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

 
29 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

 

I was thinking the same. Comparing the photos of model and prototype you can see all sorts of variations in texture and colour in the track whereas the model tends to be a bit clean as if all the track and ballast is brand new.

 

A couple of other possible changes I would be looking to make if I was "the gaffer" would be to get some correct pattern buffer stops from Dave Franks to replace the rather generic Peco ones and possible correct the ground signals.

 

i am not sure if it has been mentioned before but LB had some GNR types right up to the end.

 

Now that the layout is pretty much finished, we must find something to keep Tony busy!

I already have a couple of 'proper' buffer stops to install, Tony.

 

In time!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Lecorbusier said:

I don't know if this runs against the grain somewhat ... but my view on photographing models is that they are very much models. They can never look like the real thing as it is impossible to simulate actual weather conditions, distance, personal interaction etc etc   - so why try?

 

But that's fine .. the models themselves are tantamount to works of art in many cases, and worth photographing and celebrating in their own right. When I see photos of Gordon Gravvatt's landscape modelling I marvel not because I think it is real, but because of the skill with which he has conveyed a sense of realism and so transported my imagination, whilst at the same time allowing me to marvel at the technical skill.

 

I like the black and white images ... but for me they play down the skill and breadth of the modelling which is present in the colour images, and at the same time don't exploit the artistic qualities of the black and white medium. Taking that analogy further, I would also comment that model railway photography seems very much to be a recording exercise ... very skilful but not necessarily adding anything. This being the case, for me it will always be second best to seeing the real model ... this is not necessarily the case with the finest railway images which capture a fleeting moment in time and manage to convey atmosphere and emotion alongside recorded fact.

Interesting as always, Tim.

 

A couple of points, if I may............

 

Whether a model looks 'real' in a photograph is dependent, to some extent, on the level of knowledge of the observer. On occasions, when giving talks to photographic societies, I've put photographs of model railways. One observer was astonished at how old I must have been (or how young!) when I took a picture showing a pre-War LNER express. When I told him I'd taken it the week before, he looked perplexed; until I told him it was a picture on a model railway! 

 

As for photographs of models being 'second best' to seeing them in reality, I've lost count of the number of times I've seen a model railway in the flesh and been very disappointed with it; having first seen it in pictures. The opposite, of course, is also true.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 4

Share this post


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

I already have a couple of 'proper' buffer stops to install, Tony.

 

In time!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

Too busy building locos for you and for others!

  • Agree 1
  • Funny 1

Share this post


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

Interesting as always, Tim.

 

A couple of points, if I may............

 

Whether a model looks 'real' in a photograph is dependent, to some extent, on the level of knowledge of the observer. On occasions, when giving talks to photographic societies, I've put photographs of model railways. One observer was astonished at how old I must have been (or how young!) when I took a picture showing a pre-War LNER express. When I told him I'd taken it the week before, he looked perplexed; until I told him it was a picture on a model railway! 

 

As for photographs of models being 'second best' to seeing them in reality, I've lost count of the number of times I've seen a model railway in the flesh and been very disappointed with it; having first seen it in pictures. The opposite, of course, is also true.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

When that happens, the model photo that fools people into thinking it is real, it is usually a non modeller who is fooled. In my modelling times, I have seen perhaps a couple of photos where I had to do a "double take" because they were so close to being "real". Or as one of my friends puts it, the models are "real", just smaller!

 

I tend to like to see what a modeller has done by way of colouring and weathering, not just of the locos and stock but of buildings, general landscape and backscenes etc. We always have some degree of doubt as to whether the image we see on our screen is exactly the same as the model looks to the eye simply because of the differences caused by lighting, the quality of the colour capture of our technology and all sorts of things but it does give a good idea.

 

Colour photos give me that. On the other hand, the biggest amount of my knowledge of real railways of the period, by far, is from black and white photos. That is all I have in many cases.

 

Seeing a model in the same format as I know the real thing is somehow right.

 

So I like to see both!

 

They give me different takes on the scene. One shows me how good the modeller is at choosing colours and weathering. the other brings the model closer to how we view the prototype.

 

In one of the recent articles I did on Buckingham, Tim Shackleton took the photos and had a battle to get some of them them on the printed page in B & W. He wanted to recreate scenes from the Railway Modeller of 50 years ago. In the end, the article had a mix of B & W and colour and I thought it worked really well like that.

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

Re: B&W photos Tony, perhaps a tad more contrast. They look too grey (y) to me. My recollection of prototype photos is that they were more Black and White than 50 shades of grey. Have a play and see what you think.

 

40 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

I don't want 'soot & whitewash', Alan.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

I agree that 'soot and whitewash' is probably not a look that would gain much support.  But without putting words into his mouth, I don't think that's what Alan was suggesting.

 

Merely that images presenting a 'clearer and cleaner' view of LB and its cast of locomotives and rolling stock, would add to what you've created.

 

I hope you don't mind but I've taken the liberty of quickly doing what I hope is a very subtle change to the contrast on one of your images to illustrate what I mean.  Original image as posted on the left; My quick edited version on the right.

 

The adjustments were done in Photoshop, but are straightforward and any image editing software should be able to do the same.

 

No offence intended Tony and happy to delete the image if you'd prefer.

 

742929160_originalandcontrastadjustment-RMweb.jpg.b7e05fb5bddb37a5b78cdb37e2eb7f0d.jpg

  • Like 9
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

When that happens, the model photo that fools people into thinking it is real, it is usually a non modeller who is fooled. In my modelling times, I have seen perhaps a couple of photos where I had to do a "double take" because they were so close to being "real". Or as one of my friends puts it, the models are "real", just smaller!

The B&W photos of Martyn Welch's Hursley in the MRJ about 30 years ago certainly looked "real" to me - far more than later colour ones. I never saw it in the flesh as having queued for an hour to get into the MRJ Exhibition I couldn't be bothered to queue for another 30 minutes to see Hursley.

  • Like 2
  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, St Enodoc said:

The B&W photos of Martyn Welch's Hursley in the MRJ about 30 years ago certainly looked "real" to me - far more than later colour ones. I never saw it in the flesh as having queued for an hour to get into the MRJ Exhibition I couldn't be bothered to queue for another 30 minutes to see Hursley.

 

When I mention the few photos that make me do a double take, it was exactly those I had in mind.

 

I did exactly the same as you at the MRJ show! There were two layouts I wanted to see because I thought it would be my only chance. Leighton Buzzard and Hursley. I never saw Hursley for the same reason as you. I had queued round the building for nearly 2 hours to get in and was told it would be another 30 to 45 minutes to see Hursley. I spent the time gradually getting somewhere near Leighton Buzzard instead.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

There were two layouts I wanted to see because I thought it would be my only chance. Leighton Buzzard and Hursley.

Ah, if only! Had you been able to see into the future you would doubtless have queued to see Hursley!

  • Agree 1

Share this post


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

Interesting as always, Tim.

 

A couple of points, if I may............

 

Whether a model looks 'real' in a photograph is dependent, to some extent, on the level of knowledge of the observer. On occasions, when giving talks to photographic societies, I've put photographs of model railways. One observer was astonished at how old I must have been (or how young!) when I took a picture showing a pre-War LNER express. When I told him I'd taken it the week before, he looked perplexed; until I told him it was a picture on a model railway!  Not totally convinced that the limited capacity of some observers necessarily negates my point?

 

As for photographs of models being 'second best' to seeing them in reality, I've lost count of the number of times I've seen a model railway in the flesh and been very disappointed with it;  having first seen it in pictures. - But I would argue that this is usually as a result of omission rather than 'artistry' in the photography .... a thing your own photography doesn't suffer from!

 

The opposite, of course, is also true.

 

However ... point taken ...  and this opens a whole can of worms! I have lost count of the times I have come across modern buildings which have been designed for the photos as much as (or instead of) the end user ... universally disappointing when visited ....

 

where as there are some spatially sophisticated buildings (Borromini's San Carlo alle Quattro Fontane in Rome springs to mind) that can really only be appreciated in the flesh ... and I suspect the same is true of certain layouts regardless of the quality of the photographer. 

 

 

Edited by Lecorbusier
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Models looking like the real thing?  This comes down to the skills of both the modeller and the photographer to trick the viewer's eyes. No matter how hard we try to make our models look realistic when we see them in the flesh they are still models. I for one prefer to see photographs showing the modeller's skill rather than the photographer's ability to deceive my eyesight, but then I am a modeller not a photographer. 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 4630 said:

 

 

I agree that 'soot and whitewash' is probably not a look that would gain much support.  But without putting words into his mouth, I don't think that's what Alan was suggesting.

 

Merely that images presenting a 'clearer and cleaner' view of LB and its cast of locomotives and rolling stock, would add to what you've created.

 

I hope you don't mind but I've taken the liberty of quickly doing what I hope is a very subtle change to the contrast on one of your images to illustrate what I mean.  Original image as posted on the left; My quick edited version on the right.

 

The adjustments were done in Photoshop, but are straightforward and any image editing software should be able to do the same.

 

No offence intended Tony and happy to delete the image if you'd prefer.

 

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/uploads/monthly_2019_12/742929160_originalandcontrastadjustment-RMweb.jpg.b7e05fb5bddb37a5b78cdb37e2eb7f0d.jpg

I certainly don't mind at all, and, please do not delete your image.

 

What I would say (and no offence intended) is that in your image, the wheels and motion on the locos have almost disappeared with regard to our ability to really make them out.

 

If you wish, please alter the other images. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

Models looking like the real thing?  This comes down to the skills of both the modeller and the photographer to trick the viewer's eyes. No matter how hard we try to make our models look realistic when we see them in the flesh they are still models. I for one prefer to see photographs showing the modeller's skill rather than the photographer's ability to deceive my eyesight, but then I am a modeller not a photographer. 

'I for one prefer to see photographs showing the modeller's skill rather than the photographer's ability to deceive my eyesight, but then I am a modeller not a photographer.'

 

Which can be tricky if you're both, Clive.

 

In Little Bytham's case I cannot lose. I've had many visitors tell me that my pictures 'don't do it justice', and others who say (because of my photography?) that they'd thought it would be bigger. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is a fantastic picture of Copenhagen Fields Tony .... and for me it is the colour photo all the way. I can't believe you remember your trainspotting days in black and white!

 

I also feel hoisted by my own petard a little ... I have seen Copenhagen fields in the flesh a couple of times now, and your photo certainly adds to my experience of it, which is not to say that I was in anyway disappointed by the layout in the flesh - though to my mind viewing from so far above coupled to the smallness do rob it of something ... it feels a little like viewing from an aeroplane.

 

Tim

Edited by Lecorbusier
additional thoughts
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is a lovely view of Copehnhagen Fields but in my mind, I saw a cropped version that I really liked. So here it is!

 

It is more a photo of the train now, rather than the whole scene but I really liked the way the locos were framed by the signal and I wanted to emphasise it.

 

 

 

1313616836_CopenhagenFieldsTW.jpg.727bb82b7ad99591b4abce1d2aa0203d.jpg

 

 

ps I feel like a naughty schoolboy playing with Tony's photo!

 

Edited by t-b-g
  • Like 6
  • Funny 1

Share this post


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

'I for one prefer to see photographs showing the modeller's skill rather than the photographer's ability to deceive my eyesight, but then I am a modeller not a photographer.'

 

Which can be tricky if you're both, Clive.

 

In Little Bytham's case I cannot lose. I've had many visitors tell me that my pictures 'don't do it justice', and others who say (because of my photography?) that they'd thought it would be bigger. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

Hello Tony

 

If the modeller is a photographer as well and enjoys both hobbies and can can combine both then a big thumbs up. There is a thread about "How realistic are your models", I view it every now and then, I see some very good model making and some very clever photography, so hats off the the contributors. Sadly they still look like models to me. 

