The Ship Model Forum

The Ship Modelers Source
It is currently Mon Oct 22, 2018 3:14 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 259 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Feb 05, 2017 12:27 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 3169
Close-up crop of NEVADA. The best I can do. But I can't tell in grayscale what color the different shades of gray are. :smallsmile:

With Panchromatic B&W Film, Red appears relatively 'lighter' than most colors in grayscale.

But, it looks like turret #1 isn't painted the same as turret #2 and the two aft turrets.

Compare to the overhead view of PENNSYLVANIA.

This image tells me that NEVADA's deck was likely painted. The contrasts between the wood decks and places like the upper level decks and the Conning Tower appear to match.



Image


Last edited by Rick E Davis on Sun Feb 05, 2017 12:47 am, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Feb 05, 2017 12:42 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 3169
And to go along with the 1943 image of NEVADA from Roger;

A great overhead view of NEVADA in SF Bay on 1 July 1943. This view shows NEVADA between her tour of duty off Attu and after she completed upkeep repairs at MINY prior to heading to the East Coast.

Oh and NO her #4 turret top ISN'T painted. The turret top is completely covered with floater net bundles!!!

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Feb 05, 2017 3:30 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 07, 2014 12:47 pm
Posts: 19
Dear Rick E. Davis,

Thanks for posting the bb photos. I don't think I have seen them before.


Regards,

g. shoda


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Feb 05, 2017 10:42 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2008 10:15 pm
Posts: 545
Rick E Davis wrote:
Close-up crop of NEVADA. The best I can do. But I can't tell in grayscale what color the different shades of gray are. :smallsmile:

With Panchromatic B&W Film, Red appears relatively 'lighter' than most colors in grayscale.

But, it looks like turret #1 isn't painted the same as turret #2 and the two aft turrets.

[url=http://s131.photobucket.com/user/TincanREDavis/media/TincanREDavis001/zBB36x34-10Dec41crop_zpslvqdstzc.jpg.html]


It's interesting to compare that photo with this one which suggest otherwise.

Image

Notice you can make out the ghost rafts on turret #2 in both photos now. Also worth noting on your cropped photo, just like on Arizona, it appears that Nevada had gun director platforms installed for the forward gun tubs. You can see the circle of them on the back end of the tubs.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Feb 05, 2017 2:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 3169
Jeff,

There were two types of B&W film in use during WWII. Their spectral response to light are different.

Orthochromatic; Orthochromatic photography refers to a photographic emulsion that is sensitive to only blue and green light, and thus can be processed with a red safelight. The increased blue sensitivity causes blue objects to appear lighter, and red ones darker. Orthochromatic film proved troublesome for motion pictures, rendering pink skies as perpetually overcast, blond hair as washed-out, blue eyes nearly white, and red lips nearly black.

Panchromatic; Panchromatic photography has a photographic emulsion that is sensitive to a broader spectral response range (of colors) and is generally "truer" to what the human eye sees.

Panchromatic film was quite a bit more expensive and harder to process, hence Orthochromatic film continued in use for a long time.

So it is likely that the overhead film was Panchromatic and the onboard image you posted used Orthochromatic film. The RED on Turret Two looks closer to the GREY on Turret One in the onboard view and as completely different colors in the overhead view.

This is one of the reasons I really don't try to determine "colors" from grayscale images without knowing what kind of film was used.


Attachments:
liveries2_img_0.jpg
liveries2_img_0.jpg [ 50.13 KiB | Viewed 1261 times ]


Last edited by Rick E Davis on Fri Mar 02, 2018 12:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Feb 05, 2017 10:23 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2008 10:15 pm
Posts: 545
Thanks Rick! That is an awesome explanation and makes me believe even more that only Nevada's #2 top was red. Now if we can find a similar shot of Arizona before the explosion to look at her front turrets as well.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Feb 06, 2017 1:05 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 3169
Jeff,

The only overhead photos I have of the Battleships at Pearl Harbor prior to the attack date from mid-October 1941 and this (cropped) view dated on 10 November 1941. The full photo that this crop came from shows ALL of Ford Island. So you can realize that the photo was taken from a fairly high altitude and doesn't provide much details. I don't know for sure, but the battleship furthest to the left is likely USS ARIZONA. This battleship is moored at the same location she normally was. USS NEVADA normally would tie up aft of her, but is missing in this photo. The other three battleships in this view are from the "Big Five" group.


Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Feb 06, 2017 1:17 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 10:28 pm
Posts: 565
Location: Downey, California
So, do we suppose the (likely blown clear) rafts had been painted red, or 5-D so as not to stand out when the ship was seen in profile? (And if 5-D, and if only the #2 turret top were painted, they'd be obscuring over a third of the color meant for aerial recognition. Seeing how Maryland appears to have had both aft turrets blue at one point, and seeing the variations in where the 5-D/5-L boundaries are on the various ships, I suspect the individual captains exercised some influence over their ships' schemes. Drastic variations in placement of those rafts as well. I wonder... I've seen some models of Nevada carrying rafts on the #4 turret... perhaps her captain personally opposed to the whole color coding thing, especially as it conflicted in principle with the navy's decision to paint his ship's deck?)

Something else I see: in addition to what Jeff mentioned about it looking like there are gun director platforms installed, the foremost gun tubs look to be completely empty. Last I recall, we'd more or less "concluded" NV was carrying 3" guns there. Unless they removed them just a day or so after the attack before that overhead shot was taken, I'm inclined to figure them empty during the attack, just like AZ.

Could we get a similar zoom-in on the aft turrets to look for signs of rafts and state of the gun tubs?

- Sean F.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Feb 06, 2017 1:26 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 10:28 pm
Posts: 565
Location: Downey, California
Rick E Davis wrote:
Jeff,

The only overhead photos I have of the Battleships at Pearl Harbor prior to the attack date from mid-October 1941 and this (cropped) view dated on 10 November 1941. The full photo that this crop came from shows ALL of Ford Island. So you can realize that the photo was taken from a fairly high altitude and doesn't provide much details. I don't know for sure, but the battleship furthest to the left is likely USS ARIZONA. This battleship is moored at the same location she normally was. USS NEVADA normally would tie up aft of her, but is missing in this photo. The other three battleships in this view are from the "Big Five" group.


Image


I'd expect that's the Pennsylvania, freshly moved to BatDiv 2, with those bright white tops matching the Tennessee-class ship ahead of her.

But that brings up another question that I'd been pondering the other day:
What were the "normal" positions of the battleships of the Pacific Fleet at Pearl Harbor (including Colorado, to complete the set)? Obviously PA was not normally in drydock, nor was Vestal regularly moored next to AZ. Makes for an interesting hypothetical; what if the Japanese attacked a week/month/etc. earlier or later.

- Sean F.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Feb 06, 2017 7:07 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2008 10:15 pm
Posts: 545
Hi Sean, you are right about that being the Pennsylvania in that photo. Arizona was in dry dock at the time getting repaired. Also notice the forward boat boom on the port side of Pennsylvania. Of all the tripod BB's, only Pennsylvania had boat booms that far forward on the bow. It's a dead giveaway.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Feb 06, 2017 2:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 3169
Thanks, I didn't even think about USS PENNSYLVANIA. I scanned another photo at Pearl Harbor dated 13 October 1941 and it was clear that USS ARIZONA and USS NEVADA were tied up in the same locations that they were on 7 December 1941. Since the USN was cycling different BatDiv in and out of Pearl for training, etc., in thinking about it there likely wasn't a permanent assignment of mooring locations.

Cropped view of 80-G-411193 dated 13 October 1941. This was one of series of photos showing various ships in anchorage around Ford Island and the Navy yard complex.

