Peterborough North

[great northern]

Do you have 60006?

No, that one isn't on the roster, but then I only have half of the class..........so far. I suppose Sir Ralph should be though, but of course you can say that about all the KX engines.

[great northern]

Let's have another look through the arch.

Then things move on a bit. Quicksilver has gone off for a rest, the A1 has backed on, and another WD has sidled along the slow line with more empties.

A lovely day here, bright sunshine and something which I think is called warmth. Why, it could almost be spring.

[The Stationmaster]

'Quicksilver' through the arch is a marvellous picture (not just a photo but a real picture) Gilbert - smashing stuff.

[JeffP]

Points gained for the correct round cornered plates on "Quicksliver", one of only two A4's to carry them.

[great northern]

Points gained for the correct round cornered plates on "Quicksliver", one of only two A4's to carry them.

There are many advantages to be gained by knowing Tony Wright, Jeff.

[CUTLER2579]

Points gained for the correct round cornered plates on "Quicksliver", one of only two A4's to carry them.

 

 So come on Jeff,please enlighten us to the other one.  

 

Thanking You in advance.

[jwealleans]

Wasn't it No. 14 herself, off the top of my head?

[great northern]

 I'm still receiving enquiries about the BSOs, but have to tell everyone that they were all snapped up in very short order indeed. None left, I'm afraid.

 

Back to pictures. B17s have a magnetic attraction for my camera, so here is another angle on Gayton Hall.

Handsome from any angle, and a tribute to the craftsmanship of Messrs Wright and Rathbone. We then have a monochrome shot of Sir Vincent Raven leaving with the Heart of Midlothian. Unlike Gateshead, Heaton seems to take care of headboards.

[great northern]

The 1230 (Fridays only) Doncaster -KX, perhaps not the most glamorous of trains, and hauled by a V2 which is not in typical Top shed condition.

These two images both pose slight problems. In the first one I wanted to get a panorama showing everything at the North end, including the goods on the Down slow. To do that though, we get the out of focus lamp in the foreground. I could remove it temporarily, but should I?  To be fair, a real cameraman could move a little to avoid it, but with a fairly big camera to place, I can't. On the other one, we get part of a signal hanging in thin air. Now that was a problem for photographers of the real thing too, I've seen plenty of such images, but of course I could photoshop it out. Does it materially affect your enjoyment of the scene?

[CUTLER2579]

Gilbert,

Is the leading coach a Thompson Diagram 346 Brake and also what make is it and is it an Ian Willetts build.

Trust the eyes are still improving.

Regards,Derek.

[Oldddudders]

The laws of physics are a damnable nuisance! Lovely pics, but, yes, in both shots the eye is drawn distractingly to the out-of-focus item in the left near foreground. I suspect a magazine image would be manipulated through stacking or photoshopping to eliminate those, or use depth-of-field of an order not available on your otherwise admirable camera, nor those of most of us. But then I find much contemporary model magazine photography is far too ‘in my face’ and actually turns me off with giant images of 4mm models. Bigger is not always better, especially when the short end of the zoom has been used to improve d-o-f, and a degree of caricature has been introduced - those laws again. Bring back Brian Monaghan!

 

I think a pragmatic photoshopping would be my choice to optimise the otherwise very fine images here.

[great northern]

Gilbert,

Is the leading coach a Thompson Diagram 346 Brake and also what make is it and is it an Ian Willetts build.

Trust the eyes are still improving.

Regards,Derek.

 It is Dia 346 Derek, and has an interesting provenance. Some years ago John Fozard, now sadly deceased, intended to produce a range of "proper" Thompsons. This was the first, and I believe only one produced. It was test built by Larry Goddard and painted by him. Larry offered it to me, and I snapped it up. My memory fails me sometimes these days, but I think the announcement by Bachmann came shortly afterwards, which aborted the whole idea.

[The Blue Streak]

 

On the other one, we get part of a signal hanging in thin air. Now that was a problem for photographers of the real thing too, I've seen plenty of such images, but of course I could photoshop it out. Does it materially affect your enjoyment of the scene?

 

I think it's best left in Gilbert, I like to see the close up pictures as those that may have been taken on the day in '58. Warts and all.

 

However saying that I also like to see pictures that show the layout as it is, an actual working layout with bookshelves and all.

 

But then I'm easy to please, and I understand that others may wish to see pictures that look like the perfect photo (the one out of 20 that used to occur back in the days of film). Crikey for every roll of 24 that I would get processed at the chemist, I'd be happy with one or two. It's all so easy now, don't like it - delete it from the cameras hard drive and there you go, no more hard earned pocket money spent on naff photo's.

[Tony Wright]

The laws of physics are a damnable nuisance! Lovely pics, but, yes, in both shots the eye is drawn distractingly to the out-of-focus item in the left near foreground. I suspect a magazine image would be manipulated through stacking or photoshopping to eliminate those, or use depth-of-field of an order not available on your otherwise admirable camera, nor those of most of us. But then I find much contemporary model magazine photography is far too ‘in my face’ and actually turns me off with giant images of 4mm models. Bigger is not always better, especially when the short end of the zoom has been used to improve d-o-f, and a degree of caricature has been introduced - those laws again. Bring back Brian Monaghan!

