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!

Thomas Barclay
Software UberMensch
xwave solutions
(613) 831-2018 x 3008