Here is my dillema. I have rarely seen a armour model painted with an airbrush that didn't look like just that,an armour model painted with an airbrush. My goal is always to achieve reality in scale and color me a heretic but I don't think the current model fads look like reality. I was around armoured vehicle most of my adult life and they do not have"modulation or filters".
I appreciate the skill involved in painting all of that stuff,don't get me wrong. I tried something here on this track trying to go for a certain look and obviously I didn't achieve it. I will be the first to say that my paint job sucks.
So the dilemma is,what to do now? S---can the whole thing is the obvious choice as it is too far along to re paint.
My original plan was to have a lot of pine branches on the vehicle so the finish was not that important anyway but I will always know how crappy the paint job is. I think I just answered my own dillema. Heheh
J
Hosted by Darren Baker
SdKfz251D/11 Fernsprch WIP
jrutman
Pennsylvania, United States
Joined: April 10, 2011
KitMaker: 7,941 posts
Armorama: 7,934 posts
Joined: April 10, 2011
KitMaker: 7,941 posts
Armorama: 7,934 posts
Posted: Tuesday, June 18, 2013 - 10:32 AM UTC
retiredyank
Arkansas, United States
Joined: June 29, 2009
KitMaker: 11,610 posts
Armorama: 7,843 posts
Joined: June 29, 2009
KitMaker: 11,610 posts
Armorama: 7,843 posts
Posted: Tuesday, June 18, 2013 - 11:05 AM UTC
I have had several bad paint jobs(one reason for so many shelf queens ). I usually try to find ways of covering it up(like your branches idea). To tell the truth, I was using spray cans when hobby airbrushes were the wave of the future. I live near two naval bases, a naval air base, an army base and the marine hq. I try to base my painting off of what I see on the road. I'm not entirely sure how your expected your paint job to turn out. However, there is the "finger of God" problem. When you miniaturize something, the finish looks different. Brush strokes would be near invisible. This is just my two cents. Model on, however you feel comfortable.
panzerconor
Massachusetts, United States
Joined: February 08, 2012
KitMaker: 1,271 posts
Armorama: 1,253 posts
Joined: February 08, 2012
KitMaker: 1,271 posts
Armorama: 1,253 posts
Posted: Tuesday, June 18, 2013 - 12:06 PM UTC
I see what you mean about a model looking like a model, it makes a lot of sense actually. The paint job doesn't suck by any means, the green & red may be too thick but that's nothing that the pine branches can't help to hide. I know that on my 251 I've got a lot of branches and camo netting to help hide all the shortcomings on my paint job. So I would say to just keep going with it. Even if you look at your finished product and face-palm, everyone else could (and likely will) look at it and find it amazing. I do.
-Conor
-Conor
jhoenig
New York, United States
Joined: December 29, 2011
KitMaker: 343 posts
Armorama: 313 posts
Joined: December 29, 2011
KitMaker: 343 posts
Armorama: 313 posts
Posted: Tuesday, June 18, 2013 - 12:29 PM UTC
Jerry, Don't sweat, it there is nothing that can't be hidden with some brush and branches. I am an airbrush painter but I don't get too carried away with beginning tones (a little too green or a little too yellow) because they look totally different in the end after all the washes and weathering, plus I like to add branches and other camo stuff like the real thing and in the end alot of the model may be covered up. Some builds come out better then others, I just turn it into a positve and adapt it as needed.
GregCloseCombat
California, United States
Joined: June 30, 2008
KitMaker: 2,408 posts
Armorama: 2,394 posts
Joined: June 30, 2008
KitMaker: 2,408 posts
Armorama: 2,394 posts
Posted: Tuesday, June 18, 2013 - 01:18 PM UTC
Hi Jerry. In my experience. All you need is to apply a filter or two and the camo paint will look better. See my jagdpanther...horrible camo job but much more low key after some filters brushed on
yeahwiggie
Dalarnas, Sweden
Joined: March 24, 2006
KitMaker: 2,093 posts
Armorama: 1,359 posts
Joined: March 24, 2006
KitMaker: 2,093 posts
Armorama: 1,359 posts
Posted: Tuesday, June 18, 2013 - 07:08 PM UTC
I follow your thoughts on models looking like sprayed models instead of resembling a vehicle with fieldapplied and/or handpainted camo. They look too neat.
Tried it myself and it came out.... well, let's just say a bit toylike. I have yet to see a model where it looks convincing. Maybe it is a scalething?
