Posts: 681
Thanks: 17
Thanked 13 Times in 12 Posts
Downloads: 5
Uploads: 2
Rep Power: 2
Re: Tupolev SB-2 M-103
Come to think about it, I can't remember seeing that many WW2 colour pics of Russian a/c anyway, and certainly no early (1941-1942) birds. Anybody have that?
The "gaudy" profile is indeed in the right area, whilst the lower one does not resemble Soviet aviation lacquers at all.
In my own opinion, I think the current interpretation for a lot of 1940s painting as being dull and somewhat desaturated is a fad. I have colleagues in many museums, and (for one example) the actual finish of, say, the Bf 109G in the AWM is usually regarded as quite shocking to those who profile Luftwaffe aircraft. However, it is described as the only known authentic specimen of German painting from this time.
But, modern Western military aircraft are dull, and most persons are old enough only to remember this type of appearance. Soviet, and then Russian, aviation has retained its use of bright colours even to this day; so I reckon the surprise factor in this case is just a lack of familiarity with the subject matter.
The same applies to authentic painting of the WW2 era in general, I believe, and better restoration by Museums of the original appearances of the specimens in their collection would go a long way to reducing this modern 'dull' interpretation of these aircraft. Or, in other words, having examined a lot of 1940s aviation paint, I am not convinced by the 'modern' or desaturated interpretation on most artwork we see today.
Personally, I have the suspicion that the authentic appearance of many WW2 aircraft would be regarded as 'gaudy' by modern viewers. And if that is so, then surely VVS paint would be virtually objectionable!
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to x4btr For This Useful Post:
Yup, thanks x4btr. You helped me out with the exact shade of green for my Pe-2 also. It really felt far too bright to be true. But I am kind of happy about it now. It did hurt my eyes and I am still not sure wether it is the proper shade.
I also wondered why they call a Tupolev aircraft SB for a long time, now we know.
Regarding the faded vs bright colouration, it would change with time. Exposed parts (top of wings and fuselage) would start to desaturate, while more protected areas (like below the tail fin) would keep it's gaudy appearance. Unless the plane is fresh from the factory or paintshop, you would see these difference in colours.
Regarding the faded vs bright colouration, it would change with time. Exposed parts (top of wings and fuselage) would start to desaturate, while more protected areas (like below the tail fin) would keep it's gaudy appearance. Unless the plane is fresh from the factory or paintshop, you would see these difference in colours.
Hmmm... well, it depends upon what you mean by "faded". If, by that, you wish to imply that the colour of the paint was desaturated (i.e. losing colour and shifting towards grey) then this was almost never the case. Only certain types of RAF paint are known to have leeched their pigment from the respective carrier; this resulting from the very low quality of some of the paints employed by the RAF (not really 'aviation grade', if one can put it like that).
The majority of 1940s era aviation lacquers darken with age. This is due, primarily, to oxidation from UV radiation exposure. Some of the lacquers' carriers (the chemical "paint" in which the pigment-- colour-- resides) can be penetrated by water (with considerable exposure), and thus some pigments darken by this chemical reaction, as well. But, recall that many of the carrier types were full of various oxides, and so indeed like any other such material, they "rusted" (better to say, reacted chemically with UV exposure). This broad type of chemical make-up was pretty standard during the period for aviation lacquer in all nations. The usual lacquer would, yes, have assumed a dull surface finish, but that is not strictly speaking a change in colour.
Of course, some lacquers changed more than others. When, for example with USAAF NA42b Olive Drab, one had both the carrier and pigment full of oxides, then the result was quite an unstable resulting colour. This paint darkened almost upon application, and changed from a very bright (and 'gaudy', may we say?) yellowish colour to dark green. Here is a colour film example from Jeff Ethell's collection, showing the repaired areas in relation to the old paint.
This is rather an extreme case, it should be noted. During its usual service lifetime (5 years), most WW2 era aviation lacquers would not have changed significantly in appearance, save for those colours which included a great deal of yellow in the shade. Some shifting would have been seen in most cases, but not really a great deal by comparison to this example.
In historical timing-- i.e. with an aircraft part today which is 60+ years old-- one does of course see a fading of the colour due to pigment loss. This is the result mainly of the lacquer being physically removed from the part (by wear, etc), or from the surface of the lacquer having become tremendously scratched and scuffed so that the original semi-gloss surface (most period lacquers were such upon application) is now utterly flat. Rather than 'dull', I would myself describe this sort of appearance as translucent; but, as you will. However, this appearance would not have applied usually to the service life of the piece during the war, that is to say within 5 years or such, perhaps with the exception of extreme cases in the Pacific theatre (on which I am no expert).
Now, let me also add that with respect to modelling, there is this debate about "scale colour" in which all shades are desaturated to account for the physical size of the prototype. I am not really qualified to comment on this practice, whether it be correct or not, but it is a common technique. Further, in 'classical artwork' (if I may put it that way) the artist will always be the final judge of the "correct" colour, and rightly so (to achieve whatever effect or mood is desired). I will certainly not sit about and tell Robert Taylor what shades to use in his latest painting, for example!!
Right, sorry to go on a bit... it seems to be in my nature (!).... Ah, me....
The paint I applied started out as 'Lemon-green' from the Humbroll range. I did mix it a little bit, but not much. I now am more concerned about the blue. I looked at other model aircraft and everyone seems to have their own interpretation of the exact shade of AII Green. So I figured if no-one appears to have a defenite answer about the exact shade of AII green, I wouldn't stand out too much with my interpretation.
X4btr, you seem to be very well informed in these matters, are you some kind of an historian ?
Posts: 681
Thanks: 17
Thanked 13 Times in 12 Posts
Downloads: 5
Uploads: 2
Rep Power: 2
Re: Tupolev SB-2 M-103
Don't be sorry about the length of your answer, x4btr: it's very helpful and interesting.
By looking at the picture of the B-17, I was thinking that the sky could be used as a reference to see how much the film has altered the colours. I know that the sky's colour varies constantly, but the colour on the picture doesn't look right, so there would be no reason for the paint to look right also. Maybe by identifying the date, time of day and other things, one could get a panel of "corrected" pictures which would be closer to reality.()
As for the Pe-2 you made, Java, it's a beauty. Don't ask me why, but I'm not as shocked by the colours as I am on my profile. Everytime I look at it, I'm afraid I might go blind!...
I don't know how you guys can stand those colors without sunglasses! 
)
!...