What's your take on my analysis? Do you have a favourite paint range? Let me know in the comments below....also, if you're not currently subbed (and 2/3rd of you aren't!), then if you would do me a favour and hit that button so I can get to 25K for the end of the year it would really be appreciated - it's free, and it really helps me out....thanks!
I started out with Tamiya and found it sprays ok and paints ok, but nothing earth shattering. Since then I have a fair amount of MRP, Gunze Mr Color, AK Interactive and a bit of Alclad II for the metallic colours. To be fair, I have tried Vallejo but I found it gummed up real quick in my airbrush, a problem I don't have with any of the other brands. Tamiya has a bit of an issue with tip drying, but retarder is avalailable and I use it when I remember it.
I absolutely never mix paints, I use the closest colour I have but I'll go a tad lighter rather than darker if I have the choice as weathering usually darkens the finish a bit. The reason being is that I am just about the only person to look at my models once they are done, my wife may glance at one and say "That's nice dear!" but that is all. Go with what makes you happy.
Very interesting piece of research. It confirms my assumption that you cannot get it right by using a single brand and that you cannot go wrong since back in WW2 the paint shades differed between factories.
Tamiya range, the super LP , acrylic, and sprays cans, the big Mr hobby range and their surfacers are amazing , and Humbrol's old school enamel tins are still the best colour matches especially for the old vintage airfix kits.
I tend to stick to Ak and Vallejo with some Tamiya paints for certain applications, I have been deviating from "Standard" official paint recommendations for last 3 years, I find right out of bottle doesn't look right at smaller scale so I correct for scale and weathering. I found when in the Military no two vehicles with "the same paint job" ever looked identical anyways. There was always variation even on same vehicle paint on top of the AFV faded more than lower hull. So I go with the paint job I find satisfying.
50 years ago I used to work in the lab of a paint manufacturer, we used to look at shades in artificial daylight, a lot of the time we used to take it to the window and look at it in real daylight, there was invariably a difference. Ambient light makes a massive difference to how you see colour, which you did touch on, .Back in the late sixties, early seventies when I began modelling Humbrol 30 and Airfix G5 dark earth (I think) looked right, regardless of whether they were correct , they looked right, and surely that is half the battle. As you so correctly summed up, and if I've misinterpreted this, please forgive me, if it looks right to you then that is what counts. I have a lot of paints by different manufacturers nowadays, I mix and match to see what works best. I do like your analysis, Best Regards
Nice work, it was surprising to me how varied a particular color was depending on whose bottle was used. I have the Federal Standard fan deck which I use only as a guide when color matching. The only time I try to exact match color is when it involves decals. Like with a modern aircraft build such as an F-4 Phantom in Hill grey where the printed tailcode letters and numbers color matched the opposing grey. The top color I mix has to match the decal ink the maker used, not Federal Standard. Plus I agree with scaledown effect of lightening the color depending on the scale of the model.
That's nothing, try SCREEN matching anything from Star Wars or Star Trek. Sure we know the colors the filming model was painted, but you look at any filming model matched ship, and it looks like garish hell because it was painted for insane light levels to hit the film correctly then Processed through multiple layers of compositing.
When i hand painted models, i used citadel paint & made my own mixes. They may not have been 100% acurate but they were close enough for me. Now that i have returned to hobby i decieded to use tamiya as i can get hold them quite easily & am learning how to airbrush.
When I worked for British Aerospace at both Woodford and Hatfield back in the 90's.I always asked the guys in paint store for the best way to mix RAF colours, especially as the Mosquito was flying from Hatfield,their answer was,it doesn't matter,a mosquito built here was painted in a different shade to a mosquito built in Canada,same as a Lancaster built at Woodford would have a different paint colour to one built at Chadderton or even in Canada.just use what looks right to you, example,a 146 Regional Jet for Cross Air would have a slightly different red when painted at Hatfield compared to the red at Woodford
I'd take those anecdotes with a grain of salt (adjust size to liking). MAP used standards for a reason, including recipes and stock keeping DOTs for paints. Like in the demonstration, there will have been deviations but it certainly wasn't "just pick any old green off the shelf, job's done"
I live near Woodford I used to get on my bike and see what 146’s were there as a kid, some really random airlines with test regs on. I dare say I saw some of your handy work.
Even relying on photos can be debatable, especially on print film. In 1992 I took some photos of a Saab Draken, first with Kodak film and then immediately retook the photos with Fuji film. Kodak tends to yellow hues, Fuji to blue. The result? The Draken taken with Kodak looked a brownish hue; the same Draken taken within seconds on Fuji film looked a dark green.
