Hi, I found this scheme in an Osprey book. But I can't found any pic that despict this one.
Its a correct scheme for a IV V model?. One picture in this book show a very blur one, with the stug falling into the stream from a broken bridge.
TIA
Regards
Alvaro
AFV Painting & Weathering
Answers to questions about the right paint scheme or tips for the right effect.
Answers to questions about the right paint scheme or tips for the right effect.
Hosted by Darren Baker, Matthew Toms
Jagdpanzer IV V - Correct camo
alewar
Canelones, Uruguay
Joined: December 27, 2006
KitMaker: 773 posts
Armorama: 765 posts
Joined: December 27, 2006
KitMaker: 773 posts
Armorama: 765 posts
Posted: Friday, October 24, 2014 - 02:05 PM UTC
panzerbob01
Louisiana, United States
Joined: March 06, 2010
KitMaker: 3,128 posts
Armorama: 2,959 posts
Joined: March 06, 2010
KitMaker: 3,128 posts
Armorama: 2,959 posts
Posted: Sunday, October 26, 2014 - 06:10 AM UTC
Al;
Looks mighty cool... and mighty fanciful, to me!
I doubt anyone would have painted one all-white, and then added a brown overlay pattern onto that - the white (whitewash) would have gone onto an already-camouflaged JgdPz and if they wanted some camo to show through, they would have simply left purposeful gaps in the white coat - more often the gaps we've seen in photos of white schemes likely more represented lack of supplies of white rather than planned-for gaps, but... I really doubt that anyone would actually go to the trouble of either carefully spot-masking the white (in which case the "brown" should be revealed tricolor camo), or repainting with brown over that white hull to get those "gaps"! The barrel banding would be a crew member brushing on "strips of white" and does show up.
But we should all be cautious of saying "never" when it comes to things in War and maybe specially so with German later-war armor! I'm half-sure some expert will eventually jump up with the definitive pic and state that this indeed happened as shown in the artwork!:D
Just my opinion! It's like the proverbial tossed-down gauntlet and a red flag for the angry bulls!
Bob
Looks mighty cool... and mighty fanciful, to me!
I doubt anyone would have painted one all-white, and then added a brown overlay pattern onto that - the white (whitewash) would have gone onto an already-camouflaged JgdPz and if they wanted some camo to show through, they would have simply left purposeful gaps in the white coat - more often the gaps we've seen in photos of white schemes likely more represented lack of supplies of white rather than planned-for gaps, but... I really doubt that anyone would actually go to the trouble of either carefully spot-masking the white (in which case the "brown" should be revealed tricolor camo), or repainting with brown over that white hull to get those "gaps"! The barrel banding would be a crew member brushing on "strips of white" and does show up.
But we should all be cautious of saying "never" when it comes to things in War and maybe specially so with German later-war armor! I'm half-sure some expert will eventually jump up with the definitive pic and state that this indeed happened as shown in the artwork!:D
Just my opinion! It's like the proverbial tossed-down gauntlet and a red flag for the angry bulls!
Bob
SSGToms
Connecticut, United States
Joined: April 02, 2005
KitMaker: 3,608 posts
Armorama: 3,092 posts
Joined: April 02, 2005
KitMaker: 3,608 posts
Armorama: 3,092 posts
Posted: Sunday, October 26, 2014 - 12:32 PM UTC
Archival photos I found on Google show the vehicle in 3 color camo applied in broad stripes, or in the "ambush" camouflage pattern.
alewar
Canelones, Uruguay
Joined: December 27, 2006
KitMaker: 773 posts
Armorama: 765 posts
Joined: December 27, 2006
KitMaker: 773 posts
Armorama: 765 posts
Posted: Sunday, October 26, 2014 - 12:41 PM UTC
Bob, Matthew
Thanks for the replies. I will surf a bit more to found any pic.
The pic in the book are so blur that's impossible to guess something. But appears to be some circles .
The caption said. JAgdpanzer IV SS Panzer Jaeger Abteilung 1.
of SS Untersturmfuhrer Otto Holst
I think that the artwork show a two tone camo of dunkelgelb and brown. Very cool as you said.
