SdKfz 250/9 weathered and almost finished
Texas, United States
Joined: March 05, 2002
KitMaker: 2,250 posts
Armorama: 464 posts
Posted: Monday, March 24, 2003 - 08:56 AM UTC
United States
Joined: March 01, 2003
KitMaker: 67 posts
Armorama: 0 posts
Posted: Monday, March 24, 2003 - 10:32 AM UTC
very very nice, looking at that makes me feel in-adequate compared you your awesome work! nice work!
England - South East, United Kingdom
Joined: October 22, 2002
KitMaker: 652 posts
Armorama: 0 posts
Posted: Monday, March 24, 2003 - 11:34 AM UTC
I do like the straps on the rear of the vehicle, but constructive criticism, what colours are you using to paint?
The red/brown looks a little too pink to me. Maybe its the light but I feel that the green too is a little light.
What paint manufacturer are you using?
On the whole i like it, especially the scratches........and chips....time consuming isn't it!
WD
Martin,
Martinus Incontinentius Maximus
(Terribilis est locus iste)
Pig # 18
Texas, United States
Joined: September 15, 2002
KitMaker: 8,985 posts
Armorama: 3,034 posts
Posted: Monday, March 24, 2003 - 11:43 AM UTC
I like it! I think I said earlier that the green was a bit too light, but the weathering helped a lot, besides over time the color woud fade. LOve the chipped paint and the spattered mud though. Looks like it's been driven a bit.
Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it
VMI "76
Order of the Red Nose Plug
Blue Volute Bumper Spring Award
Texas, United States
Joined: March 05, 2002
KitMaker: 2,250 posts
Armorama: 464 posts
Posted: Monday, March 24, 2003 - 12:10 PM UTC
Hola!
Thanks for the comments!
Martin,
I used humbrol enamels for the whole thing, it does look pinkish in the pictures, but in real life it looks more like red brown. I'll take better pictures when its completed. The colors were made light on purpose due to a small supply of paint in the late war days, the vehicle is supposed to be from the last months of fighting around Budapest March '45
Ontario, Canada
Joined: June 26, 2002
KitMaker: 851 posts
Armorama: 0 posts
Posted: Monday, March 24, 2003 - 12:16 PM UTC
Not bad at all Anders.
Since this is a constructive criticism forum, I will add some. First, some of your chips and scratches are too large and out of scale. This can be fixed quite easily. Also, the dark color chips over the overpainted camo should be the dark yellow and not the dark brown/rust color. I have alot of reference books and this is a common error with even the better modellers. As you can see in the picture below, the chips are quite small and the ones over the camo have the base color showing through:
Here is a model which I used this premise on:
As you can see, the chips are very small and the ones on the camo have the base color showing through.
These things can be easily fixed and overall I like the paint job and weathering effect, nice work.
Andrew
"If the tanks succeed, then victory follows."
Col. General. Heinz Guderian
PE Expert
California, United States
Joined: September 16, 2002
KitMaker: 651 posts
Armorama: 0 posts
Posted: Monday, March 24, 2003 - 12:23 PM UTC
Anders,
Nice job! I like the look. Thanks for sharing.
________________________
Robert
"You're NEVER finished when you lose...you're finished when you QUIT!!"
_____________
Robert
519th MP Bn Ret.
Texas, United States
Joined: March 05, 2002
KitMaker: 2,250 posts
Armorama: 464 posts
Posted: Monday, March 24, 2003 - 12:36 PM UTC
Hola Andrew!
Great points! I know some of the chips are to large. I did add some lighter scratches to the different areas and didnt like it so I just went with the brown black for a better effect. Just one question, how can a paint chip be out of scale? They come in all different sizes and shapes
Ontario, Canada
Joined: June 26, 2002
KitMaker: 851 posts
Armorama: 0 posts
Posted: Monday, March 24, 2003 - 02:11 PM UTC
But some chips can be too large and out of scale, especially if they are in places were a large object could not hit it. I have never seen any photos with large chips...
Andrew
"If the tanks succeed, then victory follows."
Col. General. Heinz Guderian
PE Expert
Indiana, United States
Joined: January 04, 2003
KitMaker: 466 posts
Armorama: 378 posts
Posted: Monday, March 24, 2003 - 08:46 PM UTC
Looks nice
nice and well used. I love the weathering and the used look.
El Diablo Sel Von Selrach
aka Lord Glue
aka Lord Horn
Piggy # 52
Oklahoma, United States
Joined: March 01, 2002
KitMaker: 6,043 posts
Armorama: 4,347 posts
Posted: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 - 12:18 AM UTC
#130
Noord-Holland, Netherlands
Joined: June 07, 2002
KitMaker: 8,797 posts
Armorama: 4,190 posts
Posted: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 - 12:42 AM UTC
Anders
Great job dude on the 250. I like the weary looks of it. the chipped paint looks good to me and the scratches are quite natural too.