Tried it myself and it came out.... well, let's just say a bit toylike. I have yet to see a model where it looks convincing. Maybe it is a scalething?
jrutman
Pennsylvania, United States
Joined: April 10, 2011
KitMaker: 7,941 posts
Armorama: 7,934 posts
Joined: April 10, 2011
KitMaker: 7,941 posts
Armorama: 7,934 posts
Posted: Wednesday, June 19, 2013 - 01:41 AM UTC
I really appreciate you guys chiming in here with all of the advice. If you read any kind of anger or bad feelings from my recent posts it is all directed at myself. I have been modeling a long time and hate when I screw up something so basic.
But,since I have so much time invested so far I will use an old airborne maxim"adapt and overcome" and try to turn this thing around.
I am not really that surprised by this as my painting has always sucked!
J
But,since I have so much time invested so far I will use an old airborne maxim"adapt and overcome" and try to turn this thing around.
I am not really that surprised by this as my painting has always sucked!
J
retiredyank
Arkansas, United States
Joined: June 29, 2009
KitMaker: 11,610 posts
Armorama: 7,843 posts
Joined: June 29, 2009
KitMaker: 11,610 posts
Armorama: 7,843 posts
Posted: Wednesday, June 19, 2013 - 03:31 AM UTC
You could just build up a few layers of paint. No need to stress. I ruined an $80 job, by screwing up the paint. Now, I can just pop parts off as I loose them on other builds. Your problem is easily rectified.
panzerconor
Massachusetts, United States
Joined: February 08, 2012
KitMaker: 1,271 posts
Armorama: 1,253 posts
Joined: February 08, 2012
KitMaker: 1,271 posts
Armorama: 1,253 posts
Posted: Wednesday, June 19, 2013 - 06:24 AM UTC
I would go with Matt's solution. Maybe a very thin layer of the base coat over it? It's by no means screwed up permanently, if at all. You said at the start that this is your first vehicle in over 15 years, and with this as the only minor bump in the road, it's definitely something to be very proud of.
jrutman
Pennsylvania, United States
Joined: April 10, 2011
KitMaker: 7,941 posts
Armorama: 7,934 posts
Joined: April 10, 2011
KitMaker: 7,941 posts
Armorama: 7,934 posts
Posted: Wednesday, June 19, 2013 - 06:38 AM UTC
Matt and Conor thanks,
I may try the coat of something to tone things down but I am thinking that with all the branches I want to pile on it would be a wasted effort to put more paint on. Besides,I think part of my problem is there is already too much paint on there.
I should take this more seriously. The problem is,most armor modelers like building vehicles and use figures to augment them. I am actually a guy that likes doing figures and sometimes augmenting the figs with vehicles.
I am not really good at either so maybe I should just pick one and concentrate more on it?
J
I may try the coat of something to tone things down but I am thinking that with all the branches I want to pile on it would be a wasted effort to put more paint on. Besides,I think part of my problem is there is already too much paint on there.
I should take this more seriously. The problem is,most armor modelers like building vehicles and use figures to augment them. I am actually a guy that likes doing figures and sometimes augmenting the figs with vehicles.
I am not really good at either so maybe I should just pick one and concentrate more on it?
J
Posted: Wednesday, June 19, 2013 - 06:51 AM UTC
Ola Jerry
I have followed this thread all through. Read every comment. And when I saw the paintjob I thought "yikes" that looks rough. But when I checked it better I think most of it looks rough because in most spots the paint is more translucent then other and you see the streaks. If you take a largish soft brush and dilute the paint a bit so it flows better and applies smoother. And with very soft strokes apply it to the camo spots so you cover the paintstreaks Then It already looks much better. And if you go over it with oil dot fading, washes and filters you'll see it is quite salvageable. Some parts could still benefit from hiding under foliage but all in all I would not say the paintjob is bad.
On the subject of painting in the field.. It is not like at one point they simply stop in the middle of a field. A BMW R75 with sidecar pulls up next to them. Tosses out some tins of paint and beelines it out of there. Even in the "field" they will end up in a frontline depot of sorts where all that paint is stored. And usually they have a compressor around for those jobbies. That said of course vehicles will have been handpainted but given that a soldier will always try to make his own work as easy for himself as possible I think if a compressor and spraygun is available he will definately use it.