Regards
Alvaro
Thanks for the replies. I will surf a bit more to found any pic.
The pic in the book are so blur that's impossible to guess something. But appears to be some circles .
The caption said. JAgdpanzer IV SS Panzer Jaeger Abteilung 1.
of SS Untersturmfuhrer Otto Holst
I think that the artwork show a two tone camo of dunkelgelb and brown. Very cool as you said.
Regards
Alvaro
Posted: Monday, October 27, 2014 - 01:12 AM UTC
Shown is camo pattern on Jagdpanzer IV that was in the Patton (now Ft. Benning) collection.
My photos all: Mike Koenig.
My photos all: Mike Koenig.
hogarth
Maryland, United States
Joined: June 02, 2006
KitMaker: 672 posts
Armorama: 592 posts
Joined: June 02, 2006
KitMaker: 672 posts
Armorama: 592 posts
Posted: Monday, October 27, 2014 - 12:23 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Al;
Looks mighty cool... and mighty fanciful, to me!
I doubt anyone would have painted one all-white, and then added a brown overlay pattern onto that - the white (whitewash) would have gone onto an already-camouflaged JgdPz and if they wanted some camo to show through, they would have simply left purposeful gaps in the white coat - more often the gaps we've seen in photos of white schemes likely more represented lack of supplies of white rather than planned-for gaps, but... I really doubt that anyone would actually go to the trouble of either carefully spot-masking the white (in which case the "brown" should be revealed tricolor camo), or repainting with brown over that white hull to get those "gaps"! The barrel banding would be a crew member brushing on "strips of white" and does show up.
But we should all be cautious of saying "never" when it comes to things in War and maybe specially so with German later-war armor! I'm half-sure some expert will eventually jump up with the definitive pic and state that this indeed happened as shown in the artwork!:D
Just my opinion! It's like the proverbial tossed-down gauntlet and a red flag for the angry bulls!
Bob
That's not white. It's dunkelgelb with the brown spots. Probably printed paler than what they wanted, but per the description of the color plate, that's what it's supposed to be.
GeraldOwens
Florida, United States
Joined: March 30, 2006
KitMaker: 3,736 posts
Armorama: 3,697 posts
Joined: March 30, 2006
KitMaker: 3,736 posts
Armorama: 3,697 posts
Posted: Monday, October 27, 2014 - 01:48 PM UTC
Haven't seen the photo that painting is based on, but vehicles delivered by Vomag in the last five months of the war left the factory in what appears to be the summer 1944 pattern. The 655th Schwere Panzerjager Abteilung was surrendered largely intact to the Canadians in Holland in May, 1945, where they were extensively photographed in a captured vehicle assembly area. They had some late model Panzer IV 70 (V) in the third company (delivered November-December 1944), and some final models (Feb.-March, 1945) in the first company. It appeared that the base color for the vehicles in both companies had reverted to Dunkelgelb, with disruptive patterns of Olivgrun and Rotbraun oversprayed in fairly hard-edged patterns. This was contrary to the December, 1944 regulations, which required that Olivgrun be the base color, but apparently nobody in the Army's acceptance office was going to reject new equipment because the paint had been applied in the wrong order. Several of these photos have appeared in various publications, but they have been published in large format in a couple of the excellent Panzer Wrecks books. The second company of the battalion was Jagdpanther G2 tank destroyers, by the way.
panzerbob01
Louisiana, United States
Joined: March 06, 2010
KitMaker: 3,128 posts
Armorama: 2,959 posts
Joined: March 06, 2010
KitMaker: 3,128 posts
Armorama: 2,959 posts
Posted: Monday, October 27, 2014 - 03:34 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted TextAl;
Looks mighty cool... and mighty fanciful, to me!
