Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /membri/massimotessitori/sovietwarplanes/board/Sources/Load.php(225) : runtime-created function on line 3
AMT-1 in Akan's new acrylic lacquer line
Crea sito
Sovietwarplanes
October 22, 2020, 06:25:08 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: This forum replaces the old sovietwarplanes.com whose domain has expired in January 2017. It has been updated with the posts of the year 2016.
The new location of the site 'Sovietwarplanes pages' is at http://massimotessitori.altervista.org/sovietwarplanes/pages/
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4
  Print  
Author Topic: AMT-1 in Akan's new acrylic lacquer line  (Read 26987 times)
xan
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 459



WWW
« Reply #15 on: May 08, 2013, 02:09:17 AM »

Ilooked what I have in my documentation...

first, Marking and Soviet air force.

I don't understand well if writer are Kondratyev &Kotelnikov or Vakhlamov and Orlov/

on page 13:

Light brown dope AMT-1, developed back in 1941, was not called the Air Force until July 1943 when he, as well as on AMT 11 and AMT-12, entered the TOU. Color AMT-1 can be described as a light gray-brown. TU allowed ?minor changes color during storage?. AMT-1, as well as the other paints a series of AMT, provide semi-cover.
TU oil enamel A-21м (analog color AMT-1) introduced in September 1943 the color of the enamel is slightly different from the AMT-1, probably due to differences in the film. Oil varnish compared with nitrocellulose was yellow, so the color of A-21м was more yellow, warm. Another characteristic of oil enamel characteristic of A-21м a matte surface is dry film.

they give no references...

second Hornat:



here's what he says about the AMT-1 color:



he gives two references in FS number:

20324



20372



third one in this book :



they propose FS 26306:

surely refering in the albom Nakrasok

and finally this is the color of the AMT-1 in this albom Nakrasok






in fine what have we?
If we trust in the only colour we have , it had to be very grayish, but according to the name (it's important) and the description Hornat talk about, it had to be sand or browner...

sorry if I deviate the sens of the topic

Xan
« Last Edit: May 08, 2013, 02:11:41 AM by xan » Logged

learstang
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1786



« Reply #16 on: May 08, 2013, 05:24:18 AM »

Xan, the first book you show was written by Mikhail Orlov, as unfortunately Mr. Vakhlamov had passed away by the time the book was written.  Using a combination of a computer translation, my limited Russian, and my general knowledge of Soviet colours and camouflage, I've been able to translate this into a form I can understand.  As you indicate, according to Mr. Orlov, AMT-1 Light Brown was a light grey-brown.  AMT-21m, the oil enamel equivalent to the nitrocellulose lacquer AMT-1 had a yellow oil varnish, making this version appear more tan.  I've also read (from Orlov or Hornat?), that later versions of AMT-1 were tanner than the earlier versions.  So right there you have three versions of this colour, "Light Brown"; you have the greyer earlier AMT-1 lacquer, the tanner later AMT-1, and AMT-21m, which is described by Mr. Orlov as being "more yellow, warm".  This may explain some of the differing interpretations of this colour.  To be honest, this seems to be the trickiest VVS colour to pin down, and it may be that those different interpretations, or at least some of them, are correct depending upon the time and which variant of Light Brown, lacquer or oil enamel, were used.  That's about the best sense I can make of it.  However, what I don't understand is the greenish tint of the original AKAN AMT-1.  I don't see this greenish tint mentioned in any of the literature.

Regards,

Jason
« Last Edit: May 08, 2013, 05:29:52 AM by learstang » Logged

"I'll sleep when I'm dead."

- Warren William Zevon
Seawinder
Full Member
***
Posts: 245


« Reply #17 on: May 08, 2013, 05:29:44 AM »

Xan, the first book you show was written by Mikhail Orlov, as unfortunately Mr. Vakhlamov had passed away by the time the book was written.  Using a combination of a computer translation, my limited Russian, and my general knowledge of Soviet colours and camouflage, I've been able to translate this into a form I can understand.  As you indicate, according to Mr. Orlov, AMT-1 Light Brown was a light grey-brown.  AMT-21m, the oil enamel equivalent to the nitrocellulose lacquer AMT-1 had a yellow oil varnish, making this version appear more tan.  I've also read (from Orlov or Hornat?), that later versions of AMT-1 were tanner than the earlier versions.  So right there you have three versions of this colour, "Light Brown"; you have the greyer earlier AMT-1 lacquer, the tanner later AMT-1, and AMT-21m, which is described by Mr. Orlov as being "more yellow, warm".  This may explain some of the differing interpretations of this colour.  To be honest, this seems to be the trickiest VVS colour to pin down, and it may be that those different interpretations, or at least some of them, are correct depending upon the time and which variant of Light Brown, lacquer or oil enamel, were used.  That's about the best sense I can make of it.

Regards,

Jason

Hi Jason.
FWIW I approve of your thought process on this.