And I can understand the reasoning behind the handpainted look. But if you look at your doorframes for instance. You might see different levels in the paintcoat but most of those levels are within a margin of a mm. 1:1 this is quite visible. But a 35th of 1 mm is not visible at all. Same goes for visible brushstrokes. If you go for the handpainted look I think it is best to use the technique I mentioned above. Thinned paint gently applied with a soft brush
By the way... we work too neat on our models
I have followed this thread all through. Read every comment. And when I saw the paintjob I thought "yikes" that looks rough. But when I checked it better I think most of it looks rough because in most spots the paint is more translucent then other and you see the streaks. If you take a largish soft brush and dilute the paint a bit so it flows better and applies smoother. And with very soft strokes apply it to the camo spots so you cover the paintstreaks Then It already looks much better. And if you go over it with oil dot fading, washes and filters you'll see it is quite salvageable. Some parts could still benefit from hiding under foliage but all in all I would not say the paintjob is bad.
On the subject of painting in the field.. It is not like at one point they simply stop in the middle of a field. A BMW R75 with sidecar pulls up next to them. Tosses out some tins of paint and beelines it out of there. Even in the "field" they will end up in a frontline depot of sorts where all that paint is stored. And usually they have a compressor around for those jobbies. That said of course vehicles will have been handpainted but given that a soldier will always try to make his own work as easy for himself as possible I think if a compressor and spraygun is available he will definately use it.
And I can understand the reasoning behind the handpainted look. But if you look at your doorframes for instance. You might see different levels in the paintcoat but most of those levels are within a margin of a mm. 1:1 this is quite visible. But a 35th of 1 mm is not visible at all. Same goes for visible brushstrokes. If you go for the handpainted look I think it is best to use the technique I mentioned above. Thinned paint gently applied with a soft brush
By the way... we work too neat on our models
jrutman
Pennsylvania, United States
Joined: April 10, 2011
KitMaker: 7,941 posts
Armorama: 7,934 posts
Joined: April 10, 2011
KitMaker: 7,941 posts
Armorama: 7,934 posts
Posted: Wednesday, June 19, 2013 - 01:34 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Ola Jerry
I have followed this thread all through. Read every comment. And when I saw the paintjob I thought "yikes" that looks rough. But when I checked it better I think most of it looks rough because in most spots the paint is more translucent then other and you see the streaks. If you take a largish soft brush and dilute the paint a bit so it flows better and applies smoother. And with very soft strokes apply it to the camo spots so you cover the paintstreaks Then It already looks much better. And if you go over it with oil dot fading, washes and filters you'll see it is quite salvageable. Some parts could still benefit from hiding under foliage but all in all I would not say the paintjob is bad.
On the subject of painting in the field.. It is not like at one point they simply stop in the middle of a field. A BMW R75 with sidecar pulls up next to them. Tosses out some tins of paint and beelines it out of there. Even in the "field" they will end up in a frontline depot of sorts where all that paint is stored. And usually they have a compressor around for those jobbies. That said of course vehicles will have been handpainted but given that a soldier will always try to make his own work as easy for himself as possible I think if a compressor and spraygun is available he will definately use it.
And I can understand the reasoning behind the handpainted look. But if you look at your doorframes for instance. You might see different levels in the paintcoat but most of those levels are within a margin of a mm. 1:1 this is quite visible. But a 35th of 1 mm is not visible at all. Same goes for visible brushstrokes. If you go for the handpainted look I think it is best to use the technique I mentioned above. Thinned paint gently applied with a soft brush
By the way... we work too neat on our models
All very good points Robert. Thanks for taking the time to go through the whole thread. Your photo essay on the 251 was one of my best resources for this build and I thank you fat that. I will see wht I can do about some salvage work on this paint job.
You are correct,there were a lot of organized ways to get painting done in the field and most werkstats had at least one airbrush working off a regular commpresor but I heard last week from an old Panzermanner that once helped cammo his tank with leaves dipped in paint and then smeared on!
