Wright writes.....

[grahame]

9 hours ago, Dunsignalling said:

Hi Tony

 

Mainly because they have full-frame sensors (which makes them more expensive by definition), whereas Andy's and mine have the smaller DX size. 

 

It's also an age thing, though, older models start to exhibit quite a lot of noise/grain as soon as turned up over 400ASA, whereas many newer ones are fine at 800. They are often acceptable 1600, too, though that can depend on other factors such as subject type, lighting and whether you're intending to make big prints off the files. 

 

 

I use an old Nikon D7000 (which is over 10 years old) and has a DX 'crop' sensor but still seems to produce reasonable pics. I particularly like the perspective control facility in the camera which you can straighten vertical lines so they are not overly converging or diverging.

 

With regards to grainy pics I do tend to find that occurs if there is insufficient light and the camera is struggling to take a photo within its design limits. Generally you can never have enough light for photography (painting with light and all that) especially for models and layouts. Might be worth Andy lighting the scene with some extra lamps (and not forgetting to set the appropriate white balance).

 

This quick snap (below) just taken is at ISO200 (the camera does go up to 6400), f22 on aperture priority and left on a tripod for the requisite exposure time that the camera decrees is necessary with a 40mm micro lens. It has been cropped (just a little) and reduced in size as per the forum requirements:

 

 

HTH

 

 

[Dunsignalling]

8 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Thanks John,

 

I'd forgotten about the full-frame capabilities, though would that impact on the digital noise? As you say, it's down to age. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Age of camera definitely has a bearing. Sensor technology moves on all  the time and if one skips a generation the differences can be very apparent. If you tested the limits of your D3 against a D5 or D6, there would be differences. However, if yours performs up to or better than the requirements of the way the image will be used, any improveent delivered by the newer camera is academic.

 

The thing with a full frame sensor vs a smaller one delivering a similar pixel-count is that each pixel in the former is physically larger so doesn't have to work as hard.

 

To summarise, a good big 'un will always beat a good little 'un, but if the little 'un delivers what you want/need, there may be little benefit to be obtained from the additional investment and/or bulk incurred in moving up.

 

To give an example, A4 prints of 7802 'Bradley Manor' taken on my little Lumix Lx100 compact (Micro Four Thirds format) and my mate's full-frame D800 + 24-120 zoom costing six times as much were very difficult to tell apart, but if printed to A3 or A2, I'd expect/hope there to be clearly visible disparity!

 

John 

 

Edited December 27, 2020 by Dunsignalling

[Tony Wright]

44 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

Age of camera definitely has a bearing. Sensor technology moves on all  the time and if one skips a generation the differences can be very apparent. If you tested the limits of your D3 against a D5 or D6, there would be differences. However, if yours performs up to or better than the requirements of the way the image will be used, any improveent delivered by the newer camera is academic.

 

The thing with a full frame sensor vs a smaller one delivering a similar pixel-count is that each pixel in the former is physically larger so doesn't have to work as hard.

 

To summarise, a good big 'un will always beat a good little 'un, but if the little 'un delivers what you want/need, there may be little benefit to be obtained from the additional investment and/or bulk incurred in moving up.

 

To give an example, A4 prints of 7802 'Bradley Manor' taken on my little Lumix Lx100 compact (Micro Four Thirds format) and my mate's full-frame D800 + 24-120 zoom costing six times as much were very difficult to tell apart, but if printed to A3 or A2, I'd expect/hope there to be clearly visible disparity!

 

John 

 

Thanks John,

 

I wonder what a Nikon D6 costs these days? Not that I'll be upgrading.....................

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Dunsignalling]

23 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Thanks John,

 

I wonder what a Nikon D6 costs these days? Not that I'll be upgrading.....................

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

£6,299 and the thing is enormous - getting on for double the size of what you have now.

 

No low-angle layout shots when there's an extra inch of non-removable battery pack on the bottom!

 

John

Edited December 27, 2020 by Dunsignalling

[thegreenhowards]

I was sufficiently encouraged by all the camera comments to go and try some experiments with the D80. It turns out that although I was setting the ISO to 100, I had set an auto ISO override somewhere else in the complicated menu structure. In the end I managed to do a factory reset of the settings and set the ISO to 100. The results are dramatically improved. Here is a shot of my Yorkshire Pullman taken just now (F25, 4 secs, LED floodlight, 30mm lens, ISO100). The results are much better than I was getting.

