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

17 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

 

Could this sort of thing differentiate 'modellers' from those who just operate trains? 

 

 

 

I have noticed, while exhibiting layouts at exhibitions, that many self-differentiate through the type of questions they ask.

 

'Modellers' tend to want to know how an effect was undertaken, how you made something, what techniques were used and so on. While 'purchasers' ask where they can get something you have on the layout, who makes it and where can it be bought.

 

The problem is that quite often what 'purchasers' ask about is not RTR but scratch-built or heavily bashed. For example many have asked where this N/2mm modern dust cart can be obtained but it is something I have made. The snag is that it's not a particularly good model and is quite old. The cab is a cut-down Jet-flame Scania fire engine and the body and chassis is scratch-built. And when you start to explain how to undertake the conversion and making the various bits they walk away.

 

DSC_9153.JPG.219de275fdb7717784b61da7d33e1510.JPG

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 5
  • Craftsmanship/clever 1
  • Friendly/supportive 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, micklner said:

    Some of the last few posts make me realise why there is so much abuse and mickey taking aimed at so called self proclaimed titled "Railway Modellers" by the general public. The attitude shown is so over the top it is embarrising to read . If people want to run anything on a layout , that is their choice no one elses , does it hurt anybody and does it really matter ?? No it simply  does'nt !!.Its playing trains at the end of the day, nothing more or less . Everybody has standards in model railways as in anything else in life.

 

    What is seriously wrong with a young lad asking to run his pride and joy of a Model railway layout ?? why or what is funny?? . The attitude and the smirks probably sent him away ,never bothering to ever go to another exhibition again. We should be encouraging youngsters not taking the mickey out of them .

 

    Some people seriously to look at themselves and their attitudes.

 

But it was advertised as a recreation of the ECML in the 1930s using the actual timetables. It wasn't at a general show for the public and I doubt many attendees weren't enthusiasts.

 

BTW he was a lad in his forties, not a child and didn't seem to have any "issues", he was standing drinking pints at the bar. We call everyone lad around here.

 

 

 

Jason

  • Agree 1
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, micklner said:

    Some of the last few posts make me realise why there is so much abuse and mickey taking aimed at so called self proclaimed titled "Railway Modellers" by the general public. The attitude shown is so over the top it is embarrising to read . If people want to run anything on a layout , that is their choice no one elses , does it hurt anybody and does it really matter ?? No it simply  does'nt !!.Its playing trains at the end of the day, nothing more or less . Everybody has standards in model railways as in anything else in life.

 

    What is seriously wrong with a young lad asking to run his pride and joy of a Model railway layout ?? why or what is funny?? . The attitude and the smirks probably sent him away ,never bothering to ever go to another exhibition again. We should be encouraging youngsters not taking the mickey out of them .

 

    Some people seriously to look at themselves and their attitudes.

 

The General public love railway modellers when they make things in a skilful manner, they think that it is awesome. It's the obsessive collecting of trivia or objects and playing with toys that are the bits they laugh at. The former is a passport that excuses the latter.

Edited by Headstock
add info
  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
  • Informative/Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Steamport Southport said:

 

 

 

BTW he was a lad in his forties, not a child and didn't seem to have any "issues", he was standing drinking pints at the bar. We call everyone lad around here.

 

 

 

Jason

 

Lad tends to mean child everywhere else though.

  • Agree 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Test running somebody's new purchase on an exhibition layout is an opportunity, if it is handled properly.  A bit of jovial banter behind the back scene, deliberately loud enough to be heard by all within earshot, can do wonders to both communicate the level of accuracy of the model in question, whilst showing a sense of humour and grace in accommodating the paying member of the public.  It can be a real conversation starter with those observing the layout at the time.

 

Like many things, its not what you do, but the way that you do it...

  • Like 2
  • Agree 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Barry Ten said:

 

Lad tends to mean child everywhere else though.

I disagree "lad" is used in many parts instead of boy or man.

 

Where I grew up "little ol' boy" was used to describe a male aged between toddler to coffin dodger. 

  • Informative/Useful 1

Share this post


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

I disagree "lad" is used in many parts instead of boy or man.

