Re: Another Camoflage Question

John Crimmins wrote:

> How much do cammo schemes vary between different vehicles in the same
> force?  And by same force, I mean tanks that are deployed
side-by-side, not
> just in the same army.  Would in be unheard of to have some tanks in
cammo,
> and some in just a base coat?
>
> I have a large pile of plastic tanks from Frotress Figures, and they
come
> in two basic types:
>    Small hovertanks, with a large fixed gun on one side of the hull.
>    And larger hovertanks, with a pair of turreted guns.
>
> Both types are very well done, but the smaller tanks have a lot more
fine
> detail -- detail which I have used an ink wash to bring out, and which
> looks very good indeed.
>
> The larger tanks have a lot of large, smooth areas on their hull --
this
> makes painting an elaborate cammo scheme very easy.
>
> The problem comes when I apply that cammo scheme to the smaller tanks.
> Those details that I am so fond of vanish, obscured by the camoflage.
> Realistic though this is, I like the detail.	A lot.
>
> Would it, then, be inappropriate to have the big guys in cammo, and
the
> smaller ones just in their base coat?  They would look more or less
the
> same, but it bothers me that the small guys wouldn't quite match.  How
> often, if ever, did something like this occur in the so-called "real
world"
> that I keep hearing about?
> John X Crimmins
> johncrim@voicenet.com
>   "...is one of the secret masters of the world: a librarian.
> They control information.  Don't ever piss one off."
>   --Spider Robinson, The Callahan Touch.

Now I am not one for painting, but I do see your problem...

Could you just detail the parts you don't mind covering up...or choose a
simpler camo scheme?

Or you could paint 'em like some modern fighter planes.

Donald Hosford