GWR goods depot ironwork colour, ca. 1907 ?

[Mikkel]

I'm trying to establish the correct livery for iron (not wood) girders and -trusses in a largeish GWR goods depot around 1907. Slinn says black, with examples in light stone. But when looking at photos I seem to find sometimes all light stone, and sometimes a mix of both light and dark stone.

 

All a bit confusing, so any help would be greatly appreciated.

[Miss Prism]

I think you've established you've got something of a choice, Mikkel. So the question is whether the different bits of the interior ironwork (columns, roof trusses, balustrades) would display the same kind of variety (dark stone and light stone) as would or might be found on passenger station ironwork. I think my preference for the majority of the ironwork would be for dark stone. Part of the consideration is how much of a contrast the chosen colour(s) would be against the presumably whitewashed brick interior walls - prototype goods depot interior shots do seem unrelentingly dingy (nothing would have been cleaned), so some heavy dust weathering to blend whatever colours are used would seem to be in order.

 

[The Stationmaster]

In BR days (so not quite in the same time frame but ideas might have lingered?) the general tendency for interiors was to slosh cream on almost everything except doors and sometimes the structures of things like the Checker's offices. But all the ceiling height and above areas were usually cream unless they were brick. By then walls tended to either left as plain brick or painted - no whitewash (but I'm talking about the 1960s, not 1907), while walls which had a plaster coating were painted.

[Mikkel]

Many thanks for picking this up.

 

I have seen photos that indicate both of the things you say - eg mostly dark stone, or all-over light stone (not cream I know, but the same idea: use a light colour all over to improve light I assume).

 

I have actually tested the various options on sections of the ironwork and columns on the model to see if that gave any clues. The result is basically that any other colour than weathered grey is counter-intuitive and detracts from the realism!

 

That is probably because we expect dark and dirty shades inside a large railway structure - but photos from eg Hockley actually show that the ironwork could be fairly clean: http://www.warwicksh...goods_part1.htm

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

Don't forget some rust. Wherever there's iron...

[The Stationmaster]

Don't forget some rust.

 

On the GWR?

[buffalo]

Looking again at some of the photos in Edwardian Enterprise, I'm inclined to suggest plenty of light stone. The photos of the newly build Canon's Marsh Depot on p184-5 are interesting. Most of the interior of the rail level part of the two storey building looks to be painted white with something darker on the lower six feet or so of some of the columns. In the outer section with the steel trussing, much of the steelwork is brightly lit from the rooflights and appears to be only slightly darker than the walls. I suggest this is light stone. What is interesting, though, is where the steelwork is not so brightly lit, e.g. in the clerestorey and and to either side of the rooflights. Here, I think the paint is the same though it looks so much darker simply because it is not directly illuminated. On the other hand, there is a definite break in colour between the pillars and the steelwork. The pillars could be dark stone, but they might also be brown or even black.

 

Going back a few pages to the rather atmospheric view of Paddington Goods on p168, I wonder whether we are seeing something similar? The photo is taken into the light with only a little light from behind the camera. I'm not so sure and think I could be swayed either way. Maybe much of the steelwork is light stone but, on the other hand, it could also be dark stone with reflecting highlights. I change my mind almost every time I look at this photo.

 

The third example of a wooden shed at Newbury on p166 is also interesting. If the painters followed the same basic instructions, would steel trusses be treated any differently from wooden ones? Here, the wooden trusses are almost certainly light stone, they are only a little darker than the whitewashed walls. The wooden crane in the centre is darker and contrasts well with the rest of the woodwork. It also appears that the columns were in the lighter shade, as I think there is part of one visible at the extreme left edge of the picture.

 

I do wonder how detailed the official painting instructions were when compared to, say, those for signalling equipment.

 

Nick

[Miss Prism]

I'll throw some black and light grey into the ironwork painting pot:

 

http://www.ross-on-wye.com/images/places/ross/kerne_bridge/railway_bridge_kerne.jpg

[buffalo]

The HMRS book Great Western Way is supposed to be the authority on all matters of painting - and other things. It states that " Goods Sheds ... followed the pattern of Station Buildings generally..." It also states that for station buildings "All support columns, roof girders, trusses and ironwork, together with roof light frames ...... were in dark stone.