 

I think a pragmatic photoshopping would be my choice to optimise the otherwise very fine images here.

Ian,

 

It's an odd thing about perception in that our eye is often drawn to the thing we like least in a picture; such as irritatingly out-of-focus items (usually in the foreground). 

 

As you know, I've photographed Peterborough North from time to time, and such is the realistic (very realistic) 'clutter' everywhere (so redolent of the steam-age railway) that keeping everything in focus can be a real problem. 

 

 

This is a shot from several years ago (the blue sky is a bit too vivid), and I think I've got away (just) with the out-of-focus lamp support in the immediate foreground. My point of focus was the front of the A4. 

 

 

Because of the problems of keeping-in-focus the 'furniture' and figures at the end of the main Down platform, I've arranged this shot so that they're cropped off. The point of focus was the front of the first carriage. Ballast and track which is out-of-focus in the foreground, I don't mind - the eye is 'invited' to look beyond it. I have no idea which photo-programme Gilbert uses, but it tends to 'nibble' away at the edges of signals at times. I cut-out each segment in turn (this shot took over an hour to process!). 

 

 

I also use fill-in flash to counteract the natural light from the left, which can often obliterate that fine signal to the left of the train shed. It is a very photogenic layout.

 

 

Even with a lens which stops down to beyond F.32, it was still impossible to keep everything in focus here. The lamp to the left is clearly not sharp, but does it matter, because the whole length of the train shed is? 

 

 

Cropping results in a less-interesting picture in my opinion.

 

I agree with you in regarding many of the pictures in the current model railway press as being too much 'in your face', often in the most vivid/lurid colours. I hope this isn't seen as the moanings of a retired old git who once used to make model railway photography part of his profession, but I'm happier with my known processes. Though I've been shown stacking, I don't (nor want to) understand it. The results (as seen above) are 'achieved' optically using a powerful camera and a specialist lens. 

 

I'll be posting some pictures with a long depth of field on Wright Writes later. 

 

Meanwhile, thanks to Gilbert for giving me the opportunity to take pictures of PN. Speaking with him this morning, a return visit will be arranged soon.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Edited March 27, 2018 by Tony Wright

[Oldddudders]

I am most flattered, Tony, that you comment on my post, although I confess I had hoped you would take up Gilbert’s point, as you had “been there and done that”. What your pics show me is that increased d-o-f really helps, but cannot completely overcome the disadvantages of necessarily-short focussing distances in every case. And as we know, Gilbert already struggles to get his excellently-compact camera into certain locations, so a bigger and more capable model such as I believe you use would certainly have problems. Swings and roundabouts come to mind.

 

BTW, I have today sold my grossly-underused Nikon Df. Sad but sensible. Quite uncharacteristic, really.....

[Tony Wright]

I am most flattered, Tony, that you comment on my post, although I confess I had hoped you would take up Gilbert’s point, as you had “been there and done that”. What your pics show me is that increased d-o-f really helps, but cannot completely overcome the disadvantages of necessarily-short focussing distances in every case. And as we know, Gilbert already struggles to get his excellently-compact camera into certain locations, so a bigger and more capable model such as I believe you use would certainly have problems. Swings and roundabouts come to mind.

 

BTW, I have today sold my grossly-underused Nikon Df. Sad but sensible. Quite uncharacteristic, really.....

Your posts are always worth commenting on.

 

I think Gilbert gets some very good images, and his camera can certainly get into places that the Df cannot. 

 

I just cannot get on with compact cameras, no matter how hard I try. 

[thegreenhowards]

The 1230 (Fridays only) Doncaster -KX, perhaps not the most glamorous of trains, and hauled by a V2 which is not in typical Top shed condition.

 

Gilbert,

 

It may not be the most glamorous of trains, but the stock looks a lot more interesting than a bunch of mark 1s. Could we see some close ups of the coaches?

 

Andy

[great northern]

Gilbert,

 

It may not be the most glamorous of trains, but the stock looks a lot more interesting than a bunch of mark 1s. Could we see some close ups of the coaches?

 

Andy

Now there's a funny thing. As I put this train together the thought came into my mind-  "Andy would like a full look at this", so I did the close ups. It is a beautifully varied formation, and I managed to get it nearly right as per the book. The two CKs should both be Thompsons, but although I do have another one coupling problems prevented me including it. That's why the leading brake is wrong way round too. The only drawback is the 'orrible Hornbys. Here we go.

I dream of a rake of Dia115 seconds to the standards of the Willets/Studley Gresleys, but the cost would be such that a dream it may remain.

 

The pictures vary a bit, as the sun couldn't make up its mind whether it was in or out.

[great northern]

I've struck lucky lately in anticipating what people would like to see. Here, for Ted in particular, is one of those unedited shots of the whole length of the layout.

What's going on? The V2 hauled 1230 Doncaster occupies centre stage, the WD has finally got the road to creep forward towards end of journey, ther's a B17 by the coaling stage, and not a single bookcase in sight.

