Ever closer . . . .

[Jesters-Ink]

And to cheer up BH who seems a bit gloomy lately, a brand new Bf109G-6

[GrubbyFingers]

Oh, verynice!

[CRIPES_A_MIGHTY]

Sometimes..you just wished you'd kept your mouth shut...LOL.

Real nice work Jester!..I cant really complain about how anyones work looks overall, unless its obviously wrong, markings wise that it, if I know it to be wrong.
But you really turn out some great stuff.
How long does it take to, complete a work?, on average?..depending on size?..the amount of detail?..the referencing?..the..the..the..the....LOL.
Maybe how many do you do on average say, in a month?.

[BLOWHARD]

I was talking about the 2 planes you asked about, not Graf's, it's pretty well documented where and when and with whom he flew. But the 2 planes in the painting you posted?

That says it all. I don't think the tail he mentions as a retrofit is correct, a great many of the wooden tailed planes were painted as sub assemblies and many times didn't even match the general color of the rest of the plane.
Where does the color information come from? Did he see them in person? First hand accounts, or is it based on B&W photographs?
I'm not sure if he's right about the gray schemes either, it's not as likely on either G-10s or G-14s.
I don't know if I have all the reference material needed but I might be able to track down the production batches of these two planes, if so, you'd know pretty well, down to the side mottle and the kind of wave pattern to the upper/lower demarcation.

Don't be too sure. Even harden experts in this field have made BIG errors from time to time reprinting from another source that's incorrect. It's ALWAYS best to see the photos! For instance, some of Tullis' work from the Jadgwaffe series is pretty off when compared to the photos. Of course you can't be too critical of that since he was working on what may have been very tight deadlines.
Anyway, read whatever you can, but if it's not backed up by photos you can see, take it with a grain of salt

WHATDOYOUMEN GLOOMY!
Nice profiles as usual, I must say they are as good as it gets!
Nice interpretation of the JG/27 G-6! I'm so used to seeing it with brighter green and more bold camouflage. The famous photo of this plane in flight is REALLY good too, it almost speaks to you

[Otterkins2]

I can't say I've ever met a man more passionate about accuracy than Jester is. He is totally exhausting to follow. Some of us would produce a very pretty image (Not me however. I can't produce a profile to save my life!) and say "OK...that looks pretty good." and post it quite satisfied that we have done a good job. Not Jester! He's like that English bulldog and hangs on with his teeth. He exhaustively researches until he's pretty sure he has it right, and only then does he post. Where the hell do I vote for this guy?????

[Supah]

He told me he didn't want that picture of his sent around?

[Jesters-Ink]

The photograph of Ludwigs AC does show a stronger cammo application suggesting the colours are darker, but I feel this is more down to slightly over burning of the photographic process. I'm not always right, but I do try my best to get the basics as close as I can.

I will play with the colours too, as I think I have over bleached the colours.

As for Supah, no copyright by large American corps on this AC
I'm surprised Boeing havn't bought the rights to all these types too, then they can really pound our asses.

[sparty72]

@ otter..you should try workin with him...bull dogs are puppies compares to J lol

[CRIPES_A_MIGHTY]

Thank for the input BLOWHARD...

I can only tell you what I know or have been told.
I would like things to be as accurate as possible...but at some point the research has to stop and a decision made as to an outcome. Otherwise,
nothing would ever get done. You have to go with something.

Sure I want them to be perfect...but I would be happy for them to be as close as could be expect. None of us will truely know exactlly what the aircraft we love looked like unless we were there..Even then over the years the memory fades and things get cloudy. I guess the only beat way to know is to have sharpe crisp colour photo, that have not faded over the years. But this is not always possible..so we have to go with what we know..or find out.

Im sure if I EVER get around to creating my own profile..there wil be lots of critisim to its accuracy..but as its mine..its my opinion that ultimately counts. I'm sure it would be the same for most or all here.
If other like it ..great..if not..no lose.