My most recent trip to the archives has added some more to the subject of paint and gloss levels.
Firstly this list of manufacturers from a disposal file: ( B6588 M1725)
James Bros
Burger
Jenson and Nicholson
Taubmans
Sterling (78/79 Javis st Torrensville)
Consolidated
Taylors
BALM
Major Bros
Keystone
Glolac (Colax)
Colbind
Colfix
Grace Bros (bituminous)
Wesco
Velvene ( Davison)
Rickaha
Premier varnishes and paint
United paint co
G&A Hewson
I have the feeling this list is fairly exhaustive.
Another of the disposal files drew attention to purchasers of disposal paint on selling them to the detriment of the reputation of the original manufacturers (B6588 1892 & 1748) Whelan the wrecker being the main culprit. Manufacturers complained that much of the paint being disposed of were made to a war emergency specification where colourfastness and durability was not a priority and the use of those paints by civilians might damage company reputations because of a perception of low quality. This reinforces the view expressed in any number of files read that the paints used 1939 until mid-1944 were problematic on a number of levels but quality and durability a persistent complaint.
A file that was extremely informative was MP508/1 305/733607. (Bar 3300347) This file documents a meeting held at parliament house Canberra between the Minister for Home Security and a number of academics and manufacturers. The experts include Dakin with Berger as one of the manufacturers. (About 15 present)
The file details quite comprehensively the history of what had transpired up until 1943, the difficulties, aims and future of paint.
One of the Holy Grails was found! That being a colour chip card from Berger paints along with two other specific samples. They were found in files MP508/1 [ 305/773/146] and MP508/1 [305/773/146] I have attached photos of these. Negotiations with the Archives are ongoing to have spectrometer readings made available and attached to the file notes.
Interestingly I was told that there is a lot of equipment to do this kind of work in the Archives lad and the nearby art gallery lab but both facilities are unused on account of the lack of staff and funding to run them. It makes sense that they would have that stuff from a conservation point of view. It is incredible that the very expensive equipment including x-ray facilities is unused.
Also read from the files was the decisions to consolidate the colours across the services into Khaki Green No 3 post 1945. All vehicles were to be painted gloss except in arras north and overseas. To align with the RAAF preferences “matt” was to mean the same as “egg shell” being a gloss level of around 4% to 5% the previous army and civil requirement was dead flat meaning less than 1% although this was often hard to attain and very difficult to maintain.
Also noted was a file that showed all colours in the standard Camouflage range could be made by mixing N light stone, T dark earth, U night black, A white, and K foliage green, R red together in various quantities as follows.
B Light slate 5 parts N, 2 Foliage green, T dark earth.
D Dark Grey 8N, 4U, 2A, 1K
F Grey Green 4A, 3N, 1K (Noted as approximate)
L Scrub green (TBA when copy arrives)
P Light Brown (TBA) (noted as approximate as not red enough)
S Basalt Red (TBA
C Slate Grey 11N, 4U, 4K, 1A
E Purple Grey 8U, 8A, 1R
H Light Green 3N, 2K
M Dark Green 3K, 2J, 2U, 1N
Q Darwin Stone 5N, 2T, 1R
A file note ( bar code 9545076) on paint disposals 2 August 1944 noted :
“
Paints.
The paint stocks held throughout the commonwealth in types A,B and C are considered valueless for the following reasons.
1. They were made on the original standards association specifications to quickly carry out dull toning throughout the commonwealth when the Japanese position in the northern area was serious
2. No previous experience on camouflage paint was available in this country
3. The material generally proved unsatisfactory for a durable camouflage paint , and since the original material was manufactured and dispersed to the various states of the commonwealth , many paints have been developed by the Department of Home Security and of the Army to give far more satisfactory results.
”
This reflects much of what was discussed in various camouflage paint committee meetings in late 1942 and throughout 1943, and especially in the previously mentioned file (3300347) where local purchase and poor quality was mentioned.
That file also makes clear local purchase refers to the purchase by civil authorities and the military from one of the many paint manufacturers rather than from a local hardware with a rough eye match determining colour and whatever was on the shelf determining type.
The issue so far as paint type and quality was a consequence of the very broad specification in the Australian Standards emergency specification (the oft’ quoted ( E ) K 509 -1941 ) where exact specifications for the chemical makeup of the paint was not made, rather a broad requirement where much could be read into was laid down.
The conference attendees dived themselves down the lines of makers and consumers where the makers were sensitive to “trade secrets’ and consumers wanted a uniform durable product.
So far as I could tell this was never satisfactorily resolved and notes in papers much later ( late 44 and early 45 ) when a uniform colour was being addressed the difficulty was overcome by the consumer , in this case the Military, specified the technicalities ( Oil based Alkyd , Nitrocellulose Lacquer and so on, and in some detail ) However even this allowed for variations according to Manufactures secret recipes and I would suppose a preference for one “brand” over the other existed in the factories and with the troops. I think this would be especially so for those companies with links to overseas manufacturers such as BALM who used “Du Pont “formulas and materials.
In all of the files I have read so far on Camouflage paint 1939 – 1945 none speaks to any difficulties regarding colour matching. Some discuss the various types of pigments and their availability though I have not yet found one that formulates the pigment mix for the various colours.
I am taking this to mean, at this point in my discoveries, colour matching against the standards was not an issue. For me this means one of two things:
The first is they did not care, close enough was good enough.
The second is that the pigment formulas were precise enough so that a uniform match against the standards was consistently attainable by all manufacturers.
There is nothing in the files I have seen that would support an argument one way or the other. There is however many mentions of lack of colour fastness with fading to lighter shades being common. This seems to have been contingent on the paints chemical formulation and flatness with flatter paints fading faster. (Apart from exposure to sunlight of course)
Mention is also made in several places of the paints fragile finish where scuffing and discolouration due to spills etc. was common.
In having these files copied for my own collection I have paid to have them digitised and placed online so they are available for all. There are some files where I have had a page here and there copied which I will scan and post here eventually.
I will put up the links when the online versions are available and post the spectrometer readings far and wide when that project is finally done.
|