J
Kurmark
Canada
Joined: February 28, 2010
KitMaker: 27 posts
Armorama: 23 posts
Joined: February 28, 2010
KitMaker: 27 posts
Armorama: 23 posts
Posted: Wednesday, June 19, 2013 - 02:07 PM UTC
Jerry,both the work and research you have done on this build are immpecable.Any field applied camo(pre factory painted) leaves you LOTS of leeway.I find that the field applied finish is much more difficult to replicate than standard factory finishes and I too believe that we overstrive for neatness in our modelling efforts.The vehicle crews didn't often have the time,compressors or the concern that we show.This is a great build and I'm following it as closely as I'm able.I'm trying to gain some strength after 10 days of brain radiation,so please forgive any spelling mistakes!Keep up yhe good work,Cheers...Murray McLennan
Posted: Wednesday, June 19, 2013 - 06:54 PM UTC
Quoted Text
You are correct,there were a lot of organized ways to get painting done in the field and most werkstats had at least one airbrush working off a regular commpresor but I heard last week from an old Panzermanner that once helped cammo his tank with leaves dipped in paint and then smeared on!
Oh yeah I know those stories as well that the crews used anything from branches to Bedsheets on a stick and ye olde Broom and in my theory this was usually done with stuff you mix in a bucket. Stuff like the famous Dust/Sand/Mud camo that was used a lot on the eastern front and Afrika or white-wash camo. Stuff that doesn't need to look good but that needs to cover. And that needs to cover quickly. I think that covers about 90% of the cases. Some chats I had with German relatives who served during the war kinda confirm that.
That said there are still countles examples of handpainted vehicles so it is not all that weird. And painting camo with a leaf? Damn.. hope he had to paint a motorcycle. Otherwise he would be busy for a while.
jrutman
Pennsylvania, United States
Joined: April 10, 2011
KitMaker: 7,941 posts
Armorama: 7,934 posts
Joined: April 10, 2011
KitMaker: 7,941 posts
Armorama: 7,934 posts
Posted: Thursday, June 20, 2013 - 01:36 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Jerry,both the work and research you have done on this build are immpecable.Any field applied camo(pre factory painted) leaves you LOTS of leeway.I find that the field applied finish is much more difficult to replicate than standard factory finishes and I too believe that we overstrive for neatness in our modelling efforts.The vehicle crews didn't often have the time,compressors or the concern that we show.This is a great build and I'm following it as closely as I'm able.I'm trying to gain some strength after 10 days of brain radiation,so please forgive any spelling mistakes!Keep up yhe good work,Cheers...Murray McLennan
Thanks for the very kind words of support buddy. I know what you mean. There is reality and then there is the"modelers' reality". Unfortunately these things are usually never the same.
Having said that,I am sorry to hear about your health and your news kind of puts it into perspective how trivial my concerns are here! Get better man,that's an order from this Platoon Sergeant,
J
jrutman
Pennsylvania, United States
Joined: April 10, 2011
KitMaker: 7,941 posts
Armorama: 7,934 posts
Joined: April 10, 2011
KitMaker: 7,941 posts
Armorama: 7,934 posts
Posted: Thursday, June 20, 2013 - 01:39 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted TextYou are correct,there were a lot of organized ways to get painting done in the field and most werkstats had at least one airbrush working off a regular commpresor but I heard last week from an old Panzermanner that once helped cammo his tank with leaves dipped in paint and then smeared on!
Oh yeah I know those stories as well that the crews used anything from branches to Bedsheets on a stick and ye olde Broom and in my theory this was usually done with stuff you mix in a bucket. Stuff like the famous Dust/Sand/Mud camo that was used a lot on the eastern front and Afrika or white-wash camo. Stuff that doesn't need to look good but that needs to cover. And that needs to cover quickly. I think that covers about 90% of the cases. Some chats I had with German relatives who served during the war kinda confirm that.
That said there are still countles examples of handpainted vehicles so it is not all that weird. And painting camo with a leaf? Damn.. hope he had to paint a motorcycle. Otherwise he would be busy for a while.
I know,that would take a long time. He actually said they used handfuls of leaves but still!
Of course,these stories are just more of the large amounts of useless trivia that fills my head. I am not using it to excuse myself from a crappy paintjob. I remain my own worse critic and have never given myself a glowing review.
I do appreciate your input,once again.
J
retiredyank
Arkansas, United States
Joined: June 29, 2009
KitMaker: 11,610 posts
Armorama: 7,843 posts
Joined: June 29, 2009
KitMaker: 11,610 posts
Armorama: 7,843 posts
Posted: Thursday, June 20, 2013 - 02:35 AM UTC
Quoted Text
I remain my own worse critic and have never given myself a glowing review.
