As someone who tried to explain countless customers, why their very vibrant (pantone) company colour will not and can not be printed on a cmyk printing machine (mainly if the intend to print it on sh*tty uncoated papers, for being green), I can only bow in front of your effort. Effort to create correct colour matches but even more to explain the why-s and how-s. It's a mind dumbing rinse-dry-repeat process, so hats off.
Will have to watch this a few times I think to follow the calculation side of things but again another interesting video. Not tried mixing paints yet but have sort of used the theory when using oil paints for a figure. It has helped me to get better shades by thinking about what colours to mix rather than just trying a load. Helps to reduce waste by having an educated guess rather than just slapping loads of paints on a palette.
Thanks Alex. Another fascinating insight into what is superficially a simple topic (i.e. buy the colour required from a reputable manaufacturer). Reality, as you say is somewhat different! Unfortunately having ‘a colour perception difficulty’ (sounds better than colour blindness), some of the nuances in colour elude me.
Yes - there's a lot of uncertainty around WWII RAF underside, fuselage band and identification codes, since "Sky", "Sky Blue", "Buck Egg Blue", "Duck Egg Green" "Duck Egg Grey" and "Sky Type S" where all used almost interchangeably in documentation. "Type S" is most often used with Sky, but it was a surface finish (indicating a smoother, smaller grind size resulting in a semi-gloss paint) and nothing to do with colour at all. Documentation was directive rather than absolute, and this has led to all sorts of nonsense spouted over the years!
I'm a fan of your science based approach to explaining subjects Alex, but I'm not sure I get the point here of not starting with a colour range that you're generally happy with from an accuracy point of view (e.g. AK's Real Colors, or 3G Air) and varying tone & shade from there?
@@FinsburyPhil there are a few reasons - 1) ICMs paints are very good (see my other video on the starter set). 2) as I said, varying tone and shade of pre-mixed colours can be variable 3) cost - buying every colour you need can be expensive 4) many people can't find that elusive "range you're happy with" for all the colours they want 5) Probably the most important for me - just using colours doesn't help you develop as a painter - you don't learn anything just applying colour. Mixing colours gives you an understanding of both colours and your paints that you can use to produce better models
@@MannsModelMoments Thanks for the quick reply Alex and that all makes sense. My method is to get a decent base colour down and then do a lot of modulation using oils - so my approach to colour comes from a different direction. Out of interest I will try some mixing - are you likely to do something similar with Ammo Atom paints?
Well that takes a bit of absorbing, perhaps a few more watches. It rather begs the question of why the paint manifacturers don't do this so that we have the right colour out of the pot. Back in about '65, Humbrol drought out their "camoflage colour" range, which we used to trust pretty much, perhaps knowing no better and trusting the experts. It seems ithas disappeared at sone change of ownership or other. However, if the paint manufacturers did go to the trouble you have gone to and produced a range of reasonably realistic colours, a lot of bother would be saved and we all might be better off.
Well I think a lot of companies do (eg AK, Vallejo etc), but that still doesn't give the modeller the understanding of their paints and their manipulation. I personally believe mixing your own colours helps you both research topics and also develop your skills in ways that just applying what a company "says" is right will do. Of course, some people don't want to do that, and that's absolutely fine - this video isn't going to be for them! We all have our own journeys and I know that doing this has really helped me in mine, and if it helps others too, then I'm happy!
@@MannsModelMomentsAll I can say is I've had some very big hit and miss Humbrol paints, one being the Azure Blue which turned out to be almost exactly identical to their Number 65, which I've used as the underside to previous Bf-109s, and their Number 30 Dark Green was incredibly saturated, to the point where I couldn't even use it on my RAF aircraft. Just goes to show how weird colours can be
@@downedmushroom9659 I think the main Model manufacturers are very guilty of "not trying as hard" with their paints. AK, Vallejo, Ammo etc have paints as their mainstream business, not so much Revell, Humbrol etc.
@@MannsModelMoments yeah, I've picked up a couple tamiya paints recently, they seem to be a lot better, but since I'm using the airbrush more and more now I feel I might try some Vallejo or AK paints on a model
@@MannsModelMoments I'm inclined to agree with you. I know in my work place experience we always wanted to do an analysis the old way before using computer programs so they understood the underlying principals. However, I do think paint makers, who are afterall the pros in this, aught to be selling us good mixes so that we can get good results "out of the tin".
What do you think of the processes I use? Would you try them yourself? Let me know in the comments below!
As someone who tried to explain countless customers, why their very vibrant (pantone) company colour will not and can not be printed on a cmyk printing machine (mainly if the intend to print it on sh*tty uncoated papers, for being green), I can only bow in front of your effort. Effort to create correct colour matches but even more to explain the why-s and how-s. It's a mind dumbing rinse-dry-repeat process, so hats off.
