Wright writes.....

[jukebox]

8 hours ago, t-b-g said:

Not just 2000 pages but counting down to 50,000 posts. If the counter is right there are 20, or make that 19 to go.....

 

Sadly it will probably be some Aussie contributor who passes that milestone as I shall hopefully be tucked up in bed fast asleep when it happens.

 

I wouldn't cheat by doing another 19 one word posts!

 

Why "sadly"?

 

Glad I'm not easily offended, to be honest...

 

Yours,

 

Peasant Convict from the Antipodes

[t-b-g]

15 minutes ago, jukebox said:

 

Why "sadly"?

 

Glad I'm not easily offended, to be honest...

 

Yours,

 

Peasant Convict from the Antipodes

 

Sadly because I would have been fast asleep when it happened!

 

I was thinking of cricket type rivalry when I posted that. It was the equivalent of the Headingly test when Botham came out to bat. Only one likely result without something remarkable happening.

 

Yet history has repeated and the initiative has been seized back and the likelihood is that the post that takes us over the line will come from the home team.

[Clem]

8 hours ago, 65179 said:

The photo on the cover of the Foxline Publishing book linked to below shouldn't be entirely trusted as it's a coloured b&w image (colouring done by Larry Goddard if memory serves), but there are ample black and white photos in this book of this and similar trains to confirm the mix of liveries as valid:

 

Thanks. Already ordered!

[Tony Wright]

1 hour ago, Barry O said:

Tony LB is a very good model of part of the ECML. Grantham has a lot more in the way of things to do (shunting, engine changes) etc so both should be seen as great interpretations of the ECML..just as Retford will be.

 

The video looks good.. well done with the filming Tony and well done for editing it all Tom.

 

Baz

Thanks Baz,

 

That's very kind of you.

 

Were they all the same gauge, just think what it would be like if they were all joined together! And, throw in Stoke Summit as well. 

 

I wonder why the ECML is the most-represented in model form of all the main lines?

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

A question, please..............

 

How much digital manipulation is acceptable in a picture of a model railway?

 

 

This is one of the most-recent pictures of Retford I've taken (no trains, so no need to worry about lamps, or the lack of them!). 

 

It shows (I hope) the wonderfully-wide aspect of the railway ('No compromises!' was one of the great man's phrases), the cant of the fast lines, the splendid signals (apologies for breaking the rules of composition by having a vertical element right in the middle), the fantastic (finished) buildings (Geoff Kent and John McRae, I don't know whose work the signals are) and the distant perspective. 

 

Now, to the last-mentioned point. Do the main line tracks recede into the distance towards Eaton Wood? 

 

 

In actuality, those main line tracks disappear through 'a hole in the sky', through which can be seen a substantial electrical feed and a baseboard edge.

 

If left as it were, would it be too obtrusive? I don't have a problem with extending the sky behind the nearer signals (my eye is immediately drawn towards the ceiling and the walls of the room - and the ghostly operator!), but the on-/off-stage arrangement? 

 

All I did in the top picture to remove the aperture was to clone the surrounding, painted areas. Acceptable? 

 

 

Taken from a similar angle to the one above (I prefer this composition), with the aperture taken out (apologies for this having been seen before, but I'm interested in the opinions). 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 27, 2020 by Tony Wright
to add something

[thegreenhowards]

I love the video. One thing which would improve it for me would be some subtitled (or a voiceover) telling me what each train is. I know the rakes are well researched and some are obvious, such as the Lizzie or the Aberdeen fish, but the others are difficult to distinguish at speed and some interpretation would add to the viewing experience. I appreciate that that would not be easy with Tom editing it at distance but it would be worth it if possible.

 

Andy

[St Enodoc]

51 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

 

Sadly because I would have been fast asleep when it happened!

 

I was thinking of cricket type rivalry when I posted that. It was the equivalent of the Headingly test when Botham came out to bat. Only one likely result without something remarkable happening.

 

Yet history has repeated and the initiative has been seized back and the likelihood is that the post that takes us over the line will come from the home team.

Possibly...

[Clem]

8 hours ago, Headstock said:

 

They were around on my North South axis rather than your East west. When they were running as individual units though, they might like to take a Detour. What You need is a horde of ex NER 49' T (8), they were all over the shop.

 

have a look at this awesome Not Gran - Ord, second pic down. Ex NER T (8) / ex GCR BT (7) / Thompson CL (3-4) / Twin CL (2-5) - BT (6) / LMS Vanfit. 

 

http://www.tracksthroughgrantham.uk/recording-the-railway/grantham-railway-galleries/photographs-from-1949-to-the-1960s-by-humphrey-platts/

 

P.S. The thirteenth image down is your steel twin set, noted for its permanently attached BY (Bird brain van)

Thanks Andrew. What a brilliant site. I've not seen any of these photos before. Yes I definitely need a NER T(8). They appear in photos of the line frequently. Do you know if there's a kit? I also clocked the B1 on the SP twin diagram 310. 

