Ranger Crackle Paints

[chester]

The fact that the cracking is not so perceptible without magnification may well be a blessing to those in the smaller scales. I'm always worried that just about anything I do in 1/87 that can't actually be measured may be too large for the scale.
   I like both Chuck's and Ander's results. Nice little shed on the lower photo there by the way.

[finescalerr]

The more I see of this stuff the better I like it. Each of you has gotten excellent results with apparently minimal effort. -- Russ

[shropshire lad]

The more I see of this stuff the better I like it. Each of you has gotten excellent results with apparently minimal effort. -- Russ

  " excellent results with minimal effort" ? That is not the sort of language that we like to hear around here . We want to hear about the long protracted herculean efforts of trial and error required to achieve barely passable results which can then be adopted by Chuck and turned around to produce spectacularly realistic results .

  Maximum results with minimum effort ?   Pah , heresy , I say .

  Nick
   ( I must get some of this new wonder paint)

[lab-dad]

I need to get some of this also. (Nick if you have trouble let me know)
I keep wondering if the boards were coated with a sealer, may be even a gloss clear if the cracking/crazing would be even more prevalent? Didnt Marc mention this (on another thread for something similar)?
Has anyone tried?..
Good to see everyone having / show3ing their results.
-Marty

[Mr Potato Head]

If you apply it thick it comes out perfect if you want crackle, if you want chipping use scotch tape after it looks dry, about 30 minuets in my case. Wait overnight and it is harder to chip but looks very realistic. The crackle is subtle from the naked eye, but upon close inspection it is b-e-a-u-t-ful. I have been using paint thinner before the application to make it easier to chip that's what I want, and I thinned some last night with water  and it worked great and was more uniform in thickness and it didn't cup my boards as bad. Today after my tryptophan nap I plan to try sealer and artist oil washes for more color and depth, I'll send pictures when I awake from my coma
Gil
Happy big bird day and sweet Potato's

[finescalerr]

Gil, if you can, shoot photos of the steps and the results. -- Russ

[eTraxx]

Did a test today with the white picket fence stuff .. using diff under coats. The wood 'boards' are "Skinny Sticks" .. craft sticks from WalMart .. .285" wide

[Malachi Constant]

Ed --

Cool ... informative ... thanks for testing, labeling (quite clearly) and posting!

Cheers,
Dallas

[gin sot]

Normally I model by a sort of modified Pareto principle.  Since I'm not a contest modeler and I'd like to have a modestly functional layout within my remaining lifespan, I can accept a 90 percent result for about 40 percent of the effort.  For this reason, I try to avoid obsessive navel-gazing in favor of completing models (not that I've been completely successful in this).  The "good enough" rule works for me, but then again my standards are higher than average and I try to observe subtleties, so my "good enough" is pretty decent if I do say so myself.  The point of this hagiographic preamble is that I'm trying to conceptualize what an acceptable "cracked paint" result in HO would be.

The first thing that needs to be determined is the average size range for real-life paint chips.  Offhand I'd guess something like 1/4" to 1", but that would need to be field verified.

The second step is to determine an appropriate scale resolution.  Personally, I see no point in wasting precious time modeling details too small to be seen under normal viewing conditions, but certain details that might fall outside this parameter might add value to a foreground model if slightly exaggerated-- for truly minute details in a small scale like HO, I think a factor of 50% over scale might be acceptable, but remember I'm talking out my ass here and this is all speculation pending review.

Based on my cocktail napkin calculations, a "scale" HO paint chip would be approximately .003" to .01" in actual size, and a based on my exaggeration-for-the-sake-of-visibility factor, a size range of .005" to .015" might be acceptable.

My question for the crackle paint experimenters is "what size paint chips are you able to get?"

[Malachi Constant]

My question for the crackle paint experimenters is "what size paint chips are you able to get?"

Ed's photo above has sticks that are .285" wide ... print the photo to actual size and you can measure those and "see" if you can see them. 

Cheers,
Dallas

[Junior]

Normally I model by a sort of modified Pareto principle.  Since I'm not a contest modeler and I'd like to have a modestly functional layout within my remaining lifespan, I can accept a 90 percent result for about 40 percent of the effort.  For this reason, I try to avoid obsessive navel-gazing in favor of completing models (not that I've been completely successful in this).  The "good enough" rule works for me, but then again my standards are higher than average and I try to observe subtleties, so my "good enough" is pretty decent if I do say so myself.  The point of this hagiographic preamble is that I'm trying to conceptualize what an acceptable "cracked paint" result in HO would be.

The first thing that needs to be determined is the average size range for real-life paint chips.  Offhand I'd guess something like 1/4" to 1", but that would need to be field verified.

The second step is to determine an appropriate scale resolution.  Personally, I see no point in wasting precious time modeling details too small to be seen under normal viewing conditions, but certain details that might fall outside this parameter might add value to a foreground model if slightly exaggerated-- for truly minute details in a small scale like HO, I think a factor of 50% over scale might be acceptable, but remember I'm talking out my ass here and this is all speculation pending review.

Based on my cocktail napkin calculations, a "scale" HO paint chip would be approximately .003" to .01" in actual size, and a based on my exaggeration-for-the-sake-of-visibility factor, a size range of .005" to .015" might be acceptable.

My question for the crackle paint experimenters is "what size paint chips are you able to get?"

Gin sot.......These are the smallest cracks I have been able to get. The boards are 10" wide in 1/87 scale. Added a paint brush and a couple of nails for good measure.

Anders

[lab-dad]

That looks darn fine to me!
Off to the store!
-marty

[DaKra]

The two boards on the right seem to show grain-influenced paint chipping, an excellent effect.   What, if anything, did you do differently on these two?     

[Junior]

Dave.....probably digged a little deeper with an x-acto knife and pin before I put on the paint. Also removed a bit more paint with scoth tape. How do you like your paint brush?

[DaKra]

Dave.....probably digged a little deeper with an x-acto knife and pin before I put on the paint. Also removed a bit more paint with scoth tape. How do you like your paint brush?

Gees, I wish you guys would remember to clean those brushes!