Cheers,
Pip
Logged
Seawinder
Full Member
***
Posts: 245


« Reply #18 on: May 08, 2013, 05:45:12 AM »



Olive green and light brown on your first photo look very good - like real AMT-4 and AMT-1  Grin
AMT-4 should look like chlorophille and AMT-1 should look like sand.

Dark gray on your first photo does NOT look like real AMT-12 -it's way too light!!!  No contrast, so the whole plane looks washed out...

Second photo is very problematic: green and light brown are too brownish-greenish  Huh  Only dark gray on wing looks convincing.

HTH,
KL

Hi Konstantin.
Just to clarify. The "first photo" is one of a set posted to Plastic Pics at HyperScale of a Tamiya Il-2 built by another modeler who used the new Akan acryic lacquers for all three upper surface colors. I assume the "second photo" is of one of Xan's builds, again presumably using the Akan aqueous acrylics. If I'm wrong about that, hopefully he can correct me.

I generally bow to your MUCH greater knowledge, but I wonder if one shouldn't allow a bit more leeway with the AMT-12, which others have stated was quite prone to fading?

Cheers,
Pip
Logged
learstang
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1786



« Reply #19 on: May 08, 2013, 05:53:58 AM »

Xan, the first book you show was written by Mikhail Orlov, as unfortunately Mr. Vakhlamov had passed away by the time the book was written.  Using a combination of a computer translation, my limited Russian, and my general knowledge of Soviet colours and camouflage, I've been able to translate this into a form I can understand.  As you indicate, according to Mr. Orlov, AMT-1 Light Brown was a light grey-brown.  AMT-21m, the oil enamel equivalent to the nitrocellulose lacquer AMT-1 had a yellow oil varnish, making this version appear more tan.  I've also read (from Orlov or Hornat?), that later versions of AMT-1 were tanner than the earlier versions.  So right there you have three versions of this colour, "Light Brown"; you have the greyer earlier AMT-1 lacquer, the tanner later AMT-1, and AMT-21m, which is described by Mr. Orlov as being "more yellow, warm".  This may explain some of the differing interpretations of this colour.  To be honest, this seems to be the trickiest VVS colour to pin down, and it may be that those different interpretations, or at least some of them, are correct depending upon the time and which variant of Light Brown, lacquer or oil enamel, were used.  That's about the best sense I can make of it.

Regards,

Jason

Hi Jason.
FWIW I approve of your thought process on this.

Cheers,
Pip

Thank you, Pip!  You'll notice I've amended my comments to include about the greenish tint of the AKAN AMT-1.

Regards,

Jason
Logged

"I'll sleep when I'm dead."

- Warren William Zevon
Massimo Tessitori
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6012


« Reply #20 on: May 08, 2013, 08:29:02 AM »

Hi all,

Quote
they propose FS 26306:

surely refering in the albom Nakrasok

26306 was  proposed by V/O in an article published on M-Hobby 2/99, certainly on the base of the Alboom Nakrasok.
There is an asterisk close to the number, with a note in Russian that I can't read. Aside the number there are two other numbers, 1005-43 and 1008-43, a sort of code that I am not able to interpretate.
In the same table, fs 34201 and  36350 and Humbrol 84 are described as matches for A-21m.

I suppose that the FS chips given by Hornat are compromise matches influenced by the descriptions of coffee and milk etc, that are hardly compatible with the chip of Nakrasok alboom and the photos of the available wrecks  (all heavily weathered for what I know).

I have materially a FS-26306 chip in my hands and it looks a brownish grey without any green tinge, I wonder what is written close to the asterisk.
On my catalogue, 30324 is the matt version on the missing 20324 and is strongly tan, while 20372 looks a compromise shade.


About AMT-12:
it appears clearly darker than AMT-4 only in few photos of Il-2 of Zavod 1

but in most photos of many types it appears undistinguishable, or even lighter than AMT-4.



This one is particularly interesting.

Note the contrast with the tail of the plane on the background. On this tail, the shape ot the black (?) blotch and its sharpness recalls the planes built in z.1 after 1943, it should be grey.
Possible conclusions?
-or Z.1 employed black instead of grey on the wings and tail of its Il-2 (something similar appears on photos of Tu-2 built in another factory, I don't remember which one)
-or AMT-12 fades quickly (for unknown reasons, less quickly on planes of z.1)
-or AMT-12 appears different for planes built in different plants due to thinning, thickness of the layer and so on.
Logged
xan
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 459



WWW
« Reply #21 on: May 08, 2013, 10:50:43 AM »

Hi every body ,

Pip, the second pics is a Tyronesdaddy's mount, it was just to comparate the two kind of colors...

well the FS 20 312 solution is tempting , because it's a compromise, not very far from the Nabrasok alboom and not very far from what we can see on many of three colors camos, and last but not list, it' prettyier  Grin

but just because it's a compromise it inevitably wrong...

Orlov and Vakhlamov are the ultimate reference for all uf us I presume...

Orlov propose that:



comparing to those references, Akan paint is not far, particulary from the first A-21m:




the first pic was taken yesterday night with lights, and the second one this morning...

finely I will use the AMT-1 akan as it comes. What do you think about?

