Anyone had any luck with putting Future over a NMF such as automotive
duplicolor? I've got a P-51D that I just built where I would like to
seal the decals. I'm really happy with the shine from the rattle can,
but would hate to kill it with a gloss overcoat.
I have sprayed Future over a number of models with Old Silver, SnJ Spray Metal, Testors Metallizer, and Alclad II Lacquer finishes. The Future does indeed diminish the metallic effect. Sometimes this is barely noticeable, and others, like on my B-29 which used Alclad's Polished Aluminum shade, the effect was disastrous and ruined all my hard work.
So, it depends. P-51 wings were painted with silver lacquer. Future over the wings (except the ailerons and flaps) would be appropriate. On the fuselage, I would try to spray over the decals only, but I do understand how difficult that could be.
Lee Kolosna
What about some glear gloss or satin acrylic paint as a finisher perhaps it's easier than the future approach. I don't know as I've not tried by maybe one of the others...
...tony
what about metalizer sealer thinned with a few drops of lacquer thinneror airbrush thinner? thats what I used on my sabre dog. Clyde
Gee, I'm responding to a post started by me that I didn't even really start! ???
I've used Polly Scale and Testors acrylic semi-gloss and gloss clears over natural metal finishes and they have a similar effect to Future in that they diminsh the metallic effect to a degree, perhaps to a lesser extent than the Future. I haven't tried Metalizer Sealer that Clyde mentions and many modelers swear by it. I therefore can't comment on it although Clyde's F-86D looked smashing with it.
The fact is though any clear varnish over a metallic paint is going to knock down the shine a tad. Sometimes this is desirable, like on a P-47 which weathered to a fairly dull patina quite quickly in real life. On other aircraft, like a B-58 or a Thunderbirds F-105, the shininess is highly desired and I would recommend not putting anything over the NMF. This presents the modeler with a dilemma for decal integration. Any clear portion of a decal is going to have a slightly different reflective property than the surrounding metallic paint. The solution is to trim all the decals so that no clear shows, but even then you have the decal marking itself that typically has a glossy finish which may or may not be accurate. I've created masks for my national insignia and sprayed semi-gloss clear on just the markings themselves. It's a lot of work, but on a showcase model it's worth it to me. I really don't want to repeat the disappointment I had with my Silverplate B-29 that should have been very, very shiny and was instead dulled down significantly by the Future overcoat. I learned my lesson the hard way on that one and when I did the Trumpeter 1/32 scale P-38L, it had no clear coat over it at all. The same will be true for this F-80C that I'm currently working on.
Lee Griffin noticed that the size of a model has a lot to do with it. The larger the model, the more sensitive a NMF model is to clear overcoats. He held up a 1/72 scale model that someone had done to my B-29. Both were varnished with clears. Looking at the tonal variation for one small section, the models were identical. But the smaller model looked just fine whereas the big 1/48 bomber looked dull. So, no more clear coats over NMF models for me, if I can help it.
Lee K
Thanks Lee. That is real good information. I guess decaling would present a problem.
I've Futured over a couple of Alclad-painted models to protect ALPS-printed decals. Doesn't look too bad, from a distance. I've got to do it to the 737 I'm working on now, to keep the Draw Decals on the model. I may experiment with adding a touch of clear flat to the gloss for some of the panels to change the reflectivity a little.
Ben