Even the light you are looking under can have a huge effect on perceived colours. I took some photos at one of the Duxford show. In the morning it was a little cloudy and at Midday was bright sunshine and then it clouded over later. The photos I took of the same plane at different times came out as completely different shades such that I had to check the codes to make sure it was the same Spitfire. Taken on two rolls of Kodak 64 from the same batch and printed at the same time and place. (It was 1981!) I’m happy using Tamiya and Vallejo Model Air. I often mix a little white for a highlights, which I think is used more by armour modellers.
Paint colors are somewhat relative. Are you depicting a factory fresh aircraft or one that was painted 6 months, 1 year or more ago. The effects of sun, dirt and wear will change the shade in many ways. When I worked on USAF aircraft, especially in the 60s-80s SEA paint scheme they would lighten and darken over time and no two aircraft ever were shaded the same. Have a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!
I'm colourblind, so I just have to trust what it says on the bottle. I had great fun trying to weather a Sherman by watering down paints significantly to make an earthy wash. I ran multiple colours past my best mate and his wife. My favourite was being told that an earth brown paint looked purple when diluted. 😂
It's also worth considering that a colour changes depending on what's next to it, what's under it and how thin it is. A good example is vallejo model air RLM75. Whilst on it's own it looks completely off but put it in the context of RLM 74 and 76 and it's very accurate. A match for the colourcoats rlm75. One for the RLM rabbit hole is which colour chips you are using as a reference. There isn't really an excuse for the british colours due to precise and offical colour chips and info are published. At the end of the day the key question to ask yourself is does it look right for you and is the paint working for you.
Very well thought out, and presented. Coming from the railway modelling background the same issues rage ... try 10 different modelers and they'll give you 10 different Brunswick greens... Paint what looks right to your eye, looking at references! Of course if you're colour blind... then maybe stick to the recommendations.
As usual, a well researched and delivered topic Alex. Whilst colour match out of the bottle may be important, as you say, the qualities of the paint itself have a huge bearing - who is going to use a paint that consistently clogs or tip dries or doesn't adhere well. I'm only really interested in RAF subjects and my primary range is AK 3rd Gen but I also like Mission Models. My comparisons have included those two with Lifecolor, Hataka and Ammo.
The smaller the scale is the brighter and not the strong the color has to be. Otherwise it didnot look real and realistic. It looks abit to colorful. But that are onle my two pence to this topic. But hey great video!
I like the Fauci-meme. And i prefer enamels and oil-paint. For accurate coloring: if you paint the windowsill with a given color and repaint it partly with the same paint from the same pot, the touched up part is different due time, detoriation, weather etc so i go with my own preferences. It is right when it looks right IMO.
You could also take into account that the shade for one standard can change from one lot number to the next from any given manufacturer..it depends on where they source their pigments from, who is in charge of the mix that day, or how their mixing machine is calibrated if it automatically meters in the pigments to the mix...way too many variables for accurate 100% reproduction every single time....shade on my model could also differ from the shade on your model even if both of our paint bottles are brand new and from the same lot # because you may have shaken your bottle better than me, thereby dispersing the pigments differently throughout the carriers...I get it as close to accurate as I can by my eye, and leave it at that. Favorite paint line is whatever is easiest to work with at the time...
There are good reasons for there to be variations in colour. First of all wartime paint production is not consistent, particularly German, even in the USA unaffected by bombing we can see huge variations in colour . Variations also occur due to how aircraft weather, they can really fade or darken the colour, Olive Drab is infamous for how it can vary in appearance as an example. The RAF also applied temporary mixes to add to the confusion. Consider also scale effect. Some paint companies (AK from memory included) allow for scale effect, lightening the colour for realism. When paint companies develop their colours they might take great care to copy a colour chip, ideally taken from an area protected from weathering. These chips can very in appearance for all the reasons mentioned. Plus, there are some companies, well Humbrol certainly, who have not been particularly bothered about accurate colours. The issues with their green 30 are well known.. Often what brand looks ‘right or wrong’ is affected by our individual experience and preferences rather than reality. I remember when I first for back into modelling 14 years ago I was still thinking that Humbrol 29/30 was the right look for RAF camo!! At the end of the day I would recommend not getting too worked up about it. Pick a brand of paint that suits you, for availability perhaps, or one you get along with and stick to that. Ideally a brand that has an extensive range of colours that are identified by the colour standard number (RLM, BS, FS etc). Me, my preference is for MRP’s lacquer range. It has all the colours I need, are airbrush ready, and spray like a dream.
