Painted Jungle Jacket - Opinions Needed

Hi Arch,

This is similar to my jacket that I picked up from Austalian eBay a few years ago:





Obviously not the same exact style or colors, but given the range of what could have been painted... looks like they are both trying to mimic ERDL.

Steve

Both jackets look good to me.


owen

Thanks! I posted pics of this earlier and some Aussies suspected it could be from their guys who served in Vietnam. Given that it was found in Australia lends some credibility to that theory, though of course that's not conclusive since stuff moves all over the world quite easily now a days.

Steve

You guys have some pretty neet unique fatigues that's for sure. I give more credit to this kind of findings than to experimental stuff. Never tell me your adress please 'cause i may be tempted to commit something crazy

Best regards

Arch and Steve.........

I honestly believe that jackets like this should be considered hidden jems.
Ok they are NOT the rarest made pattern .......but they are something that an individual MADE ........in order to be hidden ...thus survive and live to fight another day.and for that alone places them in a little perch all of their own.

I am working on my book project right now and would have NO problem including these in the work, hell they might even be company made as the brown stencil seems to match up on both pieces ...or am I just seeing things?
owen

I agree these items are indeed quite interesting.

When I first saw Arch's jacket I thought there was similarity in the shapes. I don't think that now. Mine appear to be much bigger. But they do seem to be heading in the same direction. As I said, given the tons of different directions an artist could go... I find it interesting how similar these two jackets are.

The other similarity is both were made using stencils with the black lines apparently being free handed.

Steve

These remind me a bit of those WW2 NZ camo painted uniforms for the Pacific, which were aparently painted in bulk.

What type of paint is used? Is this done by spray can or brush like the old Dennisons?

Spray .
WW2 denisons used dye .

owen

Thanks, I was really asking about the application technique and what kind of paint was used on their pieces rather than quibble about dye or paint. Also can one of the gents that actually has these give some insight on how this looks to have been done? Spray and stencil, free hand with a brush? I'd very much like to know. I'm refering to the original ones posted, not so much the black squiggly line one that was clearly done with a spray can.

sorry for answering chief .

I didn't mean it like that at all mate, just trying to clarify the infomation I was after since it apparently wasn't clear.

Looks like a rattle-can job with some home-made stencil...

Yeah, the thing that bothers me about all of these (but especially Gilles' type) is that anybody can go out and grab a set of jungles and paint them up. Put them in the wash a couple of times, then the dryer on high with some shoes tossed in, and bingo... pretty convincing.

I say especially Gilles' example because that was a pretty common US Special Forces approach IIRC.

Either way, it's really not possible to prove any of these are legitimate short of a period photo with the same jacket and some connection to the guy in the picture (estate, neighbor, etc.).

Steve

I'd hope that wasn't the case, since if these are legit they are a fantastic find.

Each piece would have to be examined carefully. If they were legitimately painted when the item was relatively new and unworn, there should be signs of "compatible" wear. For example, if the knees are faded/damaged then the paint should not be as strong/bright/solid as sections that have significantly less wear (like the backs of sleeves). Likewise, if the uniform is overall significantly faded/used the pain should not appear bright/fresh overall.

It's hard to tell from pictures, but if you look at my jacket's chest pockets you can see that the orange/brown color is not uniform. Edges on the tops of the lower pockets is also a bit worn.

Still, there are reenactors out there who make such things and then wear them a lot. Enough that they could cause the paint to be significantly worn. So my thinking with such items is:

1. If there are few signs of compatible wear, it's probably a fake
2. If there are signs of compatible wear, it might be legit
3. The only way to know for sure is to have solid documentation of the specific piece in question

#3, unfortunately, is a tall order so #2 is probably the best we can do.

Steve