I have to disagree with you Andrew (oberst) about the chipped paint. There is no rule no where about the size and scale of chipped paint. It depends on what hit the tank where and how long after the paint was added. For instance a stug that has driven only through fields and sandy roads will have different chipped paint then a vehicle that was involved in streetfighting battles and is crashed through some walls.
I give you another example..... A tank made a narrow escape in a battle and a grenade exploded 9 meters away in a streetsection. A part of a cobblestone hits a corner on the side of the tank. and chips off a piece of 3 by 4 cm. After driving around on the battlefields just 2 weeks later the paintchip is suddenly 10 by 15 cm why?? Due to the weather, driving through foliage, some rain came on it and it started to rust, when this happens the chip will grow as the paint softens and get`s loose
there is no natural rule on the size of paintchips
same with scratches
Greetz Robert "FAUST" Blokker
"Wees niet onverstandig, haastig of voortvarend; alles sal regkom, as ons almal ons plig doen".
FUTBOL KAVGADIR!!!!!!!
North Carolina, United States
Joined: February 22, 2002
KitMaker: 11,718 posts
Armorama: 7,138 posts
Posted: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 - 01:08 AM UTC
Anders - Nice job. I like it very much. Honestly, I can see both sides of the chip story. So I'll just say on this 250 they work.
One thing that I would like to touch on is the hood/bonet. It does not seem to be as dusty/dirty as the rest of the vehicle. In the third photo is seems to be bright and cleaner, don't know if it's the way the light is on that photo.
Great job for a Figure Guy. Keep up the great work.
Ontario, Canada
Joined: June 26, 2002
KitMaker: 851 posts
Armorama: 0 posts
Posted: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 - 02:56 AM UTC
Quoted Text
...I have to disagree with you Andrew (oberst) about the chipped paint. There is no rule no where about the size and scale of chipped paint. It depends on what hit the tank where and how long after the paint was added. For instance a stug that has driven only through fields and sandy roads will have different chipped paint then a vehicle that was involved in streetfighting battles and is crashed through some walls.
I give you another example..... A tank made a narrow escape in a battle and a grenade exploded 9 meters away in a streetsection. A part of a cobblestone hits a corner on the side of the tank. and chips off a piece of 3 by 4 cm. After driving around on the battlefields just 2 weeks later the paintchip is suddenly 10 by 15 cm why?? Due to the weather, driving through foliage, some rain came on it and it started to rust, when this happens the chip will grow as the paint softens and get`s loose
there is no natural rule on the size of paintchips
same with scratches
Okay, but show me some reference pics with 10-15 cm chips...
I did back mine up with reference.
I do agree with everyone though that it is a nice model, especially from a figure builder.
Andrew
"If the tanks succeed, then victory follows."
Col. General. Heinz Guderian
PE Expert
Texas, United States
Joined: March 05, 2002
KitMaker: 2,250 posts
Armorama: 464 posts
Posted: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 - 12:14 PM UTC
Hola Guys!
Thanks for all the nice comments and for the "its nice for a figure painter" deals. I suppose that means its crap compared to armor guys work
About the bonnet, yeah its pretty clean, didng figure many scratches etc would occur there. But on second thought maybe the mechanics working on the engine would be bashing it with their tools so maybe some small scratches etc are in place.
As for the whole paint chip idea, I do agree with everybody and can see both point of views. I asked the initial question more to be a little bit of a smart arse then anything serious. But as Andrew says, he can back it up with pictures, well I could get my camera out and walk around my farm and others to take pics of used dozers, tractors etc to show wear and tear and BIG paint chips, and these newer vehicles have better quality paint and are used less harsh then a tank, especially a late war German vehicle.
But thats neither here nor there, fact is that small delicate chips DO look better on a 1/35th scale vehicle.
Thanks again for all the comments! I should have the final pictures of it today or tomorrow!
Ontario, Canada
Joined: June 26, 2002
KitMaker: 851 posts
Armorama: 0 posts
Posted: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 - 12:41 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Hola Guys!
...I suppose that means its crap compared to armor guys work
... I should have the final pictures of it today or tomorrow!
This is not crap, besides, what would it look like if I, the exclusive armour builder did a figure
Looking forward to seeing the final product,
Andrew
"If the tanks succeed, then victory follows."