That's how we learn.
jrutman
Pennsylvania, United States
Joined: April 10, 2011
KitMaker: 7,941 posts
Armorama: 7,934 posts
Joined: April 10, 2011
KitMaker: 7,941 posts
Armorama: 7,934 posts
Posted: Thursday, June 20, 2013 - 06:46 AM UTC
panzerconor
Massachusetts, United States
Joined: February 08, 2012
KitMaker: 1,271 posts
Armorama: 1,253 posts
Joined: February 08, 2012
KitMaker: 1,271 posts
Armorama: 1,253 posts
Posted: Thursday, June 20, 2013 - 07:24 AM UTC
Yes! Paint looks great and the mud on the treads and tires is awesome. That does look a lot better. Looking forward to the weathering
Just outta curiosity, what were the logs used for? Extra armor?
-Conor
Just outta curiosity, what were the logs used for? Extra armor?
-Conor
retiredyank
Arkansas, United States
Joined: June 29, 2009
KitMaker: 11,610 posts
Armorama: 7,843 posts
Joined: June 29, 2009
KitMaker: 11,610 posts
Armorama: 7,843 posts
Posted: Thursday, June 20, 2013 - 07:42 AM UTC
Now, your camo looks amazing! The dirt on the suspension is excellent! Do you still plan on covering it with foliage?
Dannyd
England - North West, United Kingdom
Joined: March 27, 2007
KitMaker: 803 posts
Armorama: 793 posts
Joined: March 27, 2007
KitMaker: 803 posts
Armorama: 793 posts
Posted: Thursday, June 20, 2013 - 07:58 AM UTC
Jerry, you have nothing to worry about with the paint job fella, nice work indeed.
Regards
Dan
Regards
Dan
jrutman
Pennsylvania, United States
Joined: April 10, 2011
KitMaker: 7,941 posts
Armorama: 7,934 posts
Joined: April 10, 2011
KitMaker: 7,941 posts
Armorama: 7,934 posts
Posted: Thursday, June 20, 2013 - 07:58 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Yes! Paint looks great and the mud on the treads and tires is awesome. That does look a lot better. Looking forward to the weathering
Just outta curiosity, what were the logs used for? Extra armor?
-Conor
The Leibstandarte found out in Russia that the side plates on the halftracks sometimes would deflect bullets or shrapnel into guys that were at the side of the crew compartment. They found an easy fix by attaching logs to the upper side. This would act as a splash guard for any lead sent their way. They were also not happy with the shield for the MG and said that the angles on it would sometimes deflect flying lead into crew members standing behind the gunner. They also liked to add track shoes to the front plate as extra armor(and spare tracks).
J
jrutman
Pennsylvania, United States
Joined: April 10, 2011
KitMaker: 7,941 posts
Armorama: 7,934 posts
Joined: April 10, 2011
KitMaker: 7,941 posts
Armorama: 7,934 posts
Posted: Thursday, June 20, 2013 - 08:07 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Now, your camo looks amazing! The dirt on the suspension is excellent! Do you still plan on covering it with foliage?
Yes! The foliage was in the plan all along. Maybe I should have waited until I stuck the branches on to take a pic and all of this would have been avoided! Heehee. I was just proud of my logs and wanted to see them on the screen.
This scene takes place on the road between Chateau Froidcour and Stomount where there were a lot of pines in 1944.
The battlegroup had holed up there in the woods and orchards just to the south of the chateau prior to it's push on Stomount. After the positions at Stomount were flanked by Maj McCowns' Bn Peiper withdrew from Stomount and pulled all of the tracks and trucks,etc out of the area around the chateau. The walking German and American wounded were also brought with them and all were assembled back at LeGlieze for the final defense.
So this track I am building sat still for around 18 hours allowing the mud to dry before getting fresh mud on the running gear during the pull out. Hope that all makes sense?
J
jrutman
Pennsylvania, United States
Joined: April 10, 2011
KitMaker: 7,941 posts
Armorama: 7,934 posts
Joined: April 10, 2011
KitMaker: 7,941 posts
Armorama: 7,934 posts
Posted: Thursday, June 20, 2013 - 08:09 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Jerry, you have nothing to worry about with the paint job fella, nice work indeed.
Regards
Dan
Thanks Dan,for keeping with me and for the support,
J
Kurmark
Canada
Joined: February 28, 2010
KitMaker: 27 posts
Armorama: 23 posts
Joined: February 28, 2010
KitMaker: 27 posts
Armorama: 23 posts
Posted: Thursday, June 20, 2013 - 08:42 AM UTC
It's all coming together Jerry,take your time it's going to look gteat! Cheers,Murray McLennan