From: Thomas Barclay <Thomas.Barclay@s...>
Date: Sun, 27 Jun 1999 20:47:13 -0400
Subject: Painting Camouflage on figs/tanks
Funny how serendipity works - this same conversation just happened here days ago. A magazine article I read mentioned (roughly) the following: Camouflage is designed to obscure shape and form. Painting good camouflage makes minis hard to see. It appauls artists and appeals to simulation gamers. Ask any of the players from GZG-ECC FT scenario Mr. McCarthy ran about how hard the Savasku were to see against the starscape... (and even worse in the pictures) despite a great black, blue, purplish kind of paint job. And Owen G pointed out to me face paint on the SG2 figs would remove the contrast with the uniforms. I saw someone paint DS2 vehicles so well camo'd (in a Rocky Mtn Scheme or something like that) such that you needed an electronic outline to pick them out of the background in a pic. Great painting. I'd love one of these in RL. But in a game... they can be hard to see. As art, it makes it hard to see the work you've put in your figure. Here are some thoughts: 1. If painting camouflage, consider making it not quite in colours that will match your terrain. At least then you can pick the fig out on the table (I've actually had battles where well camm'd figs have gotten forgotten about - "Sargeant, have you seen Williams?" "Now that you mention it, I haven't seen him since we moved out of the last thicket..."). 2. Use inks and washes or drybrushing to bring out the contrasting features. Consider not painting faces, or painting some of the gear on your vehicles in other colours - metallics, or other shades of green or brown - just something to catch the eye slightly. 3. If you want to paint soldiers in non-cam or in outrageous cam schemes (why do we always stick to green grass, green trees, etc. - one of these days I'll host a battle on my KV world with a purple or blue surface mat, some oddball purple or blue or pink biological formations/plants, and my KV who are getting done in a purple and blue scheme - then the humans in their greens will be out of place!) then go ahead. Logic: All modern camo is phototrophic and has chameleon features. Ergo it looks like what it is behind. That means what we are gaming with is an idealized representation of a scheme that we can easily pick out on our electronic map boards (where we'd be running the battle from). This means they could be blaze orange, if that is what helps you pick them out, or if that's how you'd dress them in garrison or work dress. We just haven't got phototrophic hobby paint yet. When we do, we can worry about matching them to their terrain, but we won't have to as the paint will shift for us. 4. If you want to paint camo, but want something good looking and maybe even with a flavor for the troop type you are painting, pick a historical scheme. My NSL are being done in my version of a German WW2 and post WW2 splotch pattern (a pinkish brown base, 2 greens, a brown, a brownish grey). The NSL vehicles are a WW2 vehicle camo scheme using a base yellow with dark green and red brown. My FSE Legionaires will be done up in a 1990's jungle or desert Foreign Legion camouflage. My Israelis will get my version of a modern IDF desert camouflage. Osprey and some others produce 'Men-at-arms' type books with good pictures of rank tabs, markings, and some good colour plates - these make excellent references not only for good uniforms, but for rank structure, and you may be able to get some good idea of a TO&E from these and other historical references, in order to give each force a feeling of 'rightness' with its past. Of course, as usual, YMMV and other views are not only welcome but expected!