Ken Merrick's "Luftwaffe Camouflage & Markings" book

[Richard T. Eger]

Dear Fellow Researchers,

I presume that Ken's book is in numerous hands by now, but there has been very little written about what people think about it, other than a lot of discussion about one color chip. This surprises me, as the book is probably the most anticipated publishing event for us in the last year, if not longer. Okay, guys, it's time to tell!!!

Regards,
Richard

[rauhbautz]

To all of those who have actually received the book, CONGRATUALATIONS!
I have just received another notice from Amazon that delivery will be again delayed as it is now listed as "not released". They have kindly allowed my order to stand until then. Anyone else in USA having the same problem, as it seems that it has been shipped to other locales.
Regards,
Bob

[Von Alles]

Dear Mr Eger, I am pleased to share comments with you about this long awaited book.

1) Not cheap
2) Average printing (I saw better)
3) most poctures already published
4) no profile
5) a lot of answers...but new questions ! *
6) a huge research work !
* For instance :
a) about the Me 262A landed is Switzerland (white 3) : Mr MERRICK, according to contempory color descriptions, says : 82/83 scheme. But color photos exist, with a brown color... This machine was restaured in Mûnich in 81/82 colors
b) What is the darkest color on a b&w pic : 81 or 83 ?
and so on.
Restauration from a B & W photo is more and more difficult...

Friendly,
Von Alles

[Richard T. Eger]

Dear Von Alles,

Thank you for your comments. I haven't seen the book myself, so can only respond to your comments:

1) True

2) Hmmm, that's odd. It was my understanding that Ken's book was to be printed on Ian Allan's new state-of-the-art press. Sounds like it wasn't, which is a shame.

3) I have mixed feelings about the situation of "most pictures already published". True, it would be nice to have new photos and there are authors that seem to be able to come up with them to entice us to buy their offerings. On the other hand, they aren't all that easy to come by. About a year ago I paid a very handsome sum of money through eBay to purchase Me 262 photos from Ken Bokelman's estate. In the end, much to my surprise (and chagrin), I found that probably 95% or more of the photos had been published before in Smith and Creek's monumental 4-part opus. Clearly, S&C had scrounged until there was "essentially no more to be found". Oh, more will surface, but the dilligence of their search became quite apparent.

4) I assume you mean color profiles. It's an author's choice. I am sure that Ken wanted his work to be as authoritative as possible and utilizing color profiles enters in an area of subjectivity, something he may have wished to avoid. What you do have in their place are accurately rendered reproductions of actual paint colors, albeit there was a mix-up in one of the chips.

5) What is presented is the lifetime culmination of one man's extensive research, perhaps the current last word on the subject. Even then, there may remain unknowns.

6) I concur. I'd like to hear more on this aspect.

5) a) I've seen the color photos of the Dubendorf Me 262 and have been left with the impression that they are rather faded with age. I wouldn't hang my hat on the brown color in those photos.

5) b) The darkness of a color on a b&w photo has been the subject of enormous previous discussion on TOCH!. Many attribute anomalies to the type of film used. In essence, I tend to doubt that you can get a clearcut answer to your question. Clearly, you recognize this from your last comment.

Thank you for taking the time to give your assessment. I'd like to hear from others on the subject.

Regards,
Richard

[Nick Beale]

Re the insatiable appetite for new photos - I hope that readers would be able to give KM due credit for new (and better) interpretations of ones that may well be familiar.

Also, it ought to be recognised that the photos are there to illustrate what the text is saying and often it's photos you already know that will do that job best.

[Von Alles]

Hello and thank you to all.

I did want to criticize Mr MERRICK when I said that most of the pictures was already published . Of course, they are used in this book to illustrate the text.
It is the same thing for the profiles. But people who don't buy the book for the moment have to know that . I was not disappointed by this book, which very complementary of UHLMANN's book. Some informations are great. Maybe, during these years, I mystified myself in thinking Luftwaffe camouflages more easy to decript. I am ffeling like in 1977 I discovered a Kookaburra book about Luftwaffe colors writen by SMITH & GALLASPY...

Good evening
Von Alles

[markojeras]

I got the book only recently and first impression is

I am happy to see all that photos in ONE book (I do not have some 50+ books in which some photos have been published before), but I bought the book because the text and color chips.

The print of the book is traditional raster type, very good, but new technology of the FM raster is much better and I am surprised to see the book printed in 'old' fashion.

There is no need for profiles in this book, there are original 'factory' camouflage drawings in the book. That is what I wanted to see.

At the end, only one question: when will the second part be out?

Now, back to reading the book

With best regards,

Marko Jeras

[Jukka Juutinen]

How about paper quality? Given the fact that the book is heavily illustrated and is expensive, the buyer must be able to expect premium quality paper, like Galerie Art Gloss 115 g. I am not on the payroll on M-real´s Äänekoski paper mill, this paper is simply superb (the best Finnish aviation journal [Suomen Ilmailuhistoriallinen lehti] is printed on this) and should be mandatory for all non-pulp throw away books. It meets strictest archival standards, i.e. RA´s claim of glossy paper not meeting such standards is nonsense.

[Ruy Horta]

Personally I believe the lack of reaction is caused to large extend by having to wait for Volume 2, like Marko pointed out. Although I have glanced at the pages, reading some paragraphs to get a feel for the text, I've decided NOT to read the work until it is joined by volume 2.

Which is not a bad thing

The quality is similar to other Ian Allan/Classic publications, the merger seems to have had a good influence on quality control. The graphic content is good and would be new to many and certainly functional to most.

I love the way each chapters is numbered by a "mini number profile".

The paint charts are very good, down to texturing (cannot wait to get my greedy paws on the late war set).

Althoug proof is in eating the pudding, I have full confidence that this work will pass the mark.

What I am happy about is the fact that Merrick's work did not turn out to be a re-worked version of his original, nor an attempt to copy Ullmann, but having mentioned these it is clear that we have been spoiled.

A shame really...

Ah, the waiting, terrible!!

[Jukka Juutinen]

But how is the paper? I mean that my latest Classic book On Special Missions is printed on poorer paper than used by Squadron/Signal, yet Tony Buttler´s book on British Secret Projects (vol 3) from Midland Publishing (another Ian Allan company) is printed on nice glossy paper. It is interesting that the International Air Power Review is printed on very glossy paper and has superb photo reproduction (much better than any Classic book I have seen so far), yet sells for some 70% cheaper per page than Classic (meaning the relative impact of paper cost is far greater with the IAPR).