 

Where I grew up "little ol' boy" was used to describe a male aged between toddler to coffin dodger. 

 

I guess the use of 'lad' varies around the country.

 

Round here 'lad' generally means young male. Older youths get called lads when they behave childishly. Old men and pensioners aren't usually called 'lads' but are often referred to as 'old boys'.

 

 

 

 

  • Agree 2

Share this post


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

it was located right next to the bar.

Ah so the Grantham operators were sitting with their feet up downing pints rather than running the layout, I presume.:jester:

 

Someone mentioned the idea of having a test track at shows and it reminded me of such an idea I saw at Ally Pally and Warley. I think it was owned by The MRC and it had multiple gauges (not just OO, N and O but finer ones like EM). You could ask to have your new purchase tested there for free.

 

Jamie

  • Like 5

Share this post


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

 

Brushed on is fine - in fact, better than sprayed. That way, you get the first elements of weathering, even if it is just a subtle hint of streaking and variable finish.

 

Works for me, anyway.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

I have brushed it on coach sides and as John suggests it gives another step in the weathering process.  I also airbrush it on when there has to be a very even or thin coat.

No problem to air brush - usually 2 or 3 very fine mists. Cleaning of the airbrush - use Windolene which works a treat. 

Dave

  • Informative/Useful 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tell me that someone is a 'lad' and I think of a primary/early secondary school boy. Hence my reaction to the post by Steamport Southport, apologies for any misunderstanding. 

 

I have heard people being called "little old boy" too. Although the 'old' makes it clear that the term is referring to someone past retirement age.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Headstock said:

 

 

Morning Tony,

 

when I was running a Hornby O1, I also titivated the little beast. A new identity was devised, wiggle pipes and injectors were added and the front truck was modified. I also replaced the smoke box door, as that provided on the Hornby model is the less common type, being suitable for a more limited number of the class. What has been said about RTR  providing variants can be somewhat sketchy across a range, variants being more usually available on the most prestigious types.

 

I was very impressed by the Hornby O1 from a mechanical point of view, I don't hold many of the manufactures products in such high esteem. Unfortunately, it tended to leak oil all over the place no matter how many times you cleaned it. This rather spoilt the paint job and was constantly having to be touched up. It has now been replaced by an 04/8 and has been cascaded to back up engine status.

GM runner 01 63579.jpg

Hi Andrew. What an atmospheric shot! It just shouts 1948-50 . Great photo.  What lighting do you use to get that daylight look? 

  • Like 2
  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

SNIP

 

Which was a bought at a show, its box opened and its proud owner plonked it on the layout (it ran for over a day). In my opinion, this is wholly unacceptable, especially as no attempt was made to remove the awful coupling and fit the extra detail bits. 

 

Could this sort of thing differentiate 'modellers' from those who just operate trains? 

 

I wonder? 

 

 

My preference of a "real" model railway is a thoughtfully and skillfully created record of a past that no longer exists.  Historically accurate in a general sense, even if not of a real or uncompressed location, and museum like in that it educates about that time and way of life.

 

In attempting to build such as that in the privacy of one's  home, often running some RTR plus a lot of imagination,  frequently substitutes for models not yet made or finished.  But it is too much of a stretch to assume that everyone else will see the the substitutes as satisfactory in an exhibition environment.  Paying to see something that is little different from the same commercial offerings in a public shop window, strikes me as distinctly taking advantage.

 

Andy

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, LNERandBR said:

Tell me that someone is a 'lad' and I think of a primary/early secondary school boy. Hence my reaction to the post by Steamport Southport, apologies for any misunderstanding. 

 

I have heard people being called "little old boy" too. Although the 'old' makes it clear that the term is referring to someone past retirement age.

I once had a discussion about this sort of thing with a Texan gentleman in my local pub.  He kept calling me ‘sir’, which was a level of formality I was not fully comfortable with.  When I mentioned this, he claimed that ‘where I come from, everyone is sir.  Why, if you ain’t sir, then you ain’t nuttin’ but a boy! 

 

Fair ‘nuff. 

  • Like 1
  • Friendly/supportive 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, The Johnster said:

 He kept calling me ‘sir’, which was a level of formality I was not fully comfortable with.  When I mentioned this, he claimed that ‘where I come from, everyone is sir.  Why, if you ain’t sir, then you ain’t nuttin’ but a boy! 

