They are the same! And I have heard that English is a confusing language.

I think those that use Humbrol like I do (it is easiest to aquire in my country), will agree that gloss is a necessity when weathering matt enamels.
My suggestion to you Martinnn, is to go to your local hardware store and get samples of commercialy used varnishes and laquers and try them out on some old model. I have discovered that sometimes you achieve better (or different) results from these.

No English isn't confusing at all, it's a nice and easy language and I have no problems with using it. You could almost say it's my second language, next to Dutch!

It's just that we don't learn any "slang" like these modelling terms at school. So that can be quite confusing....

Well, learning every day here haha :-)

Martin

I myself do not gloss before washing and have had great results.Base coat of enamel,3 days of dry time, and then first enamel wash.2 days dry and then oil wash.Or H2O soluble oil wash(Winsor&Newton).I would seal by clear coat,gloss or dull, any layers of acrylic paint that are used.I usually Use Future for gloss base under waterslide decals(Kleer in europe).I also top coat the decals before the weathering begins.I do not own an airbrush so washes are well planned before a speedy application I have used gloss coats before washing on my aircraft(1/32)This is where the advantage of gloss comes through.Nice flow over large,relativly flat surfaces With armor,it's just an individual choice regarding gloss or dull coating.Besides,after shooting your tank with dulcoat,you can still brush in some diluted Future for any satin areas you may want
Dang,sorry this is so long

"Dullcote" is a Testor's trade name for their matt varnish (spray or brush applied) and has become pretty much synonymous.

Personally I prefer Floquil "Dust" as my flat/matt/dull coating. It dries dead flat when applied properly. The floquil flat coat is also very good, but I find the "dust" acts like one of the filters people go on about to even out the tonal values of the finish.

For the gloss coat, I like "Future" which, I think is available in the UK (and maybe the rest of Europe) as "Klear"?

As for enamels and laquers they are most definitely NOT the same. They use very different chemistries and use different solvents to be applied correctly. Enamels can use mineral spirits (white spirit), Varsol, and the like to thin the paint. If you use laquer thinner in most enamels, the paint dissolves, but you destroy the adhesive element in the paint and it becomes a suspended particulate and not a real paint. Laquer thinner is a _really_ aggressive solvent and will cut almost any paint, however it is useful as a thinner really only on real laquer paints and dopes.

My 2 c.

:)

Paul

Hey Martinnnn,

Thanks for starting this thread man! I am about to enter that phase of rebuilding the 1:18 Tiger I have and I sure learned a lot from it all!
Thanks to Teacher as well for his patience and willingness to explain the whole process. For once finally it is clear to me!
And another thing, what that person said previously about no matt coat, he is very likely right, cause I just read in Tony Greenland's book that a matt model is a dead model.
The new tanks are matt indeed, but very soon after they get used, the matt starts to turn into a satin finish.
(There is a thread about it in the WW 2 German section).

Last but not least, I lived in Holland for 40 years and I know that sometimes spcialized scale modellers stuff can be hard to get over there, although generally they are well supplied. If there is anything that you need and can't get in the cold kikkerland, let me know, most likely we can work something out.

Groetjes,

Frans

yw frans, and thanks for the offer!

I've never really had problems here, I've been able to find everything I need so far....but now that I'm going to use some more "professional" techniques (yes they really are too me haha) I may encounter problems...

Sorry, but I don't agree with Tony, at least as far as a finished, weathered model goes. I would tend to agree that on a real vehicle the paint, itself, will go to a satin gloss level, although age also tends to flatten paint finishes, however, any vehicle not being shown on a wash stand will have a good layer of dust and dirt on it and it is that which imposes the really flat appearance of vehicles in the field. So, on the parade ground I think you can properly make the model satin, but in the field, dead flat.

This is my observation from looking at operational vehicles at some distance and up close as well as the absolute opinion of a friend of mine who served 27 years within the Military Intelligence field and was on many, many excercises over the years.