 

Hope this helps

Tony.

Yes, GWW is one of our main summaries of currently available evidence, but it is far from being an ultimate authority. Indeed, research and knowledge progress by the examination of evidence and the questioning, confirming and refuting the claims of such 'authorities'. In my view, the buildings section of the new edition is one of its least satisfactory parts.

 

The section you quote appeared in Jack Slinn's original 1978 edition and is repeated verbatim in the recent Lewis et al. edition. In fact, it begins "Goods Sheds at the smaller stations followed the pattern of station buildings generally and could be stone built or timber framed and cladded with planks or corrugated iron." Surely a comment on the architecture that holds no direct relevance to internal decoration? Nor is it specific to any particular era.

 

Later in the same paragraph, Slinn mentions whitewashed interiors, and his "Ironwork and girders were reportedly black" may also refer to the interiors, but it is far from certain and, in any case, is brought into question by examples from contemporary photos mentioned above in this topic. Selectively quoting a quite different section on the painting of station buildings is simply misleading. There is no reason to believe that Slinn or his later editors intended such a link to be made.

 

So, sorry Tony, it doesn't help.

 

Nick

[Miss Prism]

Even Pendon seems undecided about light and dark stone...

 

 

(Images cropped and reduced from Brinkly's originals posted in the Pendon tour thread.)

[Mikkel]

Thanks very much for the replies so far.

 

I agree that Slinn's book - although extremely valuable - cannot be considered the final say (red wagons and valance livery being other examples where our knowledge has improved).

 

Like Nick I have pored over photos and agree that the impression here is one of light stone for most of the ironwork (trusses, girders, columns). But it doesn't seem to make sense when compared to the livery application on other structures (eg platform canopies) where ironwork tended to be dark stone. One explanation for this could be that you wanted as much light as possible in a goods depot, and so opted for the lightest colour.

 

Another explanation is that we are mistaking dark stone for light stone as Nick also mentions. Eg take a look at this photo - not 1900s I know, but it illustrates the point: http://www.warwicksh...wr/gwrhd711.htm . My first inclination here is that this is light stone ironwork, with dark stone at the base of the pillar. But if the base of the pillar is instead the chocolate used to protect areas subject to heavy wear, then the rest of the ironwork may in fact be dark stone.

 

Looking at two photos from large loco sheds of the period throws up some additional points: Supporting columns and iron girders in light stone, wooden trusses in white (see photo in Slinn's original volume p159* and another of Tysely in 1908 in Edwardian Enterprise p 135).

 

The latter photo is of particular interest because here for once it is possible to compare the different colours without too much interference from shadows and light, and there is a door to the rear which gives an indication of light stone vs dark stone. If that is correct, then this photo suggests a principle where the colour differed according to the material used to support the roof. Ie ironwork is light stone but wooden parts are white.

 

*Slinn's reading of this photo is wrong, I believe, he says dark stone girders but this is due to shadow, look at the girder on the left where the light comes through. This in turn suggest the wooden roof trusses are white, which fits the photo in Edwardian Enterprise.

 

Edited to correct two places where I wrote dark but meant light!

[Mikkel]

Just to follow up on this, I've decided to go for light stone as the main livery, with chocolate bases to the pillars.

 

I did some further experiments with this livery on the model last night, and the degree of weathering needed to make it look right. The livery does take a little getting used to, and there's a tendency for it to look like chocolate and cream. No doubt there'll be people telling me I've mixed up GWR and BR liveries! But it's interesting to think that this may in fact have been the inspiration for the BR livery?

 

Another effect of this livery is that it really does brighten up the whole scene (even when weathered), compared to the dark grey that I had used as primer on the ironwork. Which I suppose makes a lot of sense.

 

Photos of my experiments can be found here: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/blog/75/entry-10460-the-treachery-of-images/