This pretty much sums up what I have experienced with paint colors. Mixing your own has obvious benefits to correctness, assuming you know what colors to mix in to get shades correct. In my experience, this particular knowledge is somewhat lacking in modeling circles. By this I don't mean most modelers don't know what they are doing. What I mean is that for those of us who have difficulties with knowing the correct colors to use for mixes, finding good information (that is relevant to modeling), is somewhat hard to come by. I personally, have difficulties at times telling if something has a particular color tint to it that is completely unrelated to what the color is supposed to represent. For example a dark brown with a purple tint (maybe a bad example). This invariably leads to mistakes when I am trying to match color references I have. Of course another way to handle this, besides what looks right to the modeler, is for the modeler to never show their work to anyone else. Then their RLM 02 could be a nice shade of Pink and no one would be the wiser!! :)
Mixing is tricky because pigments don't mix the way light does. So for EVERY paint line someone would have to figure out all the ways each color mixes with each other color. The general consensus is it's not worth making a Recipe guide especially because even batch to batch they may be changing pigment depending on supply, cost etc, As long as the finished paint in the bottle matches their standard that's all they can do.
Great Vid!!!! Me??? Wellll...... My approach is to use basic base coats on aircraft, for example I will use AK dark earth on one Spit and MRP dark earth on another. This gives a slightly different shade between aircraft, I then like to go to a custom mix sprayed on different panels to mix it up further. I do not like any two models to look the same.
Ah, the dreaded Humbrol 30 :D Yes, it's there for historical reasons only (stupid if you ask me) since back in the late 1960s they actually did have a somewhat accurate MAP DG that indeed was H.30. So they stick with that because every instruction manual has used that H.30. The closest in the Humbrol range was H.116 (matt) or the ones you mentioned.
In the early 1980's I had collected a good amount of Humbrol tins as a teen in California because they were about the only source for a military color (before MM) and affordable. After airbrushing my 1/48 F-16A as Israeli AF, I thought the colors were very accurate looking - still do. Plus the pigment allowed me to thin it for tight edges.
I have to commend you highly for this presentation. Whilst I do try to get colours that supposedly match things like wartime paint chips, this in itself can cause all sorts of issues. When so-called experts cannot agree, what chance does the average modeller stand? Just look at the sometimes willing discussions on a colour like US Olive Drab! And, as you point out, we have the physics of spectrometry, human perception of colour, wear and tear on the actual aircraft/tank/whatever, and scale considerations (what looks right on a 1/32 scale Bf109E might look totally wrong on the same aircraft in 1/144 scale) to take into account. Even airbrushing versus using a hairy stick can impact upon the colours we perceive. Then after taking everything into consideration, we think we have nailed it, only to discover the real aircraft was painted in the field with non-standard colours, so we are probably completely wrong anyway! Nowadays, I tend to use a combination of water-based acrylics (e.g. Vallejo, AK, Lifecolor) and solvent-based acrylic lacquers (e.g. SMS, Hataka, Gunze) and, provided you take care of what goes over what, this works for the majority of colours I need. Occasionally, I will make a custom blend with compatible paints, but this is probably the exception than the rule. And, in the end like all parts of modelling, if you are satisfied with the result, that's what counts. After all, there will always be someone who thinks you are wrong and probably without justification, too. Though what on earth is Airfix thinking recommending Humbrol 30 for RAF Dark Green? 😖
Personally i vote for MR. Paint I was making a hungarian Mig-21 and i was searching for the correct colour and i tried to avoid MR Paint because it is expensive but i bought 3 of the colours from them. I bought all the "recommended " paints made some 50 paint chips and i went to a museum to compare the colours. My jaw droped from the colour accuracy of the MR Paint. You could only see the paint chip because it casted a little shadow. I found their other colours to my likeing and from that moment on i become a fan of their paint. Recently i am trying out the new MIG ATOM paints since like how they airbrush.
My only problem with MRP is whites need 10 layers of slowly building up while a Mr Color white will cover it in one pass. I use MRP as my backup paint since I have a fair amount of it and invested quite heavily into it.
Humbrol appear better to my eye but I am very colour blind. I go off my comparisons with pictures and memories. Humbrol have issues with painting and spraying but to my eye...
I mix Tamiya acrylics to the correct shades or use Gunze's lacquers due to their large selection of colours. I use Replikator's mixes - which to my eye are accurate. I think when working with multiple colours, seeing how your paints look together is essential in presenting a realistic depiction of the subject you are painting. For example, a too brown Dark Earth plus a too light Dark Green would not realistically depict those two colours on say, an early war Spitfire.
Metrologists have a saying "You can't measure absolutes, you can only measure comparatively." That means having verified original chips, and verified chips of EVERY available paint line. Then matching the Originals to the best match agnostic of brand under the exact light and background the model will be displayed. EVEN THEN, Batch Variation and in bottle age are also going to change things. As well as ground tone you're painting onto, applied paint layer density, and even, particulate matter density in the air. And that's just matching the CALL OUT, try matching an old paint job at a museum under lights selected for luminosity not CRI value, and heaven forbid the horrors of museum upkeep painting that comes out of a Latex paint pail crudely color matched and brushed on thick enough to fill screw heads. You could time travel and buy a pint of the actual paint from the actual factory and odds are two pints won't be identical in the same BATCH.
