The colour scheme article in Dogfight actually referred to inauthentic and inaccurate schemes, in particular that applied to the Commemorative Air Force's 'Wildcat' in a scheme based on a single badly printed profile view.
There was there (and here) no argument with applying an original civilian scheme, and most of us are greatly in favour of schemes such as G-FIRE etc.
However, there are issues with representing an aircraft in a travesty of a military scheme, and when it is claimed to be 'authentic' that's when it gets interesting. I'm not talking about the occasional minor error, but examples, such as this Wildcat, which do not have a single aspect of the colours within cooee of reality. This leads to statements such as "I think it's a New Zealand scheme" rather than trying to get it right, which can often be done with highly skilled free help.
Who wants a poorly executed scheme that costs thousands anyway? Make it accurate, or original, but don't use a photocopy as your prime reference!
It's a hot topic, which is why we took it to a Dogfight.
Previous
Index
Next
Flat
Re: Dogfight
Edit
Reply
Quote
