To weather or not to weather

[TimHepplestone]

Greeting to all the artisitic types out there, And I'm not one of them!!

Below are to pics of a Heinkel he 111 . One a period B&W photo and the other a model featured in one of AK magazines tutorials, Now the wartime photo clearle shows the upper surface of the heinkel looking quite dirty, but the AK magazine version looks a little overdone IMHO. I'm wanting to acheive something in between. I'm thinking oils- for the ability to manipulate translucency of the effect but would be interested to knnow how you guys might go about it. Also , if anyone has a colour wartime photo of a Heinkel I would be massiviely grateful,

 

Cheers  

 

Tim

 

 

[Gerhard]

I like weathering, but the way people carry on about pre shading befuddles my mind. There are a lot of good builds spoiled with pre shading overdone. My 2c. 

[Stevepd]

It's just fashion, it sometimes does look good but in reality they just don't look like that.

[BiggTim]

I'm also not a huge proponent of pre-shading the panel lines either. There are times that it is appropriate, such as a seam that gets oily a lot, but that can be accomplished with panel line washes and a little pastel chalk. I have never painted black on panel lines before final painting. I have, however, seen many people on this site make it look great. With respect to the two pics you posted, I think the model's colors, flatness, and weathering are great, but the panel lines are overdone for my taste.

[mozart]

I've never been a fan of pre-shading, it's too formulaic for my tastes. Look at as many reference pictures as possible to understand areas where weathering took place. The simplest way is to use Phil Flory's washes, you can achieve degrees of dirtiness by varying the amount of wash you leave on.

Max

[Adrian]

I'm not a massive weatherer and usually build aircraft fairly 'factory fresh' (apart from exhaust stains). When I do venture down the weathered route I always try and build up from what can happen in reality so I start with a bare metal finish on parts to be exposed, apply some salt in selected areas before top coats (with some added white on uppermost surfaces to represent sun bleaching), panel washes (especially around engines) and pigments to represent dust and dirt. 

 

I also find some 12,000 grit sandpaper good for rubbing paint gently back to base layers, metal skin etc and for varying the degree of matt/gloss finish.

 

For me, subtlety is king.

 

Adrian

[Gazzas]

In my opinion, the model is overdone, and I don't like the brown dirt on top.  Where does it do it's job, in a quarry?

 

I like to reason my way through it.  How would dirt get on top of a plane?  As dust, maybe.  Maybe a little incidental from boots.  But it wouldn't cake.  But really, any real dirt belongs on the underside where it's splashed up by the wheels.  For a light suggestion of dirt, I might use a little pastel powder.

 

Engine oil...certainly possible.

 

Exhaust......definitely if the exhaust flows over the wing.  This can be a hugely dirty.

 

But mainly for me I limit it to suggestions of paint fading.  Long-service aircraft can get crazy fade on them.

 

I do some oil dot-filtering to give that light suggestion of streaking along the airflow over the wings.

 

But with aircraft, less is better than more, so I've been told by a lot of experienced builders.

 

And one thing I don't like is if every panel line and rivet line is darker and every panel center is lighter.  That's a pattern, and IMHO patterns are something made more often by man than by nature.

 

Unfortunately, color pictures of WWII Heinkels are pretty rare.  Usually they've been taken from the ground and show only useful fuselage area.

 

Here's a machine in Rumanian service with lots of exhaust stain on the upper wing:

 

Underside photos are aren't overly plentiful:

This machine looks hardly used at all:

The Jumo engine was messy.  Left a lot of oil about:

 

This late model isn't overly dirty:

 

Best of luck,

 

Gaz

[Gerhard]

Spot on Gaz. The photo posted from AK is indicative work from an armor builder. Not saying it's bad, but points to armor weathering. Not suitable for aircraft. 

[RLWP]

I think one aspect that gets missed is aeroplanes are often quite shiny. A semi-gloss finish is easier to maintain so that's how they were built. In your first image you can see the light reflected on the wing in the top right hand corner

 

WW1 'planes could be very shiny indeed, like the Sopwith Triplane prototype:

 

 

http://www.wingnutwings.com/ww/productdetail?productid=3039&cat=1

 

Richard

[CANicoll]

Agreed with Gaz and others - the panel line thing is easily overdone.  In the photo of the actual plane you posted it is hard to pick out a panel line in the entire fuselage - and only on the wing between the engine and fuselage.  Find a picture you like, and build to that is my suggestion.

 

German paint, esp late war, seems to fade badly in harsh sun conditions, but that does not make it dirty - just very faded.  On the other hand, some aircraft barely saw service and thus did not get a lot of wear.  I find Gaz's 111 pictures fascinating as the undersides show no wear at all, but enormous mess from the engines - leaks and exhaust in particular.

 

There is nothing wrong with a 'factory fresh' look, nor if you decide one that has beaten into the ages - it is all up to your taste.  But I think there are enough photographs of period subjects that you can find a reference for what you want it to look like and use that (or several photos) as your base.

 

Good luck and looking forward to seeing your work.

Chris

[STWilliams]

AK sell weathering products. As far as they are concerned, more weathering = more sales = more profits.

[Chek]

The best advice I can give is that you should base the look of your model on photos of the real thing, and not on other people's models.

 

The model in your post is done in what's often referred to as the 'Spanish school' style with heavy, grid-like pre-shading showing through the outer finish, and likely some post-shading applied afterwards.

 

The overall effect is analogous to make-up. To me the model Heinkel looks like the thickly applied theatre make up applied to a man impersonating a blousey old woman trying to look young in a Restoration-period play. Whereas your aim should be the minimalist look that a fashion shoot expert would apply to say, Kate Moss. In Kate's case, there may be a lot going on, but it's largely invisible to the overall effect.

 

But most of all, look at more photos of the real thing than models of it.

Edited April 8, 2018 by Chek

[Mikester]

I guess it all boils down to personal preference and what we find realistic. However, I'd say the "average Joe" prefers over the top weathering and this type of weathering somehow translates into better modeling skills. I've entered a couple of on-line contests on Facebook where the winners are determined by popular vote and inevitably the winners of these are aircraft with weathering that makes most AFVs look immaculately clean by comparison

[Sabre F-86]

I don't weather much anymore, I usually overdo it. As for the brown staining on that Heinkel, I'd be more inclined to use various shades of grey instead of the burnt siena and other stuff I used to use. I agree with Gazzas comment, what's it do? Fly out of a mud pit? Maybe Russia in the spring or fall? Mud city. Preshading? Never been able to do that right, I find it very difficult to put on just enough paint to let the dark areas show through.

[cbk57]

It is a model, it is never going to look real.  It is a matter of what makes it visually interesting.  i agree that the extreme panel weathering that is fashionable is overdone.  However, I like it when it is well done.  That to me is just that it adds visual interest to the model.  

 

If you look at Paul Budnicks work though you can see examples of brilliantly finished models where the weathering is not over done.  The same problem goes on in Armor.  It is fashionable to weather them to the point that they look like they have had 10 or 20 years of hard use with faded paint and rust etc.  When armor crews would have kept them in the best shape possible and if they lasted long enough would have received fresh paint and maintenance.  I enjoy these models but they are not necessarily realistic.

 

there is no right answer, there is only trying to make a great model to the best of your ability and taste.