The photo of 61821 (and others) have NER? clerestories in the background and a 60' GC matchboard. I wish I could have got to Grantham 10 years earlier!

[St Enodoc]

Just now, Clem said:

Thanks Andrew. What a brilliant site. I've not seen any of these photos before. Yes I definitely need a NER T(8). They appear in photos of the line frequently. Do you know if there's a kit? I also clocked the B1 on the SP twin diagram 310. 

The photo of 61821 (and others) have NER? clerestories in the background and a 60' GC matchboard. I wish I could have got to Grantham 10 years earlier!

Well done Clem. Give yourself a gold star!

[t-b-g]

I have always thought that John McCrea was McCrea, not McCrae.

 

Apologies John if you are reading this and I have been spelling it wrong!

 

Any view of Retford will always show the work of many people and I would add Geoff Tiffany, Richard Nice, Martin LLoyd, Pete Hill, Paul Marshall Potter and myself  the list whose work appears in that view.

 

It is going to be almost impossible to list the names of the contributors each time a photo is posted. That was partly why the overall phrase "Retford Mob" was coined, so nobody was left out. When Roy wrote about the layout, he always referred to the contributors as a group rather than name individuals, so nobody got left out accidentally.

 

As for the photos, I don't have strong views but I do like to see how things like backscenes have been done on a model. Getting ideas about how to, or how not to, disappear a track off scene are part of the process of learning how to build better layouts.

 

So if it is digitally enhanced, that opportunity to see how somebody else did it is lost. I would rather see a photo cropped to remove background clutter than have the clutter replaced digitally.

 

That particular view is one that cannot be seen except by a camera but it would be possible to mask the timber and cable by covering it with a thin sheet of card or suchlike, painted to match the backscene. That would hide the hole more effectively. Geoff Taylor has done that superbly effectively on "Barmouth Junction". The trains on that "appear" through the backscene almost like a magic trick and when no train is there, you can hardly see the holes.  

[t-b-g]

I was sitting like a sniper but missed it!

 

Many congratulations to all. 50,000 is some going!

[Clem]

1 minute ago, St Enodoc said:

Well done Clem. Give yourself a gold star!

Ay? (as we say in Nottingham)

[t-b-g]

Just now, Clem said:

Ay? (as we say in Nottingham)

 

He didn't even realise!

[Clem]

OK got it! Do I get a prize? (to which I know the answer will be, 'yes, a kick up the a**e')

[t-b-g]

We might need a recount.

 

The counter suggests that the Aussies may have taken the last wicket with 3 runs still needed.

 

It is suggesting that the first post on this page is 50,000.

 

Call for an enquiry of some sort.

[TrevorP1]

36 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

A question, please..............

 

How much digital manipulation is acceptable in a picture of a model railway?

 

>>> In actuality, those main line tracks disappear through 'a hole in the sky', through which can be seen a substantial electrical feed and a baseboard edge.

 

If left as it were, would it be too obtrusive? I don't have a problem with extending the sky behind the nearer signals (my eye is immediately drawn towards the ceiling and the walls of the room - and the ghostly operator!), but the on-/off-stage arrangement? 

 

All I did in the top picture to remove the aperture was to clone the surrounding, painted areas. Acceptable? 

 

 

That's all fine as far as I'm concerned Tony. All you have altered is what the builder may have done had that been possible.

 

I've no problem with manipulated images as long as that is the intention and it is made clear. However, I do detest fake steam (OK water vapour!) and smoke on what is otherwise a picture of a model railway.

[micklner]

Manipulated looks what it is , why pretend its not there .

[Clem]

4 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

We might need a recount.

 

The counter suggests that the Aussies may have taken the last wicket with 3 runs still needed.

 

It is suggesting that the first post on this page is 50,000.

 

Call for an enquiry of some sort.

Damn!! Robbed!! (echoes of VAR!)

Edited August 27, 2020 by Clem

[St Enodoc]

16 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

I was sitting like a sniper but missed it!

 

Many congratulations to all. 50,000 is some going!

I tried to give you the cue!

[Tony Teague]

44 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

A question, please..............

 

How much digital manipulation is acceptable in a picture of a model railway?

 

All I did in the top picture to remove the aperture was to clone the surrounding, painted areas. Acceptable? 

 

 

Taken from a similar angle to the one above (I prefer this composition), with the aperture taken out (apologies for this having been seen before, but I'm interested in the opinions). 

 

 

Tony

 

I think both images have their place; the unedited image records the model railway in it's 'habitat', the railway room - and we all know that there is one around the outside of the layout - whereas the second enhances the model because it compliments what the modeller is trying to do - to model the railway in its landscape and represent what was actuality.