 

Here is the identical picture taken on my iPhone.

 

I prefer the colour balance on the iPhone, but the depth of field on the SLR wins out. I will be using the SLR much more in future.

 

Sadly, I can't now work out how to set the camera back to provide a 'before' comparison so you'll have to take my word that it is a significant improvement. 

 

Thanks for all the help.

 

Andy

 

[St Enodoc]

6 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

I've filed the bogie supports down on the car's floor pan, losing about a mil'.

Make sure the flanges don't foul (been there...).

[St Enodoc]

3 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

those on new springs riding higher

Ride height was adjusted using shims to make the buffer height correct.

[Dunsignalling]

16 minutes ago, thegreenhowards said:

I was sufficiently encouraged by all the camera comments to go and try some experiments with the D80. It turns out that although I was setting the ISO to 100, I had set an auto ISO override somewhere else in the complicated menu structure. In the end I managed to do a factory reset of the settings and set the ISO to 100. The results are dramatically improved. Here is a shot of my Yorkshire Pullman taken just now (F25, 4 secs, LED floodlight, 30mm lens, ISO100). The results are much better than I was getting.

 

Here is the identical picture taken on my iPhone.

 

I prefer the colour balance on the iPhone, but the depth of field on the SLR wins out. I will be using the SLR much more in future.

 

Sadly, I can't now work out how to set the camera back to provide a 'before' comparison so you'll have to take my word that it is a significant improvement. 

 

Thanks for all the help.

 

Andy

 

You can play around with the white balance on the camera. Just take a series of the same shot at various settings and pick which you like best for layout work.

 

Just don't forget to put it back to auto before you take the camera outdoors!

 

John

[robmcg]

3 hours ago, Dunsignalling said:

Age of camera definitely has a bearing. Sensor technology moves on all  the time and if one skips a generation the differences can be very apparent. If you tested the limits of your D3 against a D5 or D6, there would be differences. However, if yours performs up to or better than the requirements of the way the image will be used, any improveent delivered by the newer camera is academic.

 

The thing with a full frame sensor vs a smaller one delivering a similar pixel-count is that each pixel in the former is physically larger so doesn't have to work as hard.

 

To summarise, a good big 'un will always beat a good little 'un, but if the little 'un delivers what you want/need, there may be little benefit to be obtained from the additional investment and/or bulk incurred in moving up.

 

To give an example, A4 prints of 7802 'Bradley Manor' taken on my little Lumix Lx100 compact (Micro Four Thirds format) and my mate's full-frame D800 + 24-120 zoom costing six times as much were very difficult to tell apart, but if printed to A3 or A2, I'd expect/hope there to be clearly visible disparity!

 

John 

 

 

As a lifelong photographer , sometimes a press photographer, and photos often published, I agree with your assessment in general, but perhaps my 60+ years of experience from Box Brownie on taught me mostly about compromise. And subjectivity.

 

I never conquered colour! 

 

My preference these days for photographing 00 models is the Canon half-frame format , but I am continually impressed by Tony's photos, depth-of-field in particular. His 'full frame' format clearly works brilliantly.

 

edit; with the correct camera, lighting, set-up, and the composition-skills Tony has!

 

As many know I enjoy photo editing and don't mind using my own version of photo-stacking, where I simply take two or three pics and match them and blend them using a resizing and selection tool, and achieve a sharp result vaguely resembling 1:1 reality.  My Canon EOS-M is a ten year old camera design I think but it works and you can buy one s/h for about UKP100  and it has a choice of aperture priority, delayed shutter, f32 on its 18-55mm lens as standard, (equiv. about 30-90 full frame? ) 

 

I hope to apply a little more of the C T Gifford school of art to future pictures. 

 

As ever each to their own.

