Good reference book WW2 armour?

[maxwellbest]

Hope I have posted in the right place...any recommendations for a good book with the emphasis on graphics to help with modelling WW2 armour? Thanks in advance...

[Troy Smith]

39 minutes ago, maxwellbest said:

any recommendations for a good book with the emphasis on graphics to help with modelling WW2 armour?

as in techniques?   There are various books, but you will likely find a lot by browsing here and other forums.

 

Note,  there is a tendency for modellers to copy other modellers, especially ones who make models with a 'WOW' factor.... 

that are often inaccurate models.

Examples

Tanks don't rust or chip much.

Armour plate does not rust.   

Neither do tracks, and they are not shiny steel when worn..... these are things I have learned here.

 

I'll put a @Das Abteilung as he's a rather good on armour overall.  

 

There are also lots and lots of photos online

this place has loads of images

https://www.worldwarphotos.info

 

There is nothing better than studying photos of the real things for making good models

 

HTH

[Stef N.]

Here's a few I'd recommend for technical drawings.

Top Drawings by Kagero are good at the cheaper end of the market.

Waldemar Trojca books I like but can range from decent to stupid prices.

Model Centrum Progres make some good books in the Armor PhotoHistory and ColorGallery series.

The old Japanese Achtung Panzer books are great but not for the money some are asking for. If you see them going cheapish then snap them up. (Not likely to be honest but you never know.)

Modelling books I'd still recommend the Tony Greenland Panzer Modelling one. Yes it's old but still inspiring in my humble opinion.

Any from the Rinaldi Studio Press series.

This guy on Youtube is worth watching for some great tips. https://www.youtube.com/c/NightShiftScaleModels

 

Also Panzerwrecks make and sell some brilliant reference and photo books. https://www.panzerwrecks.com/

 

There are also some cracking walkarounds on here.

https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/forum/342-afv-walkarounds/

[spruecutter96]

7 hours ago, Troy Smith said:

Tanks don't rust or chip much.

I think this would be much more accurate if the words".....unless neglected for a number of years" were added to the end of the sentence. Some of the ex-Soviet armour used by the Afghans in the 90's looked like they'd been dragged through a hedge backwards. We should remember that not all AFV's are lovingly cared for by their users. American and NATO tanks are generally very well maintained.... in other parts of the world, they are simply viewed as expendable tools.  

 

Chris.  

[Circloy]

10 hours ago, Troy Smith said:

Tanks don't rust or chip much.

 

2 hours ago, spruecutter96 said:

I think this would be much more accurate if the words".....unless neglected for a number of years" were added to the end of the sentence.

The composition of armour plate is not such that it can be classed as rustless/stainless however to achive the required ballistic resistance the processing and heat treatment required results in a surface that supresses the rate of rust formation. A sort of halfway house between mild steel & stainless steel.

[spruecutter96]

I take the point about the rust-free nature of armour-plate, but what about the presence of external fuel-tanks, tool tie-down cleats, applique-armour panels and "skirts", grab-handles, spare-track brackets, machine-gun mounts and other external accessories. I would take a guess that they're made with much lower-grade metals than the primary armour and would not be rust-resistant. 

 

Chris.  

[Troy Smith]

4 minutes ago, spruecutter96 said:

I take the point about the rust-free nature of armour-plate, but what about the presence of external fuel-tanks, tool tie-down cleats, applique-armour panels and "skirts", grab-handles, spare-track brackets, machine-gun mounts and other external accessories. I would take a guess that they're made with much lower-grade metals than the primary armour and would not be rust-resistant. 

 

Chris.  

Yes, indeed Chris.  One point,  the OP asked in the WW2 section, and tanks in that era tended to have fairly short lives.    I was trying to make the point that you can find models of WW2 tanks that do look like they been left outside for 5 years.   

You point about 

3 hours ago, spruecutter96 said:

unless neglected for a number of years" were added to the end of the sentence. Some of the ex-Soviet armour used by the Afghans in the 90's looked like they'd been dragged through a hedge backwards. We should remember that not all AFV's are lovingly cared for by their users.

Which is correct, and a valid point,  and is borne out by references, which bring me back to the 'refer to photos of the real thing'   

 

I was merely trying to guide OP in some of the common pitfalls I see on models,  from some of the discussions I have seen on here which have highlighted these.  

 

cheers

T 

 

[Circloy]

15 minutes ago, spruecutter96 said:

I take the point about the rust-free nature of armour-plate, but what about the presence of external fuel-tanks, tool tie-down cleats, applique-armour panels and "skirts", grab-handles, spare-track brackets, machine-gun mounts and other external accessories. I would take a guess that they're made with much lower-grade metals than the primary armour and would not be rust-resistant. 

 

Chris.  

Not so much 'lower-grade' more an appropriate grade for the application. Primer & paint or, a galvanised layer at best.

[Ade H]

Ok, well to get things back on track so to speak...

I'm not too sure exactly what type of book you're envisaging, @maxwellbest , but I know that Slawomir Zajaczkowski (who produces the profile artwork in Military Modelcraft) has published some books for Kagero. I've not read any, but I like his work in Modelcraft.

And I'll recommend the "Armor Color Gallery" (all U.S. spelling) series from (I think) Model Centrum.

Edited February 12, 2022 by Ade H
added info

[John Tapsell]

@maxwellbest - not sure from your post if you are looking for a book to help you with modelling techniques (a 'how to' book) or one to provide inspiration and ideas?

 

In terms of fundamental modelling skills and techniques, I would always recommend 'Modeling Tanks and Military Vehicles' by Shep Paine. It was first published 40 years ago but as a primer for skills and techniques, it is still one of the best. Paine also did a very good primer on 'How to Build Dioramas'. There have been many other books on modelling skills published since 1982, but the fundamentals haven't changed.

 

For painting and weathering you would first need to decide what style you want to adopt before purchasing books - there are so many different styles and fashions and there are no 'right' or 'wrong' methods, just the ones that suit you best.

 

If you are looking for a book to inspire you with ideas for WWII armour, the subject is so vast and the amount of reference material so varied, that it would be impossible to identify a single title that covered it all.

 

Again, it's a dated series, but the Arms and Armour Press books - The Eastern Front, Blitzkrieg, D-Day to Berln, British Tank Names and Markings and of course the three-volume Panzer Colours series provide a good overview of most nations duting WWII with photos and colour plates. Some of the specific data has been superceded but the photos are still good and much of the artwork still relevant.

 

 

 

[Kingsman]

Oh dear.  I'm very much afraid that this conversation has wandered into a minefield.  The original question is almost impossible to answer in a meaningful way and as someone said earlier any answer is very dependent on the period, the location and the environmental conditions for your model.

 

The argument about armour plate boils down to too many people modelling in-service vehicles in virtual range wreck condition because they simply don't understand the metallurgy and chemistry in play.  Even rusting aluminium vehicles like M113s: d'oh......  "But why would we?", I hear you cry.  Because you need to know.  In the same way you need to know about colour and about markings.  Like you need to know that stowage doesn't cling on by magnetism, invisible suckers or an anti-gravity device.  It has to be attached to something and retained by something.  And yes, the milder steel parts will rust out and you will get streaking on paintwork etc.  The rust worm always goes for the softer targets first..........  

 

From personal experience I would avoid any of the modelling books, magazines, videos and You Tube channels published by the companies who peddle paints, weathering and finishing products.  All they will do is tell you how to use their brand products.  Or they will show you models built by half a dozen people who all do things differently - using that brand products.  They are promotional tools.  I made the mistake of buying several and while they're not entirely useless or uninformative they do tend to just tell you how to apply their products without giving any real insight or understanding of why or how they might vary in different circumstances.