The chart showing the overall deviation by manufacturer does not dissapoint me in who's last. I recently bought the Atom paintvset for RAF to try as i heard good things on how they spray and they do go down well. But the colour match is awful, and that's from someone who is colourblind. The Nakajima paint is nowhere near as our host states. Funny I've always had issues with getting Mig paints to spray for me. They either tip dry/clog or i seem to add 1 more drop of thinner and it seems to destroy the paint. Don't think I will buy any more of Migs products.
Hi. Thanks for the vid. One extra thing touched on below. The function and structure of the eye and do you actually see the same colour as the person next to you. Variations in the mix and distribution of rods and cones about the focal point and the way they are wired up to the brain. Nerves aren't "standard" connections nor electric wires. And then there is all the variations during development including colour blindness and then cumulative eye damage and aging . If you and I look at a standard colour chip we aren't seeing exactly the same colour. Light is converted to an ionic impulse to the brain and then there is interpretation within that particularly structured brain. Chuck in everything else discussed here and its a complete shambles. Which just re-enforces what you say, if you think it looks good just be happy with the result. Have fun. If the hobby causes stress instead of reducing stress...well that's not a good thing for ones health in the long run. Frankly, we are pretty spoilt for hobby paint now days. Mr Hobby (GS) airbrushes delightfully. Booth/Mask. SMS and Alclad are both excellent. Booth/Mask. Lifecolor brushes really nicely but airbrushing is a building up subtle layers thing but nice matt colours. Model Air is great but I do thin it a wee bit more 80/20 Thinner/Flow improver. (And its a bit less hassle to use - not stinky). Model Colour/Panzer Aces again nice with a touch of water when brushing/glazing? Tamiya are great for spraying and brushes well with their retarder (but I gave them all to a mate who's just starting out and on a budget). Have a Hakata Air set for the Armee de l'Air but haven't tried them yet. Cheers. Have a nice Christmas. Matt🦘
I jut have to scratch my head and laugh about this argument because once the subject is exposed to the elements for a while it has already changed , I used to paint full size vehicles and once they have been in the elements the shades have already changed🤣😂😂
Everytime you hear that it's impossible to nail down an exact paint shade: Think about the guys in a car repair shop who fix scratches or other kind of car body damages: They can do it. If not, then everyone would notice immediately. So yes, of course there are correct paint shades. It just depends on which source material you are using. Lighting effects, paint fading, scale effects etc. are the things you can talk about AFTER you got the correct shade (hue+value+chroma). But there are, in principle, correct paint shades.
Talking about a car repair shop is completely different than talking about a scale model. In that example you DO have the subject, the paint and the same conditions as I mentioned would be required - you don't have that in modelling.
@@MannsModelMoments This doesn't invalidate any of my points. As I said, there IS (in principle) a correct shade for that one particular real-world aircraft (or whatever) you like to replicate. The question is: Can you identify it? To be honest, for most older (pre-1950s/60s) aircraft or vehicles this will be very hard or even impossible to achieve, but you can at least try to approach it (by checking original relics under different lighting conditions for example). But saying that "there is no such thing as a correct shade" is just plain wrong.
@@Tzeka I had to invest in a mid 1970's bottle of Testors Sapphire blue metallic to best match the color my older brother and I used when he was helping me build my Revell 57 Chevy (which he soon after blew up with an M-80 and didn't confess until months later) back then. He recently sent me two kits with an apology, so I am now building both to match the original best I can.
on another note: there is no 'perfect' rendition of any color, due to the simple fact that the difference in scale changes how the human eye sees color.
before watching, i'm gonna guess the most accurate colors are found in old fashioned tin pots of enamel paints like revell and humberol. i also predict you will end up with ICM scoring unnaturally high.
What's your take on my analysis? Do you have a favourite paint range? Let me know in the comments below....also, if you're not currently subbed (and 2/3rd of you aren't!), then if you would do me a favour and hit that button so I can get to 25K for the end of the year it would really be appreciated - it's free, and it really helps me out....thanks!
I started out with Tamiya and found it sprays ok and paints ok, but nothing earth shattering. Since then I have a fair amount of MRP, Gunze Mr Color, AK Interactive and a bit of Alclad II for the metallic colours. To be fair, I have tried Vallejo but I found it gummed up real quick in my airbrush, a problem I don't have with any of the other brands. Tamiya has a bit of an issue with tip drying, but retarder is avalailable and I use it when I remember it.
I absolutely never mix paints, I use the closest colour I have but I'll go a tad lighter rather than darker if I have the choice as weathering usually darkens the finish a bit. The reason being is that I am just about the only person to look at my models once they are done, my wife may glance at one and say "That's nice dear!" but that is all. Go with what makes you happy.