The intrusion of the railway room around the railway does in some ways detract from what the modeller is trying to achieve, so taking it out is, in my view, a good thing which allows the viewer to suspend belief.

 

Tony

 

 

[St Enodoc]

10 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

We might need a recount.

 

The counter suggests that the Aussies may have taken the last wicket with 3 runs still needed.

 

It is suggesting that the first post on this page is 50,000.

 

Call for an enquiry of some sort.

The counter shows the number of replies. You need to add 1 to get the total number of posts. Clem's was definitely the final post on page 2000 (and will remain so unless an earlier post is deleted for some reason).

Edited August 27, 2020 by St Enodoc
speling

[Tony Wright]

20 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

I have always thought that John McCrea was McCrea, not McCrae.

 

Apologies John if you are reading this and I have been spelling it wrong!

 

Any view of Retford will always show the work of many people and I would add Geoff Tiffany, Richard Nice, Martin LLoyd, Pete Hill, Paul Marshall Potter and myself  the list whose work appears in that view.

 

It is going to be almost impossible to list the names of the contributors each time a photo is posted. That was partly why the overall phrase "Retford Mob" was coined, so nobody was left out. When Roy wrote about the layout, he always referred to the contributors as a group rather than name individuals, so nobody got left out accidentally.

 

As for the photos, I don't have strong views but I do like to see how things like backscenes have been done on a model. Getting ideas about how to, or how not to, disappear a track off scene are part of the process of learning how to build better layouts.

 

So if it is digitally enhanced, that opportunity to see how somebody else did it is lost. I would rather see a photo cropped to remove background clutter than have the clutter replaced digitally.

 

That particular view is one that cannot be seen except by a camera but it would be possible to mask the timber and cable by covering it with a thin sheet of card or suchlike, painted to match the backscene. That would hide the hole more effectively. Geoff Taylor has done that superbly effectively on "Barmouth Junction". The trains on that "appear" through the backscene almost like a magic trick and when no train is there, you can hardly see the holes.  

My apologies to John if I've got it wrong, Tony.

 

In future, I'll refrain from mentioning anyone's name in a Retford picture. I always like to give due credit for work, but it seems that omission is all too prevalent. In that respect, I cannot win.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

[PMP]

51 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

A question, please..............

 

How much digital manipulation is acceptable in a picture of a model railway?

 

 

This is one of the most-recent pictures of Retford I've taken (no trains, so no need to worry about lamps, or the lack of them!). 

 

It shows (I hope) the wonderfully-wide aspect of the railway ('No compromises!' was one of the great man's phrases), the cant of the fast lines, the splendid signals (apologies for breaking the rules of composition by having a vertical element right in the middle), the fantastic (finished) buildings (Geoff Kent and John McRae, I don't know whose work the signals are) and the distant perspective. 

 

Now, to the last-mentioned point. Do the main line tracks recede into the distance towards Eaton Wood? 

 

 

In actuality, those main line tracks disappear through 'a hole in the sky', through which can be seen a substantial electrical feed and a baseboard edge.

 

If left as it were, would it be too obtrusive? I don't have a problem with extending the sky behind the nearer signals (my eye is immediately drawn towards the ceiling and the walls of the room - and the ghostly operator!), but the on-/off-stage arrangement? 

 

All I did in the top picture to remove the aperture was to clone the surrounding, painted areas. Acceptable? 

 

 

Taken from a similar angle to the one above (I prefer this composition), with the aperture taken out (apologies for this having been seen before, but I'm interested in the opinions). 

 

 

 

 

I normally don’t mind a sky extended upwards or a neutral blue gray sky added if there’s nothing at all. Where the technique falls down is when color temperature isn’t balanced, and the sun and shadows are in the wrong place  against the photography lighting. 
 

Re the holes, when we refreshed the backscene I used one to show Roy how the holes could be disguised better. Many normal techniques For hole hiding not available because of Roy’s desire to maintain authenticity to the location. As usual with scenery, getting the green light took a bit of time and perseverance, because Roy wanted it to be as good as possible first time out with no re-working. He agreed what I demonstrated was an improvement, but that still wasn’t the works order signed off by a long way!

[Tony Wright]

Thanks to all the posters for collectively passing the 50,000 mark!

 

Argumentative, controversial, self-opinionated, insensitive, useful, helpful, enlightening, disappointing, creditable, long-winded, upsetting, creative, misleading......................... Any other adjectives to describe this thread? Most of the 'negative' ones apply to me.

 

Thanks again for all the erudite (another adjective) comments from, everyone.................

[Barry Ten]

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

 

I wonder why the ECML is the most-represented in model form of all the main lines?

 

. 

 

Possibly not unrelated: