Wright writes.....

[Tony Wright]

8 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

Good!

I don't think I'm any good at producing it John,

 

Not only that, even where it's been done cleverly, in my opinion, it adds nothing (but annoyance) to shots of model railways where it's been included. It doesn't exist in reality, so why do it? Granted, I'm not averse to taking out unwanted and obtrusive background 'clutter' in my model railway pictures, but I don't put in things which aren't there. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[St Enodoc]

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

I don't think I'm any good at producing it John

From what I've seen, nobody is.

 

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

I'm not averse to taking out unwanted and obtrusive background 'clutter' in my model railway pictures, but I don't put in things which aren't there.

A very sound philosophy (pun not intended).

[Jesse Sim]

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

It was put there so that everyone can see it!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Oh, I was worried she wasn’t performing. 

[Jesse Sim]

10 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

So what will you be riding/driving to my place a week tomorrow then?

I’ll be in the car, don’t turn 25 till the 27th of this month, which is when I get my blacks. 

[chrisf]

12 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

 

I've decided not to bother with fake smoke any more.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

 

I'm glad to hear it.  One of the magazines seems to think that adding fake smoke is a good idea.  There is an element of "because we can" here and it doesn't - or shouldn't - fool anybody.

 

Chris

Edited March 12, 2021 by chrisf

[grahame]

5 minutes ago, chrisf said:

 

One of the magazines seems to think that adding fake smoke is a good idea.  There is an element of "because we can" here and it doesn't - or shouldn't - fool anybody.

 

 

I seem to recall it being seen in several of the commercial monthlies. But isn't it the photographer who processes the image and adds the smoke rather than it being a magazine policy/requirement?

 

 

[dibateg]

Ah - I can't take credit for 90040 and 90033 Tony, they were both built by Allen Hammet. 90033 was actually built for Roy Palmer. Originally they had Sharman wheels, which I think were later replaced with Markits ones when they came out. Strangely all three of my O gauge WD's have Doncaster fireboxes....

 

[Roger Sunderland]

2 hours ago, grahame said:

 

I seem to recall it being seen in several of the commercial monthlies. But isn't it the photographer who processes the image and adds the smoke rather than it being a magazine policy/requirement?

 

 

From my experience the layout owner is usually asked if they would like smoke adding. Personally I don’t have a problem if it’s done well, it just adds to the atmosphere.

[Tony Wright]

28 minutes ago, chrisf said:

 

I'm glad to hear it.  One of the magazines seems to think that adding fake smoke is a good idea.  There is an element of "because we can" here and it doesn't - or shouldn't - fool anybody.

 

Chris

Good afternoon Chris,

 

I abandoned the idea of introducing fake smoke to my pictures years ago. 

 

I actually tried it in the days of film, either by 'burning-in' areas under the enlarger or superimposition of a picture of real real smoke. Neither method was successful (and, fortunately, the results were never published). 

 

I think you're right. 'Because we can' doesn't mean we should.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[grahame]

6 hours ago, Roger Sunderland said:

From my experience the layout owner is usually asked if they would like smoke adding. 

 

I've had several layouts featured in a number of magazines but was never asked by the magazine if I'd like smoke or other fakery added. However, the photographer (when sent by the magazine) did undertake some after shoot lightroom electronic editing (removing background clutter, adding a 'sky', disguising baseboard edges, etc., (and presumably adjusting contrast, sharpening focus and other photographic techniques) but fortunately not adding any fakery or items that weren't modelled on the layout.

 

 

[Tony Wright]

I've been asked to sell items on behalf of a model railway club after the family of a late member donated them.

 

There are hundreds and hundreds of castings, etches, turnings, couplings, wheels (old Romfords) and just about anything else a modeller needs (no tools), plus some motors (mainly XO4 derivatives), gear wheels and worms.  

 

Much has been sorted, though there are still masses of items to examine. My plan is to list some of the items for potential sale on here. And, when visitors return to see Little Bytham, just lay out tray after tray inviting 'No reasonable offer refused'.

