Jump to content

Please use M,M&M only for topics that do not fit within other forum areas. All topics posted here await admin team approval to ensure they don't belong elsewhere.

Tony Wright

Wright writes.....

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, St Enodoc said:

In round figures, 60 mph in 4mm scale is about 14 inches per second.

 

It did 5 feet and a bit in about 4 and a half seconds (I just did "one missisippi... two mississipi...) so I think that works out about right.

  • Like 3
  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Posted (edited)

I too dislike the addition of smoke in pictures, but a lot of that is because it is very often a soft brush selected and then quickly dragged over the image.
 

But as a one off, this is one I have mocked up quickly in Nuke, I could have done it in Photoshop, but I like Nuke better as it is a programme I have used professionally for many years.

TonyWright02.jpg

 

Some smoke from the Action Essentials package (two separate pieces picked at different times).

The image has been graded a bit to take the edge of the colours and an overall grain has been added.

I have added some foreground foliage to emphasis the moving camera.
 

Anyway, it is hard to improve on the model of Little Bytham, and indeed many layouts that are reworked in Photoshop.
 

There is always an exception, and that is the wonderful work of Robmcg who has such a personal take on railway modelling through the use of Photoshop, and bringing a hint of Terence Cuneo into digital imagery.
 

On the subject of digital reworking of trains, here is an unfinished piece I did as part of my M.A. in visual effects over which I took a lot more time. I must finish this off and put the correct roof on York Station. This is from a short film just over 1 minute. Much of the station is York today run through Nuke and Photoshop, the Standard 4MT and some of the platform and tracks are from Pickering, the WD is Backmann, the wagons Cambrian, and the loco in the platform is a still my uncle took at York in the 50s. I know the suitcases are too near the edge of the platform, but they are there to mask the people on Pickering platform, the lamp on the right of the 4MT also needs cloning out from the other one. There are lots of little details to sort out still, but hopefully I can get it done before long (Christmas).
 

TonyWright04.jpg

 

 

Since the joy of modelling for me is making something I can hold and not just a digital file on a computer I am very happy to leave be the photos in this thread.
 

Jamie

Edited by Jamiel
  • Like 6
  • Craftsmanship/clever 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

Enough of [email protected] with photoshoppery (at least as far as I'm concerned).

 

I take pictures of the models I and others have made, showing them (I hope) as they are. 

 

In the following shots, all I've done is take out the background.

 

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/uploads/monthly_2019_08/1612427032_60017onTTPullman.jpg.09bacbea7b30303ec45718be2840b164.jpg

 

Class A4 60017 SILVER FOX (SE Finecast/Wright/Haynes) heads the northbound 'Tees Tyne' Pullman through Little Bytham. This is anomalous because the station was demolished in 1959, at least a year before the MK.1 Pullmans arrived. Still, it's my trainset and Rule 1. applies!

 

The difference in Hornby's rendition and Bachmann's rendition of Pullman umber/cream is very marked. Is either correct? 

 

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/uploads/monthly_2019_08/1983903600_60034and63766.jpg.f6d8c87f37a5d882cea2eedede0068cb.jpg

 

Another A4, this time 60034 LORD FARINGDON (Bachmann/SE Finecast/Wright/Rathbone) races south on an Up express passing an O4/2 (K's/Kinsey/Wright) on an unfitted goods. Note the cut-down rear of the tender of the A4. 

 

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/uploads/monthly_2019_08/488666705_61553and60116.jpg.c3bdc6f50ba35567eb688fed4738715e.jpg

 

Class B12/3 61553 (Coopercraft/Wright) prepares to stop with a 'parly' as Class A1 60116 HAL O' THE WYND (DJH/WRight/Rathbone) powers northwards on the Down 'Northumbrian'.

 

Visitors frequently say how much they enjoy the view from the 'far side'. It certainly gives a different perspective on LB.  

 

 

 

I fully respect your choice regarding 'photoshoppery' as you describe it.  With your panned shots, would not softer, less saturated colours look better in the background?  Contributors to RMweb go to great lengths to achieve te right livery on engines. Backgrounds in my experience are rarely made from bright primary hues.