 

You mention how photographs of a layout can be deceiving, as you state Little Bytham can appear different to what people expect to see when they see it for real. A layout that does that to me is Copenhagen Fields, before everyone jumps up and down this is no disrespect to the modelling that Tim and the gang have put into it, it looks wonderful in many photos, and is quite a remarkable model but seeing it the flesh leaves me cold. Thankfully for Tim, those who helped build and operate it there are loads of people who get pleasure form seeing it.

 

Please can we not turn this into a debate as why I find some well made layouts not of my liking. Like many on here I am quite opinionated when it comes to model railways. Please do have a pop at my taste in train sets on my layout thread Sheffield Exchange.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Clive Mortimore said:

Hello Tony

 

If the modeller is a photographer as well and enjoys both hobbies and can can combine both then a big thumbs up. There is a thread about "How realistic are your models", I view it every now and then, I see some very good model making and some very clever photography, so hats off the the contributors. Sadly they still look like models to me. 

 

You mention how photographs of a layout can be deceiving, as you state Little Bytham can appear different to what people expect to see when they see it for real. A layout that does that to me is Copenhagen Fields, before everyone jumps up and down this is no disrespect to the modelling that Tim and the gang have put into it, it looks wonderful in many photos, and is quite a remarkable model but seeing it the flesh leaves me cold. Thankfully for Tim, those who helped build and operate it there are loads of people who get pleasure form seeing it.

 

Please can we not turn this into a debate as why I find some well made layouts not of my liking. Like many on here I am quite opinionated when it comes to model railways. Please do have a pop at my taste in train sets on my layout thread Sheffield Exchange.

'Please can we not turn this into a debate as why I find some well made layouts not of my liking.'

 

I don't think we are, Clive....................

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


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

I certainly don't mind at all, and, please do not delete your image.

 

What I would say (and no offence intended) is that in your image, the wheels and motion on the locos have almost disappeared with regard to our ability to really make them out.

 

If you wish, please alter the other images. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

Your observation is noted, although it was a very quick edit that I did.

 

Thanks for the offer to alter the other images Tony.   Sadly my day job will get in the way at the moment, but I did have a quick tinker with your B&W image of Copenhagen Fields.

 

1946860857_Originalandcontrastadjusted-RMweb.jpg.cde34d190e3cb4798be2f578b4503625.jpg 

 

 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

'Please can we not turn this into a debate as why I find some well made layouts not of my liking.'

 

I don't think we are, Clive....................

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Hello Tony

 

Preempting any backlash to my deviation to the opinion of the masses. 

  • Friendly/supportive 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting use of the Tony picture of our pair of singles storming up Holloway Bank. Unfortunately, just before it was taken, the up goods distant bracket signal succumbed to a final knock (it’s had a chequered life having been rebuilt once already). Going back a few years, Craig Tiley took a similar picture with an intact signal for our RM article. 
11444F45-7CC1-40E9-924E-2DB642C83EF3.jpeg.0de9aa790dcad36fa1f309a05e7c9dde.jpeg

However, modern colour images are clearly incorrect for the era.  So I had a go at it to make it look like a tinted postcard - there were many of the GN.  Not surprisingly, this is my computer desktop image. 
75F32710-6C62-418B-ABAC-00FDA78F50CB.jpeg.bcb12f610094c54f77381357fa562cb0.jpeg

Photos obviously courtesy of Craig & RM. The UG Distant was rebuilt last year.  I now need to get into signal mode for Belle Isle. 
 

Tim

 

 

 

  • Like 13
  • Agree 1
  • Craftsmanship/clever 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Clive Mortimore said:

Models looking like the real thing?  This comes down to the skills of both the modeller and the photographer to trick the viewer's eyes. No matter how hard we try to make our models look realistic when we see them in the flesh they are still models. I for one prefer to see photographs showing the modeller's skill rather than the photographer's ability to deceive my eyesight, but then I am a modeller not a photographer. 

