Very interesting mottle on a 109

[dumaniac]

the Ju 88 would make a top diorama - 35 scale maybe

maybe not !

[matrixone]

NARSES2,
I cheated...I have seen several other photographs of this Ju 88G-1 including one in color and one in a high res scan that shows more detail than can be seen in the photograph posted in this thread.

Years ago when I had first seen the neat cross hatch painted cockpit of this aircraft I too thought some sort of netting was used during painting of the camouflage pattern but years later after looking at the other photographs I could see how it was really painted.


Matrixone

[Allan]

come to think of it, that Romanian 109 with the dots (I think they aren't all the same color) over the light blue-grey appears to approach something like lozenge cam, don't you think?

"It's just amazing what modelers consider "bad style" or "unrealistic", and what actually found its way on real world aircraft."

Great comment, and sssooo true, Dizzy...when using our airbrushes we sometimes get a little too perfectionist-like

Allan in Canberra

[Dizzyfugu]

No pun intended  Actually, I often wonder why modelers use an air brush when a) the effect looks totally artificial and b) the original shows no sign of that "feathered" spray pattern. Reality can be much "dumb" than that what you make of it on your model

I am currently doing research on the famous Indian Air Force MiG-21Fl "C992" (the one with tiger stripes), and it is amazing what you find or what people think this aircraft would have looked like. This specific plane is a good example when people try to be "hyper realistic". The most ridiculous effort I have seen is a MiG where not only the stripes have been airbrushed onto the kit's fuselage and wings in a manner that neither looks like the sharply defined original paint job, the artist also added additional stripes in a lighter color between the dark ones - which were certainly never there. OMG! But it must be good, since it's airbrushed...

[matrixone]

Dizzyfugu,
Most modelers use an airbrush to get a soft feathered edge between colors, in the case of almost all mid to late war Bf 109s they were painted with airguns which produced soft edges between colors and the best and most realistic way to copy this feature on models is to use an airbrush.
As a ''dumb'' modeler who uses an airbrush please explain why using an airbrush makes a model look ''totally artificial'',
and while you are at it show me the wartime factory paint jobs of mid to late war 109s where they were hand painted with brushes and had sharp edges....go ahead, I will wait.
Methinks you have never seen very many photographs of real 109s or you would not have made the idiotic statements you did.
Also you sound like you are against using an airbrush, nothing wrong with that but you should not make snide remarks against those that prefer using an airbrush.

Matrixone

[Dizzyfugu]

Matrix, I do not want to open up a can of worms and this here is not the right place. Concerning late German WWII liveries, I know that they differed considerably in quality, style and even colors, since anything was used what was available, esp. under field conditions.

Concerning pro and cons towards airbrush: one point is personal taste, and what you are used to work with. But, honestly, I find it amusing that modelers insist on using an air brush a) when the real thing hardly looks like the typical feathered edge you get (yes, you can control that) with that device, esp. at typical model scale and b) the finish looks quite artificial (to me). That does not mean that a model would not look good, but to me the results sometimes look rather fishy, if not "airbrushed for airbrush sake".

BTW, yes, I do NOT use an air brush. This does not imply that I am against this or would believe in "old school modelling", I rather wonder about the results and some modelling practices.

If you have a problem with this - it's yours 

[pyro-manic]

Dizzy - how would you go about painting (for example) a typical Luftwaffe late "mottled" finish? I have attempted it by hand, and it is extremely difficult.

[Dizzyfugu]

I tried it on several kits, with satisfactory results - I use a kind of dry-brushing, dabbing the tip of a brush with relatively little paint onto the areas which are to receive mottles, and with various tones, sometimes even applying underside paint (mostly RLM 76) between the mottles in order to enhance contrast. The German mottle style is really a challenge, for everyone and regardless of the techniques you use, and it also difficult because the real world excutions varied so much. You sometimes have clearly defined "spots" on a clear ground, with (almost) no feathering, sometimes the aircraft looks like a wavy mess of various tones with no clear separation between them. In my case, I just try to emulate the real world paradigm (or try to use it as an orientation). And so far it worked well for me, at least according to my expectations. But it takes more than just adding a dark set of mottles onto a light blue underground to achieve that typical look - I found that adding some RLM02 mottles greatly enhances the look and impression, that's the best basic advice I can give?

[PR19_Kit]

Modellers were producing mottle and other complex finishes long before airbrushes became as common as they are now.

The advent of the airbrush didn't just make them possible, they made the task easier and widened the scope of such finishes.

Dizzy is making the point that using one seems to be taken to be essential in today's modelling scene, especially in magazine 'reviews', whereas they aren't really. Such reviews also give the impressiion that no model is complete  without mucho PE sets and tons of resin as well, which is an equally unsupportable position.

I started plastic modelling in the early '50s and I've only this year painted my first model with an airbriush.....

[Dizzyfugu]

Thank you - you are getting my point (also including the hype of buying resin parts worth more than the kit itself...). 

[NARSES2]

Must admit I admire modellers who can get good looking mottles with brushes. I've tried many times and although I'm happy with some of them I doubt very much if they'd go to shows. However at the end of the day brushes/airbrushes are just tools, and some are happier with one type then others, the important thing is the skill that lies behind their use and there's plenty of examples of that on this site 

Some of the Italian camoflage schemes are even more difficult to get realistic finishes with a brush. Especially the "mottle within a mottle" type.

As for resin and PE. When I got back into modelling I thought it was de-riguer from what I read in magazines. Now I know that's not the case, again it's something you choose to use, you shouldn't feel that you have to use it.

But like all these things it's horses for courses and anyway I'm to lazy to use an air brush - all that cleaning. Never say never but I think I'm to old now to learn new tricks. (does this post win the prize for the most idoms used ? )

Chris

[matrixone]

Dizzyfugu,
If you choose not to use an airbrush for painting models I can see nothing wrong with that, there are many modelers that don't and also produce quality finishes on their models.
Over the years I have seen a few modelers who used a paint brush to paint mottled Luftwaffe camouflage schemes on their models and they looked fantastic but the skill level to do such finishes must have been at a very high level and the time it took to brush paint all the feathered edges must have been huge.
By using an airbrush with properly thinned paint and a couple hours practice you can paint a Luftwaffe paint scheme on a model in a very short amount of time and is VERY easy to do compared with brush painting.
Most, if not all Luftwaffe aircraft were painted by using spray guns and using an airbrush is the ideal tool to replicating that type of finish on a model and don't understand why you think using an airbrush would produce an unrealistic finsh on a model.

On my own models I rarely use resin or P.E. aftermarket parts and am against the mania that they must be used on your model or it will not be 'good enough', careful building and painting of most modern kits can produce a very good model right out of the box.


Matrixone

[arkon]

i have used sponges and other type of tissue rolled up to produce the effect.

[sequoiaranger]

The b/w picture of the Romanian 109 in an earlier post (reply # 11) caught my eye:

The "bulge" for the cowl guns extends all the way to the windscreen! In most 109 photos I've seen, there is maybe a "foot" gap between the bulge and the windscreen. Does anyone know why THIS particular 109 has such a bulge? Did the Romanians use a different weapon in the cowl to warrant an extended bulge??

Just curious!

[matrixone]

sequoiaranger,

The funny looking gun cowl bulge is a Romanian modification of the 109 airframe, not sure why they did this. The aircraft was also repainted by the Romanians and thats why it has the small strongly pigmented style mottles.
In one of my Classic Publications books I have pictures of this 109 but can't remember which one at this time.

Matrixone