 

edit 2;  apologies, I had also intended to congratulate Tony on his spurning of the modern phone, I am pleased that I am not alone in feeling that they are an abomination, I eschew them as much as I can. But then again, some may like them...  it's their use at all times which rattles me when I look at people in the streets, on trains or waiting somewhere, head down aimlessly staring as who knows what, and some with headphones, don't get me started! 

 

That off my chest, I now ask if I may be permitted to include a 'picture', it isn't a photo in any normal sense or use of the word, of a model and a mix of computer-altered images grafted together?

 

It purports to be an ex-WD 2-8-0 somewhere resembling West Yorkshire, and it includes two joined-up photos of the Bachmann engine and wagons to stay sharp, and I offer it as an example of focus ... and the pleasure of creating an image, even though it cannot be of anything actual. 

 

 

I always tended to excess...  

 

Here is a more pure example of enjoying a model to create an image, redolent in this case of a G F Heiron painting I vaguely recall from my youthful reading of 'Model Railway News' about 1963.

 

 

Again, a computer generated picture, not to be confused with an honest photo of a model.

 

Sorry about all the edits and additions, I fully understand the antipathy some feel towards editing photos.

Edited December 28, 2020 by robmcg
Add comments and picture.

[Woodcock29]

Whilst we're on the subject of photography, here are a few shots I took yesterday. I wonder what this reminds us LNER followers of? Its just received black livery for the first time in 50 years, having been painted Hawthorn green since its first restoration in 1970-71.  It still needs the boiler bands lined with a double red line. South Australian 620 Class light pacific built 1936. Photos taken on the D7000,

 

Andrew

 

 

[St Enodoc]

12 minutes ago, Woodcock29 said:

Whilst we're on the subject of photography, here are a few shots I took yesterday. I wonder what this reminds us LNER followers of? Its just received black livery for the first time in 50 years, having been painted Hawthorn green since its first restoration in 1970-71.  It still needs the boiler bands lined with a double red line. South Australian 620 Class light pacific built 1936. Photos taken on the D7000,

 

Andrew

 

 

Pity it wasn't running when we were last there. Perhaps next September?

[Woodcock29]

7 minutes ago, St Enodoc said:

Pity it wasn't running when we were last there. Perhaps next September?

ARHS are likely to have 3 operational steam locos by Sept. So should at least be steam. But I expect it'll be an Rx 4-6-0 as 621 will be based at Mt Barker for Southern Encounter runs.

Andrew

[Northmoor]

10 hours ago, robmcg said:

It purports to be an ex-WD 2-8-0 somewhere resembling West Yorkshire, and it includes two joined-up photos of the Bachmann engine and wagons to stay sharp, and I offer it as an example of focus ... and the pleasure of creating an image, even though it cannot be of anything actual. 

 

 

West Yorkshire?  That's unmistakably the approach to Ais Gill Summit.

I really like these shots as promotion for the models, the sort manufacturers like to use, well done.

 

Rob

[Headstock]

23 minutes ago, Northmoor said:

West Yorkshire?  That's unmistakably the approach to Ais Gill Summit.

I really like these shots as promotion for the models, the sort manufacturers like to use, well done.

 

Rob

 

I think he means West Riding or Westmorland.

[Joseph_Pestell]

11 hours ago, robmcg said:

 

As a lifelong photographer , sometimes a press photographer, and photos often published, I agree with your assessment in general, but perhaps my 60+ years of experience from Box Brownie on taught me mostly about compromise. And subjectivity.

 

I never conquered colour! 

 

My preference these days for photographing 00 models is the Canon half-frame format , but I am continually impressed by Tony's photos, depth-of-field in particular. His 'full frame' format clearly works brilliantly.

 

edit; with the correct camera, lighting, set-up, and the composition-skills Tony has!

 

As many know I enjoy photo editing and don't mind using my own version of photo-stacking, where I simply take two or three pics and match them and blend them using a resizing and selection tool, and achieve a sharp result vaguely resembling 1:1 reality.  My Canon EOS-M is a ten year old camera design I think but it works and you can buy one s/h for about UKP100  and it has a choice of aperture priority, delayed shutter, f32 on its 18-55mm lens as standard, (equiv. about 30-90 full frame? ) 

 

I hope to apply a little more of the C T Gifford school of art to future pictures. 

 

As ever each to their own.

