Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I’m wondering whether to buy some of these publications, are they good?
 

Particularly the Buccaneer, Javelin and V-bombers ones - are the captions and info accurate and do they have good references for what serials served with particular squadrons, etc?
 

I don’t want to buy any if they don’t really offer anything you can’t find online. Any nice, rare images?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t mind these Warpaint publications, however from what I’ve seen some of the earlier ones aren’t as good as a few of the later ones. In my opinion, the side profile artist makes a big difference to the quality of the contents and those that feature Richard Caruana’s artwork are among the best.
 

It also depends on the subject matter where say the Wellesley book stands out due to the lack of other competing publications, whilst there are probably better books on the Buccaneer than this Warpaint book. 

 

Cheers. Dave

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Warpaint series of books are one of the best reference sources, various authors and artists for profile artwork, I have every issue from number 1.

Also bearing in mind nearly all of them have 1/72nd scale drawings.

Like all reference material, it is only as good as the source it was originally retrieved from.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, dwh said:

Warpaint series of books are one of the best reference sources, various authors and artists for profile artwork, I have every issue from number 1.

Also bearing in mind nearly all of them have 1/72nd scale drawings.

Like all reference material, it is only as good as the source it was originally retrieved from.

Good to know I'm not the only one who has them all from number 1. Mind you, it does distress me when I see them on sale for much less than I paid. I then have to try to forget what the whole series and cost me and what it now might be worth 😭

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I have more modern and glossier reference books but I still find them particularly useful, I think that the Hawker Typhoon edition was one of the best resources for me when building my MDC kit.

 

Cheers

 

Dennis

Link to post
Share on other sites

Only have around three-quarters of the series and am catching up on subjects that I will probably never get round to modelling but would heartily agree with the positive comments already made on the basis of purchases made since the first releases in the series back in the 90s rather than as a contributor in more recent years.

 

They provide good coverage of their subject aircraft , some of which are not well covered elsewhere and for myself anyway provide a good starting point for further research in subjects I am interested in and a good one-stop read for subjects that I perhaps will never look any further into.

 

As mentioned the artwork can be slightly variable although very, very rarely less than excellent and from my own purchases the print quality of the current print-to-order reprints of some of the older titles is even sharper and on better paper than the original print runs for some of the early subjects.

 

Regarding serial tie-ins and the like the extent of this information can vary depending on subject and I imagine the resources that were available at the time to the author.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have all the WW2 era aircraft issues, plus a couple pre-war, and I think they are a great resource for the price.

 

 

 

Chris

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you visit your local WHS shop they are currently selling 2 of these books wrapped up together. I bought them,but they only appear to be the Vampire and Tempest,you can see most of their series I believe listed on the back. I can't remember the price now though! Chris.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Having several of these publications in my possession I ordered with confidence and high anticipation the Bristol Britannia issue.

I must say that I was very disappointed. The book is supposed to be I had presumed,it being the Warpaint series,it would increase my references for service aircraft. There are too many civil images which are out of context with the title and I have plenty of anyway. The art work however is my biggest complaint. The profiles whilst good paint work are too dark and the shape is absolute rubbish. The line drawings of the Britannia are complete crap, so woolly and undefined and as I was hoping for a decent Argus drawing was disappointed by its total absence! I don't like being so negative normally but I am quite disappointed.

 

Keith

Link to post
Share on other sites

They are somewhat variable in quality, IMHO. I bought a number of the early ones when they were new (Vixen, Hunter, Javelin), and they were fairly expensive in Germany at the time. I then left alone for quite some time and only bought a number second hand cheaply, much later.

First, the scale drawings are variable to say the least. Many of them are really ancient ones from the early days of AvNews. No issue of course if the drawings are irrelevant to you. For example, I bought the Vixen volume with the intention of building the Frog kit, and wanted the drawings to check the kit for accuracy and potential improvement. Checking the kit and the drawings against photos in the good ol' SAM "walkaround" article, it became clear that the kit was better than the drawings in some respects, e.g. the main u/c bays are much simplified on the drawings, and closer on the kit.

Similar with the Hunter volume. The drawings were apparently commissioned for the book, but... there are obvious inconsistencies. E.g. the relationship of inner pylon to dogtooth is wrong, and the same panel line is in one place on the profile but located somewhere else in the top view. To me, such visible faults (after looking at some pics) do not inspire confidence in the overall accuracy. Another aspect I really didn't like was the presentation of the huge amount of info. I hope I will not be found guilty for lèse-majesty, but the promo blurb said "x thousand words of text!". Well, the problem from my PoV is that continuous text is not the best way to present serial-to-squadron allocations and identity letters at X date - such text is unreadable and it is hard to extract the information. It may be a matter of taste, but a number of tables would have been a much better approach - IMHO.

The V-Bomber ones from a couple years later are much more to my liking, so I guess the series will naturally have evolved.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
On 13/03/2021 at 11:03, Lord Riot said:

I’m wondering whether to buy some of these publications, are they good?