 

 

Are you sure he wasn't saying cur rather than sir?

;-)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty sure.  I developed the art of saying sir but meaning cur talking to schoolmasters when I were a lad...

 

My old headmaster told me I’d never get anywhere with that attitude.  He was quite right; I never did. 

  • Funny 3

Share this post


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

Hi Andrew. What an atmospheric shot! It just shouts 1948-50 . Great photo.  What lighting do you use to get that daylight look? 

 

Evening Clem,

 

I should have credited the photo to Derek Shore. I forgot, due to having used the image previously. That said, I was art directing. I don't like the magazine style of lighting on model railway scenes. I like directional lighting. In this case the sun would be high in the western sky. At this time, the runner would have pulled into south loop to take water and allow the Newcastle York Bournemouth express to overtake it. Derek's lighting style at the time was perfect for what I wanted. I also prefer reflectors and soft boxes over lots of fill in flash. The other things to consider was the limiting of the stacking for a more natural effect and perhaps the deal breaker, the proper processing of a digital black and white mage.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 1

Share this post


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

Speaking to some of the builders of the layout, they were a bit miffed, too, Tony. Not by my comments (which, as you'll know, I made known to them!) but by the plonking-down of a totally out-of-the-box, brand new loco, which then ran unimpeded for the rest of the show. 'Democracy', I think I was told.

 

The photograph in question does indeed show some very fine modelling - exquisite in some places. Hence my comment on a straight-from-the-box loco being 'wholly unacceptable'. 

 

May I put it this way, please? If I'd paid money to see the show, and the overall layout I was looking at was clearly the product of craftsmanship, self-reliance, inventiveness, personal modelling and all of it very well done, I'd be very miffed to see something I could see in a model shop for nothing running on it. And I was! 

 

The ultimate absurdity regarding this occurred at a show some little time ago when two identical, just released RTR locos appeared on a layout for the duration. They'd both been bought at the show (by different people) and the owners exercised their individual 'right' to run something on the club layout. I walked away! I wonder how many other spectators thought that 'acceptable', wholly or otherwise? 

 

And, just to show that modified/detailed/weathered RTR locos are entirely acceptable in my view..............

 

Some more views of the same layout.........

 

22528111_Cadiford04.jpg.69b61e6113a1252cdad986ad02ec9c3c.jpg

 

575989250_Cadiford17.jpg.dc747f03189f6359196aaa14fd96f293.jpg

 

1436871413_Cadiford20A.jpg.ebdc16a947980c6cdcafe27fa6ccfd78.jpg

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

P.S. It might amuse you to know, Tony, that when I'm invited to take pictures of a layout, without exception, the layout builders ask me my opinion. They don't (won't?) always agree with me, but they want to know. 

 

Much better in my view than the sneaky comments one often hears as 'criticism', then, when 'confronted', the commentator disappears. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I am sure that if people had any idea that the photos you take are going to be used on a public forum to draw attention to what they have done wrong, they may not be quite so keen on you taking them.

 

Criticism that has been requested is one thing, belittling the work of others by calling it "unacceptable" is another.

 

I see much that is wrong either on individual models or on layouts. I will sometimes offer comment in a private way, not drawing the attention of others to the fault, or if I am asked to comment, I will mention things.

 

In your photo above, I can see a couple of things that I would regard as worse than running a RTR loco.

 

Surely any decent photographer would have sorted out the signals and points before pressing the shutter! Portraying correct operation is just as important as correct locos.

 

We all get things wrong sometimes and having our mistakes pointed out to us is bad enough. To have them described as "unacceptable" is a step too far for me. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Agree 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, micklner said:

    Some of the last few posts make me realise why there is so much abuse and mickey taking aimed at so called self proclaimed titled "Railway Modellers" by the general public. The attitude shown is so over the top it is embarrising to read . If people want to run anything on a layout , that is their choice no one elses , does it hurt anybody and does it really matter ?? No it simply  does'nt !!.Its playing trains at the end of the day, nothing more or less . Everybody has standards in model railways as in anything else in life.