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Feb 07, 2017 9:00 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2008 10:15 pm
Posts: 545
Yeah, for some reason Pennsy always seemed to be moored at 1010 dock. This is a rare occasion of her at Battleship Row.
I too, like Sean, would like to see a crop of Nevada's aft turrets and gun tubs. Can you post that as well?
Thx


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Feb 07, 2017 11:11 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 3169
Here you go. Shadows and clutter/crew activities make seeing things a little harder for this part of the ship.

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Feb 07, 2017 3:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 10:28 pm
Posts: 565
Location: Downey, California
Empty gun tub, plain as day.

Maybe hints of bleached/unbleached paint in ovals where rafts were placed on turret 4? Two aligned along the starboard (photo left) edge, maybe two along the centerline (between turret 3's barrels?)? Real hard to say with a white top and the shading issues you mentioned. Interesting challenge...

Got the shape of the mainmast searchlight platform, though! I've been wondering about that.

Thank you!

- Sean F.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Feb 07, 2017 5:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2015 9:25 am
Posts: 2127
Location: Los Angeles and Houston
Rick E Davis wrote:
Jeff,

There were two types of B&W film in use during WWII. Their spectral response to light are different.

Orthochromatic; Orthochromatic photography refers to a photographic emulsion that is sensitive to only blue and green light, and thus can be processed with a red safelight. The increased blue sensitivity causes blue objects to appear lighter, and red ones darker. Orthochromatic film proved troublesome for motion pictures, rendering pink skies as perpetually overcast, blond hair as washed-out, blue eyes nearly white, and red lips nearly black.

Panchromatic; Panchromatic photography has a photographic emulsion that is sensitive to a broader spectral response range (of colors) and is generally "truer" to what the human eye sees.

Panchromatic film was quite a bit more expensive and harder to process, enhance Orthochromatic film continued in use for a long time.

So it is likely that the overhead film was Panchromatic and the onboard image you posted used Orthochromatic film. The RED on Turret Two looks closer to the GREY on Turret One in the onboard view and as completely different colors in the overhead view.

This is one of the reasons I really don't try to determine "colors" from grayscale images without knowing what kind of film was used.


This difference is also why many of the photographs we see of ships in Ms. 11/21, or Ms. 12/22 look so "Light" compared to the likely actual Shade for the Hue of Blue in question.

And there are tricks to figuring out which film was used by comparing a white-value and a known color value/hue to a greyscale comparison used specifically to determine what the known Color Value/Hue should be for that type of film.

It can get really complex, but we had a class for this in Photographic Restoration when I was younger that taught a lot of different techniques for discovering likely colors within a photograph.

MB

_________________
OMG LOOK! A signature

Working on:


1/700 (All Fall 1942):
HIJMS Nagara
HIJMS Aoba & Kinugasa
USS San Francisco
USS Helena
USS St. Louis
USS Laffey & Farenholt
HIJMS Sub-Chasers No. 4 - 7
HIJMS Sub-Chasers No. 13 - 16


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Feb 17, 2017 6:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2008 10:15 pm
Posts: 545
Rick E Davis wrote:
Thanks, I didn't even think about USS PENNSYLVANIA. I scanned another photo at Pearl Harbor dated 13 October 1941 and it was clear that USS ARIZONA and USS NEVADA were tied up in the same locations that they were on 7 December 1941. Since the USN was cycling different BatDiv in and out of Pearl for training, etc., in thinking about it there likely wasn't a permanent assignment of mooring locations.

Cropped view of 80-G-411193 dated 13 October 1941. This was one of series of photos showing various ships in anchorage around Ford Island and the Navy yard complex.

Image


This shot of 'Zona prior to the explosion would suggest that both forward tops were painted the same but I would love to see a hi-rez copy of this photo to get a better look.
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Feb 18, 2017 11:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2008 10:15 pm
Posts: 545
The video of Nevada leaving dry dock after repairs can be found on the net from multiple sources. Almost all of them however are horribly blue shifted making Nevada appear more blue than what she really was while wearing MS-1/5 camo. This caused ALMOST just as many arguments as the Arizona debate.

