"parade uniform or campaign uniform ?" Topic

Hi All,

Do you prefer the campaign or parade uniform, and why ?
The campaign dress looks pretty messy (dirt, mud, blood). How do you paint it ?

The parade dress is too feminine looking to me.
What do you think ?

Parade uniform every time. Why – because thats what the troops wore in battle, and that is what our figures represent most of the time…

(Contrary to popular and contemporary perception, where possible troops were urged to spruce themselves up for battle as much as possible, not only to occupy them, and take their minds of the impending butchery, but also to intimidate the enemy, and enhance esprit de corps and subunit cohesion.)

I have both but tend to paint most units in campaign uniform – that being said, I agree with Sparker that units dressed up for battle more often than I think we reckon

When I get around to actually painting, I tend to paint parade dress. In 28mm, I often add mud and/or dust up to about the knees…

At least do the guard in dress : ) …. but yes I like my guys in full dress. Mind you there are certain nationalistic characteristics to consider, for example late Prussian's have a certain no fuss business like look about them, however they probably are not the norm.

Parade uniforms for me every time. It's all about the pageantry.

Full Dress.
That's what the uniforms were intended to look like.
And also agree that troops often dressed the part for battle.

You are never overdressed on the battlefiedl!

Greetings

I prefer a campaign look myself.

Full Dress

Parade dress, I want my chaps to look smart.

Campaign dress is fine for marching, but games of marching are a bit dull, I prefer to fight battles:)

I don't have enough time left in my life to get into campaign mode, so do dress uniforms as the norm. I did convert some French line to the 88th in Spain with white tail-less vest; brown "baloon overalls", and covered shako, but that is because I had Waterloo era French that I wanted to use for the Peninsular. I also did 36 of the 16eme Leger with brown overalls, otherwise in dress, which may have been factual.

If I can ever do the 48 battlions I have planned, I might do some others in campaign mode! My Spanish are quite another matter.

GdeP

Parade dress. This is mainly because I like the pageantry but also because I like to use all the same figures in each unit. This works when they are in full uniform but might look a bit odd for figures in campaign dress.

I am slowly coming around to parade uniform. At first I wanted individualism and variety in my units. No two exactly the same rig, all on campaign and none in the same pose. The snag is we are trying to create a scale effect. My fourteen grenadiers a cheval are trying to represent nearly one thousand at full strength. They actually look like a mob, especially as two of them have been blasted from their mounts. Each figure I am delighted with, but, en masse, if I was doing it again………….

Generally parade dress then a quick dip to take the shiny off it. Uniforms were probably neatly brushed before battle, but once the guns started dust, smoke. Etc would have dirtied them up a bit.

Campaign with each figure individual looks great for skirmish games, but not so much for mass units. For the latter I want uniformity.

Good point about the Prussians, Tarty! Apparently their dress was so practical it served as the model for Commonwealth Service Dress when Khaki was adopted in the 1880s!

And yes, I think we all underestimate the amount of smoke and dust on the battlefield. I can't find it now, but I have seen footage of a Royal Armouries boffin firing a Brown Bess at full load, demonstrating 3 rounds a minute. Needless to say he is in full safety rig – white overalls, anti flash, etc, and he is as black as a sweep after just 3 rounds!

Parade for me also, although I have started to add some wear and dust on a few. (although never on the elites)

If I were doing militia or Confederates or WWI I would most likely go with "campaign mode".

I never understood why anyone would cast campaign dress, except for some "on the march" campaign diorama.

I've always thought that those who buy those figures, and paint figures in campaign dress, were just too tired or too lazy to paint all the piping on French infantry uniforms. I admit it can get tedious, but those same wargamers usually paint their British in full dress. So the Brits look great and the French look like a homeless mob.

But that raises the question: Why do we wargame Napoleonics and paint those figures to begin with? It's the beautiful uniforms, no?

I've always thought that those who buy those figures, and paint figures in campaign dress, were just too tired or too lazy to paint all the piping on French infantry uniforms.

I like campaign dress, and intend to paint every unit in my French army that way (unless I do the Guard, which I don't anticipate). And everyone of my Frenchies are completely piped – collars, cuffs, lapels, turnbacks, etc. I do the buttons as well.

Why would you expect that because my Ligne have trousers and shako covers, I would be too "lazy" to do the piping? I paint mine in campaign uniform because it gives them a little individuality, and because I expect they spent a lot more time looking like that than in full dress. But they're still Napoleonics, so I try to get the uniform parts right, campaign dress and all.

If I were too "tired" or "lazy" to do piping, I'd be doing ACW!

Mark

Actually, I was referring to greatcoats as part of what I'd call "campaign uniform."

I don't count trousers as campaign uniform. I work in 1/72 plastics, and almost nobody makes French infantry in breeches and gaiters. Trousers were commonly worn on all occasions by French infantry after 1808, IIRC.