 

I have taken quite  a few panned photos of real trains and it's rather difficult, as you have shown.

 

Here is an edited photo of a Bachmann A1 I created some years ago 

 

60157_Roller_Bearing_Peppercorn_A1_At_Work_ECML_4abcde_r1500_crop1.jpg.a46beee716c3bcdf47827669cbb4dc3e.jpg

 

or if you prefer Gresley...

 

60046_ECML_A3_at_Work_1961_3ab_r1500.jpg.88a4976a0f72241eb878120f177c6ffd.jpg

 

I'm perfectly comfortable with a degree of editing of photos, as you can see,  and it's not meant to be more than 'a picture' hopefully evocative.  Cheers.

 

 

  • Like 15

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 24/08/2019 at 20:26, Jol Wilkinson said:

While the Scalefour Society does not, AFAIK as a member, have any facility in which to store or display layouts, it is possible that one of the membership might be able to help.

Reflecting that maintaining a sophisticated and complex model such as Maindee East might be too difficult for most museums or or similar institutions (viz. Heckmondwyke and the NRM), it might be better offered as a diorama. In which case a location with strong GWR connections could offer the best opportunity to find a suitable home, such as Didcot or Pendon.

All good points, thank you, Jol.  I certainly wouldn't like Maindee East to end up like Heckmondwike (the model railway that was my first great inspiration when I first saw it in Model Railway Constructor Model Railways).  While I'd already wondered about talking to Pendon, I hadn't thought of Didcot at all.

 

On 25/08/2019 at 18:44, 4069 said:

Pendon does not want or have space for any additional layouts, and I suspect that Didcot would not be interested, especially in a model that is not of a real place.

You could well be right, but at the very least for the sake of a few minutes writing an email or making a phone call one or the other might just be able to point me in the right direction.  

 

I think the discussions about Maindee East Engine Shed are moving away from being appropriate for Wright Writes, so after consulting Andy York I've set up 'A Future for Maindee East Engine Shed' as a new topic in Modelling Musings & Miscellany.  For those who are interested I'll post updates there.  I'll also continue to be very open to advice and suggestions, so please keep them coming.  Thank you all for your interest and goodwill so far. 

 

Pete T.

 

Edited by PJT
Correction of magazine title
  • Like 4
  • Friendly/supportive 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Jamiel said:

I too dislike the addition of smoke in pictures, but a lot of that is because it is very often a soft brush selected and then quickly dragged over the image.
 

But as a one off, this is one I have mocked up quickly in Nuke, I could have done it in Photoshop, but I like Nuke better as it is a programme I have used professionally for many years.

https://www.jamielochhead.co.uk/jpegs/Trains/TonyWright02.jpg

 

Some smoke from the Action Essentials package (two separate pieces picked at different times).

The image has been graded a bit to take the edge of the colours and an overall grain has been added.

I have added some foreground foliage to emphasis the moving camera.
 

Anyway, it is hard to improve on the model of Little Bytham, and indeed many layouts that are reworked in Photoshop.
 

There is always an exception, and that is the wonderful work of Robmcg who has such a personal take on railway modelling through the use of Photoshop, and bringing a hint of Terence Cuneo into digital imagery.
 

On teh subject of sigital reworking of trains, here is an unfinished piece I did as part of my M.A. in visual effects over which I took a lot more time. I must finish this off and put the correct roof on York Station. This is from a short film just over 1 minute. Much of the station is York today run through Nuke and Photoshop, the Standard 4MT and some of the platform and tracks are from Pickering, the WD is Backmann, the wagons Cambrian, and the loco in the platform is a still my uncle took at York in the 50s. I know the suitcases are too near the edge of the platform, but they are there to mask the people on Pickering platform, the lamp on the right of the 4MT also needs cloning out from the other one. There are lots of little details to sort out still, but hopefully I can get it done before long (Christmas).
 

https://www.jamielochhead.co.uk/jpegs/Trains/TonyWright04.jpg

 

 

Since the joy of modelling for me is making something I can hold and not just a digital file on a computer I am very happy to leave be the photos in this thread.
 

Jamie

Thanks for these, Jamie,

 

Your 'smoke' effect on 60501 is far more impressive than mine. But then, I am 'prejudiced' against the technique, and have no interest in acquiring the necessary skills. 