Fascinating stuff.
Thanks for taking the time and effort to provide this guide.
Will have to watch this a few times I think to follow the calculation side of things but again another interesting video.
Not tried mixing paints yet but have sort of used the theory when using oil paints for a figure. It has helped me to get better shades by thinking about what colours to mix rather than just trying a load. Helps to reduce waste by having an educated guess rather than just slapping loads of paints on a palette.
Exactly!
Thanks Alex. Another fascinating insight into what is superficially a simple topic (i.e. buy the colour required from a reputable manaufacturer). Reality, as you say is somewhat different!
Unfortunately having ‘a colour perception difficulty’ (sounds better than colour blindness), some of the nuances in colour elude me.
Thanks for this - it will be a big help on my next model(s)
These are great - firstly v useful and secondly really informative. Q: what was the hand held colourimeter you used?
It's a Linshang LS172, I also have a Nix Mini 3R but the LS172 is better for this kind of work
I need to watch Mos’ video about modelling becoming too complicated first….
just a check.... the later RAF underside colour - the light grey - is sky blue (BS101)?
Yes - there's a lot of uncertainty around WWII RAF underside, fuselage band and identification codes, since "Sky", "Sky Blue", "Buck Egg Blue", "Duck Egg Green" "Duck Egg Grey" and "Sky Type S" where all used almost interchangeably in documentation. "Type S" is most often used with Sky, but it was a surface finish (indicating a smoother, smaller grind size resulting in a semi-gloss paint) and nothing to do with colour at all. Documentation was directive rather than absolute, and this has led to all sorts of nonsense spouted over the years!
I'm a fan of your science based approach to explaining subjects Alex, but I'm not sure I get the point here of not starting with a colour range that you're generally happy with from an accuracy point of view (e.g. AK's Real Colors, or 3G Air) and varying tone & shade from there?
@@FinsburyPhil there are a few reasons -
1) ICMs paints are very good (see my other video on the starter set).
2) as I said, varying tone and shade of pre-mixed colours can be variable
3) cost - buying every colour you need can be expensive
4) many people can't find that elusive "range you're happy with" for all the colours they want
5) Probably the most important for me - just using colours doesn't help you develop as a painter - you don't learn anything just applying colour. Mixing colours gives you an understanding of both colours and your paints that you can use to produce better models
@@MannsModelMoments Thanks for the quick reply Alex and that all makes sense. My method is to get a decent base colour down and then do a lot of modulation using oils - so my approach to colour comes from a different direction. Out of interest I will try some mixing - are you likely to do something similar with Ammo Atom paints?
@@FinsburyPhil I have reached out to Ammo, but no reply as yet....
Well that takes a bit of absorbing, perhaps a few more watches. It rather begs the question of why the paint manifacturers don't do this so that we have the right colour out of the pot.
Back in about '65, Humbrol drought out their "camoflage colour" range, which we used to trust pretty much, perhaps knowing no better and trusting the experts. It seems ithas disappeared at sone change of ownership or other. However, if the paint manufacturers did go to the trouble you have gone to and produced a range of reasonably realistic colours, a lot of bother would be saved and we all might be better off.
Well I think a lot of companies do (eg AK, Vallejo etc), but that still doesn't give the modeller the understanding of their paints and their manipulation. I personally believe mixing your own colours helps you both research topics and also develop your skills in ways that just applying what a company "says" is right will do. Of course, some people don't want to do that, and that's absolutely fine - this video isn't going to be for them! We all have our own journeys and I know that doing this has really helped me in mine, and if it helps others too, then I'm happy!
@@MannsModelMomentsAll I can say is I've had some very big hit and miss Humbrol paints, one being the Azure Blue which turned out to be almost exactly identical to their Number 65, which I've used as the underside to previous Bf-109s, and their Number 30 Dark Green was incredibly saturated, to the point where I couldn't even use it on my RAF aircraft. Just goes to show how weird colours can be
@@downedmushroom9659 I think the main Model manufacturers are very guilty of "not trying as hard" with their paints. AK, Vallejo, Ammo etc have paints as their mainstream business, not so much Revell, Humbrol etc.
@@MannsModelMoments yeah, I've picked up a couple tamiya paints recently, they seem to be a lot better, but since I'm using the airbrush more and more now I feel I might try some Vallejo or AK paints on a model
@@MannsModelMoments I'm inclined to agree with you. I know in my work place experience we always wanted to do an analysis the old way before using computer programs so they understood the underlying principals. However, I do think paint makers, who are afterall the pros in this, aught to be selling us good mixes so that we can get good results "out of the tin".