Level of obsession with paint shade accuracy

okay, I'm bailing on this topic

my IQ is a bit higher than what Sniper posted a few days ago,,,,,and I am getting totally lost

I am not able to comprehend how somehow "throwing out all standards" and just painting it to some imaginary "right" can result in a model looking "good"

I'm perfectly able to acknowledge that TLAR is a valid standard, and I have said so for years

I'm just not able to get OD for a tank, by starting with either pink and adding colors to it,,,,,or starting with the surrealist's "fish" and getting a plane

This is topic a country music song waiting to happen. Just throwing in two orthogonal purgatories of mine, consider these two photos:

These are two versions of the same image from scene 101 of the 1953 film “The War of the Worlds”. The top is as it was shown in the movie; the bottom is the result of stripping the Day-For-Night or nuit américaine (“American night”) filter that Michael D. Moore (2nd unit Director) used.

So one obsession is which is “right”? Obviously the answer is “it depends”. Are you are looking for details pertaining to US Army Reserve M4A1(76)W Sherman tank 30126777? or are you trying to replicate the scene from the movie?

My orthogonal puzzlement is this: A movie isn’t objective reality. It’s an illusion, a fake, and there are foul-ups. (In scene 141, this M4A1 is “disintegrated”; in scene 151, Ann Robinson & Gene Barry duck behind the same vehicle.) I claim that the same thing is true for any reference: there’s no such thing as “objective reality”.

“Right and wrong do not exist in graphic design. There is only effective and non-effective communication.” — Peter Bilak, ILLEGIBILITY

perfect Doog

your P-47 illustrates all the modeling ideas,,,,if you consider that you can claim "scale effect" for your TLAR choices on those two colors,,,,,,it also goes along with "it's my model",,,,,,another very valid point in this hobby

it reminds modelers that even though "Joe says it's FS 12345" they still have complete control of what they do with that information

You know, on second thought, I actually have two schools of thought on this.

The first is definitely TLAR - but I'd define that as breaking away from indicated colors and finding something else that "looks better". Case in point - I was building a P-47 earlier this year that called for an Insignia Red cowl and Insignia Yellow rudder. But the IR looked too dark and dull compared to the pictures, and the IY looked way too pale. So I swapped them for Guards Red and some RAF yellow.

To me, that's TLAR.

The second school of thought is FICE. F' It, Close Enough. Applies to the notoriously variable colors that either differed by who applied them (different factories using different mixes), by how they weathered, or just lack of overall quality control. Intermediate Blue. Olive Drab. Pretty much an WWII Soviet color. Once, I got all pissy about getting Intermediate Blue exactly right...but it was so not worth the effort. So these days, when I encounter a pesky color like that, I find a jar of something and say FICE.

Agree, Rex.  I will, when my current stores of paints are depleted, look to Lifecolor for replacements.  It's a good paint, brushes AND airbrushes well.  And it's acrylic to boot.

Tim

Tim, you might want to give LifeColor's home site a look,,,,,ignore the lack of Italian translations,,,,the color patches have English labels under them

I remember the EDSG being there, and a good color match for the Luftwaffe's post war Green for their Jets

with the current paint brands out there,,,we have no choice but to use TLAR compared to FS,,,,there is a pretty big fact missed in reading the FS text pages in the book of chips,,,,,the paint companies seem to have interpreted based on one line in there, that doesn't say what most modelers believe it says

as a Green shirt in the corrosion shop,,,,I'd guess that you are one of the few other guys that believe like I do,,,,,,,I clearly remember the "green tinted gray" on helo's that "common knowledge of FS" says "can't be true"

I used TLAR with FS and Munsell  to come up with my paint palette, and I like it fine,,,I don't claim that anyone else has to, though,,,,,,there are many ways to approach this hobby and still have fun

my theory is that I had to choose an Insignia Red to build anything,,,,so, how I chose it made a difference to me

TarnShip

in a way, we all use standards of one kind or another

 

Rex

I start with a color chip that is considered "the standard".  I look for a paint that is close, otherwise I'm just guessing.

Example:  FAA Extra Dark Sea Grey (EDSG).  FS 36118 is considered "close" but when I compared the FS fan to an EDSG chip, EDSG is bluer whereas 36118 more gray and not as dark.  Yes, that's to my eye (I'm not colorblind) and in different lighting.  MM/Acryl EDSG appear true to the FS; Humbrol is also too gray but not as much as MM and Aeromaster was spot on for fresh EDSG.  Unfortunately EDSG was known to fade/shift to an even bluer shade.

