Info needed: correct colours for WWII Aust vehicles

[Mrs Vampire]

Hi Darryl

I think all of my high falutin ideas are out the window following some more reading on archive material.

Australian Khaki Green No 3 has turned up and I can find nothing on that from the Camouflage committee yet . I cant find a reference to it other than in words... It just pops up in the files early 1943... and referenced to another colour "medium green" which likewise just floats there .

I am settling on getting samples from my vehicles and trying to figure out how to get a near exact match to them. I have enough unfaded original on both to satisfy my pernicikityness.

The archives show a clear disconnect from the Camouflage committee, the Paint Committee , the Army and so on...then to top it off the folk at the coal face dont have a clue about all this and are going it alone.

I will have a look at the samples down at the AWM , some in Victoria and elsewhere. I can get my hands on the Australian Emergency Standard and will post a copy here when I have one.
But for me the situation has evolved to finding the best way to get colour from my vehicle without trucking a Tank down to the Paint shop !

To answer your question I have not seen any army vehicle repainted that is close to the colours on my Stuart.

I propose a number of reasons. ( but reserve the right to change at a moments notice)

1 It is assumed the Stuarts , being American , were imported in US Lusterless olive Drab. The evidence on my machine is that it was imported painted in British 223 ( or similar) because it was a commonwealth lend lease export. I suspect some Stuarts were imported in US colours because the documentation records the importation of M3s in march 1942 with miles on the clock and US fit out on board...my guess is used tanks from US army.

2 no one has researched the light stone completely or it was a variety of local colours. Certainly nothing I have seen on a vehicle is remotely like the colour chips from the AWM or Tonys door both of which are very similar to the colour on my Stuart. (BTW none of the greens on Tonys door are like the green on my stuart but they are like the green on my Blitz. )

To confound me completely I have discovered equipment stenciling on the rear armour deck that is obviously US army stencil blue!!! All the other Stencils on the Tank at the time of export were Black!!!

I have seen posted on Keiths Facebook photos of Australian Stuarts that have apparently carried US W numbers and Commonwealth T numbers...indicating they were issued to the US Army prior to export so I thought they would have been painted US olive Drab. Weirdly they numbers seem to have been painted white... and both behind the grouser rails which makes no sense at all to me. For those machines knowledge of their history would be needed to clear that up.

In the end I can make my own Tank quite authentic and document the provenance that informs my decisions. ( I think I may even leave some small areas of original paint exposed for later reference and historic interest.) But to speak for the fleet as a whole....wouldn't touch that with a barge pole .....save to say some of the schemes seem quite strange and I would love to hear the owners story about how they arrived at them .

Along the way some interesting discoveries are still coming to light . Early riveted M3 with square rear armour with horseshoe turrets ...in Australian service 1943!! Well why not...pull the turret of one and stick it on another and in doing so completely ruin the lovely M3 , M3 hybrid, M3A1 narrative ...then I thinks to meself...well if they can stuff around with the Paint Narrative why not the vehicle Narrative...

So I am minded of conversations I had with folk down at the AWM when the P-40 was going together....that in the end even with all the evidence to hand you have to choose a moment in time that you want your artifact to represent. They all changed from delivery to disposal with all sorts of combinations of paint , camo schemes , equipment and fitouts.

I have opted for a moment in time when the 13th were deployed down to Bribie island for exercises June 1943..... I am thinking Friday June the 18th just after stand down

[Mrs Vampire]

some people don't tell you stuff even though they must know it.

Dakins "the Art of camouflage" both editions available online . Not much use to me save to say the photograph in colour of a light stone , Khaki green truck so often posted elsewhere but unaccredited is from this book .


A705 172/1/1182 PART 1 DWB [Director of Works and Buildings] - The Art of Camouflage - Publications
Access status: Open Location: Canberra
1941 - 1951
http://recordsearch.naa.gov.au/scrip...e.asp?B=682682

[Mrs Vampire]

I now have the The whole file as PDF.

The art of Camouflage 1941 and 1942 Daikin

PM with an e-mail addy for a copy its 5.3 Megs big . If there was some way to store it on site I would do that.

[Mrs Vampire]

Today I rubbed back most of the rear armour and found all the stencils for the Axe, Mattock, Handle and Shovel .

I had a look at the closeness of commercially available paints and the Light Stone looking for a somewhat near match. I have around 100 colour chips in the whitish department and the only thing that is vaguely close is colorbond Paperbark.

Nothing in the Australian Standards or the BS colours is near. It looks like they modern colours are too pure where my Tank is a muddy whitish yellow.