But you raise another question: I would expect all members of an infantry unit to be wearing the same color of shako covers, and the same color of trousers. Where is the individuality in that? I conclude that you paint a variety of shako cover and trouser colors within the same unit.

To each his own.

Also, I just don't see why an infantry unit would wear shako covers for battle – unless it was raining at the time. For me, it doesn't make sense.

But you raise another question: I would expect all members of an infantry unit to be wearing the same color of shako covers, and the same color of trousers.

I certainly wouldn't. There might be a standardized issue of trousers at some point in an unit's history, but after that there would be a lot of ad hoc replacement of worn-out items, made from whatever was available or possibly taken from a dead enemy. Uniformity would suffer the longer the unit was in the field. Same for shako covers.

I conclude that you paint a variety of shako cover and trouser colors within the same unit.

I do. Usually I paint the majority of them the same/similar colors (e.g., different shades of grey or some such) and them throw in some that are totally different, to represent replacements that were obtained from sources other than the supply depot.

But they all get piping.

I know gamers like to think that uniformity of dress was the norm in the Napoleonic wars, but I don't agree. When you have the Duke of Wellington being unable to identify the 95th Rifles as they marched past him, due to the deterioration of their uniforms with use, I seriously doubt other armies* would be in much better shape. The best example of this is, of course, the Grande Armee on its way home from Moscow.

* – note that I'm doing the Peninsula this time around, where armies were supplied irregularly at best. The Austrians in 1809 probably presented a more uniform appearance, as they were operating close to their supply sources in a relatively brief campaign.

Widowson,

I've always thought that those who buy those figures, and paint figures in campaign dress, were just too tired or too lazy to paint all the piping on French infantry uniforms.

Wow, talk about condescending without basis in reality. Yeah, with all the figures we paint and all the detail that goes into them, people who choose things different than you must be lazy… I'll think of that next time I am viewing pictures of some exceptionally high end painted figures who happen to have shako covers and remember that the painter must be lazy regardless of the quality of his or her painting…

Also, I just don't see why an infantry unit would wear shako covers for battle – unless it was raining at the time.

Hmm, I wonder if infantry rushed to battle from a day's march away to reinforce Ney's III Corps in 1813 or Davout's march to the Russian left flank at Eylau had time to change to their dress uniforms before hitting the the Russian line? My resources regarding primary source material for the spring campaign in 1813 are thin but I'm sure in one of the many accounts recorded in the Combat Journal of the III Corps 1805-1807 at least notes a pause in the action that would have afforded troops the opportunity to refresh their uniforms before making their assaults…

Davout reports that all three divisions and the light cavalry began their march two hours before dawn with the 3rd Division on the road at 3AM and Friant's 2nd Division was in combat by dawn (p.149).

Gudin reports that his division arrived in Beisleiden, was immediately redirected to Serpallen and once there was directed to detach the 12th Ligne and the divisional artillery to Friant followed by the 21st & 25th Ligne. Part of the 85th Ligne went straight into combat (p.157-158).

Morand reports he arrived at Peleken about 6:30AM, then followed Friant's division and deployed south-southwest of Serpallen. In Morand's words: "The brigade under General Ricard was barely formed into three columns… when I received the order to take position in front of the village of Serpallen and to also attack the enemy…" (p.160).

All taken from Combat Journal of Operations, 1805-1807.

I suppose it is possible that the men all put on their dress uniforms in the dark sometime before 3AM on February 8th, 1807 prior to marching to Eylau after somehow managing to have kept them clean and preserved through the everlasting mud that dominates all available discussion of the 1806-1807 campaign in Poland. But I doubt it.

If the retreat of 1812 and the random holding actions fought in the middle of the night are perhaps to be considered an exception in your mind and the battles of 1813-1814 fail to be regarded as representative because they are associated with hardships and privations not present in earlier campaigns then 1807 should do nicely.

Further more if you don't care for the Eylau example then consider the battles of Pultusk and Golymin where elements of the VII & III Corps marched straight to the field and then straight into combat and where Soult's IV Corps marched all day in the mud never to make it to the battlefield. If the theory is that Soult's men dressed in their best uniforms before beginning their march in the expectation that they will reach the field of battle prepared then wouldn't we also have to conclude that at least some of them had their uniforms largely ruined and thus would be hard pressed to look their best for any battle that followed shortly thereafter.

In agreement Mserafin I just don't see a valid argument that the display of the uniform was ever valued higher than the timing of commitment to battle. It would seem outright bizarre to me that tens of thousands of men were able their dress uniforms in great care and condition while living outside commonly without even a tent cover to resist the rain.

To each his own.

Indeed. And as I will not tell you how to paint yours, please do not characterize my efforts poorly when they differ.

Cheers,

The Bandit

All

Too lazy to paint all the piping….

Spot on, I am. When I need to bulk up my forces quickly its Greatcoats and shako covers the whole way, and if anyone can point me towards Brits in Greatcoats (28mm) then I'd bite your hand off.

