The second one, definitely!
Looks very realistic, while the other on is a bit elementary... But they both taste good!

Hi reichsfox,

I like them both, but the second one a bit more.
Which kits are they? I guess the first one the Italery recovery sherman (straight from the box or not?) and the second one an Tamiya?
Good job well done

Martin

Has to be the second one looks so real.

Gday Reichsfox
The first is very well painted, but would be at a stage where I would then say "Ok, let's start some weathering"...
The second has a sense of realism, although the bare metal scrapes and scratches would not be as prolific on a Sherman due to the high quality of its Olive Drab application. Have to say though that with a few little tweaks and extras in detailing you would have a lovely looking M4 there...More pics?
Cheers
Brad

Definitely the second one - looks nice and used.

i agree with the second one!!! very realistic

koen

Hi mate,
i think you did an excellent job on both your tanks. From a very personal point of view i love the first one..! Also if its not so "realistically weathered" i think that you made an excellent use of light/shades , light rust strikings , and so on...meaby the absence of heavy weathering signs its due to the fact that this particoular machine hasnt seen some "rought and dirty days" yet..!
The second its a beauty too. Lets say it has a more "...warriors....came out 'n play..." look !!
Since i'm more a German guy stuff , would you please tell me wich colours have you used to depict the overall aspect of the tanks..., it looks like a olive green stuff.

Anyway a very nice job indeed..!! Keep on walking on this path mate, you have really good skills..!!

Ciao.
Alex

reichsfox,
Hard for me to vote. The first set of pictures are rather dark and I can't make much out of the second set. These old eyes .
Will say the first one does look good.
Joe

To be honest, it shouldn´t really matter what we think, it should be what you like best yourself. How much weathering is a personal taste, and when asking for opinions, you´re going to get all sorts of answers and preferences, meaning you´ll probably be more confused than when you started.
Both work in their own way, IMO. I often find myself having the same problem ... and all I can offer, is to do what you find pleasing ... find your own preference .. and then get advice on how to improve on that.

I like them both. The subtle weathering on the M32 looks great, just as the heavier weathering on the M4. Well done. Just one question, where are the drivers' hatches in the first picture?

The second IMHO is more "realistic"

The first IMHO is more "artistic"

It just depends on what you like. I think that they are both great models in their own way.

I would go with something in between.

The first one just landed in Normandy.

The second one is a bit overdone except if it is a tank that has survived all the way from Normandy to VE day without having been serviced.

Thanks for sharing

They both look great,
I agree with Jesper about the timing for the tanks.
There is a beleif that the second a tank was used all the paint fell off and it got covered in mud which I find a bit far-fetched.
While the second looks great for a tank that has seen a lot of action the first could quite easily have been used for some time in the summer of '44 without getting wrecked, particularly if a crew took care of their tank.
Great kits all the same and more importantly you are obviously excellent at weathering tanks, regardless of the amount!

James

Both Good ones.

Great job

The only thing I can say is the wire on the second one might be in the way of the Hull machine gun

Hello,

Could anyone tell me from what site the second sherman photos were picked?

thank you

I like them both, then again, I tend to weather mine in much the same way. Some are light, while others are heavy and then some. Nice work, thanks for sharing. "Q"

I agree with those who say they like both. The M32 is very subtle. The first viewing of it I didn't notice any weathering at all. If was the 2nd viewing that I noticed it really was weathered, just not very heavily. I don't think the 2nd one is overdone either. To me it looks like many tanks I've seen in photos.

Both are good looking models Well done.

Doug

I like them both, but the 2nd one more - the weathering maybe heavy - but its not been 'overdone'.

Very good models.

As someone who personally likes lightly weathered vehicles on their own, I prefer the first one. But it all depends if you are going to attach them to groundwork, as each has to fit into it's deplicted enviroment.
Just remember before it got filthy and muck covered it started out clean and well maintained.

I think they both look great. You have done an outstanding job with both kits.

Riechsfox,
Oh no question this ias the one!!!

I like the first one

Hey Reichfox,
Both vehicles are representative of opposite ends of the "weathering" debate.
The M32 is a little on the light side, almost like a freshly issued AFV while the M4
appears to be a seasoned veteran in need of a little TLC.
To me, both look great.
The only other only nitpick I can add is with the M32's .50 cal. ammo box.
In the 2nd photo, it looks like one of the old hollow bottom Italeri MG ammo boxes that should
be replaced with a new ammo box or filled in and covered with some filler putty or styrene sheet.
Otherwise, their both nicely done.
Let the debate continue!! :-)

Cheers

jjumbo