One more 1st pattern Denison smock with a twist

[lnijherald]

Gentlemen, thank you for your comments and information.

Greg, what is that stamp inside the neck of your smock? It is a very nice smock indeed!

Ivan, I've heard the theory that the handpainted ones were supposed to fade. However, I find it hard to believe. Remember that most weren't issued to agents but airborne troops who needed camouflage, agents had the overalls they buried upon landing. Also, without an indepth knowlegde WWII French work clothes I assume that they are dark in colour for practicality.

Ken, you are correct about the paint techniques that were used, much is still to learn. I have used the terms screenprinted and handpainted as that is how the patterns are commonly known. Just like the 1st and 2nd patterns nomenclature, historically incorrect but known to every collector.

I have looked into the original manufacturers, but none still seem to be in business today. Whyman was from Leeds I believe, a manufacturer of waterproofed clothing.

Have you contacted todays manufacturers of replica smocks? They may shed some light on the processes involved.
Or perhaps you can contact a guild like http://www.prismuk.org/
I'm sure that a current professional can tell how smocks were dyed from a picture.

Luc

[kammo man]

The fabric was layed out in a long line , that is the complete bolt of cloth .

The workers then mopped green or brown in sweeping movements creating the pattern .

It is as simple as that .
No hidden method just simple low tech graft .
owen

[SMP]

Greg, what is that stamp inside the neck of your smock? It is a very nice smock indeed!

Luc

Someone asked that question a few years ago

http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...ighlight=STAMP

[grip3846]

stamp

I have a size 6 2nd pattern smock with an 8 stamped in same place as Gregs
Regards,Ivan

[SMP]

I have a size 6 2nd pattern smock with an 8 stamped in same place as Gregs
Regards,Ivan

Does it have buttons instead of a zip ?

[kammo man]

Here is a 1942 Hand camoed cloth Dennison I have .
The colors are strong and dark .
When in condition like this you can see the mop marks quite clearly .
Each smock is different but the pattern always follows a real loose fluid flow .
Think of mopping a kitchen floor .
It comes natural to all you scullry maids form upstairs downstairs !!!
As regards different dye lots being used ...
To a manufacturer all patterns look the same and printed camouflage fabric regardless of being hand painted or machine made makes NO difference .
But it is a collectors dream .

Any way either the green or brown goes down first ,if you look at this very closely you can see bluring where wet different color meets .
As regards to fading .
When new the colors were strong and dark ,however because the ink was NOT cured in the normal way it fades quite quickly .
This was mended with the roller method as it is considered vat dyed and or cured .
This is m
eans a heat was applyed to the wet printed fabric "bonding "it into the denim .

We must remember the the Germans were 10 years ahead of the British in 1942 regarding camouflage uniform development so the first Dennisons were mearly a stop gap method of getting camouflage uniforms into troops hands with ideas carried over from WW1 .
The British learn fast and sometime by the end of 1942 a complete new uniform had been developed incorpating a new windproof pattern AND a new Dennison pattern .
These patterns continue through out the war with only minor tweeking .

I hope this helps in some way of understanding this cloudy subject .

owen

[kammo man]

Here is the back side of my Dennison .
The tail has been cut off .
But you can follow the pattern quite easily .

owen

[force136]

Handjob !

I hear all you guys and thanks for the theories and info.

Yes we know that the early garments were hand dyed. We also know that the SOE camo suit was also hand dyed. This is because there is an interview of the guy in charge of the SOE camouflage section stating that. However there are 1942 dated smocks with both the types of camo you are mentioning ie. the hand coloured demin and the supposedly printed type. So if this is true, this must have changed in 1942. I personnally dont think it was printed at all from 1942-1945 only a more concentrated application of colour. This is something that could have been modified very quickly. I agree that huge bolts of material were done by hand. If they were printed, it would have been done on a drum or via a screen. I have been told that they were not able to do this on huge bolts of material and that if it was done this way, it would be much smaller sheets of material and you would see repeats quite commonly. I have also seen drips - slashes -dots and impressions ( like the brush was just pressed into the material creating a blotch without any streak ) on both the early 1942 examples and the multitude of modified smocks that came later. It is interesting that in the early 1950's smocks are found ( I have had many of these ) where the camo pattern actually resembles more the first 1942 examples where there are large panels of colour with only small amounts of blotches etc. are added.

In other words they could not print huge-long swatches of material on a drum or screen because these were only so big. The pattern would repeat very often.

However if you take a huge bolt of material and lay it out on a long table and apply each layer of colour at a time by hand, it is probably more likely and overall, an easier process.

Like I said, other countries camo ie. SS/Whermacht/Luftwaffe/US Marines Corps etc. You can see with the naked eye that it is a printed process with repeats. The British stuff is not so obvious.

BTW - The smock, like everything else during the war was tentative from the get go. The snaps at the back to hold up the flap, the strait sleeves, button cuffs, button collar, camo pattern were all just modifications to the original garment. It was not done at once but over time. So there is no such thing as a 44 ptn etc. I have published in my book on 1CPB the suggestions made by airborne troops in North Africa regarding the smock. All these things are included but took different amounts of time to be implemented.

Anyway - will continue to look into this and should I find anything will let you guys know.

Ken

Here is a 1942 Hand camoed cloth Dennison I have .
The colors are strong and dark .
When in condition like this you can see the mop marks quite clearly .
Each smock is different but the pattern always follows a real loose fluid flow .
Think of mopping a kitchen floor .
It comes natural to all you scullry maids form upstairs downstairs !!!
As regards different dye lots being used ...
To a manufacturer all patterns look the same and printed camouflage fabric regardless of being hand painted or machine made makes NO difference .
But it is a collectors dream .