 

I would also question treating modeling as art and losing sleep and hair over zenithal lighting, shadow and shade, how colours change in different sunlight conditions etc.  They're 3D objects to be seen from multiple angles and in naturally varying light conditions, not a 2D still life painting carefully lit on a wall.  In another post I jokingly said that we've arrived at the point of telling competition judges and audiences on forums like this the colour might look wrong to their eyes because it is depicted on a dull day in October rather than a sunny day in July.  But are we getting to that point? 

 

You see many models with every panel carefully faded-out from a lighter centre to a dark edge with "pre-shading" of panel lines and edges.  Find me a real tank that looks like that from 35 feet away (in 1/35) - and I won't be holding my breath.  It just looks silly.  And edges catch the light and so are lighter, not darker........  Many modern combat aircraft do use counter-shaded grey schemes with darkened highlight areas and lightened shadow areas, but that is a deliberate form of visual camouflage as shadows have been proven to catch and draw the eye.  We Brits understood this on vehicle camouflage which is why some schemes in the early half of WW2 used white under gun barels, turret undercuts and lower glacis'.

 

Unfortunately many older books even those by well-respected authors and modellers like Shep Paine and Francois Verlinden are now so old that there is a whole generation of products and techniques they don't even mention.  Some don't even cover acrylic paints and were written in enamel-only days.

 

Finescale Modeller magazine have published a few guides that are worth a look.  Likewise Osprey.  Look for books not published by product manufacturers and also look for the publication date.  Be wary of any that are more than about 5 years old and avoid any more than 10 years old.  Also look at the page count: slim books won't tell you much.

 

With this in mind, have a look at Bookworld's pages of modellig books https://www.bookworldws.co.uk/product-category/modelling-books/

 

And in a non-advert for the old Shep Paine book above, he has his M51 tracks on in 2 different directions..........

[cmatthewbacon]

Going right back to the original question, +1 here for Shep Paine. The best advice delivered in the most accessible way, supporting a newbie to get better rather than marketing a range of expensive products… there’s no contest. 
best,

M.

[Ade H]

Paine was way before my time so I may be wrong, but they are modelling how-tos, right? The OP did mention that he wanted an emphasis on graphics, so I thought maybe he wants some profile drawings, hence my suggestions.

Some of the posts here seem to be way off track with critiques of style.

Edited February 12, 2022 by Ade H

[cmatthewbacon]

Or he could mean he wants visual how-to’s rather than text descriptions. If the question is “first books for modelling WW2 armour”, then I stick with Paine, plus Airfix Magazine Guides from Gerald Scarborough, and some of the Crowood Press “Modelling WW2…” books…

best,

M.

[Graham Boak]

I also assumed he just wanted lots of pictures to illustrate techniques, not just pretty profiles, and quite a lot of such books those do exist nowadays.  It is unfortunately true that many of these are produced by people trying to sell their own products and often pushing techniques that are more art school than realistic.  Not that this appears to matter to many.  The key question perhaps is whether he wants more information on assembly techniques for modelling different/new subjects, or on the painting of kits straight from the box.  For example, the PSL Guides are much more basic. often linked to conversion projects and text-heavy, whereas anything from Velljo/MIG Hobby/AK seem to be heavily biased towards heavily stylistic finishing techniques rather than building ones.

 

However, wouldn't it have been better to actually search for such examples from book and model shop sites, and then come to this site with more specific questions about those on offer? 

[cmatthewbacon]

We were all there at some point @Graham Boak. Sometimes you just don’t know what you don’t know. Unless there’s a particular look (eg “Spanish school”) you’re going for, I reckon Chris Ellis and Shep Paine are good “Essentials”, with Francois Verlinden and  Spencer Pollard as “Next Steps”…

beat,

M.

[maxwellbest]

Phew..OP here..was thinking more along the lines of colour plates showing various paint schemes plus details..yes, I have wandered into a minefield..but it makes for an interesting read for sure...thanks to all who have contributed..!