Very interesting piece of research. It confirms my assumption that you cannot get it right by using a single brand and that you cannot go wrong since back in WW2 the paint shades differed between factories.
Tamiya range, the super LP , acrylic, and sprays cans, the big Mr hobby range and their surfacers are amazing , and Humbrol's old school enamel tins are still the best colour matches especially for the old vintage airfix kits.
I tend to stick to Ak and Vallejo with some Tamiya paints for certain applications, I have been deviating from "Standard" official paint recommendations for last 3 years, I find right out of bottle doesn't look right at smaller scale so I correct for scale and weathering. I found when in the Military no two vehicles with "the same paint job" ever looked identical anyways. There was always variation even on same vehicle paint on top of the AFV faded more than lower hull. So I go with the paint job I find satisfying.
It’s all subjective, people overly obsessive about the “correct” color take the fun out of modeling. Use which ever color looks right to you.
Hence my reason for not joining IPMS
50 years ago I used to work in the lab of a paint manufacturer, we used to look at shades in artificial daylight,
a lot of the time we used to take it to the window and look at it in real daylight, there was invariably a difference.
Ambient light makes a massive difference to how you see colour, which you did touch on,
.Back in the late sixties, early
seventies when I began modelling Humbrol 30 and Airfix G5 dark earth (I think) looked right, regardless of whether they were correct
, they looked right, and surely that is half the battle.
As you so correctly summed up, and if I've misinterpreted this, please forgive me, if it looks right to you then that is what counts.
I have a lot of paints by different manufacturers nowadays, I mix and match to see what works best.
I do like your analysis,
Best Regards
Interesting video, Alex. Thank you.
The biggest surprise to me was how well Revell came out, considering what a comparatively narrow range they have.
Nice work, it was surprising to me how varied a particular color was depending on whose bottle was used.
I have the Federal Standard fan deck which I use only as a guide when color matching.
The only time I try to exact match color is when it involves decals. Like with a modern aircraft build such as an F-4 Phantom in Hill grey where the printed tailcode letters and numbers color matched the opposing grey. The top color I mix has to match the decal ink the maker used, not Federal Standard. Plus I agree with scaledown effect of lightening the color depending on the scale of the model.
I build tanks from Girls und Panzer and believe me it is an adventure trying to "accurately" color match paint schemes from a Japanese anime.
That was an anime I really loved. The Hetzer is my favourite character, and the KV-2 falling over after each side shot-meme is priceless.
That's nothing, try SCREEN matching anything from Star Wars or Star Trek. Sure we know the colors the filming model was painted, but you look at any filming model matched ship, and it looks like garish hell because it was painted for insane light levels to hit the film correctly then Processed through multiple layers of compositing.
When i hand painted models, i used citadel paint & made my own mixes. They may not have been 100% acurate but they were close enough for me. Now that i have returned to hobby i decieded to use tamiya as i can get hold them quite easily & am learning how to airbrush.
When I worked for British Aerospace at both Woodford and Hatfield back in the 90's.I always asked the guys in paint store for the best way to mix RAF colours, especially as the Mosquito was flying from Hatfield,their answer was,it doesn't matter,a mosquito built here was painted in a different shade to a mosquito built in Canada,same as a Lancaster built at Woodford would have a different paint colour to one built at Chadderton or even in Canada.just use what looks right to you, example,a 146 Regional Jet for Cross Air would have a slightly different red when painted at Hatfield compared to the red at Woodford
I'd take those anecdotes with a grain of salt (adjust size to liking).
MAP used standards for a reason, including recipes and stock keeping DOTs for paints. Like in the demonstration, there will have been deviations but it certainly wasn't "just pick any old green off the shelf, job's done"
I live near Woodford I used to get on my bike and see what 146’s were there as a kid, some really random airlines with test regs on. I dare say I saw some of your handy work.
Even relying on photos can be debatable, especially on print film. In 1992 I took some photos of a Saab Draken, first with Kodak film and then immediately retook the photos with Fuji film. Kodak tends to yellow hues, Fuji to blue. The result? The Draken taken with Kodak looked a brownish hue; the same Draken taken within seconds on Fuji film looked a dark green.
Even the light you are looking under can have a huge effect on perceived colours. I took some photos at one of the Duxford show. In the morning it was a little cloudy and at Midday was bright sunshine and then it clouded over later.
The photos I took of the same plane at different times came out as completely different shades such that I had to check the codes to make sure it was the same Spitfire. Taken on two rolls of Kodak 64 from the same batch and printed at the same time and place. (It was 1981!)
I’m happy using Tamiya and Vallejo Model Air. I often mix a little white for a highlights, which I think is used more by armour modellers.
