HMS Prince of Wales

[Cag]

Hi All,

Thanks Lindsay, I have that image from the Imperial War Museum i think it is A 5015. I agree that it is most probably the same tone, but the shadows and the areas of worn paintwork don't help! Thanks for everyone's input it is most appreciated.

I do think that it shows the difficulty with these patterns, tones can change from image to image due to numerous reasons even with coloured photographs and film and reversed prints!

Best wishes
Cag.

[elcejay]

Ah, I see that drawing you posted is an old example. The entire Hacs tower emplacement is one shade darker (C) than the main superstructure color (D). The front view of the sketch does not show that. Perhaps I should update it..

Thank you EJ, very much appreciated!

Cheers,
Lindsay

[elcejay]

(Post 1 of 2)

Hello all,

Searching through the Commonwealth Camouflage posts and another forum, I picked up on the C.B.3089 trail through posts there by Dick and Michael (a very hearty and sincere 'thank you'). C.B.3098 gives colour samples for the G and later B series paints, along with their corresponding paints from previous paint series. Details follow (typed in MS Word and pasted here, hence the tone change in my post). Michael posted a high-res scan of the samples, which I have attached below (I had to split the samples from one into two rows to meet the image size requirements, but the resolution is unchanged).

If this has worked as well as I hope it has, it gives us at least ball-park matches for MS1, MS2, MS3, B5, B6 and 507c. I will post three tonight (Queensland time), and the others soon. Please let me know if these results are not to expectations, Dick and Michael, and perhaps we can work out how to resolve that. All, of course, is reliant upon the match you see, Michael (and any other holders of a copy), between the original C.B3098 and the scan that I have downloaded from the other forum.

Scan of CB3098 02a split.jpg

(Pasted text below...)

The colour matching was done by uploading medway508�s posting on another forum of a high-resolution scan of the samples in what I believe to be an original copy of C.B. 3098 (Training and Staff Duties Division, Naval Staff, Admiralty T.S.D 1502/43SD The Camouflage of Ships at Sea released in May 1943 - see attachment above) into http://scalemodeldb.com/paint. The scan was loaded at 100%. Each sample was �read� at a number of points using blocks of 25 (the scan covering the largest area, therefore giving the best average) to determine RGB255 values. Areas of any sample with white flecks, or other obvious discontinuities, were ignored (as they throw the scanned values out).

The RGB 255 values of the scans made across each CB3098 sample vary by a few points (in the range of 1 to 3 unless otherwise stated) because, as you can see, the samples do not present a uniform colour (you could describe them as mottled). The variation is not consistent (e.g. red may be higher, green lower, and blue higher in a scanning of one portion of the sample when compared to a scan of another portion of the sample). That is quite normal for a mottled image, but with that range of values in mind, the paints (or Federal Standard or RAL colours) shown as �matches� in the images at the end of this post are selected on the basis that they are within a ? of seven of the �average� RGB values that I found (i.e. I consider that to be a colour match given that I used values in the middle of the range for each sample, so anything with a ? of seven is only 1 to 3 points outside the already small range of the sample). Where the website returns no paints that are a 'match' under that definition, I will present a �reasonable� match (use at own discretion) if there is one.

The range of paints on http://scalemodeldb.com/paint is limited. The companies and colour systems in its database are listed on the site quite clearly, so please check for yourself. The range is also out of date, e.g. Tamiya XF range goes up to XF71 on the site, but XF81 in reality at the time of this post. The Tamiya TS spray range is not there at all. So please understand that there may be other suitable, and perhaps more suitable, paints. (Of the three posted here tonight, we have a good match for MS1, an excellent match for MS2, and a not-so-good match for B5.

I will work on finding other matches and post updated images if I am successful. If anyone has RGB values for other paint ranges, or can point me to sites, please do. I have many site links and documents for paint equivalents (e.g. Valljo's pdf and IPMS links) but only a few that I would call accurate.) I would particularly love RGB values for WEM paint - I have nothing to go on there other than low-res shots of the S&S chips from the website.)

In each image, I have pasted the description from C.B.3098 over the C.B.3098 paint sample (paraphrased with regard to the shade matches of MS2, B6 and 507c - see below, second bullet point), given a colour swatch and RGB values from http://scalemodeldb.com/paint which I know gives a repeatable result on all other colour search websites that I have used, and the paint matches (in the manner described above).

Two final points:
� the C.B. 3098 samples, and therefore the colour matches, are for reference in painting an object at 1:1 scale, you may want to lighten them.
� EDIT OF 16 APR 16: The attachment immediately below (reposted from medway508's posts under Commonwealth Camouflage, thank you Michael) shows that MS.2/G.10 differ from 507A in reflectance percentage only, the colour is the same. The same is true of the relationship between G.45 and 507C.