 

One 'criticism', if I may? The late Wilf and little Pete, both ex-of the Bytham 'gang' would be horrified at the inclusion of foreground foliage. The embankments and cuttings in the Bytham area were immaculate just over 60 years ago. No trees or shrubs were present - it was just well-tended grass, kept down by 'controlled burns'. If ever an aspect of our railways has altered beyond recognition during the last two generations, it is the uncontrolled reversion to Nature of the railway periphery. Imagine trying to get an 'equivalent' panning shot on LB today. Impossible, because the main line just runs through a green corridor!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Like 3
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Thanks for these, Jamie,

 

Your 'smoke' effect on 60501 is far more impressive than mine. But then, I am 'prejudiced' against the technique, and have no interest in acquiring the necessary skills. 

 

One 'criticism', if I may? The late Wilf and little Pete, both ex-of the Bytham 'gang' would be horrified at the inclusion of foreground foliage. The embankments and cuttings in the Bytham area were immaculate just over 60 years ago. No trees or shrubs were present - it was just well-tended grass, kept down by 'controlled burns'. If ever an aspect of our railways has altered beyond recognition during the last two generations, it is the uncontrolled reversion to Nature of the railway periphery. Imagine trying to get an 'equivalent' panning shot on LB today. Impossible, because the main line just runs through a green corridor!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Hello Tony

 

The "green corridor" is one of those double edged situations, many plant spices survive in this uninterfered environment, but they leave their leaves on the line. It is a haven for all types of wild life, the different birds that dine off Mo's bird feeders may not be around if the railway was as sterile as much of our cultivated land is. There is a down side it is home to many borrowing animals which can make cuttings and embankments unstable.

 

Anyhow would a LNER A-Zooooma look any better panned or not? Photos of the birds on the trees would look much nicer.

  • Like 2
  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Barry Ten said:

 

It did 5 feet and a bit in about 4 and a half seconds (I just did "one missisippi... two mississipi...) so I think that works out about right.

 

You could always try.......Thousand and one, thousand and two, thousand and three.........and no need to 'check canopy' either!

  • Like 3
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the other issues with digitally added steam that makes it often look wrong is it is usually added starting at the chimney rim - look at the prototype and there is usually a clear gap (albeit small) between the hot vapour emerging in the blast and it condensing enough to form the white we see. So we then get the issues of scaling - to make it visible it probably has to be an over-scale gap but if you leave out the gap it looks wrong.

  • Informative/Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 26/08/2019 at 15:06, polybear said:

An appeal to those clever and most knowledgeable people that frequent Tony's excellent thread - can anyone shed any light as to the origins of the following mouldings (Manufacturer and prototype) please?  Another of those items collected at some long-forgotten exhibition in the dim and distant past....

Many thanks,

Brian

 

 

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/uploads/monthly_2019_08/IMG_1270.JPG.ec40ef8e0c815e985369f042e6696e52.JPG

 

 

Looks like a mix of Kirk body and DC Kits floor.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Clive Mortimore said:

Hello Tony

 

The "green corridor" is one of those double edged situations, many plant spices survive in this uninterfered environment, but they leave their leaves on the line. It is a haven for all types of wild life, the different birds that dine off Mo's bird feeders may not be around if the railway was as sterile as much of our cultivated land is. There is a down side it is home to many borrowing animals which can make cuttings and embankments unstable.

 

Anyhow would a LNER A-Zooooma look any better panned or not? Photos of the birds on the trees would look much nicer.

'Photos of the birds on the trees would look much nicer.'

 

Will these do Clive?

 

1570541360_Bullfinch03.jpg.9125f14046efee58bba0a79ca2876b16.jpg

 

585312611_Bullfinch04.jpg.f45c191d5b4ae72117afab0fbc539b1a.jpg

 

Dsc_2373.jpg.abab2c3facd7077c5cb05b3869ed9ad0.jpg

 

Dsc_2383.jpg.963c4f62155bc0af7fe43594a524b93d.jpg

 

Dsc_2406.jpg.522f2f1dae39318b970481975e807b9e.jpg

 

Dsc_2412.jpg.a7a557e172d45e47db99d8137cc0f8a9.jpg

 

Dsc_2413.jpg.447e87f7121850381e9bf11fe41df566.jpg

 

Dsc_2415.jpg.808a85f271a2c7ed0fb6ed435052abdc.jpg

 

I can't immediately find the images of two types of woodpecker, tree creepers and nuthatches. The sparrow hawk was too fast!!!!!!!!!!!

