discussion panel lines ?

[Guest]

yet another numpty question but ive seen some guys spray these lines in pre primer yet another video i watched they were added at the end of painting with a pin wash or oils using a cotton swap is it a case of either or, maybe both ?? personal preference ??? or down to differing models needing differing techniques ??

 

[Guest]

It’s a case of different modellers using different techniques. As with everything else in modelling, it comes down to: use the one you like.

 

[BarryW]

I would suggest they are two different things. The pre shading that you describe is to help modulate the paint colour to create depth. If you look at a large complex shaped surface such as an aircraft you will find that it does not look a uniform colour as light gets reflected back in all directions. The reason this shading is around panel lines is due to the way stressed metal skin looks with an oil canning effect. What you are trying to do is get a slight darkening on the outer edges of a panel and highlight the centre.

Then you have the second complimentary effect to get the appearance of dirt and shadow inside the panel lines. For that a pin or sludge wash is usually used.

 

[Guest]

thanks barry, if i dont ask i dont learn !!! :smiling4:

 

[stona]

Barry has given an excellent explanation.

There is a tendency to overdo washes in panel lines on aircraft. I would always suggest that any modeller takes a look at photographs of his subject, failing that similar subjects.

It's one of my pet peeves :smiling3:. The average Bf 109 did not appear segmented like an insect!

Cheers

Steve

 

[Guest]

It's one of my pet peeves :smiling3:. The average Bf 109 did not appear segmented like an insect!

Maybe not, but an aircraft model with panel lines painted in the same colours as the rest of the wing looks much more like a toy than one in which a darker colour has been put into those panel lines.

Or to put it another way: it’s a slightly more artistic way of painting the model, not necessarily to represent reality but to actually show the detail that’s there. Unlike, say, the vastly overdone paint chipping you see on a large number of armour models, which purports to be a realistic painting style but is exactly everything but in most cases.

 

[yak face]

Im with Steve , the trend for highlighting every single rivet and panel line is not my cup of tea .I do use washes but i try to be as subtle as possible ,often only highlighting the control surfaces on an aircraft . There is a place for panel line washes but I feel its become almost obligatory to ink every single one till the model looks like an engineers technical drawing! I fear some modellers think that a model is not done properly unless its been done like this. As steve says we should be looking to replicate the aircraft as seen in photos , if the photo shows every single panel line visible then go for it but more often than not theyre very faint . As far as Armour ive no idea really so I'll leave that to them wot nose!

 

[Guest]

i will start building soon i promise lol just good to hear tips in advance !! :smiling4:

 

[Guest]

There is a place for panel line washes but I feel its become almost obligatory to ink every single one till the model looks like an engineers technical drawing! I fear some modellers think that a model is not done properly unless its been done like this.

Quite likely, because modellers have turned out to be just as obsessed with the latest fads as the rest of the population. Especially now that, in recent years, we’re seeing all these ready-made products for things that we used to just make ourselves, what you get a lot is people just using the readymades instead of thinking for themselves.

Me, I’ve been applying darker colours to aircraft panel lines for a couple of years, and I think my models look better for it. However, I don’t want them to be too stark — you won’t find me grabbing a bottle of near-black Panel Line Wash™ regardless of the colour the model has. Rather, I go and find a bit darker shade of the colour underneath, and use that. Light grey over white, for example, or darkish blue over medium blue, that kind of thing. Just regular paint, usually, thinned with some water until it flows well enough.

 

[Ian M]

My go to for aircraft is normally Payens Grey oil paint. Not to dark, not to light just enough to pop the detail a little and take the 'brand new' look off of things. I tend to use as a wash/filter and vary rarely bother with a pin wash.
Armour tends to get a good wash of what ever is a passable colour for the place they are; muddy or sandy.
A thing I always try to avoid is the heavy fading of panels. purely on the premise that most things WWII where 'newish' and the paint not that old. Yes it got dirty, yes some colours faded quicker than others. Yes they got beat up quicker than your average car/truck. But I am sure that in the day they did not all look like a barn find.
Aircraft where kept clean. Even down to the exhaust and gun smoke being cleaned off as much as possible on return from a raid/sortie. Even the hard pressed RAF did all they could to keep their aircraft as clean as they could.
I like a weathered model just as much as the next guy, I just think some times they are over done. Guilty as charged. Have done it myself. In fact I have a couple of things that I have line line for a re-paint as I think that they are just a bit to beaten up. Maybe I might put them in a diorama of a restoration project one day.