 

This picture does illustrate another niggling problem It seemed a very good idea to put a nice neat fascia on the front of the fiddle yard, but the colour turns out to be a very difficult one to photoshop out. Plain white would be much better.

 

Soon after all this occurred, a D16 made its way up to the engine yard, where it will wait for a while before taking a couple of carriages down to East. An opportunity for a broadside shot of such elegance is not to be missed.

[thegreenhowards]

Now there's a funny thing. As I put this train together the thought came into my mind-  "Andy would like a full look at this", so I did the close ups. It is a beautifully varied formation, and I managed to get it nearly right as per the book. The two CKs should both be Thompsons, but although I do have another one coupling problems prevented me including it. That's why the leading brake is wrong way round too. The only drawback is the 'orrible Hornbys. 

 

Sorry to be so predictable! I think it was worth it though because that is a lovely rake. The 'orrible Hornby's don't show up too much when looking at the rake as a whole although the tumblehome is very evident in close up next to your lovely kit built coaches. I wouldn't worry about the Gresley CK; I imagine that these FO relief trains would be made up of whatever scratch stock was available so would not necessarily follow the carriage workings very closely. 

 

One uber critical point is that I believe that the d.155 SKs were fitted with ventilators in alternate windows on the corridor side after the late '30s. The Kirk kit has this mod, but not the Mousa sides which I assume you have used. It may be that not all of them were modified so you may be OK - do you have any evidence for this as I'm wrestling with what to do about mine?

 

Andy

[chaz]

I've struck lucky lately in anticipating what people would like to see. Here, for Ted in particular, is one of those unedited shots of the whole length of the layout.

from bridge.JPG

What's going on? The V2 hauled 1230 Doncaster occupies centre stage, the WD has finally got the road to creep forward towards end of journey, ther's a B17 by the coaling stage, and not a single bookcase in sight.

 

This picture does illustrate another niggling problem It seemed a very good idea to put a nice neat fascia on the front of the fiddle yard, but the colour turns out to be a very difficult one to photoshop out. Plain white would be much better.

 

Soon after all this occurred, a D16 made its way up to the engine yard, where it will wait for a while before taking a couple of carriages down to East. An opportunity for a broadside shot of such elegance is not to be missed.

Claud.JPG

 

 

I love the finish on the Claud, what I might call working clean. Whoever weathered it did well.

 

I regret that a D16 would be totally out of place on Dock Green.

 

Chaz

[great northern]

I love the finish on the Claud, what I might call working clean. Whoever weathered it did well.

 

I regret that a D16 would be totally out of place on Dock Green.

 

Chaz

 Tim's weathering work on display here. It is one of the latest he has done for me, and the standard gets higher every time. I keep trying to raise the bar by asking for ever more complicated and subtle effects, but he delivers the goods beautifully whatever I ask.

[great northern]

The old shed yard is quite crowded at the moment, so we shall have another look at it from a different angle.

Then attention is transferred to yet more coal empties approaching behind an 02, which has been allowed to use the Down main, as this is a slack time for express workings.

Those signals will get bedded in very shortly, I hope. I wish to place on record that I am a very happy bunny.

[Fenman]

That Claud really is a masterpiece.

 

Did either of the Royal Clauds get to PN?

 

Paul

[great northern]

Sorry to be so predictable! I think it was worth it though because that is a lovely rake. The 'orrible Hornby's don't show up too much when looking at the rake as a whole although the tumblehome is very evident in close up next to your lovely kit built coaches. I wouldn't worry about the Gresley CK; I imagine that these FO relief trains would be made up of whatever scratch stock was available so would not necessarily follow the carriage workings very closely. 

 

One uber critical point is that I believe that the d.155 SKs were fitted with ventilators in alternate windows on the corridor side after the late '30s. The Kirk kit has this mod, but not the Mousa sides which I assume you have used. It may be that not all of them were modified so you may be OK - do you have any evidence for this as I'm wrestling with what to do about mine?

 

Andy

Right Andy, that sent me scurrying off to get my copy of Harris, as I had some vague memory of reading about this. The relevant text seems to be in the section relating to the Flying Scotsman sets of 1938, as follows- "These were standard outline teak bodied end door carriages, Dia 251 and 258 to 66ft 6in length, and the rest 61ft 6ins, and all were to diagrams unique to these sets. The 30 carriages were equipped with pressure ventilation and heating,and had double glazed windows. One noticeable feature was the provision of alternate windows with sliding ventilators on the corridor side". The thirds in these sets were to Dia256.

 

That suggests to me that all other end door thirds, mainly to Dia 155, would have had the earlier arrangement. I can't find anything which says that earlier diagrams were altered to conform, and it seems unlikely I think, as it would have been an expensive exercise at a time when the LNER was strapped for cash. The onset of war a year later would surely have put an end to such alterations anyway? However, I am no expert, and am ready to be corrected. If that happens though, I am bound to say that I shall revert to my "Does it look like a " test, and mine will stay as they are.