 

There are some bogies, two of which (made-up) are 12' 6" wheelbase. Does anyone know which railway used these (they're BSL). 

 

I'll keep folk posted. 

[Chas Levin]

Hello all, my latest completed model is a bit of fun, light relief from the current loco build. Apologies to any LNER, GWR or Thorneycroft purists - this is a 'might have been' offering!
The LNER maintained a very large fleet of road vehicles as part of their door to door parcels service and the fleet did include some Thorneycroft vehicles, so I thought it wasn't impossible that they might have included the PB 4 Ton Lorry depicted in this vintage Merit kit (subsequently reissued by Peco and more usually seen in GWR livery):

 

[Barry Ten]

I spent an evening and a bit building this Finetrax point in Code 40, for a small N gauge project based around the forthcoming

Sonic Models 56xx.

 

It's my second attempt at building a point. The first one, in 00, wasn't a success as the C+L sleepers went banana shaped

while they were still on the template. The Finetrax point base has an integral base and sleepers so I don't think that'll happen

here. I also struggled with the tie-bar on the C+L one, whereas the kit has all the bits you need, as well as the option of a handy

jig.

 

I won't say it was a doddle but I think the next one will be easier.

 

Edited March 12, 2021 by Barry Ten
missing an "a"

[PupCam]

On 11/03/2021 at 11:45, LNER4479 said:

Yep! And according to the ever excellent BR Database website ...

https://www.brdatabase.info/locoqry.php?action=locodata&type=S&id=426452173&loco=2639

 

What a remarkable piece of work!

 

Thanks for bringing it to my attention.

 

Alan

[jimwal]

4 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

There are some bogies, two of which (made-up) are 12' 6" wheelbase. Does anyone know which railway used these (they're BSL).

 

If the 12' 6" wheelbase bogies are 6 wheel they well be LMS or Midland ones as used on restaurant and sleeping cars. I have BSL restaurant third with them on.

 

The GWR, LNWR and Caledonian used 6 wheel bogies, there may have been others.

[St Enodoc]

17 hours ago, Roger Sunderland said:

if it’s done well

There's the rub.

[St Enodoc]

13 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

'Because we can' doesn't mean we should.

More sound philosophy.

[Tony Wright]

My mention of a variety of items for sale has already resulted in two emails. And, what was inquired about was on the lists!

 

As soon as I've sorted more stuff out, I'll post lists......................

[Tony Wright]

On taking the delivery of all the bits and pieces belonging to the late Les Blackburn of Spalding MRC, I was asked if I'd complete a locomotive which he'd started...............

 

 

I have no idea of its origin (though it's obviously a cast metal body).

 

The chassis is a solid milled block of brass. It didn't run, though it had a Portescap in it. The problem was the whole thing had locked solid and will eventually need freeing (a not uncommon occurrence). All I've done is strip the chassis, paint it black, install a replacement simple Branchlines 'box and a DS10 motor, tweak the rods (they jammed on running!) and install new pick-ups.

 

I'll complete the body (using bits from the numerous packets) and paint it.

 

The idea is it'll be retained by the club as a memento of a well-liked club member. All the rest of his kit-built locos have gone off for auction. 

 

Since most of the work will have been done by Les, I think it'll be a fitting 'recollection'. 

 

I've done this sort of thing a few times now - complete locos/rolling stock started by someone who died before they were completed. In the case of Geoff Brewin's locos (an A1 and a V2), I have mementos of a friend, and, though I don't believe in a rewarded afterlife (or any afterlife), if I'm wrong, then I'm sure he'd be pleased. 

[Beechnut]

One of these perhaps? I do have the complete kit, just a sample to illustrate the similarities.

 

Brendan

[Tony Wright]

1 hour ago, Beechnut said:

One of these perhaps? I do have the complete kit, just a sample to illustrate the similarities.

 

Brendan

Thanks Brendan,

 

It could well be.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

Those who've been following the BRM virtual exhibition today might well have seen snippets of this........................

 

 

 

It's when I tested the KR models RTR GT3 on Little Bytham (apologies for the wobbly BG in one or two of the sequences; one of the bogies' retaining 8 BA nuts had worked loose - now back in place).

 

I honestly can't remember what the real GT3 sounded like (it occasionally ran through Chester on test from Newton), but it's certainly got a whine on the model. 

[chris45lsw]

23 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

I've been asked to sell items on behalf of a model railway club after the family of a late member donated them.

 

There are hundreds and hundreds of castings, etches, turnings, couplings, wheels (old Romfords) and just about anything else a modeller needs (no tools), plus some motors (mainly XO4 derivatives), gear wheels and worms.  

 

Much has been sorted, though there are still masses of items to examine. My plan is to list some of the items for potential sale on here. And, when visitors return to see Little Bytham, just lay out tray after tray inviting 'No reasonable offer refused'.

 

There are some bogies, two of which (made-up) are 12' 6" wheelbase. Does anyone know which railway used these (they're BSL). 

 

I'll keep folk posted. 

 

[chris45lsw]

Hello Tony 

 

The only 6 wheeled, 12' 6" wb bogies which BSL and later Phoenix made were for the GWR and LMS so they must be one or the other.  As a price guide the Southern Railways Group can still offer a set of unassembled castings for a pair of bogies (wheels not included) for £10.50.

 

Chris KT 

[robmcg]

On 13/03/2021 at 06:21, Tony Wright said:

Good afternoon Chris,

 

I abandoned the idea of introducing fake smoke to my pictures years ago. 

 

I actually tried it in the days of film, either by 'burning-in' areas under the enlarger or superimposition of a picture of real real smoke. Neither method was successful (and, fortunately, the results were never published). 

 

I think you're right. 'Because we can' doesn't mean we should.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

Ah, a favourite subject of mine, digitally-altered photos!  I am not as set-in-my- ways as some around here, being a mere 70 years, old and am thus open to some new ideas. *

 

* conditions may apply., 

 

In the past I have fallen foul of rules because I have not always made it clear that my own pictures are often altered by editing, having rather naively thought it obvious. After all, they are usually digital photographs of my models with grafted-on backgrounds, foregrounds, smoke and steam, just as I remember the real thing from the 50s and 60s. Thus they evoke a scene, and in no way are intended to be an accurate record, which is what some see as the role of photography.

 

There's the rub; are photographs accurate?  Or are they like painting, representations of a person place or thing?

 

In my opinion digital images can bring both together.

 

I would never choose to add smoke or steam to a photo of Little Bytham, it is a superb model of a place as it was in 1958, its beauty and craftsmanship is obvious, to graft smoke onto it simply does not work. Equally a portrait of a single beautiful model of a steam engine, craftmanship and art is self evident.

 

However when you use a model to paint something digitally and the intention is simply to evoke an imaginary scene, with good memories of the real thing, and also to celebrate the quality of a model, a whole range of ethical dilemmas comes  into play. Is it an archive of history? No.  Does it resemble something real? Yes...   rather as some paintings might do. 

 

The intention of a digital photograph is the key.  Photos must be honest, they should never pretend to be something they are not.  The swathes of painted smoke over models of steam depots do not please me at all,  but my own painting of smoke over a model may well do so, where the scene is rather like a well-crafted photo or painting.  Some photographers were simply brilliant, Treacy comes to mind, but the scenes they shot are long gone.  Thus models, manipulation of modern media, and a bit of creative time, and we can have a very modest equivalent, albeit without the authenticity..

 

Instead of adding smoke or steam to a model scene or engine, may I suggest an alternative?  Taking a portrait of a model and pasting it over a scene created from digital photos of real scenes. I do this a lot, it can make a model look superb, without detracting from it in my eyes and enhancing the beauty of the model.

 

Certainly it is not everyone's cup of tea, but the way a superb model can remind people of their days of spotting, as well as simply being attractive in itself, well this is the 'broad church' of modelling itself.

 

Here is a photo of a model I messed with yesterday...      the first ER post-war Pacific to be withdrawn?  A super Hornby RTR 00 model, too. Weathering by TMC. Picture edited.. 

 

 

Apologies if you have seen this or similar before.