Help support TMP


"Brit Lt infantry belt - dodgy Osprey print - white or buff?" Topic


10 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

Please don't make fun of others' membernames.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Napoleonic Painting Guides Message Board


Areas of Interest

Napoleonic

Featured Hobby News Article


Featured Link


Featured Showcase Article

28mm Soldaten Hulmutt Jucken

Personal logo Editor in Chief Bill The Editor of TMP Fezian paints the Dogman from the Flintloque starter set.


Featured Workbench Article

Building Two 1/1200 Scale Vessels

Personal logo Virtualscratchbuilder Supporting Member of TMP Fezian builds a cutter and a corsair, both in 1/1200 scale.


Featured Profile Article

First Look: Barrage's 28mm Roads

Personal logo Editor in Chief Bill The Editor of TMP Fezian takes a look at flexible roads made from long-lasting flexible resin.


Featured Book Review


1,480 hits since 18 Jun 2016
©1994-2024 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

olicana18 Jun 2016 5:20 a.m. PST

Hi guys,

I'm in the process of painting the British 71st Light Infantry for the Peninsular.

I'm looking at a plate C in Osprey's Wellington's Infantry 2. The printing quality of the plates in my copy is not great and I can't decide if the belts are shown as 'campaign grubby' white or actually light buff. I know they were made of buffalo leather, which was buff, so my question:

Did 71st Infantry have un-whitened belts and if so was this usual for light infantry? I can't find anything in my guides that says they were.

Thanks in advance.

James

RavenscraftCybernetics18 Jun 2016 6:33 a.m. PST

If it was white and went into the field, it would soon look buff.
The only way it could stray pristine white is if it was made of patent leather.

go with the buff.

Reactionary18 Jun 2016 7:13 a.m. PST

Units with buff facings often had buff leatherwork.

Camcleod18 Jun 2016 7:19 a.m. PST

Buff faced Regts. usually had buff belts as well.

Personal logo Artilleryman Supporting Member of TMP18 Jun 2016 9:55 a.m. PST

Indeed, the 71st had buff facings, and therefore had buff belting. My Osprey is clear and shows buff belting as does the Cent Jours site. link

Winston Smith18 Jun 2016 1:18 p.m. PST

Soldiers were supposed to keep up on the white coloring with pipeclay. It was even listed with the essentials they carried in their packs.
Somehow, pipeclay may have ended up being one of the first things "lost" while on campaign.

HammerHead18 Jun 2016 3:52 p.m. PST

white

Personal logo deadhead Supporting Member of TMP19 Jun 2016 11:16 p.m. PST

Buff and do not forget rifle slings too……even though white looks far better, it is wrong for 1815 anyway.

Tyler32624 Jun 2016 7:23 a.m. PST

I use a camel color as a first coat then brush off white to give it a dirty look. Works pretty good. No white looks white after a few hours , never mind a few days, weeks, month in the field. I never use a pure white any longer for anything.

Personal logo deadhead Supporting Member of TMP27 Jun 2016 3:22 p.m. PST

I know how folk feel about re-enactors….but I suspect these folk are not far off the truth. Buff faced units, Light or not, did not whiten their leather equipment straps. Indeed turnbacks were buff, but lace was white.

A recent trip to Williamsburg USA showed me that the result is not far off what we see here. Right off the production line is lighter, but a few weeks of exposure and this is right

picture

An earlier posting;

TMP link

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.