 

What will Wright Writes come up with next?

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

  • Like 18

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

They are lovely Tony. Pity the sparrowhawk was behaving like an A-Zooooomer.

 

When I lived in Essex I would go to the railway line to take photos of the OLE on the GER, and often end up sitting still just watching the comings and goings of the birds and animals along side the line. Just ordinary wild life, nothing too exotic. I found it very relaxing.

  • Like 4
  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, cctransuk said:

 

I agree wholeheartedly with Tony's comments !!

 

We have been here more than once - and I thought that it had been agreed last time that Rob would confine his altered images to his own thread. For my part, I pressed the IGNORE tab long ago.

 

However, lately it seems that whichever thread I turn to, I find numerous 'YOU HAVE CHOSEN TO IGNORE POSTS FROM rpbmcg' markers. Once again, Rob seems to be invading threads with his images, regardless of their relevance to the subject matter.

 

I appreciate that a significant sector of the membership enjoy and admire Rob's images, but they know where to find them - in Rob's own thread. I can only assume that Rob is dissatisfied with the size of his audience, and is seeking to impose his work on those of us who have little or no interest in it.

 

MODS : Please can you bring pressure to bear in order to ensure that Rob's work is easily accessible to interested members IN HIS OWN THREAD, and not interspersed at random amongst what most of us regard as real modelling.

 

.... and yes - I do know that Rob has issues that severely limit his ability to participate in 'real modelling', and he has my genuine sympathy in that respect.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

 

But the discussion was on photoshopping and altering images so the pictures were relevant.

 

Or is it only certain people who are modellers or "experts" that can post images or comment?  Just scroll past them if you don't like them. Simple.

 

 

 

Jason

  • Agree 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

'

 

I can't immediately find the images of two types of woodpecker, tree creepers and nuthatches. The sparrow hawk was too fast!!!!!!!!!!!

 

What will Wright Writes come up with next?

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

 

May I humbly offer a pair of great spotted woodpeckers? The one on the left is a juvenile, the other is an adult male.

 

woodpeckers.jpg.ab508c6ec07f8307069eced402da6509.jpg

 

And now back to trains...

 

Last night I took my King onto the workbench and reworked the loco-tender connection to bring the tender closer, jacked up the rear of the body by a fraction of a mm, and started adding some details to the underneath of the cab. Unfortunately all my reference books cast very little light on this area so an element of guesswork will be required, but the main thing will be to fill in the void and suggest the presence of stuff, rather than modelling it accurately. Heresy, I know.

 

Al

  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Steamport Southport said:

 

But the discussion was on photoshopping and altering images so the pictures were relevant.

 

Or is it only certain people who are modellers or "experts" that can post images or comment?  Just scroll past them if you don't like them. Simple.

 

 

 

Jason

I agree the photos (in context) were relevant, and I don't have the slightest problem in their being posted on here. 

 

However, they interest me very little (other than in their technical expertise, but not as pictures of actual models). In the same way that what I post probably doesn't interest many, many others.

 

I'd hope anyone can post on here, regardless of their level of 'expertise'. I hope one can say that Wright Writes is egalitarian. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Like 6
  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

I agree the photos (in context) were relevant, and I don't have the slightest problem in their being posted on here. 

 

However, they interest me very little (other than in their technical expertise, but not as pictures of actual models). In the same way that what I post probably doesn't interest many, many others.

 

I'd hope anyone can post on here, regardless of their level of 'expertise'. I hope one can say that Wright Writes is egalitarian. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Tony,

 

Well done. It needed to be said & it was best coming from you. Otherwise we would be joining those who try to ban those who they disagree with. Unfortunately it seems to be the flavour of today.