I doubt anyone would have painted one all-white, and then added a brown overlay pattern onto that - the white (whitewash) would have gone onto an already-camouflaged JgdPz and if they wanted some camo to show through, they would have simply left purposeful gaps in the white coat - more often the gaps we've seen in photos of white schemes likely more represented lack of supplies of white rather than planned-for gaps, but... I really doubt that anyone would actually go to the trouble of either carefully spot-masking the white (in which case the "brown" should be revealed tricolor camo), or repainting with brown over that white hull to get those "gaps"! The barrel banding would be a crew member brushing on "strips of white" and does show up.
But we should all be cautious of saying "never" when it comes to things in War and maybe specially so with German later-war armor! I'm half-sure some expert will eventually jump up with the definitive pic and state that this indeed happened as shown in the artwork!:D
Just my opinion! It's like the proverbial tossed-down gauntlet and a red flag for the angry bulls!
Bob
That's not white. It's dunkelgelb with the brown spots. Probably printed paler than what they wanted, but per the description of the color plate, that's what it's supposed to be.
Robert G.;
I can readily accept a dunkelgelb base with brown and green spots! That would be plausible and, as Gerald O. has noted, latest-war vehicles may well have reverted to dunkelgelb base-coats as versus the putative oliv-grun regulation base.
My remarks above were of course in response to the question about that picture as the ref for a scheme, and it sure looks pretty white to me, so there went I; however as there is apparent evidence that this was really supposed to be DG, I'll go with that - camo over DG would certainly be plausible! Camo over white? Not so.
What one might need for to do the scheme right would be a couple of good photos...
Bob
SdAufKla
South Carolina, United States
Joined: May 07, 2010
KitMaker: 2,238 posts
Armorama: 2,158 posts
Joined: May 07, 2010
KitMaker: 2,238 posts
Armorama: 2,158 posts
Posted: Tuesday, October 28, 2014 - 02:23 AM UTC
Alvaro,
Check the publication date for that Osprey book. There has been a lot of new information and research on the factory applied camouflage used by the Germans from about Sep '44 through the end of the war, and the "ambush" patterns were almost all factory applied. Each factory had it's own, unique patterns and methods of application, and the color art work from the Osprey book does not match any.
This is a common problem and one that everyone should be wary of - using dated references. What was once the best information known is very often superseded by newer research and facts. Relying on a single source, especially one that is many years old is risky if accuracy is very important. Osprey quite often republishes information and artwork from it's Vanguard series that may be decades old, so even if the particular copy of one of their books is brand new, the information may be very dated and incorrect.
If you contact me using the PM function with your email address, I will send you my PDF ambush camouflage notes. There were several different methods of application - stencils, hard-edged brush painted and free-sprayed patterns used by various factories. In these notes, there is a photo of the JagdPz IV which looks at the pattern you're interested in. It was clearly applied by a stencil, and one that was not too large at that. The repeating stenciled pattern appears clearly across the side of the vehicle.
Alliance Model-Works makes a painting stencil for the ambush pattern for the particular vehicle you're interested in:
AM-Works::LW35077, Stencil for VOMAG Ambush Cammo
HTH,
Check the publication date for that Osprey book. There has been a lot of new information and research on the factory applied camouflage used by the Germans from about Sep '44 through the end of the war, and the "ambush" patterns were almost all factory applied. Each factory had it's own, unique patterns and methods of application, and the color art work from the Osprey book does not match any.
This is a common problem and one that everyone should be wary of - using dated references. What was once the best information known is very often superseded by newer research and facts. Relying on a single source, especially one that is many years old is risky if accuracy is very important. Osprey quite often republishes information and artwork from it's Vanguard series that may be decades old, so even if the particular copy of one of their books is brand new, the information may be very dated and incorrect.
If you contact me using the PM function with your email address, I will send you my PDF ambush camouflage notes. There were several different methods of application - stencils, hard-edged brush painted and free-sprayed patterns used by various factories. In these notes, there is a photo of the JagdPz IV which looks at the pattern you're interested in. It was clearly applied by a stencil, and one that was not too large at that. The repeating stenciled pattern appears clearly across the side of the vehicle.