Paint colors are somewhat relative. Are you depicting a factory fresh aircraft or one that was painted 6 months, 1 year or more ago. The effects of sun, dirt and wear will change the shade in many ways. When I worked on USAF aircraft, especially in the 60s-80s SEA paint scheme they would lighten and darken over time and no two aircraft ever were shaded the same. Have a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!
This is why I don’t worry being 100% on target. If it looks right it’ll be right.
I'm colourblind, so I just have to trust what it says on the bottle.
I had great fun trying to weather a Sherman by watering down paints significantly to make an earthy wash. I ran multiple colours past my best mate and his wife. My favourite was being told that an earth brown paint looked purple when diluted. 😂
It's also worth considering that a colour changes depending on what's next to it, what's under it and how thin it is. A good example is vallejo model air RLM75. Whilst on it's own it looks completely off but put it in the context of RLM 74 and 76 and it's very accurate. A match for the colourcoats rlm75. One for the RLM rabbit hole is which colour chips you are using as a reference. There isn't really an excuse for the british colours due to precise and offical colour chips and info are published.
At the end of the day the key question to ask yourself is does it look right for you and is the paint working for you.
The effect of a colour looking different when with other colours is what is known as "enhanced contrast", hence why I mentioned that in the video.
Very well thought out, and presented. Coming from the railway modelling background the same issues rage ... try 10 different modelers and they'll give you 10 different Brunswick greens...
Paint what looks right to your eye, looking at references! Of course if you're colour blind... then maybe stick to the recommendations.
As usual, a well researched and delivered topic Alex. Whilst colour match out of the bottle may be important, as you say, the qualities of the paint itself have a huge bearing - who is going to use a paint that consistently clogs or tip dries or doesn't adhere well. I'm only really interested in RAF subjects and my primary range is AK 3rd Gen but I also like Mission Models. My comparisons have included those two with Lifecolor, Hataka and Ammo.
Das ist richtig gut geworden! Vielen Dank 👍👍👍
Something to consider regarding paint colors - On the real vehicles out in the weather, it fades or discolors quickly. Add dirt as the garnish.
And is it a cloudy day? Sunny Day? Two hours to sunset? Is it under a tree? Parked next to a white marble building. It never stops.
The smaller the scale is the brighter and not the strong the color has to be. Otherwise it didnot look real and realistic. It looks abit to colorful. But that are onle my two pence to this topic. But hey great video!
I like the Fauci-meme. And i prefer enamels and oil-paint. For accurate coloring: if you paint the windowsill with a given color and repaint it partly with the same paint from the same pot, the touched up part is different due time, detoriation, weather etc so i go with my own preferences. It is right when it looks right IMO.
I just use the colour that looks best for me! End of discussion! Great video, and happy Christmas and all the best for 2025👍👏
You could also take into account that the shade for one standard can change from one lot number to the next from any given manufacturer..it depends on where they source their pigments from, who is in charge of the mix that day, or how their mixing machine is calibrated if it automatically meters in the pigments to the mix...way too many variables for accurate 100% reproduction every single time....shade on my model could also differ from the shade on your model even if both of our paint bottles are brand new and from the same lot # because you may have shaken your bottle better than me, thereby dispersing the pigments differently throughout the carriers...I get it as close to accurate as I can by my eye, and leave it at that. Favorite paint line is whatever is easiest to work with at the time...
There are good reasons for there to be variations in colour. First of all wartime paint production is not consistent, particularly German, even in the USA unaffected by bombing we can see huge variations in colour .
Variations also occur due to how aircraft weather, they can really fade or darken the colour, Olive Drab is infamous for how it can vary in appearance as an example.
The RAF also applied temporary mixes to add to the confusion.
Consider also scale effect. Some paint companies (AK from memory included) allow for scale effect, lightening the colour for realism.
When paint companies develop their colours they might take great care to copy a colour chip, ideally taken from an area protected from weathering. These chips can very in appearance for all the reasons mentioned. Plus, there are some companies, well Humbrol certainly, who have not been particularly bothered about accurate colours. The issues with their green 30 are well known..
Often what brand looks ‘right or wrong’ is affected by our individual experience and preferences rather than reality. I remember when I first for back into modelling 14 years ago I was still thinking that Humbrol 29/30 was the right look for RAF camo!!
At the end of the day I would recommend not getting too worked up about it. Pick a brand of paint that suits you, for availability perhaps, or one you get along with and stick to that. Ideally a brand that has an extensive range of colours that are identified by the colour standard number (RLM, BS, FS etc).
Me, my preference is for MRP’s lacquer range. It has all the colours I need, are airbrush ready, and spray like a dream.