Next I suppose I will have to attempt to mix up something on site and do my own eye match. I have three sources where I can have a look at original specification chips but no way to take those chips to a dealer to have them matched. I have spoken to Dulux, CSIRO and Sydney Uni seeking access to archival material from the time..none of them have any . The Australian Standard ,posted here earlier in the thread, is made from Unobtainium.

The Factory applied British Dark Green is all over the rear of the Tank and in good shape where it is beneath the Light stone.

The American Stencil Blue is an exact match to that currently made in the US
by the Drab Olive supplier.

Looking at my photos The colour is only mostly like them it is different on account of how the camera deals with light. Same for colour cards held up against the job they come out blindingly white yet held up against the paint they look quite close to the eye.

I also found drips of Yellow paint between the light stone and the green. My guess is that the Turret Squadron and Troop numbers were yellow. My Stuart was A squadron 13th armoured.

[Tony Wheeler]

Originally Posted by Gina Vampire

I had a look at the closeness of commercially available paints and the Light Stone looking for a somewhat near match. I have around 100 colour chips in the whitish department and the only thing that is vaguely close is colorbond Paperbark. Nothing in the Australian Standards or the BS colours is near.

Gina, how close is BSC 361 Light Stone? In theory it should be identical to original BSC 61 Light Stone.

[Mrs Vampire]

Hi Tony not sure. I will have to get some mixed up. At least with the british paint the standards still exist and exact colours can be made.

I am also saddened to learn that all the good work Bob Mosley put into getting a set of standard colours up is lost.

Protec in Adelaid no longer employes Bobs contact and the formula was never put into the computer. I think this is a tragic loss of some hard done research and Bobs legacy.

I am working on three mixes of green and still at a loss as to how to transfer the Light stone on my vehicle onto something reproducible.

I know at least that modern pigments react to light quite differently to the originals so no photograph will show the paint identically . Its all about how radio waves react with particles on a surface.

There is also a problem /difference with matting agents . The modern ones will not go as flat as 1942/3 paint. It seems to be a struggle for Modern paints to get below 10% which is low sheen .

[Mike Cecil]

Wartime instructions called for adding very fine sand to increase the 'matt-ness'. Is that an option?

Hard to spray I imagine, but could be brushed on. Problem is keeping the sand evenly distributed throughout the can while dipping the brush - the paint at the top will quickly change 'matt-ness' after only a very short time of no agitation.

Gina, I have to applaud your tenacity: the end result should be very satisfying for you.

Mike

[Mike K]

Talcum powder works as a flattening agent

Also fine silica powder as used by potters , the hobby shops may help out ?

[Mrs Vampire]

Hi Mike

I may try to flatten using flatting base from the refinisher shop.

I think I may try to find a paint technologist from one of the major paint companies and have a chat.
The project has moved slightly from finding the correct colours to reproducing them.

It is really hard to get the people down at the paint suppliers across the issues. It saddens me that every restoration seems to have to go through this .

[Richard Farrant]

Originally Posted by Gina Vampire

Hi Mike

I may try to flatten using flatting base from the refinisher shop.

I think I may try to find a paint technologist from one of the major paint companies and have a chat.
The project has moved slightly from finding the correct colours to reproducing them.

It is really hard to get the people down at the paint suppliers across the issues. It saddens me that every restoration seems to have to go through this .

Hi Gina,
I have been following your thread and know that it relates more to your country but the following may be of interest.
We are very lucky in the UK that there are so many paint companies who are willing to produce the various shades of paint for our restorations. The type of paint mainly used is a synthetic alkyd paint which is 2 hour quick drying of a type made for machinery use. One make I use is HMG Paint, Speedline C71. It is usually supplied as a semi-matt, which appears to have a sheen to it, but after a few weeks of curing and slight weathering it matts down very nicely. The benefit of this finish is that not being dead flat matt it does not show oil or grease spots and can easily be cleaned.
Something to explain regarding dead flat matt paints, a guy came to me quiet distraught as he had restored his jeep in the original US shade of Olive Drab, his first test drive revealed an oil leak from the transfer box that resulted in the whole of the back end of the jeep body covered in oil spots. I trying to clean it, the situation was made worse, the paint absorbed the oil. I think you will find if using a dead flat Matt that it may look good initially but on a short time of use, hand and foot marks will mar the paint as well oil and grease, etc., which once in the paint, will not come out.

When I worked in army workshops the camo paint had a slight sheen and was not what I termed "blackboard paint", which is what a dead flat matt is like.

