection is relatively straightforward. A hobbyist might have a single unit or a handful of individual figures, making a simple, flat list sufficient for tracking progress and paint recipes. However, as a collection grows — multiple armies, distinct factions, or a standalone board game project alongside the main collection — a single list quickly becomes noise.
When one flat list stops being enough
The transition from “a few models” to “an army” is a real shift in how a collection needs to be organized, and it has nothing to do with which tool you use. In a flat list, every entry has the same visual weight — a single test model for a new faction sits right next to the core units of a primary army. As the number of entries grows, finding anything specific becomes reliant on constant scrolling or filtering.
More importantly, a flat list makes it hard to answer a question like “how many models are left in this unit?” or “is this army actually done?” without mentally filtering the whole collection. That’s true in a paper binder split by tabs, a spreadsheet with one tab per faction, or an app — the underlying need is the same: a container that groups related models together so you can check on one project’s status without wading through everything else you own.
What’s worth grouping, and why
A “project” doesn’t have to mean an entire army. It’s useful any time a set of miniatures belongs together for a reason beyond just “I own them”:
- An army or faction for a tabletop game, so you can track how much of a force is actually painted.
- A single diorama or display piece, where several miniatures need to be finished together for one final result.
- A commission, so work for a specific client or friend stays separate from your personal backlog.
- A one-off board game, which otherwise gets mixed in with an ongoing wargaming hobby.
The common thread is that grouping by project answers a “how’s this specific thing coming along” question that a single alphabetical or chronological list can’t answer efficiently, regardless of whether that list lives on paper, in a spreadsheet, or in an app.
How BrushLog handles this
BrushLog implements this as Project management: a project has a name and an optional free-text description, and each miniature can optionally belong to one project. Projects stay a single flat layer — there are no nested sub-projects — which keeps the grouping simple for the vast majority of collections: an army, a game system, or a themed side-project.
Project management is a Pro feature, alongside unlimited miniature and paint registration, the Before & After comparison slider, and weekly painting reminders. As with the rest of BrushLog, project data is stored locally on your device with no account registration required.
Download BrushLog on the App Store: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/brushlog/id6763442950
Summary
Grouping miniatures into projects — whether it’s an army, a diorama, or a commission — is what turns a flat list into something you can actually check the status of. Whether you manage that grouping with folders, spreadsheet tabs, or a dedicated project feature, the organizational benefit is the same: you can answer “how’s this one coming along” without scanning your entire collection.
For a broader discussion on building your recording system, see our core comparison guide: Notebook, Spreadsheet, or App? How Miniature Painters Should Track Recipes and Progress
To learn more about the specific data you should be tracking for individual models, read our guide on core fields: Beyond a Name: Building a Useful Miniature Collection Record
This article organizes information from a recording and organizing perspective. If you notice an error or outdated information, please contact us. Last verified: July 2026