As an occasional (and more casual than Tony) layout photographer, the odd shot that makes viewers uncertain gives me a real buzz.

 

All the more so if the rest looks good enough that they don't even notice the S&W or Kadee couplers!!!!

 

John

Edited by Dunsignalling

Share this post


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

That is a fantastic picture of Copenhagen Fields Tony .... and for me it is the colour photo all the way. I can't believe you remember your trainspotting days in black and white!

 

I also feel hoisted by my own petard a little ... I have seen Copenhagen fields in the flesh a couple of times now, and your photo certainly adds to my experience of it, which is not to say that I was in anyway disappointed by the layout in the flesh - though to my mind viewing from so far above coupled to the smallness do rob it of something ... it feels a little like viewing from an aeroplane.

 

Tim

Thanks Tim,

 

But, as mentioned, it's only a few who are given the dispensation to place their cameras on such hallowed ground! 

 

Of course I remember my trainspotting days in B&W. I started trainspotting (proper) in 1956, and Trains Illustrated (which was avidly read at the time) was always monochrome. Even when it grew up into Modern Railways (still having steam images on its cover from time to time) it was mainly B&W, as was the contemporary Railway World (which was also read from cover to cover at the time). The main photographic contributors' work of the day was always in B&W - Eric Treacy, Colin Walker, etc.  

 

It was as late as 1964 before I took my first colour images (at aged 18), and a few of my subsequent efforts have now been published. Student poverty, not-so-good cameras (it was at least a decade later before my Nikon F) and ignorance of the process meant many were indifferent. 

 

Perhaps not as indifferent as my very first pictures I took of railways............................

 

These have probably appeared before, but with 1,600 pages now, a long way back. 

 

Patriot.jpg.9a22f75225ad2bdeb8022981014bbf9e.jpg

 

45502 ROYAL NAVAL DIVISION at Chester in 1957. Behind is part of the (long demolished) City Hospital where I was born, 11 years previously. Was it preordained I'd be gripped by railways? 

 

1549721482_A2-2small.jpg.c34348f00a9ca0d9710d8c4a59274048.jpg

 

Also taken in 1957, at Botany Bay, just north of Retford. Class A2/2 WOLF OF BADENOCH heads a Down special. Nobody told me that a Brownie 127's shutter speed would not be adequate to 'freeze' a fast-moving train! 

 

Ah, those B&W days........................... 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

  • Like 11
  • Friendly/supportive 1

Share this post


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

 

 

 Nobody told me that a Brownie 127's shutter speed would not be adequate to 'freeze' a fast-moving train! 

 

 

 

 

 

Good job they didn't, in my view - that shot, grainy as it is, is far more evocative of the mass and power of a working steam loco than some superbly exposed, pin-sharp photo of the likes we've all seen a million times before.

  • Like 2
  • Agree 2

Share this post


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

Thanks Tim,

 

Of course I remember my trainspotting days in B&W. I started trainspotting (proper) in 1956, and Trains Illustrated (which was avidly read at the time) was always monochrome. Even when it grew up into Modern Railways (still having steam images on its cover from time to time) it was mainly B&W, as was the contemporary Railway World (which was also read from cover to cover at the time). The main photographic contributors' work of the day was always in B&W - Eric Treacy, Colin Walker, etc.

 

Ah, those B&W days........................... 

 

 But of course .... I wasn't talking about the photos taken or those avidly poured over in magazines .... but rather what you observed with intense excitement with the naked eye - and yes ... through the lens of your own Camera ... in magnificent full colour !!! Live steam no less - which sadly for many of us it is only possible to get an inkling of through the prism of black and white, and to some extent the sanitised heritage scene.

 

Mallard in Blue .. the flying scotsman in Green ... not to mention the glorious LMS in Crimson Lake ... 

 

Surely you don't remember those Halcyon days in black and white ? however nostalgic the photos might be.

  • Like 1

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.