I wanted a sample of the British SCC No.2 Brown for a restoration and was lucky to find a bracket for a regulator box with a large patch hidden from dirt and light for about 70 years, this was checked by a paint company and replicated with great results. If you cannot get a part of your tank to a paint company, ask if they might have a representative in the area who could bring a colour tester out, if you convince them there is a market for sales to other enthusiasts, they may well play ball.

regards, Richard

[Mrs Vampire]

Hi Richard. I am impressed with the amount of information available in the UK so far as british paint is concerned.

So far as the finish being smudged and knocked around I am not so sure I want perfection . Todds stuart has a variety of touch ups on it as well as being scuffed and chipped after being in use for about seven years. It looks fabulous.

So I may opt for a surface that is somewhat fragile and looks used. I like that look. I am not a big fan of pristine "hot rod" restorations....I prefer something that appears as they did when in use.

[Mrs Vampire]

Latest from Protec. I provided them with Three NOS parts.

Two in the later dark foliage green (M) and one in the earlier lighter green (J)

Protec provided me with three samples one they think may have been the green made for Bob Mosely ( I think M) the other two from my samples. The degree of flatting in their Fleet Khaki Green No 3 ( M ) was good . In the two samples mixed for me one had none and was full gloss and the other was satin.

I will flatten them both down with flatting base and have another look .

The paint they provide is similar to that brought at the hardware chain although labeled and supplied as Industrial Alkyd Enamel.

It is difficult to brush taking two coats to cover grey primer. The finished result is streaky on account of uneven distribution of the flatting agent and thin. It takes several hours to achieve touch dry on a reasonable warm day (28 deg C ).
I have still not seen anything to match the Coulthard's for sprayability, brushability and finish.

[Ian Fawbert]

Hi Gina,

Maybe try these guys. Very nice, very helpful, very used to MV restorers!

http://www.floritecoatings.com.au/

Not a big drive from you and well worth giving them a call and going to have a chat. They are an old place with a lot of experience. I've used their paint on my jeep and a lot of the guys in the AMVCS have used it too. Trevor Boyle put me onto them- seems to be all he uses for his resto's. it has worn very well on my GPW, still nice and flat (actually flattened more with age I believe), 11 years after I first started painting it and 8 years/ 6000 miles after she was registered.

I did have to use hardener, as the quickdry enamel wiped off once dry with fuel or thinners, but with hardener, nothing has touched it, even brake fluid struggles!

With all the research you've done and samples/ info you can provide, they should be able to help a lot. Price is excellent too- 4L of custom OD was around $50 2 or 3 years back. They have everything you'd need too, including undercoat and thinners and flatteners or know where to get it.

Might be easier than the big guys who, if I read right don't seem too helpful.

Cheers,
Ian.

[Mrs Vampire]

Many thanks for that advice Ian. I will see them today.

So far I am prepared to say the Protec Fleet Khaki Green No 3 is a near exact match with the FGT and the NOS spares I have.

I am nearly certain this is the Colour Bob Mosley researched and is responsible for .

My dilemma gets more dilemmarish though . My Stuart was painted British Green No 13 when manufactured for commonwealth lend lease export. ( That green has been given a variety of names however the British standard only assigns numbers to them.)

The difficulty is that it is a US version of that colour. I came across a similar difficulty when doing the P-40. On that project paint was taken from the lap joints and other places on the airframes original skins, where a near original colour was present. The paint did not match any of the Australian or british standards. The original Manufacturer was contacted ( DuPont USA) colour codes, as specified in the contracts were obtained along with paint chips and they still did not match . It seems that Curtiss , the Boing of its day, in the heat of war mobilisation, made their own shades.
In the end Dulux Australia's laboratories used their technology to devise a near perfect match.

I dread the story for the Stuart will be the same. With the P-40 it was possible to take the wing skins into the lab.... not so easy with a ton of Armour plate.

[Mrs Vampire]

Alex over at Flourite was very very helpful. We will due a spectrograph on the Stauat sometime soon.

I have learned flatting base will not take the paint below satin in gloss and special powders only available at factories needs to be used if opacity and gloss is to be controlled.

They have offered to flat down the samples I have to hand. They have done a number of Khakis for vehicles and I discovered the sample I had done earlier by R&D was done by them but to a modern colour because the sample I provided was not passed on. OHHh the things you find out...

Confirmation the Greens and Browns manufactured during the war and later contained Lead and that is now illegal to use. The Lead was not only a preservative and anti corrosion agent it was the colouring pigment .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead_paint

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead(II,IV)_oxide

Because of the reflective properties of those pigments Vs modern pigment all modern reproductions will look different to the original in different lighting conditions.