A1 %26 A2 paint - Copy.jpg

example of wording CB3098 Table 5.jpg

Onto the colour matching...

MS1 G5 per CB3098.jpg

MS2 G10 507a per CB3098.jpg

B15 and B5 per CB3098.jpg

Regards,
Lindsay

[elcejay]

Hello all,

I have edited my post of 10 Apr where I colour-matched Dick's B5 swatches and one of the KGV photos. I made a basic error in my summary. I had compared the samples by a simple analysis of how many points apart the RGB values were, looking for about the same number of points difference in each direction. That's fine for determining a match between 'colours' that are close, but not when they are that far apart. The values should change proportionately by percentage for us to say that they are of the same 'hue' or not. In other words (in case my terminology is out), if colour 'a' is 10% lighter than colour 'b', then each value should be 10% higher, or pretty close to it when using scans from different sources.

That error has not affected my other posts, but please let me know if you want confirmation that I have checked something. It does not affect any presentation of RGB values and paint matches in any of my posts, including the 10 Apr 16 post. The colour matches and colour values in the 10 Apr 16 post, and all other posts of that nature, are correct representations of the colours in the images.

The only other image where I made an empirical analysis of paint matches was in the deleted image of 'yard fresh' matches for MS3, MS4 and MS4a. In case you downloaded it before I deleted it, the information in it is correct for the analysis of those values and the modelling paints listed . I deleted it because I was not confident that we had the correct values in the first place, and I didn't want to be the cause of someone ending up with a model that looks like my KGV.

Apologies for any confusion.

(By the way, I picked up my KGV today to work out what to do with her. There, hiding underneath, was an Akagi! In 1/350! Wondered where I had hidden that! Has to be one of the biggest marketing stunts in modelling history. Whack a wonderful steam-punkesque image on a huge box, tell people there's a poster of that right there in the box for you, and grab suckers like me and my good wife who said 'wow, that one looks cool, isn't your birthday coming up!' The real thing looks nothing like the box. When did M.C. Escher start painting ships? The box art is so contracted perspectively that I can't marry the model and the art at all. 80% complete. Very nicely engineered. Gobsmackingly ugly. My wife likes it even less than she likes discussing shades of grey paint, and that's really saying something!)

Regards,
Lindsay

[508medway]

Lindsay,

One problem with using the reprint of CB3098. I have two copies which are bound differently. The colours are different in the two copies.

I'll try scanning the two separately and then putting them side by side.

Michael

[elcejay]

Thanks Michael, looking forward to it!

Cheers,
Lindsay

[508medway]

Thanks Michael, looking forward to it!

Cheers,
Lindsay

Comparing the two is a nice idea but I forgot one thing. One edition has the samples in a circle, so trying to scan them all together adversely affects the resulting colours as attached. I�ll have to scan each colour separately for both editions & line up the results. Notice the tan G45 in one edition.

[508medway]

Well here are the results. Three other differences in the editions.

1) Edition one has a larger area of colour to scan.
2) Edition two is on better quality & thicker paper.
3) The paint on edition 2 seems more dense to my eyes.

Edition 1 has B55 & B30 very similar, G20 looks more like a green than a grey and G45 as a tan.
Edition 2 has B55 as a grey,

Dick would be able to tell us which, if any, match the real colour samples he has sighted.

[elcejay]

Thanks Michael,

I didn't see the Ed1 and Ed2 image before sending you a PM a short while ago - I will await Dick's reply before proceeding.

I am tempted to ignore the Edition 2 B55. It looks to be a G paint with a 55 reflectance value. (Perhaps there was a publishing error for which an addendum might have been issued?)

Regards,
Lindsay

[Sutho]

For everyone here doing up paint examples on screen. Is it possible you could kindly head over to CASF, aircraft carriers and HMS Ark Royal WWII and take a look at the pages and formula Dick had provided for bronze grey. I would appreciate it if more people could help out and show me what this colour looks like and possible give me a formula for model paints available from local hobby stores. Thanks.

[Cag]

Hi All,

Just a quick question. Imperial War Museum images A 4980 and A 4981 show the starboard side of Y turret, does there seem to be 3 colours in the camo scheme on this turret or is this again due to lighting conditions?

Best wishes
Cag.

[EJFoeth]

[img][img]http://media.iwm.org.uk/iwm/mediaLib/428/media-428190/large.jpg?action=e&cat=photographs[/img]
MR CHURCHILL'S VISIT TO ICELAND. 15 AND 16 AUGUST 1941, ON BOARD HMS PRINCE OF WALES ON THE JOURNEY TO ICELAND AND AT REYKJAVIK, ICELAND. ON THE RETURN JOURNEY FROM HIS MEETING WITH PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT MISTER CHURCHILL VISITED ICELAND.. � IWM (A 4981)IWM Non Commercial Licence[/img]

This image is quite interesting for for another reason; what is the purpose of that cable wrapped around the barbette? I've seen in on so many RN vessels...