 

William

  • Like 1
  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Steamport Southport said:

 

But the discussion was on photoshopping and altering images so the pictures were relevant.

 

Or is it only certain people who are modellers or "experts" that can post images or comment?  Just scroll past them if you don't like them. Simple.

 

 

 

Jason

 

Jason,

 

Quite so - though I have never claimed, nor will I ever claim to be an expert.

 

The 'IGNORE' button continues to do it's good work; I simply miss anything that Rob may post that is not an 'altered image'.

 

I can live with that.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

  • Friendly/supportive 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ecgtheow said:

Tony,

 

Well done. It needed to be said & it was best coming from you. Otherwise we would be joining those who try to ban those who they disagree with. Unfortunately it seems to be the flavour of today.

 

William

Thanks William,

 

Like many topics, most things have a 'natural home'. In Wright Writes' case I'd hope what finds a home the most are the works of model-makers, whatever their standard. Personal model-making, surely the ultimate goal, or at least it is to me. 

 

As I've alluded to, I have no interest in so heavily-Photoshopped images of models that they cease to be photographs of 'actual' models. They are more like 'clever' paintings, but, in my view, they're so far-removed from actual model-making as to have no 'practical' use. I'd better clarify that last point, so there's no ambiguity. Though one should never make models of models, seeing other folk's work, how they've solved problems and/or made something work, I've found of immense help at times. Completely altered mages offer me nothing, other than I can 'appreciate' the skill-level involved in their creation. A skill I have no wish to learn, nor have any interest in.

 

Each to their own, as always, and nobody has the right to dictate what others should or shouldn't do. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

  • Agree 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, cctransuk said:

 

Jason,

 

Quite so - though I have never claimed, nor will I ever claim to be an expert.

 

The 'IGNORE' button continues to do it's good work; I simply miss anything that Rob may post that is not an 'altered image'.

 

I can live with that.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

Where and what's the 'ignore' button, please?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Where and what's the 'ignore' button, please?

Hi

 

Hover the mouse over the username of a poster and it brings up a window. At the bottom there is an option to ignore all posts from that user.

 

Cheers

 

Paul

  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PaulCheffus said:

Hi

 

Hover the mouse over the username of a poster and it brings up a window. At the bottom there is an option to ignore all posts from that user.

 

Cheers

 

Paul

 

What he said.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Barry Ten said:

 

May I humbly offer a pair of great spotted woodpeckers? The one on the left is a juvenile, the other is an adult male.

 

 

Modern image:  this green liveried class is progressively spreading throughout the Home Counties...

 

 

P3180182.jpg

  • Like 7
  • Funny 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pleased to report that Geoff West and I operated Little Bytham's 57-move train sequence almost perfectly today. I say almost, because right at the end I neglected to throw the right switch. 

 

No locos smoked, none made 'chuffing' noises and there wasn't the slightest evidence of computer-control or manipulation. 

 

Geoff brought two kit-built K3s, one needing pick-ups. Pick-ups were duly made, and away it went; just like other - perfectly!

 

Thanks for your most generous donation for CRUK, Geoff.  

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can I offer a garden bird sighting from a couple of days ago.  Our village was visited by a flock of Storks migrating south who perched on any high object they could find. They chose the high voltage cables that cross our garden and with 6' wingspans were spectacular coming into land.  No earth faults were detected.

P8230990.JPG.1e77bec41762761d2af641fa10c422ef.JPGThree or four then roosted on each pylon and a lot more on the silo at the other end of the village.   The pylon you can see above is next to the railway shed.

Meantime some modelling is ongoing.  I am part way through painting a 2F and a 2-4-0 one in Black the other in lined red and black.   A friend has offered me a day's instruction in lining. I have found a bow pen but need to find a Bob Moore pen that is somewhere in the shed.   Hopefully I will be able to post some pictures in due course.

 

Jamie

P8230996.JPG

  • Like 15

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know if this will count to real twitchers, but I've just ordered nameplates for Guillemot, Sparrow Hawk and Kingfisher. All these birds were once common around Gateshead,  though the last flew down from Edinburgh." Kingfisher" will adorn a Wills A4 on Comet chassis when I get round to building it- using solder, of course.

John

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.