 

edit 2;  apologies, I had also intended to congratulate Tony on his spurning of the modern phone, I am pleased that I am not alone in feeling that they are an abomination, I eschew them as much as I can. But then again, some may like them...  it's their use at all times which rattles me when I look at people in the streets, on trains or waiting somewhere, head down aimlessly staring as who knows what, and some with headphones, don't get me started! 

 

That off my chest, I now ask if I may be permitted to include a 'picture', it isn't a photo in any normal sense or use of the word, of a model and a mix of computer-altered images grafted together?

 

It purports to be an ex-WD 2-8-0 somewhere resembling West Yorkshire, and it includes two joined-up photos of the Bachmann engine and wagons to stay sharp, and I offer it as an example of focus ... and the pleasure of creating an image, even though it cannot be of anything actual. 

 

 

I always tended to excess...  

 

Here is a more pure example of enjoying a model to create an image, redolent in this case of a G F Heiron painting I vaguely recall from my youthful reading of 'Model Railway News' about 1963.

 

 

Again, a computer generated picture, not to be confused with an honest photo of a model.

 

Sorry about all the edits and additions, I fully understand the antipathy some feel towards editing photos.

 

I love your work, Rob. And I can't see anything "wrong" with it. You are not trying to pass it off as something that it is not.

 

If that first picture is indeed on the S&C, I would interested to know the date of the background picture. As per my post just now on Wayne Kinney's thread, I am trying to find out when the S&C running lines would have been changed from bullhead to flatbottom.

[Joseph_Pestell]

11 hours ago, Woodcock29 said:

Whilst we're on the subject of photography, here are a few shots I took yesterday. I wonder what this reminds us LNER followers of? Its just received black livery for the first time in 50 years, having been painted Hawthorn green since its first restoration in 1970-71.  It still needs the boiler bands lined with a double red line. South Australian 620 Class light pacific built 1936. Photos taken on the D7000,

 

Andrew

 

 

 

If the French had purchased Light Pacifics from the US as well as Mikados, they would surely have looked a lot like this (but with a bit more pipework hanging off the boiler).

[MPR]

13 hours ago, thegreenhowards said:

I was sufficiently encouraged by all the camera comments to go and try some experiments with the D80. It turns out that although I was setting the ISO to 100, I had set an auto ISO override somewhere else in the complicated menu structure. In the end I managed to do a factory reset of the settings and set the ISO to 100. The results are dramatically improved. Here is a shot of my Yorkshire Pullman taken just now (F25, 4 secs, LED floodlight, 30mm lens, ISO100). The results are much better than I was getting.

 

Here is the identical picture taken on my iPhone.

 

I prefer the colour balance on the iPhone, but the depth of field on the SLR wins out. I will be using the SLR much more in future.

 

Sadly, I can't now work out how to set the camera back to provide a 'before' comparison so you'll have to take my word that it is a significant improvement. 

 

Thanks for all the help.

 

Andy

 

Glad to see you’ve sorted the camera settings out. The D80 remains a really nice, usable camera even today, my father-in-law has used one for many years, only recently adding a D7200 to his bag. I had the same 10 megapixel sensor in a Sony A100 and got a lot of good images from it - neither of these cameras does well above 400ISO though. 
One thing to remember is that ISO isn’t a real thing with digital cameras, there are photons landing on each pixel and then gain (amplification) is applied to the photo current that is generated. The cleanliness of the output signal is then dependent on the intrinsic and largely fixed noise of the sensor element plus any non-idealities in the amplification chain. If there is little light falling on the subject, either because the overall light levels are low, or part of the subject is dark, the noise will tend to dominate.

Putting it another way, setting to ISO 100 and under exposing by one stop may give identical results to exposing correctly at ISO 100.

As another poster commented, more light is usually better!

 

[Tony Wright]

Some excellent comments on photography; many thanks. 

 

I love the last one, though I don't understand it at all!

[Tony Wright]

Progress with the Southern Pride Mk.1 BSO continues.....................

 

Roof now screwed in place (it unscrews, of course), with those nasty roof ribs largely gone. 

 

No gangways are supplied (just the folded paper concertina sort). I had some spare plastic ones (from where is anyone's guess), so glued these in place, then added the concertina ones.