Anyway, the turret side curves away from the camera with only the gradient caused by that curve visible in the darker patch. Comparing contrast of the lighter color on either side of the dark patch is hence tricky.

POW_04.jpg

From this image I'd say it's one colour only.

[Cag]

Hi All,

Hi Evert-Jan, I think the cable is either something to do with towing or refueling at sea, hauling in hoses or something but I'm sure someone will know for sure. Thanks for the pic and the explanation!

Best wishes
Cag.

[elcejay]

Hello all,

Back to paints...

Three images of KGV in Nov 1942 when reportedly painted in 507A, 507C, B5 and B6 (all relevant to PoW), with white countershading and decks/walkways in 507A). I post these in the hope that we can confirm KGV scheme at that time (Nov 42) as being those paints, and then come to an agreement on what we are seeing. This will help me to help establish the level of value that these photos give us, good or bad, in checking colour matches.

There are about a dozen colour images of KGV Nov 42 in the IWM WW2 transparencies collection. (They are all copyrighted to IWM and posted here for research purposes only.) These are the three best ones for our purposes.

(A 'version' of the sailor with rifle image was posted earlier by Sutho - that version is reversed, but it is also in the IWM collection, along with the one shown below.)

If there is a consensus that KGV was painted 507A, 507C, B5 and B6 with white countershading, it appears to be quite clear that what we see here (whether or not we agree with how the paints look) is:

-507A on top 3rd of barrels (all photos)(note decks/walkways were also 507A)
-507C on middle third of barrels (all photos)
-White on bottom third of barrels (all photos)
-B5 on lower portion of barbette (second photo), and on bridge above the 'V' made by the bayonet and rifle muzzle (third photo)
-B6 on the upper portion of barbette (second photo), and on bridge beside the sailor's face (third photo)

TR 324.jpg

TR 325.jpg

TR 309.jpg

Regards,
Lindsay

[Sutho]

Hello all,

Back to paints...

Three images of KGV in Nov 1942 when reportedly painted in 507A, 507C, B5 and B6 (all relevant to PoW), with white countershading and decks/walkways in 507A). I post these in the hope that we can confirm KGV scheme at that time (Nov 42) as being those paints, and then come to an agreement on what we are seeing. This will help me to help establish the level of value that these photos give us, good or bad, in checking colour matches.

There are about a dozen colour images of KGV Nov 42 in the IWM WW2 transparencies collection. (They are all copyrighted to IWM and posted here for research purposes only.) These are the three best ones for our purposes.

(A 'version' of the sailor with rifle image was posted earlier by Sutho - that version is reversed, but it is also in the IWM collection, along with the one shown below.)

If there is a consensus that KGV was painted 507A, 507C, B5 and B6 with white countershading, it appears to be quite clear that what we see here (whether or not we agree with how the paints look) is:

-507A on top 3rd of barrels (all photos)(note decks/walkways were also 507A)
-507C on middle third of barrels (all photos)
-White on bottom third of barrels (all photos)
-B5 on lower portion of barbette (second photo), and on bridge above the 'V' made by the bayonet and rifle muzzle (third photo)
-B6 on the upper portion of barbette (second photo), and on bridge beside the sailor's face (third photo)

TR 324.jpg

TR 325.jpg

TR 309.jpg

Regards,
Lindsay

Out of all the photos I have seen the last one if the two blue colours on the bridge area are B5 and B6 then they match what WEM colour coats produce.

If we were to examine the evidence we have I would put more weight on the colour chips that WEM had based their paints on over any B&W period photo.

I would put very little weight on the colour slide earlier in the thread given its very poor resolution and image quality.



One thing that this thread has proven to me is that the depiction given in volume 4 of Warship perspectives is incorrect. The depiction on the Tamiya box is incorrect. The depiction on the Force Z survivors website is incorrect. The profile Morskie is incorrect. The one solid thing that this thread has produced is the camouglage scheme labelled A to E and that is a good achievement.

It is just the colours people need to agree upon now. I suspect if the colours on the Colour coat tins and paint chips are correct then there will be some who will believe that B6 or others may not have been on the ship. That is what needs to be worked out.

The other question is whether paints were mixed when applied to the ship as the Royal Navy did in some instances.

[dick]

-507A on top 3rd of barrels (all photos)(note decks/walkways were also 507A)
-507C on middle third of barrels (all photos)
-White on bottom third of barrels (all photos)
-B5 on lower portion of barbette (second photo), and on bridge above the 'V' made by the bayonet and rifle muzzle (third photo)
-B6 on the upper portion of barbette (second photo), and on bridge beside the sailor's face (third photo)

It seems to me that the paint on the middle third of the barrel in the second photo matches the paint on the front face of the turret which in turn matches that on the upper portion of the barbette...
also the paint on the bridge "beside the sailor's face" does not look the same as that on the upper portion of the barbette.