So I have to settle on not only a time in history for the colours but also a time of year and time of day ... So winter ( june July) and Noon ???

then this arrrrrrggggggggg https://www.scribd.com/fullscreen/11...ciuytqmqflzrst

The quest for perfection is ,consequently, a hopeless cause.

[Mike K]

re the flattening agent. you want to find the flattening stuff they use in red oxide primer , the old red primer had a dead flat appearance

mike

[Mrs Vampire]

Will ask Mike.

[Ian Fawbert]

No worries. I am glad they were able to help/fill in gaps/give direction. I have always found them to be like that.

Good luck,
Ian.

[Mrs Vampire]

Have now done a spectrograph on Bobs Khaki Green No 3

The colour spectrum is exactly the same as my NOS spare parts save for Bobs being around 10% lighter. That may be because the sample Bob had were light exposed or that they were a part of the natural variations in the paint of the time.

Florite now have a spectrographic match for U.S Lusterless Olive Drab No 9 ( 1939- 1949) for anyone wanting something exactly the same as that available from the U.S

Gloss measurements on all My NOS examples and the U.S Olive Drab are less than 1% . The Protec samples using flatting base are around 20% and their Khaki Green No 3 is 2% ( Just about indistinguishable from 1%) .

We tackle the Tank and the FGT next week .

[Mrs Vampire]

Flatting base used in the 1940s was Talc. Florite have been a boon . Now spectrographed what we could on the Tank and Blitz and will arrange for a loan spectro to do the paint chips at the AWM.

Below:Protec supplied Australian Khaki Green No 3 colour M from the official chip set. This is the "Bob Mosely" colour .
It is a luscious look but more of a satin finish than dead flat. ( some say "egg shell" )
In the second shot a NOS Khaki Green No 3 part next to the Protek mix then third shot with half of the helmet glossed up with water. This demonstrates the darkening effect of Gloss and why the protec colour appears somewhat darker than the NOS parts I have.
Protec is slightly glossier and even my NOS parts are around 4% on account of handling and oil . The spec (and the chips at the AWM) is dead flat. ( less than 1% gloss)

[Shane]

Hi all

Have come across this tin of paint any idea what year it was made?



Cheers Shane

[Mrs Vampire]

No clues on the tin?? Looks like 1940 and is No 3

any chances of a swatch for comparison ?? bit of primed tin or Al Al about 4"x2" couple of dips or brushed coats would be grand

[Tony Wheeler]

Shane, that's LIQUID GOLD you have there! You may have solved our whole standardization problem. That old lead paint is the real McCoy, all we have to do is match it. Can you produce some colour chips for us? No need to make your own, just grab some from any paint shop and reuse them. I use Colorbond chips from the local hardware shop.




Depending on the batch date it could be pre '42 or post '42 Khaki Green. It's Berger paint, and they were the official supplier when camo was first introduced in Jan '42:

MP 508/1 item 305/733/244 Camouflage Paints. January 1942
Australian Standard Camouflage Colours. Berger Paint Company Camouflage Paint Chips.

A .. .. .. .. White
B .. .. .. .. Light Slate
C .. .. .. .. Slate Grey
D .. .. .. .. Dark Grey
E .. .. .. .. Purple Grey
F .. .. .. .. Grey Green
H .. .. .. .. Light Green
J .. .. .. .. Khaki Green
K .. .. .. .. Foliage Green
L .. .. .. .. Scrub Green
M .. .. .. .. Dark Green
N .. .. .. .. Light Stone
P .. .. .. .. Light Brown
Q .. .. .. .. Darwin Stone
R .. .. .. .. Red
S .. .. .. .. Basalt Red
T .. .. .. .. Dark Earth
U .. .. .. .. Night Black
W .. .. .. .. Light Earth

Khaki Green was one of the colours modified after Sept '42:

Standards Association of Australia. N.S.W. Camouflage Paints Committee. September 1942

11 th. meeting of Committee, it was advised that the standard range of colours was to be amended as follows:-

Khaki Green J To be darker.

Either way Shane it's a very exciting find. Can you mix it properly and post a photo here?

[Mike Cecil]

Hi Tony,

Berger were big manufacturers of paint in Australia (their website claims they supplied the original paint for the Sydney Harbour Bridge).

BALM Pty Ltd, the British Australian Lead Manufacturers Pty Ltd, and manufacturers of DUCO and DULUX brandnames, were a main supplier of camouflage paint to the Aust forces on WW2 (I have copies of correspondence).