 

 

Yes, once lowered, the bogies caught on the floor pan (and my couplings). The wheels were still well-clear. I just nibbled bits off the bogie to clear, and filed some bits off the floor pan. 

 

 

At the towing end, I fixed a Bachmann gangway cover (should ever this car be last in a train - necessitating removal of my coupling). The roof isn't quite seated properly yet. 

 

 

In comparison with a Hornby BSO, it's still a fair bit taller. The nibbled-away bogie is apparent here. I can't really lower it any further. 

 

 

But then there's no need, since it matches a Bachmann Mk.1 quite well (the roof is still not quite seated properly). 

 

 

Since its position will be in a mainly modified Bachmann Mk.1 rake (it's the 3rd car), then it should suit quite well. It'll (correctly) replace a Bachmann BSK, lettered with a 'W' prefix! In all the years this rake has run, nobody has ever noticed this anomaly; nor did they on Retford, where Roy Jackson once showed me two identically-numbered 'W' prefixed Bachmann Mk.1s, adjacent to each other in a rake! 

 

As with any loco I build, I always thoroughly road test any carriages I'm building, long before they're completed. 

 

Is it worth building something like this carriage these days, especially now that Hornby produce an RTR Mk.1 BSO? Before, perhaps? As I mentioned, I've had the kit over 20 years, and things move on. At the time the likes of these SP cars were exceptional value for money (are they still?). 

 

As a 'layout' coach, I'm sure it'll be fine, though RTR equivalents will probably be better-finished. That said, as part of a 13-car rake, who'll notice? 

 

I'll certainly finish it and report accordingly..........................

 

For those interested, the picture above was taken with a Nikon Df shooting a TIF file; I used an 18-35mm Nikon zoom (set to 35mm), with the ISO set at 100, and a five second exposure at F29 with the focus at 2' 6". Shadows were lightened by pulses of fill-in flash during the exposure, with the ambient room lighting providing the principal illumination. 

 

 

[CF MRC]

‘Spose it’s the time of year to look back on what’s appeared from my workbench over the last year. For me, it was a lot more varied than usual; background descriptions are in the ME, narrow gauge and 2mm parts or RMWeb.

 

All the best for 2021, when we get there, and enjoy your modelling!

 

Tim

[cctransuk]

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

 

 

In comparison with a Hornby BSO, it's still a fair bit taller. The nibbled-away bogie is apparent here. I can't really lower it any further. 

 

 

Are the bogie centres correct? The end axle looks to be very close to the headstock.

 

John Isherwood.

[cctransuk]

1 minute ago, cctransuk said:

 

Are the bogie centres correct? The end axle looks to be very close to the headstock.

 

John Isherwood.

 

Ah - I see the problem!

 

Compared to the Hornby and Bachman models, the solebars are very deep.

 

John Isherwood.

[Tony Wright]

54 minutes ago, cctransuk said:

 

Are the bogie centres correct? The end axle looks to be very close to the headstock.

 

John Isherwood.

Good afternoon John,

 

I think the bogie centres are a twitch too near the headstock.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

52 minutes ago, cctransuk said:

 

Ah - I see the problem!

 

Compared to the Hornby and Bachman models, the solebars are very deep.

 

John Isherwood.

I think the solebars are too deep as well.

 

Like many models which purport to represent the same things, if it's a whole train perhaps best not to mix and match? 

 

Certainly, with regard to the pretty 'standard' Mk.1s, none of the RTR ones match exactly, and neither do the kits I've built.

 

Ah, well........................

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

[ScRSG]

3 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Is it worth building something like this carriage these days, especially now that Hornby produce an RTR Mk.1 BSO? Before, perhaps? As I mentioned, I've had the kit over 20 years, and things move on. At the time the likes of these SP cars were exceptional value for money (are they still?). 

 

Originally, if memory serves, the SP coaches were the best ones if you wanted a flush glazed coach, as the only rtr ones at the time were old Hornby or Mainline, so the SP ones were a Godsend. As stated above they are no longer available and the current rtr ones are much superior, although I still find it difficult to accept £40+ for a coach!