[Troy Smith]

43 minutes ago, maxwellbest said:

.was thinking more along the lines of colour plates showing various paint schemes plus details

There is a reason for my sig line on profiles....

More about aircraft, but given a lot of tank pics are murky, but much the same applies.   

 

You will also get books that look pretty, but are not much use.

 

My suggestion, really, is to treat your requests on a case by case basis, Eg "I want a Churchill in Tunisia in 1943,  what colours, units and variants",. Is likely to get a precise answers, as opposed to " what colour were Churchill's" , ,  and utilise all the possible resources, though if starting afresh, and ask here,  for armour, Missing Lynx is very knowledgeable,  but isn't always as tolerant, though I got some great info on Soviet armour in camo.  May sound obvious, Google, especially if you you use it search a specific site,. Try adding the site name into the search.  It's how I find thread on here, though easier if you know it exists.

 

While we have only a few really knowledgeable armour buffs here,  even if they don't know the answer, they can point you in the right direction to getting one.

 

This way you can eliminate the poor references.   I have learned a mass of information from online sources.  Bear in mind many older references maybe OOP,   but are online as scans, less easy to use, handy to find out if it's worth tracking down. Note also older references can be out of date or plain wrong.  

 

This may sound daunting at first, but you can quite quickly learn to cross reference all these sources and get answers that would have been hard to get even ten years ago, let alone thirty.  This is how I approach research personally.  Note above I tagged some names, these are folks I know are the go to members, bear in mind "in real life"  knowing when the switch from Khaki Green to SCC2 Brown is hardly a common topic, so being able to discuss this with others is actually quite fun!

 

Cheers

T

 

 

[Bullbasket]

12 hours ago, cmatthewbacon said:

Going right back to the original question, +1 here for Shep Paine.

+2.

If you are after good books with some accurate drawings then the series by George Bradford would be useful. He did British, Us and German WW2 vehicles. Published by Stackpole Books.

 

John.

[Bertie McBoatface]

14 hours ago, Das Abteilung said:

Oh dear.  I'm very much afraid that this conversation has wandered into a minefield.  The original question is almost impossible to answer in a meaningful way and as someone said earlier any answer is very dependent on the period, the location and the environmental conditions for your model.

 

The argument about armour plate boils down to too many people modelling in-service vehicles in virtual range wreck condition because they simply don't understand the metallurgy and chemistry in play.  Even rusting aluminium vehicles like M113s: d'oh......  "But why would we?", I hear you cry.  Because you need to know.  In the same way you need to know about colour and about markings.  Like you need to know that stowage doesn't cling on by magnetism, invisible suckers or an anti-gravity device.  It has to be attached to something and retained by something.  And yes, the milder steel parts will rust out and you will get streaking on paintwork etc.  The rust worm always goes for the softer targets first..........  

 

From personal experience I would avoid any of the modelling books, magazines, videos and You Tube channels published by the companies who peddle paints, weathering and finishing products.  All they will do is tell you how to use their brand products.  Or they will show you models built by half a dozen people who all do things differently - using that brand products.  They are promotional tools.  I made the mistake of buying several and while they're not entirely useless or uninformative they do tend to just tell you how to apply their products without giving any real insight or understanding of why or how they might vary in different circumstances.

 

I would also question treating modeling as art and losing sleep and hair over zenithal lighting, shadow and shade, how colours change in different sunlight conditions etc.  They're 3D objects to be seen from multiple angles and in naturally varying light conditions, not a 2D still life painting carefully lit on a wall.  In another post I jokingly said that we've arrived at the point of telling competition judges and audiences on forums like this the colour might look wrong to their eyes because it is depicted on a dull day in October rather than a sunny day in July.  But are we getting to that point? 