Alliance Model-Works makes a painting stencil for the ambush pattern for the particular vehicle you're interested in:
AM-Works::LW35077, Stencil for VOMAG Ambush Cammo
HTH,
GeraldOwens
Florida, United States
Joined: March 30, 2006
KitMaker: 3,736 posts
Armorama: 3,697 posts
Joined: March 30, 2006
KitMaker: 3,736 posts
Armorama: 3,697 posts
Posted: Tuesday, October 28, 2014 - 03:29 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Haven't seen the photo that painting is based on, but vehicles delivered by Vomag in the last five months of the war left the factory in what appears to be the summer 1944 pattern. The 655th Schwere Panzerjager Abteilung was surrendered largely intact to the Canadians in Holland in May, 1945, where they were extensively photographed in a captured vehicle assembly area. They had some late model Panzer IV 70 (V) in the third company (delivered November-December 1944), and some final models (Feb.-March, 1945) in the first company. It appeared that the base color for the vehicles in both companies had reverted to Dunkelgelb, with disruptive patterns of Olivgrun and Rotbraun oversprayed in fairly hard-edged patterns. This was contrary to the December, 1944 regulations, which required that Olivgrun be the base color, but apparently nobody in the Army's acceptance office was going to reject new equipment because the paint had been applied in the wrong order. Several of these photos have appeared in various publications, but they have been published in large format in a couple of the excellent Panzer Wrecks books. The second company of the battalion was Jagdpanther G2 tank destroyers, by the way.
Silly quoting myself, but I found a jpg of one of the 655th vehicles, the first company commander's ride. Had a solid rather than cut-out gun travel lock, solid brake access doors (no vents, just handles), only had steel wheels on the first axle, and had a cast left idler and a welded right idler. It had the segmented track for the gunner's periscope mounting on the top deck, and the bolts around the commander's and loader's hatch openings. Also had a mounting step welded to the front edge of the upper bow. Notice the absence of ambush spots. Click on the photo to see it larger.
Bluestab
South Carolina, United States
Joined: December 03, 2009
KitMaker: 2,160 posts
Armorama: 1,906 posts
Joined: December 03, 2009
KitMaker: 2,160 posts
Armorama: 1,906 posts
Posted: Wednesday, October 29, 2014 - 03:13 AM UTC
I'm guessing the source book is Osprey's Ardennes 1944 Peiper & Skorzeny. The original print date is 1987. The picture in the book is pretty bad.
I've seen some of the other pictures of this vehicle and the camo scheme seems more subdued than the color plate. The photos aren't great but it appears to be a two color scheme. The brown is a lot softer than the color plate and doesn't stand out nearly as much. My guess is that the artist took a bit of license and made the brown and yellow contrast more than they actually did.
HTH
I've seen some of the other pictures of this vehicle and the camo scheme seems more subdued than the color plate. The photos aren't great but it appears to be a two color scheme. The brown is a lot softer than the color plate and doesn't stand out nearly as much. My guess is that the artist took a bit of license and made the brown and yellow contrast more than they actually did.
HTH
alewar
Canelones, Uruguay
Joined: December 27, 2006
KitMaker: 773 posts
Armorama: 765 posts
Joined: December 27, 2006
KitMaker: 773 posts
Armorama: 765 posts
Posted: Wednesday, October 29, 2014 - 10:56 AM UTC
Gerard, Mike, Alex
Thanks for your help and comments. Yeap, this is the book, but the spanish version....usually they have less profiles in case of planes, and less pics and text in case of armour.
And, you can read that "some platoon have a lot of coincidences" instead of casualties due translation mistakes!. So imaging the rest. {well, I do a lot too}
I ask as I found very interesting this scheme. Sadly I dont know a lot about german camo, and I try to do some differents schemes on each model that I do.
TIA regards from the south
Alvaro
Thanks for your help and comments. Yeap, this is the book, but the spanish version....usually they have less profiles in case of planes, and less pics and text in case of armour.
And, you can read that "some platoon have a lot of coincidences" instead of casualties due translation mistakes!. So imaging the rest. {well, I do a lot too}
I ask as I found very interesting this scheme. Sadly I dont know a lot about german camo, and I try to do some differents schemes on each model that I do.
TIA regards from the south
Alvaro