This particular copy of that film is by far the truest representation of her actual color.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5cqIT6_Cbs&t=9s

The portion of the film showing Nevada is at the end. Here are a couple of screen shots with a great look at her hull above the boot topping, the boot topping itself, and the anti-fouling red below the boot topping. The anti-fouling red and the boot topping were just repainted prior to undocking. Notice also the thin line of sea blue paint used at the top edge of the boot topping to give it a straight line. That was the very beginning of her getting painted into overall sea blue paint.

Image

Image


Last edited by Jeff Sharp on Sat Aug 12, 2017 6:10 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Feb 20, 2017 6:30 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2008 10:15 pm
Posts: 545
SeanF wrote:
So, do we suppose the (likely blown clear) rafts had been painted red, or 5-D so as not to stand out when the ship was seen in profile? (And if 5-D, and if only the #2 turret top were painted, they'd be obscuring over a third of the color meant for aerial recognition. Seeing how Maryland appears to have had both aft turrets blue at one point, and seeing the variations in where the 5-D/5-L boundaries are on the various ships, I suspect the individual captains exercised some influence over their ships' schemes. Drastic variations in placement of those rafts as well. I wonder... I've seen some models of Nevada carrying rafts on the #4 turret... perhaps her captain personally opposed to the whole color coding thing, especially as it conflicted in principle with the navy's decision to paint his ship's deck?)
- Sean F.


Sean,
For years I believed that those two rafts that left the ghost images on top of turret #2 were not there on Dec. 7th. I could never spot them in any of the sortie photos. Now, finally more and more Hi-Rez photos of that day are becoming available.
Here is a crop of turret #2 during her sortie showing those 2 rafts in place.

Image

As far as whether or not they painted the rafts to match the turret top, perhaps this photo will help answer that question. Notice the white raft leaning up against to mast leg. I bet this was one of the rafts that was on top of Turret #4.

Image

I was also able to locate 4 maybe 5 more rafts in this crop of the same Hi-Rez photo as above that I never knew existed. Also worth noting is that shed that is directly under the mast legs, sitting on top of the boat deck.

Image


Last edited by Jeff Sharp on Sat Aug 12, 2017 6:14 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Feb 23, 2017 12:58 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 2:57 pm
Posts: 17
While looking at these aerial views of the Nevada and only being able to see these pictures in black and white, 20B deck blue was not in use, I'm thinking these decks could have been paints in 5D as well. Any thoughts?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Feb 26, 2017 2:23 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 3169
In going through more of the 1941 camo documents that I have access to, I found something that explains why USS NEVADA and USS TENNESSEE have painted decks and most (or none) of the other battleships don't. See attached, note which battleships were included in these "painted decks aerial observation camo effectiveness" experiments.

The first letter dated 31 October 1941, had an attachment providing a "temporary" formula for mixing a paint to use in place of the new 20-B deck paint.

The second letter dated 12 November 1941, provides a revised list of ships involved in the experiment and that were to have painted decks. I don't know when their decks were painted, but in a 22 November 1941 letter, the results of the tests for the destroyers (USS MAHAN (DD-364), USS DRAYTON (DD-366), USS LAMSON (DD-367), and USS FLUSSER (DD-368)) were presented. A couple of weeks before the attack. A lot of "camo" experiments were going on prior to the attack on Pearl Harbor with directives changing all the time.

I'm as interested in these Task Force assignments myself. I knew that the Carriers were divided up as such, but I didn't know that a Battleship was assigned to at least some of them. Plus I didn't realize, or overlooked, that these Task Forces dated back to at least October 1941. In other TF databases as of 7 December 1941, BatDiv 2 & 4 were assigned to TF 1 and BatDiv 1 was assigned to TF 2. No Battleships were assigned to TF 3 (Scouting Force). I suspect that only these ships were listed as to being "evaluated" for this experiment.

Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 259 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests


You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group