Tony Wright

2024-04-18T16:51:19Z

3 hours ago, maico said:

I watched Dunkirk at the South Bank IMAX. The director had been in and set the sound levels himself but for me it was way to loud. I had to leave before the end with my ears hurting. I think Christoper Nolan may have damaged hearing!

I don't have any problems hearing actors mumbling but some of the sound effects were ridiculous. For example, the return fire from the Heinkel was slow thumping canon fire but at that stage of the war the Germans and British had rifle calibre machine guns.

Good evening,

I don't know about the aerial weaponry in the later Dunkirk, but what stopped any belief in its authenticity was seeing green BR Mk.1s as the survivors journeyed back to London.

The original (John Mills) B&W Dunkirk from the late '50s was far superior.

Why is it that when railways are shown in movies (or on TV), very little thought seems to have been given to make sure they're 'accurate for period', or even place. James Bond, on his journey back from Istanbul in From Russia With Love, appears to be travelling overnight in an all-green train hauled by a Royal Scot! Shadowlands got it right, and Loughborough 'could have been' like Oxford in the film, especially as the locos were weathered.

Regards,

Tony.

2024-04-18T12:48:04Z

1 minute ago, 34theletterbetweenB&D said:

Possibly because one of our number was the son of a bookie? It was years later that I learned of the naming association with the Gees. What we most wanted of course was 'Streak!'

Good afternoon,

'Streak', of course. Shouted at the tops of our voices when one of those famous front ends made its presence felt at Gamston, Retford, Botany Bay, Bawtry, Doncaster, Selby, Riccall, Thirsk and Darlington - all the places where I saw an A4.

I suppose the epithet was a 1950s/'60s schoolboys' phenomenon - Eric Fry once chided me for using it in his presence; 'Streamliner', he said, but he'd seen them in their pre-War heyday.

Though I rather doubt it, wouldn't it be nice to hear '91'!, '91'! shouted in a pre-voice-breaking squeal at Retford today?

Regards,

Tony.

2024-04-18T08:45:09Z

5 minutes ago, 34theletterbetweenB&D said:

Alternatively: Racehorse!

That's what the little gang in short trousers that I was part of would have been yelling. This so typical scene led to a love of Doncaster's finest, which produced the 'Grand Parade of Flamboyant Velocity, placing the ECML Miles Beevor all other lines'. Sigh.

For Tony's benefit, I used that arrangement of pacific names in an essay on the topic 'memories of childhood', and dear JAG Walker graded it A+.

A splendid play on words, though I never heard of the A3s referred to as 'Racehorses' - only ever A3s in my short-trouser days.

CENTENARY was one of the few not named after an equine sprinter.

Years ago, a commentator once suggested a current loco (say a Class 47) should be named RED RUM, in honour of the National's most-famous multi-winner. A nice thought, though it showed an 'ignorance' of the policy of the LNER/BR when it came to naming its speedsters. All the equine names commemorated winners on the flat, usually the Classics.

Regards,

Tony.

2024-04-18T07:17:40Z

4 hours ago, NZRedBaron said:

Ooh, what's the story of this picture of Centenary here?

Good morning,

Story?

It's a normal Up parcels/empty stock working at Greenwood between the summers of 1961 and '63.

The train's consist? A steel-panelled Gresley BG (wooden-bodied; note angle trussing), not sure, 12 ton four wheeled van (recently-painted), BR CCT, BR Mk.1 BG and can't tell.

Regards,

Tony.

2024-04-17T18:19:48Z

6 hours ago, Chuffer Davies said:

Whilst I would have to agree that the clarity of dialogue on many recorded broadcasts is poor we should recognise that as we age our hearing also deteriorates. In particular it is typically the high frequencies that are increasingly attenuated and it is these frequencies that are required to decipher consonants. Although I can still function day to day quite well without hearing aids I decided I would invest in a pair none the less. I now not only hear birdsong and music clearly once more, of relevance to recent comments here, I can better decipher tv dialogue than without them.
Perhaps it is time for some on ‘hear’ to consider a hearing test?

Now back to some modelling…

Regards,

Frank

Good evening Frank,

I had my (first) hearing test late last year. I was told my hearing was good for a 77 year old, and I didn't need a hearing aid.

After finding the diction in Oppenheimer mainly incomprehensible, I watched an old B&W movie yesterday starring Robert Mitchum, Frank Sinatra, Lee Marvin, Broderick Crawford and, I think, Joan Fontaine (Not as a Stranger). I could hear every word perfectly.

Regards,

Tony.

2024-04-17T08:41:01Z

10 hours ago, Bernard Lamb said:

Good evening Tony.

In the first shot I find that the tall signal is too dominant. A much darker sky might help. I can never tell what time of day it is on your train set, without being told what service is depicted.

In the other shot I find that the point rodding detracts from the assertivness of the signal. This one, to me, is the 'better' shot However the parked waggons tend to lead the eye away from the main subject, which rather spoils it.

I have mixed feelings about the greyness of your track. Being used to less well maintained minor branchess in my modelling, where the track tends to be the colour of well weathered LMS bauxite, it is not what I would do. However to show off your express trains it provides an excellent neutral background.

Basically there is no right or wrong. When I was printing photographs for an income I would deliberately aim for a slightly warm flesh tone. Clients would like it. Not a very PC remark these days, but the aim was to flatter the femail subjects, rather than to produce an accurate portrait.

On the subject of current trends in photographic equipment. I have recently bought a Nikon Z5 and am using it as a general camera in place of a frull frame DSLR. Lighter, quieter and it gives surprisingly good results.

Bernard

Good morning Bernard,

Thank you for your comments.

The tall signal is meant to be dominant! Right from French's time as signalling superintendent on the GNR, where possible, he insisted on sky backgrounds. In reality, that signal was over 50' high (pity the poor lamp-man).

A much darker sky? During daylight, apart from during approaching thunderstorms and when the scenery is snow-covered, the sky is usually the lightest tone in any scene. I was once astonished during my art school days when our tutor took us outside after a recent snow-fall. He put a mirror, flat on the snow, and the overcast sky was still as light as the snow!

I don't know many layouts where the lighting depicts the actual time of day (didn't Dave and Shirley Rowe produce a lighting masterclass on their Iberian layout?). Bytham's room lighting is a lot (LED strip-lights), spread consistently so as not to give too deep-shadows. I know this doesn't replicate the sun, but there's isn't enough 'internal atmosphere' to soften the shadows were I to have a single, powerful light-source. Cloudy but bright is what I try to achieve.

Ballast colour?

The ECML was usually ballasted using limestone, and very well-maintained. Norman Solomon used limestone for ballast on LB.

The rail sides would be rusty, but the overall ballast wouldn't be brown.

Regards,

Tony.

2024-04-17T07:28:57Z

5 hours ago, thegreenhowards said:

Maybe I’m easily pleased, but I found Oppenheimer very interesting and well worth watching. I didn’t know much about the history, certainly not his left wing sympathies, so it filled in some gaps in my knowledge.

Andy

Good morning Andy,

Could you make-out all the dialogue?

That was the weak point for us. Looking at all the buttons on the TV's remote, which one turns on the subtitles?

Regards,

Tony.

Tuesday at 19:56

Chris Walsh and I edited the moving footage I took of Hornby's latest steam-generator P2 on Gilbert Barnatt's Peterborough North a week or more ago (readers might recall, I couldn't get DCC to 'couple-up' to Little Bytham). My thanks to Gilbert for this.

The video will appear on World of Railways soon (the TMC one made by Howard Smith is already on Youtube).

It steamed well.

I mused over what carriages it might pull when the prototype is completed (nothing on PN was suitable, so it ran light engine).

I thought Hornby's latest EWS Mk.2s might suit, so this afternoon...............

Staged these two static shots (the loco is programmed not to work on DC. If I ask a friend to programme it for DC as well, will the smoke generator work, I wonder? Anyone know?).

Tuesday at 19:39

I've fully-processed the two A4 shots I left unaltered last night...........

Apart from some foreground cropping, this is full frame.

This has been cropped to the left, a bit on the right and in the foreground.

I don't know which is 'better' (if either) but both show the overall excellence of the Nikon 24mm prime lens (and, no, it didn't cost even near a thousand!).

Tuesday at 19:35

14 minutes ago, maico said:

Well, bokeh is how the out of focus area is rendered. If it is smooth it will give the subject in focus a three dimensional look and pop.. If the bokeh is messy the object in focus will look less defined and sharp to the eye.

The best lenses for me are also the most expensive for example a Leica Summilux-C 25mm T1.4 cine lens is £24k

Good evening,

And I thought paying a thousand pounds for a lens got me a 'best' one!

Regards,

Tony.

Tuesday at 17:30

4 hours ago, 1471SirFrederickBanbury said:

I think it has less to do with garish artificial colours, but down to being a reaction to some of the more desaturated examples where people have tried perhaps too intently to make the image gritty and realistic.

A great example is the (not so) humble motion picture. In years gone by with film, many movies were bright and bold, with vibrant colours filling the screen.

Skip a few years and digital cameras were the new big thing, but many movies were even less vibrant than videos filmed on tape. This was a great effect to make movies feel more realistic, but as with many things, it began to be used in far too many examples, where it just makes everything dull.

Meanwhile outside of Hollywood, people started missing the vibrancy of their Kodachrome and Velvia, which also gave more contrast. Even now, many movies and television shows which should feel bright and grand have that grandeur ground off in post production.

I find that whenever I look through old albums of prints from film, I see something there that isn’t present in most digital photos, especially phone pictures. This grander sense of a scene of life being picked out of reality is a significant challenge.

I also find my phone camera and screen both want to keep everything desaturated, dark, and shifted toward a green-brown colour cast.

My response to the annoyance of having to correct everything in post to look decent was to ask my father for his old 35mm Canon AE-1, and in time, I’ll probably have many duplicate photos from the phone and the real deal to ponder over.

Good evening Rohan,

The one thing I like most about old 'talkies' (other than their often 'gritty' appearance) is that I can understand every word that's said.

The other night, Mo and I started watching Oppenheimer and gave up because most of the dialogue was mumbled; into incoherency at times! A multi-award winner it might be, but what has happened to actors' diction?

I find it everywhere in the media today (and I'm not going deaf!). Incomprehensible gibberish at times, accents so thick as to be able to be cut by a knife and spoken grammar so appalling (he's took a dive, the other day!) that an ear would have been cuffed in my teaching days! If this is what 'inclusivity' in the media means, I'm glad I'm old!

Apologies for the rant.

Regards,

Tony.

Tuesday at 12:29

9 minutes ago, Barry Ten said:

Here is my Mainline 4MT, purchased from (I think) a Carlisle model shop during a family visit to the Lake District in 1980. To put that into perspective, the other thing I bought that day was the special "Borchester Market" edition of Model Railways which I still have.

The 4MT is a bit noisy but it runs quite well apart from that, and for the hell of it I converted it to DCC (a bit tricky due to the way the motor brushes work) but not too bad.

The weathering was acrylics, brushed on not long after the model was bought.

Very nice Al,

Are we going to see anything from the big box I handed over to you at York?

Regards,

Tony.

Tuesday at 12:28

14 minutes ago, Izzy said:

Actually that’s not strictly true in relative terms in that most fixed lens small sensor cameras have native DOF that even at wide-open apertures is greater than most larger sensor cameras such as DSLR’s can produce even with their lenses stopped right down. It’s a sliding scale with such as large plate view cameras having very shallow DOF and very small sensors basically giving back-to-front DOF. In the old days of film use this was used to advantage to produce cheap fixed focus/focus free/fixed aperture cameras simply because everything captured at any focused distance would be in relative sharp focus within the DOF. This continues these days with most small sensor cameras. It’s all to do with the relationship with focal length and sensor size. Where the larger sensor cameras gain is with far better image collection information thanks to larger pixels. Their downside is the need for a far greater amount of light falling on a subject to fill/saturate those pixels and the much longer shutter speeds thus required to capture one and provide a sharp and blur free result, meaning using a tripod is almost a given. With small sensors and thus very short focal lengths this isn’t needed and they can be hand-held down to very slow speeds with sharp images being produced. Sharp is of course a relative term to be considered in relation to the overall image quality. In other words whether the image is viewed at distance, down at pixel level, or something between the two.

