I found this searching on the net, if you like color reference then this is for you:
http://www.nwha.org/index.html

Very nice pics!!! Thanks for sharing...
Ciao

Thasnks for the link, some neat stuff there.

It would appear from the website that these are photos of re-enactments. As such, as good as they are, they are secondary sources. You can certainly use them as reference, but in they would not be acceptable in scholarly research.

colored and clear photos...thanks for the reference AP

reenactmens perhaps, but still great source of reference.

Holy guacamole! I know that those are re-enactments, but they are still awesome! Thanks for posting this! Thanks for your time.

Howdy APbullet,

First, thanks for the photo link.......but, Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, this really touch's on something that has bugged the 'poop' out of me for some time now....(yeah gang, it's 'soapbox' time')

I'll try to keep it simple. WHY, is the only accepted version of something, a photo of that 'something'????
We ARE talking about the nineteen FORTIES, right? WARtime, correct? In ENEMY territory most of the time, Yes?
So, why do we, and when I say 'we', I mean the IMPS, AMPS, etc., base all of our acceptability of subject matter on whether a photographer (whether friend or foe) just happened to be hanging around that particular neighborhood?????
Geeeeeeeeeez.
Fortunately we are now being granted some much welcome 'I-was-there' insight into the existence of some of the more esoteric, or more personalized 'variants' that participated in WORLD War II. One of the more extremely positive roles the Internet has been able to play of late, is the role of 'personal' secretary to some of the more 'immobile' WW II participants and veterans that we are losing by the hundreds every day, who have held their tongue these many years, and who can now, from the comfort of their home, and from the pleasing position of 'annoymity' the Internet provides them, finally tell their stories!!
We already have new information garnered from some of the recent books on the SAS long range desert patrol participation in North Africa (for example) that tells us of the interesting additions and configurations employed on their vehicles that there is no existing picture to corroberate. So, are we telling them that they are making this all up? And that any model kits built based upon those 'I-was-there' stories are false!?!

Tread.

If this is indeed the case, methinks modelers think too highly of themselves.

Well said Treadhead

Dang, I agree. Well said Tread !
By the way, I was shocked. This reanactment outfit is almost in my back yard! About 90 miles away from my home in Oregon. Never have heard of them till now! Interesting indeed. And to top that off , I was also in the 1st Inf. Div. for two years in 1970 and 71.
Hey, small world!

Cheers,
Garry

If you think it's bad for WW2, try doing WWI aircraft (even armor) and asking about color!

There are color photos from WW1 (yes, very true), but hardly any of aircraft. Certainly not of the major German Aces that people are so interested in.

Ask what color Werner Voss's cowling was on his Triplane and you may start WW3! His mechanic said yellow, somone else remembers it olive...

If there is no photo to prove 'TRUTH' it seems people will never agree! Even though we all know a photo has never been the truth at all!

Steve

Howdy sniper,

Excellent addendum to the point. World War I is even more in 'contest'. But to really throw deisel on the fire.....
I was just fortunate enough the other day to pick up a copy of the recent 'Military Modeling' magazine( Vol.33 No.14 Nov.-Dec. issue). It is the issue that is dedicated to Euro Militaire 2003 coverage.
Within it's pages are some absolutley mind-boggling examples of model assembly/painting. I would estimate that approx. 80% of the pages are devoted to figure painting. No problem with that, Euro Militaire normally is devoted to figures mainly. However, here's where my point blossom's.
On page 20 and 21, there is an excellent figure depicting a Chinese Warrior from the 1st Century! Also, on page 34 there is a great version of a (I believe) 5th Century Lepontic Warrior. And finally, on page 63, again, a 1st Century Roman Signifer that has been featured in other magazines previously, and received rave acceptance by the figure painting masses. Herein lies my question...

Upon which photograph's are these figures, and their associated paint scheme's based?

(.............sound of a cricket chirping in the darkness............................)

Now, let's see if we can't 'fire-up' some response's from the 'Figure Talk' gallery.........

Tread.

Heck, just remembered the superb 'Henry VIII' figure on page 30. Great example of painting talent, and it bears a remarkable resemblance to Charle's Loughton's portrayal in the film "The brides of Henry VIII"!!....so, are film depictions of supposedly authentic wardrobe/costume colourings/textures considered acceptable 'reference' material??

Thanks for sharing! That is a very interesting site. It looks like those guys are close to home too. I might have to check them out.

You are right photos way to clean and crisp to be WW2!!.
Grainy and dull yes.
That is a Killer T/34 tho would not mind having that parked in the Yard (++)

Yes plus no beat up Tanks all clean and new no damage!!

Treadhead,

You have a very good point. It would bewonderful if I could get in contact with veterans from the eastern front during wwII, and if your know any please give me their e-mail adress ( [email protected] ). One thing though: I think that alot of people like to look at pictures of things that they are building and modeling not only for refernece, but because it can help to make their modeling experience alot better and more fun. It was great when I got to ride on a t-34/87 after I had built a model of one. I would love to be able to sit down and have a chat or exchamge e-mail with a Russian veteran from WWII (or any veteren actually) but the fact is, alot of people dont have that privelage.
I myself am a WWII Russian reenactor. It is a great thing to be able to share pictures of "things" like this because they give people a better understanding of what they are painting or modeling. And you have to remember the reason we do this hobby. (For Fun)

~Katyusha~

Well said and well thought out, Tread.

Thanks for the insight. I've often wondered about some of the issues you've raised.

Hmmmm, more food for thought!

Granted, there were no photographers, but there were plenty of artists, both in China and Rome. Lots of that art has survived. On top of that, there is an entire sub-category of archaeology that studies anchient textiles. These scientists can determine how a textile is made, from what and how it was dyed.

The color plates in the Osprey books and other reliable sources of informatiuon are based on this research -- no historical artist worth a tin of thinner would base his artiwork on "this could have happened," "this might have happened," or (god forbid) "this would look cool ..."

Anecdotal evidence recalled 60 years after the fact -- while it may be intriguing -- is pretty poor evidence. I love talking to the old vets as much as anyone with an interest in history, but for reference, I want a photo or a description written within a few years of the event.