Paul

Hi Tankmodeler,

When Tony wrote about the satin finish, he WAS indeed talking about the paint on the tank, NOT the finished weathered and dusted model.
He states in his book that German armour came out of the factory looking matt/dull, but that scraping, walking etc over the surfaces make the paint satin looking very soon.

Frans

Martin,
I only do selective washes, so a gloos coat on my model helps a lot on having the wash flowing better. On top of that decals, in my view, adhere better and the risk of silvering is reduced...
Ciao

Just sprayed my M4A1 sherman in X-22.....I'll apply the decals once the X-22 has dried, and after that I'll try some washes....let's see how it comes out!

https://armorama.kitmaker.net/forums/46502&page=1

If you'll take a look at what I wrote :

"Sorry, but I don't agree with Tony, at least as far as a finished, weathered model goes. I would tend to agree that on a real vehicle the paint, itself, will go to a satin gloss level, although age also tends to flatten paint finishes, however, any vehicle not being shown on a wash stand will have a good layer of dust and dirt on it and it is that which imposes the really flat appearance of vehicles in the field. "

You'll see that I realise that, but given that the dust sits on the paint, I don't find it any use to paint my model with a satin sheen, just to make it dead flat after to add the dust that the vehicle had in service.

I gloss the model to add the decals and to help the wash part of the weathering process and then flatten it completely with a realistic coat of dust. That the washed vehicle might be satin sheen under the dust is no longer relevant. :-)

Paul

Hi Tankmodeler,

LOL, yeah...you know what, you might be right..
I guess the only thing is, if there are parts that are less dusted and will show "realistically" satin finish..
And to be frank with you, I haven't tried the technique myself yet, so....
Oh hell, it doesn't really matter, lol, this keeps us off the streets anyway or?
Cheers man!

Frans

Ain't that the truth!

:)

Hi guys Interesting subject.I work in a hardware store and I baught a can of their own brand acrylic varnish 500ml for £2.00 I tested it on a old model the effect was terrific so I got some of the same stuff in Matt Im yet to try it but will let you know how it turns out. Im fed up with paying £££ extra because it has "Modelers" in the title

To gloss or not to gloss that is the question.... yada yada yada. For me its a no brainer. Gloss, decals, additional gloss to seal decals, wash, flat/dull/matte (Take your pick) more weathering. I find that washes will definately flow better over a gloss. They tend to spider web out on a flat finish thereby causing the use of more wash. They also alter the color of the paint, darkening it. I just do the recesses and panel lines on mine. I believe somebody called this a "pin or spot" wash. I use an airbrush to do the rest of the model. Pastels come into their own towards the end of the build once it is secured to a base/diorama. The best advice I could give on this, is to try several differing techniques and find what best suits your needs. It never hurts to experiment....on something worth experimenting that is :-) Most importantly though, remember to have fun this is just a hobby! "Q"

Personally I'm not in favour of satin effects on tanks for two reasons, partly because as mentioned elsewhere dust & muck tends to be matt, but also because in my view paint has to be "scaled" as much as construction parts. To see what I mean, try painting a 1/35 figures boots with full gloss black. Don't look right does it? Much better to paint them matt then buff them up! The same follows for vehicles, in my view they just don't look right unless they are "flat". But a 1/16 vehicle may need different treatment of course.
I've never tried putting a gloss coat on first before applying transfers, I thought the silvering just had to be lived with, so started painting my markings instead (except for turret numbers). Must try it this time. Don't think I'll be covering the whole vehicle though, my budget (time or money) doen't allow any mistakes!!!
BTW all I've ever used is Humbrol. I've fought shy of Acrylics because in my experience they dry very fast & I'm always worried about them clogging the airbrush. I have tried them on figures, but again they dry too fast for mixing or for the effects I'm familiar with & if thinned they have a tendency to dry glossy, which I hate on figures.
Does anyone remember Rose paints? They were in a tube like oil paints but were water based. They were excellent for figures, & the colours were really rich. I think they were also marketed as Pelican Plaka.