With the images taken with the 24mm I think the most impressive part is the apparent distortion free result. Usually with any DSLR wider-angle lens much below 35mm you expect to see hints of barrel distortion even with the best examples. However in these digital days in-camera processing can offset this and maybe this is what has helped here.

Bob

Good afternoon Bob,

I've heard about how to correct barrel distortion when using wider angle lenses. Heard about it, but I don't have a clue of how to apply it.

The shots I took with the 24mm lens are exactly as the camera 'saw' them.

As others have pointed out, with such an enormous DOF achieved, there is no need for focus stacking.

Regards,

Tony.

Tuesday at 12:23

4 hours ago, jwealleans said:

Morning Tony,

I thought you might like a look at this, which I acquired last week on Ebay. I'm just a sucker for a C1, I suppose. I thought it looked good enough to be worth finishing off and having it in my hands confirmed that impression. I have no idea how old it is or who made it, though I don't think it's recent.

I take my hat off to those who can scratchbuild to this standard. It ran surprisingly well, though it'll need a modern mechanism fitting. I wondered whether the mech might give an idea as to it's age? I've never seen one like this before and I'd have suggested it was homebrewed except that it has Romford and a number stamped into the brass frame.

Good afternoon Jonathan,

It's a very early Romford by the look - similar to contemporary Zenith motors (were they made by Romford?).

I'd date the whole thing as near-70 years old!

Regards,

Tony.

Monday at 21:22

I've been fascinated by the many learned comments of late regarding various lenses and their attributes.

Thank you for all of them, and if you'd like to make some more.....................

This evening, I've tried a few shots using the 24mm Nikon lens on the front of the Nikon Df, with these results...........

Class A4 60010 DOMINION OF CANADA (Pro-Scale/Wright/Rathbone) rushes through Bytham on the morning fast Newcastle (Goddard/Houlden/Wright).

Both shots have had a little cropping. In the shot above, the lamp standard is out of focus, as is the nearer end of the BCK. Neither of these bother me; the eye is invited to look beyond.

Two more, though with no manipulation or cropping.............

In both these I've had the camera further away from the principal subject matter in order to show how wide Little Bytham is (the 24mm lens being ideal for this). Layouts are usually 'measured' in length, but width (for accuracy) is just as important in my view, especially if an actual prototype is modelled.

At least some foreground cropping will be necessary in the two shots above.

More indication of Bytham's width is seen here as Class A2/2 60501 COCK O' THE NORTH (DJH/scratch/Wright/Rathbone) heads the morning York/Hull express (Wright). Some foreground cropping has taken place, and a little to the left.

In this sort of view, I place the camera about a foot from the front of the loco, with the focus set to two and a half feet, leaving F.22 to give me the necessary depth of field.

In this view, I'm a bit nearer, with the focus set to one foot, meaning the background loses some focus, but I don't think that matters. The schoolboy trainspotters are just about enough in focus, and the B1 (Bachmann/Comet/Wright) hauling a Kings Cross Grantham express (Geary/Wright) certainly is; sharp enough to reveal its leaning-back cab (occasionally prototypical).

Finally....................

Two shots of B12/3 61553 (Coopercraft/Wright) leaving Little Bytham with a Peterborough-Grantham 'Parly' (Geary/Wright).

Some foreground cropping has been necessary, but the full width is shown.

The 24mm Nikon lens isn't so suitable if a close-up of a loco is required, but for 'layout' shots, I think it's excellent. Like all Nikon lenses, it's incredibly sharp.

Monday at 20:50

2 hours ago, Captain Kernow said:

What an excellent job, Tony. A loco like that for £5.00? Wonderful!

I bought one of these back when they first came out. I had no where to run it for many, many years, so it only got a little test running now and then.

When wanted to use it on my S&D layout 'Engine Wood', I found that the wheels were no longer retained on the axles, the usual Mainline split chassis problem.

My solution was to put a Comet chassis under the body and apply some weathering. Should I start exhibiting my remaining S&D layout again, the Standard 4 still remains in 'front line service'.