[Cag]

Hi All,

Hi Sutho, as far as I can remember from CAFO's and AFO's I've seen the MS colours were prepared by suppliers to the Admiralty (The Silicate Paint Co/Duresco, Messrs Paripan Ltd, Goodlass and Wall & Co) as they were 'emulsion' type paints not oil based as were the Admiralty paints. I have tried to find who now owns these old defunct companies, and have written to them to see if they have any archive materials, unfortunately I have received no response whatsoever and seems to be a dead end.

These three companies also supplied the AP 507b and 507c paints due to the oil paints creating 'flash' or reflectance from sunlight due to the gloss nature of the paint, where the emulsion types (MS) did not as they were 'matt' (MS- Matt Surface?). Goodlass & Wall also supplied the Aranbee coating that was applied to HMS PoW and was a sealing compound designed to cut down on water friction on hull plate joints IIRC.

Therefore I'm not too sure whether the MS paints were mixed by the ships crews like the old AP paints were, but I'm sure someone with better knowledge will tell us for sure (In the 1930's there was a full investigation into ships paints, shades and consistant mixing of the same and outsourcing paints which is held in the files ADM 1/10002 Painting HM Ships in times of Peace and ADM 116/2732 Paint Supply Commitee which both make interesting reading).

The film ADM 499 from the Imperial War Museum shows the PoW crew 'painting ship' either pre or post Halberd and they all seem to be painting from small paint tins which I presume were supplied from the paint shop possibly from a main source (I have not found out as yet in what containers and quantities MS paints were supplied in but I'm sure someone will know).

I am no expert and there is anecdotal evidence that paints were mixed by crews (Maybe the later A1 oil based paints?) but if these camouflage paints were outsourced and supplied matt emulsion types I'm not sure how the crews could mix up replacements with old pigments and mediums available on board as they would be of an oil based nature and therefore create the flash which was the reason for the introduction of the MS paints in the first place? Obviously the supplied MS paints, I presume, could be mixed if paint ran out but maybe this explains differences in paint schemes from time to time as paints became readily available or not and had to be painted out until fresh stores arrived? (Which is why I think official naval stores records may be the way to go as they would record what paints were sent to what ships?)

Sorry I cannot answer your question better Sutho but do hope this helps a little,
Best wishes
Cag.

[elcejay]

It seems to me that the paint on the middle third of the barrel in the second photo matches the paint on the front face of the turret which in turn matches that on the upper portion of the barbette...
also the paint on the bridge "beside the sailor's face" does not look the same as that on the upper portion of the barbette.

Thanks Dick,

I agree with you on both counts and will reassess. (My initial thought was that 507C wrapped around the port face and at least part of the front face of the turret, but wondered if there was a transition between paints behind the sailor's head. I did not anticipate the reflection factor having quite so significant an effect.)

A few questions, please (for you or any reader)...

1. On the lower barbette and the bridge above the bayonet, are we seeing one or two B paints? (I suspect it is B5 on both counts.)

2. Can you point me to a plan of the late '42 KGV scheme, please? (I can only find the patterns before and after that one.)

3. I have the reflectance values for G10 and G45 from CB3098, but none for 507A and 507C. Are you able to provide them (with the reference if possible), please?

Regards'
Lindsay

[elcejay]

This is what I think that we are seeing...

TR 325 paint Q.jpg

(It is very difficult to determine the colour of the paint on the upper barbette and the front turret face by colour matching - it returns all nature of values due to shadow and, being so close to the camera, from dirt. Returned ranges are in yellows, greens, blues and violets. No consistency. I think that we have to go from eyeball, and I agree that it must be 507C.)

Regards,
Lindsay

[508medway]

It seems to me that the paint on the middle third of the barrel in the second photo matches the paint on the front face of the turret which in turn matches that on the upper portion of the barbette...
also the paint on the bridge "beside the sailor's face" does not look the same as that on the upper portion of the barbette.

Thanks Dick,

I agree with you on both counts and will reassess. (My initial thought was that 507C wrapped around the port face and at least part of the front face of the turret, but wondered if there was a transition between paints behind the sailor's head. I did not anticipate the reflection factor having quite so significant an effect.)

A few questions, please (for you or any reader)...

1. On the lower barbette and the bridge above the bayonet, are we seeing one or two B paints? (I suspect it is B5 on both counts.)

2. Can you point me to a plan of the late '42 KGV scheme, please? (I can only find the patterns before and after that one.)

3. I have the reflectance values for G10 and G45 from CB3098, but none for 507A and 507C. Are you able to provide them (with the reference if possible), please?

Regards'
Lindsay

Lindsay, please refer to the attached summary from the records.