I am workign on a F-86 in natural metal finish (NMF).
As usual, I put a shiny base coat in gloss black but I am also aware that varying the base coat will gve me variaiton in the NMF top coat without that I have to use different shades of NMF.
Considering that I start from gloss black, all undercoats that I put will be lighter than black.
Are there any people who have experience with this who can tell me what the result would be of using light greay as an undercoat, or yellow, or whatever you have ever tried?
Ha. I have the exact same question, more or less, for an upcoming build. Do I vary the tones of the primer/undercoat (black on some panels, grey on others, etc.,), vary the tones of the “metal” top coats, or a combo of both? And I plan to use Alclad paints too. Although, I have considered trying Tamiya XF whatever the silver numbers are - it may be an easier/more traditional way to tone individual panels with.
I’ve been considering which technique to use for the last couple of weeks, but haven’t had time to try ideas out yet. I appreciate that Alclad paints are rather pricey, but the only way to answer this question is to start experimenting. And now I’m thinking I should start the trials sooner than later, because I 'm really curious how the Alclads will work over a mottled (for lack of a better word?) undercoat.
My intention is to usen only alclad aircraft aluminium, and the various undercoats should give the idea of weathering, and perhaps of some panels having been replaced after war dammage.
Using different top coats (shades of alclad) leads to much to an effect as if different materials were used to buidl te plane. Question is to what extend I need to vary the undercoat as to not exagerate
My recommendation is to test first. The extent to which an undercoat influences the final finish of metallic paints depends on the brands, the thickness of the paint, and whether gloss or matt paints are used underneath - possibly more things I don’t know about. Sometimes the undercoat makes almost no noticeable difference. I know because I did a lot of testing before finishing a 1/32 scale Starfighter. I went for post shading and different metallic tones in the end because it gave me more control and visible differentiation. I tried to find my tests to post shots here but I think I threw them away once I’d learned my lesson. Anyhow, try first on plastic card or an old kit is my recommendation, that way you’ll know what you’re going to get, otherwise you could be disappointed.
I covered the complete model with mr surfacer 1500 black, and then some panels with a second layer of mr surfacer grey or mr surfacer white.
I used alclad airframe aluminium as top coat
That works but the variation is way too stark. I was lucky that the many decals (big yellow surfaces) broke the effect and it has delivered a very nice model in the end.
For the future, I would mix surfacer black and grey to have a base coat of dark grey, and then make variations with panels in black, or panels in light grey. That would give an end result that would propably be moe realistic.
But this has proven that differing undercoats do make a big difference.
Interesting that you got a totally different result from me, but that’s why I was recommending a test. It seems like metallic paints are the most volatile when it comes to finish. I hope you like your end result.
yes, i like it … tbut too some extend thanks to the decals that break/cover my experiment; in future i will do it like i said above and reduce the variation.
Also, i thinkw e should be modest in those things. Many models look like the planes have been dragged through the mud and that doesn’t happen too often in real life.