Any way either the green or brown goes down first ,if you look at this very closely you can see bluring where wet different color meets .
As regards to fading .
When new the colors were strong and dark ,however because the ink was NOT cured in the normal way it fades quite quickly .
This was mended with the roller method as it is considered vat dyed and or cured .
This is m
eans a heat was applyed to the wet printed fabric "bonding "it into the denim .

We must remember the the Germans were 10 years ahead of the British in 1942 regarding camouflage uniform development so the first Dennisons were mearly a stop gap method of getting camouflage uniforms into troops hands with ideas carried over from WW1 .
The British learn fast and sometime by the end of 1942 a complete new uniform had been developed incorpating a new windproof pattern AND a new Dennison pattern .
These patterns continue through out the war with only minor tweeking .

I hope this helps in some way of understanding this cloudy subject .

owen

[kammo man]

Greetings mate .
I have given this matter much thouht over the years and during this time have looked at at least 30 plus Dennison smocks .
There are 3 different patterns for sure .

Hand painted .
42 pattern .
44 pattern .

Windproof pattern .

The roller method to me is only in the 44 pattern .

I believe the 42 pattern may have been a water based silk screen .
The size of a screen could have been very large indeed .
The base color would have had a brown print , dried then set up with the green print .
If a scheme is placed oposite its former print it gives a Very random scheme indeed .
This is one reason you can never find a repeat length in this or the Windproof pattern .

I own a clothing company and a large part of by business is printing thousands of yards of fabric at a time .
I have shown smocks to guys who do this for a living and they all say the same thing .
Also I have looked at hundreds of pairs of windproof trousers and find it very hard to find a repeat ever .
Thus this is the only logical method of manufacture , if not labour intensive .

I think by 44 the pattern had been scaled down and very large rollers were put into use .
Less time consuming = cheaper product .
More out put .

Just my thoughts on this never ending subject .


owen

[force136]

Hi Owen

Sorry mate, no such things as the patterns you suggest. There are smocks that have some but not all modifications. I did not make this up. This is documented in "Secret and Confidential Subject Files, Army-Reports of Proceedings of Monthly Meetings of Dominion Representatives at the War Office, Ministry of Aircraft Production - Airborne Forces Program - Monthly Progress Reports." Held at our archives in Ottawa under RG24 C-8281. These documents state very clearly when specific modifications were suggested and implemented. Some of the modifications that you mention are 1944 are in fact suggested in 1942 and implemented in 1943.

You would be surprised what we have in Canada on Airborne clothing and equipment for British and US Airborne Forces. This is because our military and Govt. investigated all available clothing and equipment for both these militaries before and during the raising of parachute troops in Canada. It was thought too expensive to develope our own so we requested up to date info on all airborne material being produced in the UK and US. We actually have documents that do not readily exist in UK and US archives.

I will have to disagree with you on the size of material that can be printed at one time in the 1940's. I will also have to disagree with your theory about moving the screens around using different colours. I checked that already and there is no repeat there either.

Again, I am not saying they were not printed, I just need solid evidence as I get conflicting information. This includes info from people who printed various materials in the 1940s.

There are specification sheets on the smock here in Canada printed in 1944 and 1945 and they do not say specifically how things were done. They just talk about materials used, production numbers and how they were shipped when they were done.

Anyway I have seen a lot of smocks as well. I have seen early examples with no snaps on the back to hold up the flap, examples with snaps but with the old sleeves and examples with suggested modifications made in the reports mentioned above. All took place between 1942-43. There are 1943 dated smocks with snaps on the back for the flap and examples dated 1943 with snaps on back, straightened sleeves and button cuffs. So all modifcations were part of the smock in 1943. The same is true with the Trousers Parachutist. The final design manufactered was made begining in 1943 even though examples in various configurations existed since 1940.

Ken

Greetings mate .
I have given this matter much thouht over the years and during this time have looked at at least 30 plus Dennison smocks .
There are 3 different patterns for sure .

Hand painted .
42 pattern .
44 pattern .

Windproof pattern .

The roller method to me is only in the 44 pattern .

I believe the 42 pattern may have been a water based silk screen .
The size of a screen could have been very large indeed .
The base color would have had a brown print , dried then set up with the green print .
If a scheme is placed oposite its former print it gives a Very random scheme indeed .
This is one reason you can never find a repeat length in this or the Windproof pattern .

I own a clothing company and a large part of by business is printing thousands of yards of fabric at a time .
I have shown smocks to guys who do this for a living and they all say the same thing .
Also I have looked at hundreds of pairs of windproof trousers and find it very hard to find a repeat ever .
Thus this is the only logical method of manufacture , if not labour intensive .

I think by 44 the pattern had been scaled down and very large rollers were put into use .
Less time consuming = cheaper product .
More out put .

Just my thoughts on this never ending subject .


owen

[grip3846]

buttons or zip

SMP,
It has a half zip.
Regards,Ivan

[jelle]

Someone asked that question a few years ago

http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...ighlight=STAMP

Gas treatment stamp?

[Greg B]

Greg, what is that stamp inside the neck of your smock? It is a very nice smock indeed!



Hi Luc, the letters appear to be top row- H E/N D
Middle row - Q Y O
Bottom row -0W0?

Quite hard to make out really...some of it is faded and a couple of the letters may be different

I currently have this smock set up on my Airborne officer mannequin and would take quite an effort to remove. But next time I remove it I will take some clear pics of the stampings.

Greg

[jelle]

Lovely display Greg.I believe its a gastreament stamp.

[Greg B]

Thanks Johan, According to Steve this smock was found after the war in Normandy where the 6th Airborne had there Headquarters. So I guess it would be correct for it to have had a Gas treatment.

Greg