Now the guessing part.  If I didn't know what EDSG was supposed to look like, I'd only know it was supposed to be, not just dark, but EXTRA DARK.  It's a SEA GRAY.  So do I use Tamiya Dark Sea Gray (XF-54) and add some black to make it darker?  I tried that before I had the standard chips and compared to photos my finished models just didn't look right, not enough blue.  Nobody faulted me (they weren't interested in FAA), but...I KNEW it wasn't right.

I want my models to start with the right color (TLAR applies, after the standard is checked).  Having spent time in the paint shop with USN jets over the last 30 years, I know how much even FS can vary, so I'm not pedantic about the finished product, so long as it looks right.  But not all grays (or is it greys) are equal.

Does that make me OCD?  It's a hobby, and to me, it's MY hobby.  If that's the way I enjoy my hobby, then

and I will NEVER criticize how YOU enjoy YOUR hobby.

That's my

Tim

Every kit i build/paint is an experiment for me.  That said I don't obsess over the paint shade or technique.  Maybe one day i will build the one kit where all these puzzle pieces will fall into place.  Then and only then I might pull some OCD.  Until that day..  its is just like Bgrigg says "Close is good enough."

ahhh, I get it now

well, that whole "can't determine colors from old photos" thing doesn't come up for me,,,,,there is only one photo of any use to "us" that the color is not obvious on the tail

for irony, Squadron now owns both the book series and the decal series that opposed each other in their conclusions on that color,,,,,,one says Insignia Blue on the tail, the other says Dark Red/Maroon

since both are "wrong color usage" on that Crusader,,,,,,,,most modelers just build the next cruise for that aircraft, when the color "went by the regs",,,,,,and was just  Red trim

I'm fortunate in that any Black and White photos I have to work with have color photos to  complement or support my color choices,,,,,,,even if I have to look at shades of gray, we know what color contrast fills in the color for us

Rex

TarnShip

I don't get that rubic's cube thing, Tom?

It’s a classic color optical illusion. The ‘blue’ tiles on top of the left cube and the ‘yellow’ tiles on top of the right cube are actually the EXACT same shade of gray. Google ‘color-constancy illusion’.

I like to be in the Ball Park ...

As Han's earlier post says, paint weathers and changes.  So what exactly are we trying to match?

I don't get that rubic's cube thing, Tom?

Yeah. Right.  

wing_nut

I'll never chime in on this question but just had to come and look to see how many worms have escaped the can already.  Not too bad... yet.

Still not too bad.  Only 3 pages after 4 days.

TarnShip

 

if using TLAR,,,,do you then go and figure out a new Panzer Gray for each new tank you build?,,,or do you use your favorite mix to paint the next one with, also?

No. I use MM Panzer Grey for all, right outta the rattle can. Same with all German armor, they get Panzer Gray, Afrika Mustard, or Dark Yellow, depending on the theater.  I change the shades of color with the weathering. Same as the "real world" , my armor starts "Factory Fresh" and gets faded/dirty/repainted/chipped/ after it gets decaled and rolls off the "assembly line".

when doing a green US Sherman, a green Rus T-34 and a green Japanese Chi-Ha,,,,,,do you use the same green for all of them?,,,,,,or do you vary them for each service

Shermans get MM OD (the factory thing again), Ivan's stuff gets a Euro-Dark Green (although they used whatever was laying arund, if they got painted at all, like during Stalingrad), and I haven't built any WW2 Jap. armor... They're just too "silly-looking" for lack of a better term.. Same with Italian, French, and a few Brit tanks, like the Churchill.... 

Regardless of the country of origin though, I stick with rattle cans for armor, since 99% of them are one-color and I can paint them in their overall color in about a minute with 'em..  If I need a comuflage finish, like the MERDC or NATO camo on modern US armor, I still paint the basic color with the a rattle can of the color that covers the largest portion.. I'll airbrush (or brush-paint, if it's a field-applied finsh) the other camo-colors in afterwards..

in a way, we all use standards of one kind or another

now, put down those buckets of tar and I'll explain what I mean

if using TLAR,,,,do you then go and figure out a new Panzer Gray for each new tank you build?,,,or do you use your favorite mix to paint the next one with, also?

when doing a green US Sherman, a green Rus T-34 and a green Japanese Chi-Ha,,,,,,do you use the same green for all of them?,,,,,,or do you vary them for each service

Me, I go to FS lists, pick out the colors that best match by Mk ! eyeball,  looking at any and all ranges,,,,,,and then developed a palette of paints to use on my models, using whatever company paints as long as I don't try to "cross type enamels with acrylics"

TLAR is a standard,,,,,,and as Hans said,,,,,you don't go and used totally "wrong" shades of a color on purpose,

Rex

I use the exact paint shade.