When I have leave from work then that's the time for full dress.

F

Bill, I am with you. When I need quick units, greatcoats rule (and I personally am not too keen on the "every man in a different pair of trousers" look). But then I also love the full dress look, and am still waiting for a decent set of French in full dress. The HaT 1808-12 range was not quite right for me style wise. the Zvezda (and HaT) light infantry are brilliant, but still waiting for line – and not those weird Esci/Italeri versions with two chest straps etc.

As to uniformity, well I guess we will never know how they really dressed. I love my Blandfords for the campaign details they show, and a lot of historical paintings support the worn look. But I have also read that units employed people to make uniforms, so I guess the will was there.

But at the end of the day, I guess we all paint what we enjoy. I have no axe to grind against the campaign look guys, but I prefer full dress and the finery. To the extent that I would prefer my Guard Chasseurs a Cheval to be wearing pelisse, even though I know they stopped around 1805. For me, it is a colour and spectacle thing on the table.

So peace to all the different styles of painting :-)

To Marc the Plastics fan, yes. Peace and love to all, man.

If you want to create dioramas, you want no two figures dressed the same and all as different castings. Even setting out on a "new" campaign, as in June 1815, the French army had that happy knack of putting comfort and practicality before smartness. After a few months campaigning in Spain, Russia or Eastern Germany……..

Let me repeat my thought about "scale effect". As a wargamer, (I speak from total ignorance) I imagine you try to present a dozen or two 28mm figures as a whole regiment. That is going to be more effective in parade dress and "uniformity" of figures. I have too many units, in dioramas, which I think are great modelling (conversions) and painting of guys, covered in mud, in authentic colours (which from any distance look black).

'er indoors asks "Who are (sic) that bunch of tramps?"

Rifles' green? Real thing…almost black. 28mm…..work at it. Do not use the real colour.

Scots Greys? I painted them…finished them. The family all said they were the worst thing I had ever done. Flat…. So I highlighted in bright scarlet, lighter blue over the facings, lighter yellow (totally wrong) on the lace….and I admit, they are transformed. Totally wrong for the day (18th June) but they look "right" in 28mm.

Marc is right. Do what you want. We are modellers……

I have a dozen Chasseurs a Chev de La Garde riding through a
wheatfield. You cannot imagine the work that went into them. Everyone laughs, as they are largely invisible….

Thanks DH – I guess that was partly what I was saying. Sometimes, there is a lot of passion exhibited on these boards, but I generally find that I like most pics I see of Naps, in all their styles.

But your point on "scale effect" is relevant as well, which I guess we all (maybe) forget at times. And I suppose it depends what distance we are viewing – on the table (when no one really seems to notice/care the detail of teh paint jobs, they just want that unit to win) or on display/in our hands when we paint. I have spent quite a long time trying to simplify my painting, so moving away from individual works of art and more towards "wargaming pieces", so that I can play more games in more eras. The "dip" has helped there :-)

Oh yes….the dip effect. On red especially, or any light colour, just amazing.

My only problem is on white, I get tide marks. Is this rumour about PVA glue or even floor polish true…add a few drops and it spreads better? Never tried it yet……not on Perry figures. I could not bear to get them wrong.

I have my Victrix figures to practice on……many dozens of them…not one finished, but brilliant for experiments. Must try it

It takes me back to Airfix Magazine in the early 70s. Somewhere in the loft I still have that issue where writers were apopleptic at the idea of using shading on battleships. They thought if you had a tin of whatever the Hood was painted with in 1941, (Funny I can still recall it was AP 507B) you could apply it to a 1:600 model now. Do not highlight detail etc……just slap it on.

Scale effect. Ignore it at your peril.

Happy Easter to all……

My only problem is on white, I get tide marks. Is this rumour about PVA glue or even floor polish true…add a few drops and it spreads better? Never tried it yet……not on Perry figures. I could not bear to get them wrong.

I've recently started using the floor polish technique, and I have to say that I'm impressed. It's formulated to gather in low spots, so it doesn't give the "tide marks" of which you speak. It does turn the figure glossy, though, so one has to go back with Dullcoat (I prefer Floquil Figure Flat) a few times.

I didn't mean to disrespect anyone's painting habits or preferences. I'm just one vote for "full dress" or as close as one can get.

I'm sure some units arrived on the battlefield in their marching kit. However, a march did contain breaks every two hours, from what I've read. It would be that last rest period where I would expect soldiers going into battle to doff their shako covers.

And Marc, I'm sure that you and I are among those who will never forgive Zvezda for promising French fusiliers and Russian "shooters", and then dropping them from the production schedule. DAMN.

One way to offset the limitations of HaT French infantry is to remove the heads and re-attach them at a slight angle. It does make a notable improvement. But those marching poses! Yeesh! I usually cut them off at the waist and use the "marching" legs for advancing figures.