Why is it that of all the things modelers disagree on, the main culprit is color? Sure, there are flare-ups about configuration and outline of various subjects, but the thing that gets modelers cross-threaded is color.
Let me posit this: Why is it, that the further away in time we get from an event, the more certain we are that something was done in a certain way, or painted in a certain manner, or matched a particular standard? If the Luftwaffe didn't record exactly what color RLM 84 was (or wasn't), how is it that we are so absolutely sure that it was a close match for RAF Sky? Or why is it that only in the past few years that we've been led to understand that the Wehrmacht had a pea green color they used on certain vehicles?
Now, I'm not saying that I discount the research that unearthed these possibilities. People devote their lives to this sort of archaeology, and I'm grateful. But it would seem to me that time is not kind to paint, even paint that has been hidden from the effects of weather and sunlight. And, most of the research is being based on these "protected" samples. In some cases, the colors have been in line with what is currently known (or accepted as fact), but what's to say that color X has shifted drastically even though it was hidden from view for lo these many years?
What I am saying is not to sweat the small stuff. Find something that's close and go with it. Life's too short.
Now, the other color debate has once again reared its ugly head–was Lou IV's camouflage done in blue or green? Like the age-old question, "How many licks does it take to get to the Tootsie Roll center of a Tootsie Pop?", the true answer is "The world may never know."
We're having a heat wave–105 today with the heat index. I'm pretty much wrung out, so I'll leave it at that for tonight. I'm trying to get my external HD to mount up with the ol' iMac again, and once I do I can free a few old articles I wrote on various subjects. I look forward to posting them for you…
Be good to one another. I bid you Peace.