I've read many contradicting articles and comments on whether WW2 RAF aircraft had hard or soft edges on the upper surface camo patterns. I know the demarcation between the upper and lower camo was a hard edge and it has been said that rubber mats were laid over the upper surfaces for masking giving a hard edge but many restored aircraft have a soft edge to them. Most pics I have of war built aircraft are too poor a quality to be sure, some look hard edged, some soft edged. Does anyone have any definite reference on this?

I am certainly no expert in this area, but I don't think it's possible to generalize across all RAF types. Iit's my understanding that it varied somewhat (depending on the A/C type, when and where it was originally painted, etc.) I am just positive, for example, that many Hawker Typhoons, for example, had tightly sprayed soft edges; lots of pics out there supporting this. (See, e.g., http://en.wikipedia.org/upload/b/bb/Hawker.typhoon.rcaf.750pix.jpg.

Bottom line: look at pictures of your type and, if possible, of the individual aircraft you're modeling. HTH.

I have never found difinative proof one way or another, but after looking at what evedence I could I came down on the side of hard edge. I would like to be prooved wrong because I prefer the look of a tight soft edge on a model. The main reason I believe in hard edge is because of the style of the camo, it isn't random enough (hardly random at all) to be applied free hand. Also to spray a free hand camo demarcation on a full size aircraft would take longer than laying on a rubber mat and just spraying. Of course there will be exceptions to this, particularly where units have done the painting, but a factory paint job, I believe would be hard edge.
Mal

I don't know, Mal. Here's a link to what seems to be a well-reserached refutation of the rubber-mats-all-the-time position. http://www.cooperdetails.com/html/roysrants/rant20030324.html I have no idea who this guy is, or whether he's off his nut, or what. But it seems like he's made a fairly convincing case on this point.

I have been waiting for the 'rubber mat' legend to make an appearance....hehehe..Jim #:-)

:-) Thanks Part-timer, I'm convinced. That is the best explanation I have ever read, when put like that it sound right. If I ever enter a model in a competition I'll include a copy, for all those judges that say "if I see a Spitfire with soft edge camo it wont win" I've actually read this type of comment a couple of times. Anyway thanks for the link, luckily I'll be getting a new airbrush in a weeks time
Mal

I think that there could be another thing to consider if opting for a "tightly sprayed soft edge" for a kit and that would be the scaling down of it. If the soft edge was about 5cm (just a figure off the top of my head as an example) on the real thing then at 1/72 scale it would be 0.69 of a millimetre. Even at 1/48 scale it would be 1.04 mm. If airbrushing freehand it could be easy to overdo it.
I agree with Mal that a slight soft edge does somehow look better, even if only to have something to show after spending big bucks on an airbrush and compressor :-)

I too have seen references that suggest both.
Maybe it was down to the man who did the spraying taking into account the thickness of the rubber mats. As for pattern, there seems to have been little in variation. Most was "A" or "B"schemes. "B" being a mirror image of "A". I imagine they simply flipped the rubber mats.
Two penneth...
Peter

It depends, if you are doing a factory fresh airplane then it will definatly have a hard edge, but the more weathered yout aircraft is, then the more touch ups ground will probably have done. Feild painted touch ups rarely have a hard edge since they are sprayed on by hand.
hope this helps

:-) I have further information on this subject. Harri, the guy that painted the nose art and painted the tigers head on the 74? Squadron Hawks, told me that he had spoken to a guy that used to paint restored WWII aircraft. They apparently used the same method that was used back in the 40s and this really does make sense.
The guy in charge would draw the patern on, freehand using chalk. 2 sprayers would have a gun each, one with one colour, the other with the other. They would start at the sampoint and spray their different colours together, along the line. They would then fill in their colour. This would give a nice tight, sprayed edge, as each of the 2 sprays would prevent the other going to far to the other side. The freehand chalked line would account for the subtle differences in camo patterns and the spray method is both quick and simple. It also would be easy to do the mirror pattern, the sprayers just swapped sides. That would account for the odd and even serial number switch.
Mal :-)

slightly.
An uncle of mine was a mechanic in the RAF during WW2 and remembers that when the change from Dark Earth and Dark Green camo to Dark Grey and Dark Green was made, due to short-time supply glitches, although not as great as the Luftwaffes, for a while there were aircraft that still had sky undersides with the new Green/grey schemes, and occasionally the new lighter grey undersides with the old earth/green topsides.
Basically it was due to existing aircraft being operational and having limited downtime, so, as much was done as was possible in between normal operations.

Cheers
Peter

Wow, real original research. Thanks, Mal. The case for tight but soft edges looks stronger and stronger.

Would a tight soft edge be seen in !/72 or !/48? or at that size would the seem to be hard?
I have the same dilemna when painting factory NATO schemes on armor.
capnjock

I guess that's the real question, but Iwould go with a freehand camo pattern, certainly in 1/48, but it would have to be nice and tight. 1/72 would be a different story.
I also have a slightly different angle on this. In a letter to Scale Aircraft Modelling, quite some time ago. A contest judge stated, catagorically, that if he came across a Spitfire model with soft edge camo, no matter how tight the demarcation was, it wouldn't be even placed! At the time I believed the camo to be soft but tight edged (further research lead me to believe differently, now, after this thread, I'm back where I started :-) ) My point being who is this guy to decide what we as modellers do? I know we don't have to enter contests, I don't. But if I found out that one of my models was not placed, based on one mans perception of what may or may not have been the practice for painting wartime Spitfires I would be a very unhappy teddybear Spraying a tight freehand edge, in 1/48 scale shows a certain amount of control over an airbrush. I've heard of similar types of prejudice as well, like, "if a model is weathered the modeller is trying to hide flaws". What? That to me is someone, a contest judge? who hasn't mastered the art of weathering. I would like to enter some of my models in a competition, but I would like a level playing field. I certainly wouldn't mind in the slightest being beaten by a superior model. Rant over :-)
Mal

:-) I think Big Mal just about sums this one up!

All such disagreements should be sorted out (amicably ) over a pint!

I've got more reference pics than I'd willingly put a price to... and, sadly, all I can say is... the more references you have, the more uncertain the overall picture becomes!

For every picture I've got of a hard edge... I've got one of a soft edge... so if anyone says they've got the ABSOLUTE answer... I'll say they are a liar (OOPS sorry madam!!!) or mistaken...

My own preference is for a very slightly soft pattern.. to keep everybody happy - but I know it never will...

Another 2 penny worth... worth no more nor less

All the best

Rowan

Hey holdfast, enter some competitions. Also join a club if possible. I have had an immense amount of fun since I have. Once I place a model into the contest, I forget about it and enjoy the other models and the people. I have won, placed and not shown. I pay attention to those I KNOW know their stuff, do not pay attention to those that don't and am friendly to ALL. I have been to enough contests to know that it really is up to luck to win. I am happy just to see that my efforts seem to be on par with most of the others. I am still working to appease the perfect model inside of me, so I am not worried to a great extent on what others think. Anyway, enter and enjoy!
capnjock