Then I add 10% white for scale distance, pre shade, gloss coat it for decals, another gloss coat for the wash, wash, dot filter, flat coat, highlight panels, anti monochromatic filter, pin wash, sludge wash, polish, weather with pastels, grafite powder on the metal parts, paint chips, post shade 

ehhh, so basically I go for "close enough"

Close counts in horse shoes, hand grenades and scale modeling!

....B-17 were OD Green all over. Then the color photos and videos came out and people noticed the Dark green blothches on the spine and verticle stabilizers. This of course does not even take into consideration the repair patches used (usually from wrecked planes) where the OD green was.....let just say not the same.

The OD paint from the USAAF stocks were quickly exhausted in 1943 and the 8th AF went looking for the closest match to it with RAF colors and whatever they buy from the locals..

One thing to keep in mind too, is that those patches of OD green on the Early F-models were, in fact, camouflage patterns designed to break up or disguise the outline of the aircraft as it sat on the ground... The documentary of "The Memphis Belle" showed it well on the 91st BG's Forts..

Just remembered this pic I found:

[View:/themes/fsm/utility/:550:0]

Talk about a patchwork of grey!!!

[quote user="Essexman"]

My concern for the right shade of O/D was cured after seeing a photo of a B17 that looked like it had been painted up using about six different shades....and thats before thinking about how the tint in the picture might have changed.

I liek this quote...as I site here and watch the History channels Air war in color. I remember when I first started modeling....B-17 were OD Green all over. Then the color photos and videos came out and people noticed the Dark green blothches on the spine and verticle stabilizers. This of course does not even take into consideration the repair patches used (usually from wrecked planes) where the OD green was.....let just say not the same.

Very nice thread.

Yes I have been guilty of trying to find that exact match inthe past. After a few years and the help of a paint conversion site I found that a lot of the acrylics I work with have similar hues but different names......but in the end they are close enough for me! And as has been noted once the weathering and washes go one the original color gets lost.

My main concern is getting to where it looks right after weathering... I use MM OD right outta the rattle can, then start there with the weathering process, as that's basically the way it works on the prototypes..

I like the WW2/Korean War USN colors of blue as MM makes them, so they get shot right outta the can as well... 

Overall though, folks that obcess over the exact shade of a particular paint needn't do so, unless that's part of their process... I've been in the Army through four different Army-wide tactical vehicle camouflage schemes (Overall OD, 4-color NATO, 4-color NATO DESERT, and MERDC), AND the Desert Sheild/Desert Storm camo, which, in our case, was so hastily applied that it was chipping off in large areas almost before they got to KKMC... We didn't even paint the Howitzers and the FAASVs. They were still in the MERDC scheme or (the newer ones) NATO scheme with CARC, although the soft-skins got repainted with the Desert Sand CARC in most cases... 

This next nit is more about technique than color, but I gotta say something about it anyway..

There was an article in FSM some months back that featured a track with varying shades of the base-color that sticks in my mind... While it looked fine in the magazine, I suspect that using the Mk I Eyeball, in person, that paint would have looked like what it was, three or so different shades of paint.. I've seen that before, in oerson, and gotta say that's not only a lot of work, it's a lot of work for nothing, because it doesn't (to me) look like the same color of paint under various lighting conditions... 

Frankly, it looks fine if the primary purpose of the paint job is for a magazine article or the like, since you're showing a 3-D object in a 2-D format, but it doesn't look right if the lighting ever changes angles and intensity... The only place this type of base-color painting would be desirable is if it's in a shadow-box, where the viewing angle  is restricted to one, and the lighting is controlable, IMNSHO... "Shading" a model vehicle of aircraft is just asking for trouble on the contest-table... A builder has no more control over the lighting and angles used than he/she has over the weather outside the venue... However, I digress..

Getting the "exact" shade of a particular prototype is a pipe-dream.. I have a mild color-vision problem, for one thing, and I judge at contests too, lol...  (Red-Green Color Discrimination is what the doc called it and before y'all start,  IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH POSSUM LODGE OR THE LOCALS LIVING AROUND THE POSSUM LAKE, CANADA AREA)...