 

[Tim Marlow]

One bugbear of mine is the prevalence of dead matt finishes, especially on aircraft. I’ve read a large number of pilot memoirs over the years, and there are quite a few examples of people wanting high gloss on their aircraft, because it reduces drag and gives them a couple of mph more when flying. The opposite, wanting a matt finish, is relatively rare. I can only remember one example. The reason given be that it minimised the reflective “flash” that occurs when the aircraft turns across the sun...
There are very many pictures showing smoke staining, fading and chipping on aircraft though, far more than I have been able to find for armour. Some BoB era spits have almost no paint on the wing walks.....for example.

 

[Guest]

One bugbear of mine is the prevalence of dead matt finishes, especially on aircraft. I’ve read a large number of pilot memoirs over the years, and there are quite a few examples of people wanting high gloss on their aircraft, because it reduces drag and gives them a couple of mph more when flying.

This was the reason for the RAF’s “Type ‘S’” (for “smooth”) paints, of which people today only seem to remember Sky and think its actual name is “Sky Type ‘S’”. No, it’s called “Sky” and the “Type ‘S’” just says it’s supposed to be smooth and non-draggy despite having a matt finish.

There are very many pictures showing smoke staining, fading and chipping on aircraft though, far more than I have been able to find for armour. Some BoB era spits have almost no paint on the wing walks.....for example.

I recently bought a Ki-43 kit specifically to paint it in one of the Japanese field-applied camouflages that wore off almost faster than it went on

 

[Ian M]

One bugbear of mine is the prevalence of dead matt finishes, especially on aircraft.

paint it matt. wash it once and it's satin. Wash it twice and its almost shiny.... I have seen many a picture of Spitfires, Real photos of real aircraft taken WWII Some where almost gloss, all had a sheen of some kind. Around the canopies where they got polished the paint was shiny and even worn through to the primer...There is a photo on here some place of JJE just after it had been washed. Shiny as a new shoe.
What ever. In the end it is what we personally like our models to look like. (unless you are trying to please the judges more than yourself). that matters.
On another note. Just because I am not a fan of doing it, it does not stop me being gobsmacked by some of the builds I have seen on here and the WWW. Talent with out doubt.

 

[colin m]

Weathering, that emotive subject. This rather poor photo was taken straight of the TV. I can imagine the uproar if someone weathered a model to this extent. View attachment 333093

 

[boatman]

HI Guys I know im a newbie on the forum an not tryin to offend anyone on here but I think its bein taken a bit to seriously as I think we all do modelin a bit differently. An
as many have said lets enjoy the hobby an enjoy each model that we see an leave it at that .An that's my penny's worth as I have not treid to wheather or do panel lines yet but I intend to if I can get some success i'll be pleased but for me It will be trail an error
chris

 

[Guest]

unless you are trying to please the judges more than yourself

My experience with competitions is that painting things like you see them in photos is a good way to not get very high marks, even if you include said photo with the model.

On another note. Just because I am not a fan of doing it, it does not stop me being gobsmacked by some of the builds I have seen on here and the WWW.

Same — I see lots of pictures of models painted in a style that I don’t particularly care for and wouldn’t apply myself, but which clearly shows the modeller is a much more talented painter than I am. One that comes to mind is @TranDuy’s models on here: I’m not a fan of his style of painting, but I also know I wouldn’t be able to paint models looking as good as his even if I did want to finish them like that.

It’s like music, I suppose. I hear a lot of music that I wouldn’t want on my iPod, but I can appreciate the skill needed to make it.

 

[stona]

Each to their own.
I always work to photographs of my subject if possible. It's just the model comes out a bit more colourful!





Cheers

Steve