 

You see many models with every panel carefully faded-out from a lighter centre to a dark edge with "pre-shading" of panel lines and edges.  Find me a real tank that looks like that from 35 feet away (in 1/35) - and I won't be holding my breath.  It just looks silly.  And edges catch the light and so are lighter, not darker........  Many modern combat aircraft do use counter-shaded grey schemes with darkened highlight areas and lightened shadow areas, but that is a deliberate form of visual camouflage as shadows have been proven to catch and draw the eye.  We Brits understood this on vehicle camouflage which is why some schemes in the early half of WW2 used white under gun barels, turret undercuts and lower glacis'.

 

Unfortunately many older books even those by well-respected authors and modellers like Shep Paine and Francois Verlinden are now so old that there is a whole generation of products and techniques they don't even mention.  Some don't even cover acrylic paints and were written in enamel-only days.

 

Finescale Modeller magazine have published a few guides that are worth a look.  Likewise Osprey.  Look for books not published by product manufacturers and also look for the publication date.  Be wary of any that are more than about 5 years old and avoid any more than 10 years old.  Also look at the page count: slim books won't tell you much.

 

With this in mind, have a look at Bookworld's pages of modellig books https://www.bookworldws.co.uk/product-category/modelling-books/

 

And in a non-advert for the old Shep Paine book above, he has his M51 tracks on in 2 different directions..........

 

There's a lot in this long and thoughtful post that I sometimes agree with. Often I look at models and think 'that looks silly to me", then I hasten to add to myself, "but it's not a silly model made by a silly person, just my personal view of this particular thing". 

 

Fortunately it's a very broad hobby and there's plenty of room for painting your own models in whatever style you like.

 

As a spectator I occasionally like to see the intense colours of the 'Spanish style' from time to time. I like pre-shading and other weathering tricks when they rescue a model from being dull and uninteresting to look at. I like to see metal represented without the use of unrealistic metallic paints, from time to time. I admire the super detailed spot on accuracy of some modellers too. I've even admired 'what-if' models of fictional subjects, so what if someone likes the look of chipping and rusting on their tanks? As long as they like the result, what's it to me? And if I don't like it, well there are plenty more to look at.

 

As a modeller, I do what pleases me, refer to references critically for inspiration and try to emulate those modellers whose work pleases me; in that order. Shocking as it may be, I don't personally rank accuracy above the importance of telling interesting little stories in paint and plastic. That's just my way of having fun in this hobby, other viewpoints are available, and to be completely candid, my way of thinking also changes from day to day, model to model 🤷‍♂️. You will find this friendly debate between 'accuracy' and 'interest' going on indefinitely all over the world of modelling. 😄

 

The exception to this laissez faire approach of mine would be competitions, I guess. I assume that they have laid down criteria that a model must match up to?

 

Now, after all that waffle, my personal views on books with colour plates? If you mean the three view profile types, they are drawn and coloured, shaded, weathered even, by artists and then printed with varying degrees of fidelity to the artist' work so if accuracy is your thing, maybe you have to be careful with them. If you mean colour photographs of the second world war, watch out for colourised pictures pretending to be real colour and bear in mind that the relative colours in real old colour photos change over time as some dyes fade more than others. The argument about printing errors also applies. Oh and looking online at colours is almost futile given the variability of the equipment and the inability of digital photography to capture the infinite range of the real world. This is another reason why I rate interest above accuracy - accuracy is so hard to find!

 

So grab whatever references you can find (and afford), look at them critically, compare them with each other, chat about specific problems on here, and don't let it worry you too much.

 

In my opinion 🤣

[Mike Starmer]

Be wary of the Bradford drawings.  I use these for some illustrations of disruptive patterns.  They do not always agree in dimensions of the same components in different views.  I would agree with Das Abteilung in his views.    There are series of new books on AFVs from a Polish company.  Having seen a copy of the Crusader with a hideously incorrect colour cover and some imaginative artwork inside I would say be careful what you buy.  Don't trust artwork without a picture.