My Jan 1943 dated Standards Association colour cards don't have a paint source indicated. Wonder which of the suppliers provided them.

Mike

[Mike K]

I had a can of wartime light stone AKA desert yellow or whatever it was called .

I found it in a shed in Wodonga , the scrap metal yard - Plumbs ? We made a trip to the scrap yards during an early Corowa . The can was rectangular shaped and under the small lid it had a cork seal . Somebody else had some of the same cans as well , I think it was C Anderson .

My can is long lost , I should have kept it

BTW Plumbs had a 44 gallon drum full of N0. 3 mics with the carbon inserts and a yard full of 19 set leads , all mixed up like a huge bundle of metal snakes

[Mike K]

https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/F03642/

Ford vans in 3 colour camo RAAF. The Ford vans would probably be for training the navigators in DF , direction finding . The vans would drive around the countryside and the trainees would practice the DF locating with wireless sets in the vans . There are also Bedfords in that line up .

[Tony Wheeler]

Excellent find Mike, we rarely get to see WWII camo in colour. Evidently RAAF Parkes put a lot of effort into vehicle camo. The entire fleet has undergone full repaint in what appears to be a well thought out scheme. Note consistent pattern for each vehicle type, and colours well chosen to match the terrain. Like most such endeavours they've taken some licence with the colour sets approved for use in January '42. The result is a unique 4-colour scheme, which I would hazard a guess at being: Khaki Green J; Grey Green F; Dark Green M; Dark Earth T. Interestingly the Bedfords appear to display the same scheme minus Khaki Green, suggesting some experimentation / refinement. Evidently they found the official schemes unsuitable so they developed their own local scheme. Which is fair enough I reckon, given the accompanying instruction: "The colour combination selected should approximate to the colours of the country in which it is expected the vehicle will operate." On that score we can judge for ourselves in this case, thanks to colour film! I'd say they succeeded admirably, although perhaps less so on the Ford vans, which look rather pale to me.

Of particular interest are the camouflaged ambos, something extremely rarely seen, as this policy was reversed in July '42: "Vehicles carrying the “Geneva” cross will not be camouflaged." I notice even the aircraft tractor was camouflaged, despite retaining yellow for safety visibility, somewhat defeating the purpose I'd suggest! Likewise the old tanker retained some yellow patches, and what a fabulous looking vehicle it is. I reckon we should make more use of early '42 camo schemes on restos, they're an important part of Australian camo history, and what better way to make your vehicle stand out in the parade!

[Mike K]

Being a RAAF base the paint on those vehicles may have been left over from aircraft ?

I think the aircraft seen are Wackett trainers ?

Tony, the colour u marked "F" looks more like light stone to me ?

The refuelling truck has me wondering what brand it is ?

The chap standing at attention on the tractor looks kinda funny

It is some kind of formal parade .

[Rob Beale]

I have been trying to source this colour for an early 1941 Universal Carrier Mk I* project, and came across the following article 2008 by Mike Starmer & Mike Cooper on the MAFVA modellers' site:

http://www.mafva.net/other%20pages/starmer%20camo.htm

Quote:
"1939-41 – Bold horizontal/ diagonal patterns of two greens following M.T.P. 20 of June 1939. The most usual colours were a basic of Khaki Green No. 3 and Dark Green No.4. Plain G3 was an occasional alternative. Infantry tanks Matilda I & II appear quite dark in tone, possibly Khaki Green No. 3 and Deep Bronze Green No. 24 in some cases."


An earlier version 2005 on an Aussie modellers site here has the following extra useful info. (my highlighting)

Quote:
"Europe 1939-41 – Bold horizontal/ diagonal patterns of two greens following M.T.P.20 of June 1939. The most usual colours were a basic of Khaki Green No. 3 (BS 381C Middle Bronze Green No. 23 ) and Light Green No.5 (Light Bronze Green No. 22). Plain G3 or G5 were occasional alternatives. Infantry tanks Matilda I & II apparently only G3 and Dark Green G4 (Deep Bronze Green No. 24)."

The main difference between the two articles is his substitution of Dark Green No.4 for Light Green No.5, but the alternative colour names are interesting.

If this is true AND the paint shades in BS381c are unchanged (except for the effects of modern paint materials) then Khaki Green No3 is also known as Middle Bronze Green

(I have used a lighter green on our LP2 resto that I found in a NZ Dulon fleet colours chart in the 1980s which I now believe is called Light Bronze Green).

Has anyone else used Middle Bronze Green?

Rob

[Mrs Vampire]

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.