Xan
« Last Edit: May 08, 2013, 10:55:14 AM by xan » Logged

bbrought
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 90



« Reply #22 on: May 08, 2013, 11:14:22 AM »

Hi Massimo:

26306 was  proposed by V/O in an article published on M-Hobby 2/99, certainly on the base of the Alboom Nakrasok.
There is an asterisk close to the number, with a note in Russian that I can't read.

and

Quote
I have materially a FS-26306 chip in my hands and it looks a brownish grey without any green tinge, I wonder what is written close to the asterisk.

I assume you are referring to the table on page 23 in the magazine. The asterisk points to note number 4, which reads:

"Очень приблизительное сходство (надо темнее)."

This means: Very approximate similarity (needs to be darker).

Hope that helps...

Bennie
Logged

BA Broughton
xan
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 459



WWW
« Reply #23 on: May 08, 2013, 11:23:05 AM »

it does help!
Xan
Logged

Massimo Tessitori
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6012


« Reply #24 on: May 08, 2013, 01:48:40 PM »

Thank you Bennie.

Hi Xan, it's strange, from the dicussion on Britmodeller I made the idea that AMT-1 had to be greener than A-21.

Regards
Massimo
Logged
66misos
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1565

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.


WWW
« Reply #25 on: May 08, 2013, 05:11:16 PM »

Hi Xan,

I think that using Akan AMT-1 as it comes is nothing bad.
Akan makes extraordinary effort to make paints as authentic as possible. But making paints in two different factories gives two different results (water acrylics vs. laquers), regardless modern technology and peacetime processes.
I do not know wheter original paints were produced only in one factory during war. Imagine that wartime stress, also in paint production, application etc. No wander there could be different colors of the one particular paint part no., changing a bit in time and territory.

    66misos
Logged

KL
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1678


« Reply #26 on: May 08, 2013, 06:55:19 PM »

It's usefull to see different sources and how different they are.  Interesting discussion too.
Few comments:

-  "Coffee with  milk" is a description used by Vahlamov years before the classical 1999 M-Hobby text which relayed on Albom Nakrasok
-  In period technical literature AMT-1 and A-21m were called "light brown" or "dirty sand" (I haven't seen "gray" in any official description
-  Although called "sand" colour was supposed to blend with the colour of dry dirt.  It definitively did not relate in any way to desert sand

Regarding Albom Nakrasok AMT-1 and A-21m chips:
-  Nothing in common with "coffee with milk"
-  Nothing in common with desert sand
-  AMT-1 and A-21m chips are very close (definitively closely related colours):  AMT-1 is slightly darker, A-21m is slightly yellower.

I don't have any AKAN paints and I am not planning to purchase any, so I can't say how close they are to Albom chips.  I would greatly appreciate if somebody provides me with AKAN paint chips. Smiley
 
HTH,
KL

PS. Xan, I have my own FS equivalents for Albom Nakrasok chips, send me a PM if you are interested.  
« Last Edit: May 08, 2013, 07:11:50 PM by KL » Logged
66misos
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1565

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.


WWW
« Reply #27 on: May 09, 2013, 09:23:17 AM »

Hi,

these are pictures from E.P. page http://vvs.hobbyvista.com/Research/1948/1948_Albom_Nakrasok.html about his observations of Albom Nakrasok. Original text accompanying pictures is in Italic font:


"A section of Pe-2 wing surface at Bodo, here showing an unusually well preserved area of ALG-1 primer..."

   
"Pe-2 stabiliser at Bodo. This 'golden' tint is very typical of oxidised ALG-1."


"The most corroded example of ALG-1 I have ever seen on an actual part (this found on an Il-2 wing which has sat uncovered in a forest for 70 years) which is starting to turn orange; it is still, however, less corroded than the 1948 booklet chip."

In the different thread was written:
...This brown ALG-1 is also preserved on some Il-2 wings found in the tundra - some authors (namely Pilawskii  Wink ) confused this primer with camouflage paints and called it AII Brown, AMT-1 etc  Grin...

So does color on these images represent yellow-brown primer ALG-1 (IMHO here too bright) or light brown A-21m? AMT-1 on these metal wings seems not to be a case.

    66misos
« Last Edit: May 09, 2013, 10:00:51 AM by 66misos » Logged

xan
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 459



WWW
« Reply #28 on: May 09, 2013, 10:18:37 AM »

I finished my camo with akan aqueous acrilyc paints:





the AMT-12 seems to be black as AMT-6!
the pics are taken inby the morning with lightd woh gar the AMT-1 warmer than it is I think...

I tried without light:




I have the impresion that with the AMT-12 at the side, AMT-1 get browner...
What do you thnk about?

Xan



Logged

bbrought
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 90



« Reply #29 on: May 09, 2013, 11:01:52 AM »

Xan, I also thought my AMT-12 is too dark, but you know what: The combination on your model looks really good to me. I also agree that the presence of the other colours can influence your perception. On your model, the AMT-1 now definitely looks less grey than it looked before. If it was my model, I would leave it exactly as is.
Logged

BA Broughton
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!