To put some focus into my stash I have decided to concentrate on ships that took part in the Spanish Civil War non intervention patrols. The correct order of the recognition stripes does matter to me. From bow to stern RN colours have been represented as red white blue or blue white red but I have yet to see any evidence to back either opinion. I need more certainty so time to look at some photographs. Yes I know this is often referred to as an exercise in futility but I disagree. Please note I am not asserting that colours can be identified from B&W photographs but there is information within them to assists us as B&W photography is a science not a black art. I should also say I have been a keen photographer since my youth and, when I had a darkroom, I developed my own films and printed my own pictures. That’s a lot of films and a lot of pictures. I have a fair degree of knowledge.
What we must have is known colours. Say a flag. So here are some contemporaneous pictures of republican aircraft from the SCW. I know that these aircraft have the colours of the republican flag on the tail (Bright red at the top then yellow then purple) and recognition bands in the same bright red on the wings and behind the cockpit.
Attachment:
c5abb4b0031a60f6f20a3f90b740f22e--air-force-civil-wars.jpg
Attachment:
Esparanza_Potez_540_FARE.tiff.png
Attachment:
Koolhoven FK-51 001.jpg
Attachment:
39789515e761f7a161415b4c2d44cc21.jpg
I can understand why at this point people throw up their hands and walk away but we need to study these photos against the science. I should say I see posts in forums about the difference between orthochromatic and panchromatic film, but this is a bit of a red (or rather black) herring. Ortho film (introduced in 1870) has no sensitivity to red, or yellow, light. So those parts of a picture remain unexposed on the film negative which therefore shows up as black on a print. It also does funny things to flesh tones which is another giveaway. So red and yellow colours on ortho film always show up as a flat black on a print. It doesn’t darken red it renders it black. Pan film introduced in the early 1900s is sensitive to all light and so avoids this effect. So we know for certain these 4 pictures are on Pan film. Where the confusion lies is that colour sensitivity on Pan film can be altered by using different coloured filters on the camera lens. Filters are primarily the reserve of enthusiasts and professionals. For example I would use a green filter on a landscape as this lightens the greens to give you more variety of tone between all the greens an so add depth and interest to the print. However it also darkens reds and blues but in a landscape this is normally not a problem. A red filter is another common filter. It lightens reds and darken blues and is often used because it can add punch and drama to a picture. Fortunately, the effects on how colours are represented under filters is a known. The photography mad web site has an excellent article on the use of coloured filters in B&W photography including a great chart showing the effect on various reds yellows greens and blues filters have.
https://www.photographymad.com/pages/view/using-coloured-filters-in-black-and-white-photographyIf you are still hung up on orthochromatic film its effects are the same as panchromatic film with a blue filter. As you can see from the chart rather easy to spot and rarely used for obvious reasons.
Now what can we tell these photos? Well looking at the i-16 on its nose, it is a snapshot of an incident (so likely amateur photographer) but notice how the red bands on the wing and fuselage are difficult to see? Dark green and bright red the same tone? We need to look at the light. We can tell from the shadows that there is a strong sun to the left and rear of the plane, so most of the plane is in indirect light which has darkened down everything so minimalizing the difference in tone between colours. However, the tail of the plane is in direct sunlight (and probably over exposed – these are tricky light conditions) and it confirms red is darker than purple.
The Potez in flight shows a marked contrast between the green and the red parts of the fuselage. We know from the reflection of the front of the plane it is in direct light. Looking at the rudder colours the top of the rudder is green then we get the red yellow and purple. The purple is the darkest shade. Not what we expect but the lightening of the green and red and the clear contrast between them suggests an orange filter has been used which also explains the dark shade for the purple.
The Koolhaven biplane shows strong distinction between the green and the red but both are very dark. We can tell from the shadow of the photographer in the foreground that the sun was strong, low and directly behind the photographer. I consider this has fooled the photographer into bad underexposure. Still it confirms that even underexposed red should be darker than green and purple in direct light. It also highlights when compared to the i-16 on its nose the difference in tones between direct and indirect light
The last photo of an i-16 on the ground is in the rarer light earth with green patches camouflage. Looking at the detail in the pilot’s uniform tells us the exposure is spot on. The high contrast between the two camouflage colours both of which are lighter than we might expect coupled with the good definition of the grass says green filter. Hence why the bright red looks black.
So, what have we discovered? We can consider 2 of the photos to be false friends as they have been taken with a filter. The other two confirm that red should be darker than purple or blue. Looking at the pictures of these turret markings the front colour is usually the darkest. So, if the RN recognition stripes were red white and blue the colour nearest the bow was red not blue.
Login
Register
FAQ