This pretty much sums up what I have experienced with paint colors. Mixing your own has obvious benefits to correctness, assuming you know what colors to mix in to get shades correct. In my experience, this particular knowledge is somewhat lacking in modeling circles. By this I don't mean most modelers don't know what they are doing. What I mean is that for those of us who have difficulties with knowing the correct colors to use for mixes, finding good information (that is relevant to modeling), is somewhat hard to come by. I personally, have difficulties at times telling if something has a particular color tint to it that is completely unrelated to what the color is supposed to represent. For example a dark brown with a purple tint (maybe a bad example). This invariably leads to mistakes when I am trying to match color references I have.
Of course another way to handle this, besides what looks right to the modeler, is for the modeler to never show their work to anyone else. Then their RLM 02 could be a nice shade of Pink and no one would be the wiser!! :)
Mixing is tricky because pigments don't mix the way light does. So for EVERY paint line someone would have to figure out all the ways each color mixes with each other color. The general consensus is it's not worth making a Recipe guide especially because even batch to batch they may be changing pigment depending on supply, cost etc, As long as the finished paint in the bottle matches their standard that's all they can do.
What were your mixes (brands, colors and amounts)?
@@JessWLStuart covered in my ICM mixing videos
My experience with Valejo: Yes, they have a broad range. But the named shades are often nothing what they claim to be.
Great Vid!!!! Me??? Wellll...... My approach is to use basic base coats on aircraft, for example I will use AK dark earth on one Spit and MRP dark earth on another. This gives a slightly different shade between aircraft, I then like to go to a custom mix sprayed on different panels to mix it up further. I do not like any two models to look the same.
Ah, the dreaded Humbrol 30 :D
Yes, it's there for historical reasons only (stupid if you ask me) since back in the late 1960s they actually did have a somewhat accurate MAP DG that indeed was H.30.
So they stick with that because every instruction manual has used that H.30.
The closest in the Humbrol range was H.116 (matt) or the ones you mentioned.
In the early 1980's I had collected a good amount of Humbrol tins as a teen in California because they were about the only source for a military color (before MM) and affordable. After airbrushing my 1/48 F-16A as Israeli AF, I thought the colors were very accurate looking - still do. Plus the pigment allowed me to thin it for tight edges.
I have to commend you highly for this presentation. Whilst I do try to get colours that supposedly match things like wartime paint chips, this in itself can cause all sorts of issues. When so-called experts cannot agree, what chance does the average modeller stand? Just look at the sometimes willing discussions on a colour like US Olive Drab! And, as you point out, we have the physics of spectrometry, human perception of colour, wear and tear on the actual aircraft/tank/whatever, and scale considerations (what looks right on a 1/32 scale Bf109E might look totally wrong on the same aircraft in 1/144 scale) to take into account. Even airbrushing versus using a hairy stick can impact upon the colours we perceive. Then after taking everything into consideration, we think we have nailed it, only to discover the real aircraft was painted in the field with non-standard colours, so we are probably completely wrong anyway!
Nowadays, I tend to use a combination of water-based acrylics (e.g. Vallejo, AK, Lifecolor) and solvent-based acrylic lacquers (e.g. SMS, Hataka, Gunze) and, provided you take care of what goes over what, this works for the majority of colours I need. Occasionally, I will make a custom blend with compatible paints, but this is probably the exception than the rule. And, in the end like all parts of modelling, if you are satisfied with the result, that's what counts. After all, there will always be someone who thinks you are wrong and probably without justification, too. Though what on earth is Airfix thinking recommending Humbrol 30 for RAF Dark Green? 😖
Personally i vote for MR. Paint
I was making a hungarian Mig-21 and i was searching for the correct colour and i tried to avoid MR Paint because it is expensive but i bought 3 of the colours from them. I bought all the "recommended " paints made some 50 paint chips and i went to a museum to compare the colours. My jaw droped from the colour accuracy of the MR Paint. You could only see the paint chip because it casted a little shadow. I found their other colours to my likeing and from that moment on i become a fan of their paint.
Recently i am trying out the new MIG ATOM paints since like how they airbrush.
My only problem with MRP is whites need 10 layers of slowly building up while a Mr Color white will cover it in one pass. I use MRP as my backup paint since I have a fair amount of it and invested quite heavily into it.
Humbrol appear better to my eye but I am very colour blind. I go off my comparisons with pictures and memories. Humbrol have issues with painting and spraying but to my eye...
I mix Tamiya acrylics to the correct shades or use Gunze's lacquers due to their large selection of colours. I use Replikator's mixes - which to my eye are accurate. I think when working with multiple colours, seeing how your paints look together is essential in presenting a realistic depiction of the subject you are painting. For example, a too brown Dark Earth plus a too light Dark Green would not realistically depict those two colours on say, an early war Spitfire.
"a closer match than I'm showing," I see what you did there.
I don't like to have everything super-serious! :-)
Where are you getting your color samples from.