75023 was a Templecombe loco for a while in the early 1960s. Here it is on 'Engine Wood':

And on 'Bleakhouse Road':

Thanks Captain,

The model had been previously weathered by its (original?) owner, and I, using prototype photos for reference, added to it (the weeping from the regulator gland is very common on these locos, as are brown deposits around the smokebox).

If I had a use for it, I'd definitely build a replacement Comet chassis, but that would be way beyond the brief.

Regards,

Tony.

Monday at 16:03

1 hour ago, MJI said:

The wheels warped on my Bachmann version, I do need to get the spares for it.

Good afternoon Martin,

This one has all the 'attributes' of the original split-chassis 'nastiness' (here I am weathering the motion).

After I'd cleaned the crud of decades off the wheels, it ran, but with all the quietness of a chain saw! A drop of oil quietened it to a pitch not damaging to one's hearing, then the quartering went on the rear axle under load. A bead of superglue on the inner plastic muff's end seemed to work, but this type of thing is all too common with this awful mechanism - a split-chassis which literally splits! Bachmann perpetuated this nonsense when it took over the range (the split-chassis B1s and V2s being particularly notorious in my experience).

So, the question must be asked, why did I bother? Because it shows that with a bit of perseverance, something really cheap can be sort of 'resurrected'. Granted, it'll never be as quiet as anything produced today RTR (though it's on a par with some kit-built locos I've had through my hands), but it will run.

Years ago, there were two exhibition layouts where locos using this type of mechanism ran. I think one represented Marsden and another a viaduct on the Lancs/Yorks border. Entering the show, one knew immediately if those layouts were present, especially if a train were double-headed!

Regards,

Tony.

Monday at 14:04

As part of my series of articles for BRM on 'budget modelling', I've just completed fiddling with an old Palitoy/Mainline BR Standard 4 4-6-0 75XXX.

Considering the initial outlay was merely £5.00, and it still runs................. Not bad?

Sunday at 13:59

Pleased to report that the Gibson Stanier Mogul has now sold.

Just two to go!

Sunday at 09:56

1 hour ago, dibateg said:

I'm reworking a second hand J39 to become 64747, and did the usual search on the number and shed allocations etc. The one thing missing from my doner engine was the vacuum tank on the tender, so I set about getting one. Having posted my work on WT, I was contacted by another WT member also building 64747 in 4mm scale, to tell me that engine did not have a vac tank - or a pick up dome for that matter.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/190924022@N03/51401740566

Now, I thought that all J39s had a vac tank.... apparently not so! An edict was issued in 1946 that various freight classes including J39s, should have the water pick up gear removed at works visits. On examining Yeadons, 64747 had several General's in the early 1950's, so it's not unreasonable to assume that the gear was removed during that period. With my layout period of '59 - '62, I needed to do something. So I set to with a hot iron from the inside and dropped out the existing filler and dome. Then made up a new blanking plate for the dome space and I had in stock an ROD tender type filler that looked more like the one in the Flickr photo. It does look rather empty on that rear platform now... although I have added th elifting links since.

As loco builders, we enjoy our engine picking... Even the tools boxes were wrong, they didn't look anything like the group standard ones.

I only mention it, as when I did a Google image search on 64747, a picture of one on Little Bytham came up..... and I'm sure it had a vac tank... probably a loco I built years ago!

Regards

Tony

Good morning Tony,

I think this is the one...........

Ex-Charwelton, it definitely has a vac' tank (which is staying).

I believe it was built for the late Stephen Gradidge by Alan Hammet, originally supplied in LNER condition. I also believe you acquired it, and repainted/weathered it into BR condition - as is seen above.

It's a really lovely loco in all departments (the only thing I've done is to add the lubricator drive). It's a privilege now to own it.

Regards,

Tony.

Sunday at 06:23

10 hours ago, maico said:

On my screen Tony, the area in focus has more resolution in the image shot at F8.

Having spent a lifetime working in the film industry behind the camera I've got a pretty good eye!

Good morning,

I concede to your expertise, and I think I know what you're getting at. However, the difference is slight, and more than made up for by the lower picture being of far greater use because it's all in focus.

Regards,

Tony.

Saturday at 19:01

Profiles

Forums

Blogs

Gallery

Events

Exhibition Layout Details

Store

Posts posted by Tony Wright