Col. General. Heinz Guderian
PE Expert
Pennsylvania, United States
Joined: January 30, 2003
KitMaker: 119 posts
Armorama: 0 posts
Posted: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 - 01:42 PM UTC
Well, What would I look like if I ATE paint chips 10cm by 15 cm? You could use me as a referrence photo! I think It looks fantastic. I like my stuff REALLY Dirty....nudge nudge wink wink... I really like the gun/mount...the chips and worn metal look fantastic...tell me how!
I really don't like building models, but enamel thinner smells great!
Other white meat #73
Vice Director of the Ministry of Funny Walks
D.S.B.
Texas, United States
Joined: March 05, 2002
KitMaker: 2,250 posts
Armorama: 464 posts
Posted: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 - 01:55 PM UTC
Hola!
Thanks Guys
The gunmount was painted in the same manner as everything else, dark yellow, drybrushed in lighter shade, then filtered with burnt umber, the next thing was washes at certain spots with a dark brow, finally chips added with dark rusty brown. The metal areas were painted with a 50/50 mic of Humbrol Stainless Steel and Flat black, washed with pure black and drybrushed with pure Stainless Steel. Hope this answered your question
Alabama, United States
Joined: September 26, 2002
KitMaker: 1,318 posts
Armorama: 837 posts
Posted: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 - 02:26 PM UTC
I think your work is excellent. I love the camo colors. Great for late war stuff. I can tell these guys were the last ones in the unit to get their vehicle painted, and all that was left of the green and brown was the residue around the sides of the tin. You can't get dark paint from an emtpy tin. Those are the details we all know from reference, but never think to incorporate them into our work. Great job, Anders.
Patrick
#130
Noord-Holland, Netherlands
Joined: June 07, 2002
KitMaker: 8,797 posts
Armorama: 4,190 posts
Posted: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 - 09:47 PM UTC
Andrew
this weekend I`ll make some pics of a trailer my dad and I made. My father uses it each week a couple of times. The trailer is now about a half year old and the weather did a good job on the small chips that were on the fenders for example.
Quoted Text
Okay, but show me some reference pics with 10-15 cm chips...
I did back mine up with reference.
I`m sorry to say that I`m not really impressed by this. Why?? I tell you Should we really base your whole chipped paint theory on that one single picture you posted?? I think that`s a rather poor Backup. but I would be more impressed if I had let`s say 20 or 30 pics from different battles different eras and such to compare.
I`m sure that you have a lot of reference but have you got detailpictures of every tank that ever left the Factory?? As every tank drove it`s own way It also has his own damages and stuff. Your whole theory is based on what you have seen so far.
But the Absence of evidence is no evidence of absence
I`ll make pics for you of a trailer that is used less extensive as a tank.. (so no driving through bushes and stuff but normal road use and see what weather does to your vehicle)
Greetz Robert "FAUST" Blokker
"Wees niet onverstandig, haastig of voortvarend; alles sal regkom, as ons almal ons plig doen".
FUTBOL KAVGADIR!!!!!!!
Milano, Italy
Joined: September 02, 2002
KitMaker: 2,606 posts
Armorama: 1,721 posts
Posted: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 - 10:22 PM UTC
Good job Anders! The only one thing I can notice like being a bit "odd" is that you painted the straps at the rear of the model as well, anyway consider that I'm not a specialist on German AFVs in WWII.
Fabio
Impetu Hostem Perterreo
Ontario, Canada
Joined: June 26, 2002
KitMaker: 851 posts
Armorama: 0 posts
Posted: Wednesday, March 26, 2003 - 02:32 AM UTC
Quoted Text
... I tell you Should we really base your whole chipped paint theory on that one single picture you posted?? I think that`s a rather poor Backup. but I would be more impressed if I had let`s say 20 or 30 pics from different battles different eras and such to compare...
I`ll make pics for you of a trailer that is used less extensive as a tank.. (so no driving through bushes and stuff but normal road use and see what weather does to your vehicle)
Faust, my friend, you insult my intelligence. I do have many different photos to back up my theory but alas, I have no scanner and have to photograph the pics which is an inconvenience. As for photos of different eras, tanks in WW2 went through a more unique experiece and were painted and finished in unique way that make other era's more irrelevent. Regarding the trailer you mentioned, how is that at all suitable for evidence? Does it have a similar primer that the German vehicels did? Does it have a camoflauge pattern? Has it seen combat?
I have beean meaning to make this point about chips and scratches for a while and now that I finally have, I am surprised that there is so much opposition. I attempt to make the most accurate models possible and I am simply sharing my acquired knowledge...
Andrew
"If the tanks succeed, then victory follows."
Col. General. Heinz Guderian
PE Expert
#130
Noord-Holland, Netherlands
Joined: June 07, 2002
KitMaker: 8,797 posts
Armorama: 4,190 posts
Posted: Wednesday, March 26, 2003 - 03:43 AM UTC
Andrew
I try to insult nobody`s intelligence. and that was never the meaning.. I hope that`s the same from your side. and I never said you had only one picture of chipped paint on a tank. I also never said you are a bad modeler so if you feel attacked I`m sorry for that.