@@CFster covered in my Luftwaffe mixing video
Very informative, thanx.... 8-)
Metrologists have a saying "You can't measure absolutes, you can only measure comparatively." That means having verified original chips, and verified chips of EVERY available paint line. Then matching the Originals to the best match agnostic of brand under the exact light and background the model will be displayed.
EVEN THEN, Batch Variation and in bottle age are also going to change things. As well as ground tone you're painting onto, applied paint layer density, and even, particulate matter density in the air.
And that's just matching the CALL OUT, try matching an old paint job at a museum under lights selected for luminosity not CRI value, and heaven forbid the horrors of museum upkeep painting that comes out of a Latex paint pail crudely color matched and brushed on thick enough to fill screw heads.
You could time travel and buy a pint of the actual paint from the actual factory and odds are two pints won't be identical in the same BATCH.
The chart showing the overall deviation by manufacturer does not dissapoint me in who's last. I recently bought the Atom paintvset for RAF to try as i heard good things on how they spray and they do go down well.
But the colour match is awful, and that's from someone who is colourblind. The Nakajima paint is nowhere near as our host states.
Funny I've always had issues with getting Mig paints to spray for me. They either tip dry/clog or i seem to add 1 more drop of thinner and it seems to destroy the paint.
Don't think I will buy any more of Migs products.
Hi. Thanks for the vid.
One extra thing touched on below. The function and structure of the eye and do you actually see the same colour as the person next to you.
Variations in the mix and distribution of rods and cones about the focal point and the way they are wired up to the brain. Nerves aren't "standard" connections nor electric wires.
And then there is all the variations during development including colour blindness and then cumulative eye damage and aging .
If you and I look at a standard colour chip we aren't seeing exactly the same colour.
Light is converted to an ionic impulse to the brain and then there is interpretation within that particularly structured brain.
Chuck in everything else discussed here and its a complete shambles.
Which just re-enforces what you say, if you think it looks good just be happy with the result.
Have fun. If the hobby causes stress instead of reducing stress...well that's not a good thing for ones health in the long run.
Frankly, we are pretty spoilt for hobby paint now days.
Mr Hobby (GS) airbrushes delightfully. Booth/Mask.
SMS and Alclad are both excellent. Booth/Mask.
Lifecolor brushes really nicely but airbrushing is a building up subtle layers thing but nice matt colours.
Model Air is great but I do thin it a wee bit more 80/20 Thinner/Flow improver. (And its a bit less hassle to use - not stinky).
Model Colour/Panzer Aces again nice with a touch of water when brushing/glazing?
Tamiya are great for spraying and brushes well with their retarder (but I gave them all to a mate who's just starting out and on a budget).
Have a Hakata Air set for the Armee de l'Air but haven't tried them yet.
Cheers. Have a nice Christmas. Matt🦘
@@MatterusOD There's a great Kursgesagt video on whether the green that I see is the same as the green you see....the short answer is, it's not!
I jut have to scratch my head and laugh about this argument because once the subject is exposed to the elements for a while it has already changed , I used to paint full size vehicles and once they have been in the elements the shades have already changed🤣😂😂
@@helmutvorlaufer6647 laugh about what argument? Did you watch the video??
Everytime you hear that it's impossible to nail down an exact paint shade: Think about the guys in a car repair shop who fix scratches or other kind of car body damages: They can do it. If not, then everyone would notice immediately. So yes, of course there are correct paint shades. It just depends on which source material you are using. Lighting effects, paint fading, scale effects etc. are the things you can talk about AFTER you got the correct shade (hue+value+chroma). But there are, in principle, correct paint shades.
Talking about a car repair shop is completely different than talking about a scale model. In that example you DO have the subject, the paint and the same conditions as I mentioned would be required - you don't have that in modelling.
@@MannsModelMoments This doesn't invalidate any of my points. As I said, there IS (in principle) a correct shade for that one particular real-world aircraft (or whatever) you like to replicate. The question is: Can you identify it? To be honest, for most older (pre-1950s/60s) aircraft or vehicles this will be very hard or even impossible to achieve, but you can at least try to approach it (by checking original relics under different lighting conditions for example). But saying that "there is no such thing as a correct shade" is just plain wrong.
@@Tzeka I had to invest in a mid 1970's bottle of Testors Sapphire blue metallic to best match the color my older brother and I used when he was helping me build my Revell 57 Chevy (which he soon after blew up with an M-80 and didn't confess until months later) back then. He recently sent me two kits with an apology, so I am now building both to match the original best I can.
on another note: there is no 'perfect' rendition of any color, due to the simple fact
that the difference in scale changes how the human eye sees color.
@@daveyjones5702 yes, I mentioned this in the video
before watching, i'm gonna guess the most accurate colors
are found in old fashioned tin pots of enamel paints like revell and humberol.
i also predict you will end up with ICM scoring unnaturally high.
@@daveyjones5702 nope