For me they have been invaluable for lots of research. They have long been my 'go to' reference for many years, although some of the earlier publications can be difficult to find and expensive when you do.

 

See PM

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Miko said:

For me they have been invaluable for lots of research. They have long been my 'go to' reference for many years, although some of the earlier publications can be difficult to find and expensive when you do.

 

See PM

Guideline publications do a print to order for these books, so will only cost you cover price, see their website

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have all three V Bomber ones. I know the Vulcan the best of the three aircraft. The info is generally OK, but there are mistakes. Profile drawings cannot be relied on for aircraft configuration; there are errors that are obvious to a Vulcan nerd like myself such as a white Vulcan B2 with a TFR blister, although most people wouldn't know. The 1/72 drawings included look.... questionable. My best resource for Vulcan references is the Vulcan B Mk.2 from a different angle by Craig Bulman, that tells you almost everything you could want to know about Vulcan B2s.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, dwh said:

Guideline publications do a print to order for these books, so will only cost you cover price, see their website

 

Good to know, I haven't acquired a new one in some time, I have most of them in digital format

Link to post
Share on other sites

Although the profile drawings are nice and well done technically, there are lots (!) of errors. It seems that the artist has not done good enough research for each single profile. This is mainly a problem with the later issues, not so with the earlier ones.

 

Nils

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have most of the relevant (to me) Warpaints and am looking forward to the new MiG 3.  I entirely agree that they are very variable in content and are not to be relied upon for accuracy.  However they are a good read, lots of pretty pictures and good art (with a pinch of salt at times) and generally are better the more unusual the aircraft,  After all, there's not a lot else on the Albemarle, is there?  By all means (as always) check the author.  If you don't already have anything significant on the subject then they make good introductions, and for the money there are worse ways of spending your time over a good cup of coffee.

 

I do recall Alan Hall saying that it is a good idea to include at least one deliberate error so that you could track anyone stealing your work.  I don't know whether he was joking, nor if he ever did.  This was probably before the days of Warpaint, but it would explain having the Danish Condor illustrated with a pale blue stripe!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/27/2021 at 7:45 PM, dwh said:

Guideline publications do a print to order for these books, so will only cost you cover price, see their website

With money being a bit tight back in the 1990s I only bought the earlier issues of Warpaint with subjects that that were of very definite interest to me at that time but in more recent years I have been able to buy some of those earlier ones that I passed on when first released by using Guideline's print to order arrangement and have found that the quality of paper being used now for these far surpasses that being used back in their early days and that the covers especially are far stiffer.      Also an excellent way to keep their back catalogue constantly available and a pity that more publishers have not followed the lead.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/30/2021 at 7:06 PM, Des said:

... that the covers especially are far stiffer.      

Not only that - the covers of the early ones are incredibly prone to rubbing, just like the good old red Profiles.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not wanting to tick people off here, but I've often thought that the Warpaint format is of pretty limited use to most modellers. Is there really any need to have fifty profile views of the same aircraft? There aren't many model-makers who would be making that many versions of one airframe (or anything like that number). In a way, it seems like quantity over quality, from where I'm sitting.

 

Other users mileage may vary... 

 

Chris.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, spruecutter96 said:

Not wanting to tick people off here, but I've often thought that the Warpaint format is of pretty limited use to most modellers. Is there really any need to have fifty profile views of the same aircraft? There aren't many model-makers who would be making that many versions of one airframe (or anything like that number). In a way, it seems like quantity over quality, from where I'm sitting.

 

Other users mileage may vary... 

 

Chris.  

 Depends on whether one models as an adjunct to a wider interest in aviation or has much narrower interests although in that case not too many print references restrict themselves to a single airframe at a specific time and place and even then what if that is not the specific airframe/time/place that 'most modellers' are planning to build and finish?

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/13/2021 at 12:43 PM, Latinbear said:

Good to know I'm not the only one who has them all from number 1. Mind you, it does distress me when I see them on sale for much less than I paid. I then have to try to forget what the whole series and cost me and what it now might be worth 😭

Stopped @100 myself and said that it for me....

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, George Norman said:

Stopped @100 myself and said that it for me....

 Sounds wise. I'm at about the 115 mark and struggling with enthusiasm to buy the balance.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, spruecutter96 said:

Not wanting to tick people off here, but I've often thought that the Warpaint format is of pretty limited use to most modellers. Is there really any need to have fifty profile views of the same aircraft? There aren't many model-makers who would be making that many versions of one airframe (or anything like that number). In a way, it seems like quantity over quality, from where I'm sitting.

 

Other users mileage may vary... 

 

Chris.  

It does give us a good range of options as a starting point. I'd use it more as a catalogue of airframes to find one that stands out to me or has a specific set of features, and then use that as a starting point for further research. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Latinbear said:

 Sounds wise. I'm at about the 115 mark and struggling with enthusiasm to buy the balance.  

I enjoy them though, usually twice the price of a mag so I think they are a good buy despite the concerns noted else where.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...