Even if you do get it, using the same paint from the same can that you got from the factory isn't gonna look quite right...  So, TLAR applies in most cases and will go a long way in allowing you to build and paint more, and research a little less...  Most model paint manufacturers went to a lot of work getting the paint the right "Scale" color in the first place... Duplication of effort is rather a waste of bench-time (if such a thing matters to you, that is) While I don't claim to know about the atmospheric influence on paint shades that're scaled down, I know what "looks right" in my eyes...  So I go with that...

Another thing I touched on, but didn't expound upon, is the fact that one can look at a line of M60A3, M109A3s, or Ex-RAF P-40s from the Umpteenth Fighter Sqn, Eleventeenth Fighter Group, Eightish Air Force and see ten different "shades" of colors, all dependant on what day of the week they were initially painted, how long they've been out in the weather, the amount of salt-air, desert winds, arctic temperatures they were exposed to, etc, etc., etc., and if they were painted with factory paints, or locally procured shades (VERY common in the 8th AF in England, especially with the OD used)..

So the bottom line for me is, Don't sweat it... Judges don't carry color-chip booklets with 'em (same thing goes for the Pilot's Operating Handbook or the Dash 10if they do, they got issues, are probably still living in their parent's basement and you're screwed anyway... Might as well leave the seam in that metal barrel...)

Oh.. One more thing, and then I'll shut up about it...  Being a shade or two off, or having the curvature of the camouflage demarcation line a scale two inches too low is not an issue... However, just because there's a bit of wiggle room it doesn't mean you can conjure up totally ridiculous patterns and colors, unless you're doing, on purpose, a "What If?"-type of build or contest, and you need to be able to explain that if asked... And don't try to pass off Olive Green as Olive Drab, Dark Grey as Panzergrau, light blue as RLM Lichtblau or Khaki as Tan...

 It's kind of like Creative Gizmology, wherein the Gizmologist doesn't try to duplicate, bolt-for-bolt, nut-for-nut, types of added details, but suggests them, while still maintaining a good bit of Imagineering... Suggestion, rather than Duplication, is the key... It's quite acceptable, it's far less money and time, and it's, above all else, it's YOURS...

Reasoned

Hans von Hammer:

It translates to "Does It Look Like I Give A "F"(F-word here)?"

 

 

That's one serious acronym Hammer!

Got a few more that are in the same vein, and unique to the US Army Chemical Corps, but this is a family rag...

It's only three sylables.. "DILL-a-Gaf"...

Sounds like my kind of team, G... I played softball with the MPs BNCOC Instructors one year, called themselves "The SWAT Team"...  Kinda corny, IMHO, but then, they were MPs, so they got a pass...

Hans von Hammer

It translates to "Does It Look Like I Give A "F"(F-word here)?"

 

That's one serious acronym Hammer!

My concern for the right shade of O/D was cured after seeing a photo of a B17 that looked like it had been painted up using about six different shades....and thats before thinking about how the tint in the picture might have changed.

Reading about painting during Desert Storm also confirms your chances of getting 100% perfection are nil.

IMO does it look right... after reading up about it ? The main thing to watch is kit color schemes as they ll be geared into convenient paint colors which might not be right.(Was it was Revell who years ago had box art with a P51D with a lot of red, which should have been O/D (tho that may ve been correct in the instructions)?  Im sure Ive built US Navy planes with the undersides shown as white.  

TLAR is a good one, as is my favorite, "DILLIGAF", when Rivet-Counters strike... Even made a smilie for 'em..

It translates to "Does It Look Like I Give A "F"(F-word here)?"

Another thought that comes to mind in this discussion is mixing paint.  I have some buddies that will not build a model unless they can buy the correct shade of paint in a bottle.  There is nothing wrong with mixing your own colors, as long as you stay within the same brand and type (do not mix acrylics and enamels, for instance).

The human eye is actually a pretty good color matcher if you have a reference (within the limits of what I have already said about accuracy of printed photos).  If you are reluctant to try it, pick up a book on oil or acrylic painting at a library, and maybe even buy a color wheel at an art store.  Mixing your own paint opens up a whole world of new colors.

One simple mix is adding a little flat white, flat gray, or flat tan to flat black to make a more realistic tire color.  Give that a try as an intro to mixing your own colors.

You'd better obsess about it, lest the paint police knock on your door.

Far too many variables to consider. The elements, method of application, variation within the same manufacturer, etc. Approximate shade is good enough for me.