Quoted Text
tanks in WW2 went through a more unique experiece and were painted and finished in unique way that make other era's more irrelevent.
With this you state more or less that only WW2 tanks had problems with chipped paint. My opinion is that that is wrong but ok.. Would a tank that drove around during the battles of stalingrad have the same damages as a tank that drove around in Africa?? With all more or less the same sized chips??
Quoted Text
Regarding the trailer you mentioned, how is that at all suitable for evidence? Does it have a similar primer that the German vehicels did? Does it have a camoflauge pattern? Has it seen combat?
No the trailer hasn`t seen any war. it has no camoflage pattern but yes it is primed with a very heavy primer and then painted and lackered.... three layer of laquer. What I wanted to show you is how easily paint gets chipped under stress of weather without all the drags of the battlefield( we are now talking about a vehicle that only is used on roads and bushes). I mean the chips all start as a small dot where the stone hit`s the metal but after three months the chip gets 4 till 5 times as big as the metal underneath starts to rust.
Greetz Robert "FAUST" Blokker
"Wees niet onverstandig, haastig of voortvarend; alles sal regkom, as ons almal ons plig doen".
FUTBOL KAVGADIR!!!!!!!
Ontario, Canada
Joined: June 26, 2002
KitMaker: 851 posts
Armorama: 0 posts
Posted: Wednesday, March 26, 2003 - 07:52 AM UTC
Quoted Text
...With this you state more or less that only WW2 tanks had problems with chipped paint. My opinion is that that is wrong but ok.. Would a tank that drove around during the battles of stalingrad have the same damages as a tank that drove around in Africa?? With all more or less the same sized chips??
Well. I never intendend to generalize the different campaigns but to clarify, the statement I made about chips, etc. is more relevent to the Russian Front and ETO than to Africa, although it is still applicable. This is becasue the nature of combat is similar in all of these theaters. I also did not say that only WW2 tanks had this chipping problem but I did say that their situation was unique to others.
Quoted Text
No the trailer hasn`t seen any war. it has no camoflage pattern but yes it is primed with a very heavy primer and then painted and lackered.... three layer of laquer. What I wanted to show you is how easily paint gets chipped under stress of weather without all the drags of the battlefield( we are now talking about a vehicle that only is used on roads and bushes). I mean the chips all start as a small dot where the stone hit`s the metal but after three months the chip gets 4 till 5 times as big as the metal underneath starts to rust.
Well not many tanks saw combat for 3 months straight. They were either knocked out, captured, disabled, rested, etc. so a trailer that has been exposed to the elements that long is indeed irrelevent to the discussion.
Faust, I do consider myself friends with you as we do occasionally talk in the chat room and as such, I too am not intending to insult you and believe this to be a spirited discussion, no more. Although I have been gathering a grass roots following who agree with me, maybe there will be a war of the paint chips?
Take care, I look forward to your response,
Andrew
"If the tanks succeed, then victory follows."
Col. General. Heinz Guderian
PE Expert
New York, United States
Joined: May 07, 2002
KitMaker: 1,065 posts
Armorama: 508 posts
Posted: Wednesday, March 26, 2003 - 08:26 AM UTC
Guys, this is constructive CRITICISM. Don't be upset with Andrew for making a constructive critique.
I have been thinking about the whole paint chipping thing lately, too. I have trouble finding many photos that have these very 'chipped' finishes. Even on vehicles that have seen combat.
I do see lots of scratches and scuffs, but very few things I would consider chips. And, I agree with Andrew that they are small in comparison with the model we are talking about.
But, I do like the way paint chipping looks on some models, even if its not 100% accurate. So, its a bit of a dilemma. On one hand we are trying to be true to reality. On the other, we are trying to infuse a sense of life into a hunk of plastic. At best we can achieve a happy balance.
Andrew gave some great info about what color would appear under such a chip. We can all benefit from that kind of comment. But, he said overall he liked the model. He was just doing what I think he should be, giving some ideas about what he thought could be improvements.
I see so many "I like it" or "Great job" comments that this seems less like a critique area and more like a praise board. There's nothing wrong with that either if that's the expectation when posting.
I have been through a lot of critiques during both my education and professional life. It is never easy to hear negative things, if you see them as negative. Looking back, I have learned a lot more from honest comments than I have from simple praise. Even though I may have been hurt or upset at the time, it was a good thing in the long run...
I think people post here to get feedback that will make their next model better. If everyone loves what is shown, where's the incentive to try something new?
Something to consider.
Steve