 

    What is seriously wrong with a young lad asking to run his pride and joy of a Model railway layout ?? why or what is funny?? . The attitude and the smirks probably sent him away ,never bothering to ever go to another exhibition again. We should be encouraging youngsters not taking the mickey out of them .

 

    Some people seriously to look at themselves and their attitudes.

Mick,

 

I think it's important that youngsters (and others) are encouraged in their railway modelling, and that mickey-taking only works if it's mutual. 

 

You say it's embarrassing for you to read some recent posts (possibly some of mine?) and it doesn't matter what anyone runs on their layout. With regard to the latter point, I'm in complete agreement, but I think there is a much greater responsibility at shows to get things 'right'. Not in the 'hair-shirt' sense, where nothing ever gets finished because of the zeal for absolute accuracy, but on two levels in my opinion.

 

Firstly, we should display what's been made/modified, not just something bought. Tony Gee took issue with my criticism (he has every right to) of a scene where a straight-out-of-the-box loco was literally plonked on a very nicely-modelled (my emphasis) railway. It was entirely incongruous in my view - tantamount to having beautifully made and accurate locos/stock running on perfect track, through realistic scenery, where someone has just plonked down an inappropriate, and unaltered RTP building. 

 

Secondly, the whole scene should be believable, inasmuch as it's accurate to period and place. 

 

Nobody has the right to dictate what anyone does with regard to their model railway in the privacy of their own home (I don't believe anyone has suggested that, by the way). However, if an individual or club has their 'work' on display at a show (where folk have spent money in order to see it), then I believe there is a much greater responsibility with regard to 'modelling' and accuracy. It really doesn't matter whether folk know if something has been actually made or is accurate or not (they'll enjoy it, anyway), but to those 'in the know' so to speak, it'll give great satisfaction if things are made and are correct, and, surely, it's also about education.

 

Finally, I wonder just where this thread would go if all posters took the attitude that "It really doesn't matter whether I make anything (I'll just buy it or get others to do my modelling for me), I won't care whether anything I make is accurate or not and I won't be 'critical' (however constructively) of any model I see in case some are embarrassed". 

 

I've found out far more about my own modelling limitations because of critical observation/comment than any sycophancy or anyone not wanting to 'offend'. With that in mind, I learned what a 'snowflake' was the other day. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Edited by Tony Wright
  • Like 2

Share this post


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

 

Surely any decent photographer would have sorted out the signals and points before pressing the shutter! Portraying correct operation is just as important as correct locos.

 

 

I would think it's the responsibility of the layout owner/operator to ensure these things are correct just as much as the photographer. If the layout owner wants their layout to be portrayed in a favorable light then they should be just as much on the ball as the person taking the photos.

 

Having had Tony taking photographs of one of my own layouts I can certainly say that he is very professional in the way that he captures his images. Yes, he questions what he sees before him but this is always given in a constructive manner. He also makes it quite clear how the images will be used.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

 

I am sure that if people had any idea that the photos you take are going to be used on a public forum to draw attention to what they have done wrong, they may not be quite so keen on you taking them.

 

Criticism that has been requested is one thing, belittling the work of others by calling it "unacceptable" is another.

 

I see much that is wrong either on individual models or on layouts. I will sometimes offer comment in a private way, not drawing the attention of others to the fault, or if I am asked to comment, I will mention things.

 

In your photo above, I can see a couple of things that I would regard as worse than running a RTR loco.

 

Surely any decent photographer would have sorted out the signals and points before pressing the shutter! Portraying correct operation is just as important as correct locos.

 

We all get things wrong sometimes and having our mistakes pointed out to us is bad enough. To have them described as "unacceptable" is a step too far for me. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bravo Tony,

 

'Surely any decent photographer would have sorted out the signals and points before pressing the shutter! Portraying correct operation is just as important as correct locos.'

 

Exactly the constructive criticism I seek. 

 

The picture which first sparked off this debate will not be used, by the way. The reason (in consultation with others) is because it doesn't show the layout in the 'best light'. It is, therefore, unacceptable.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

Edited by Tony Wright
typo error
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, LNERandBR said:

 

I would think it's the responsibility of the layout owner/operator to ensure these things are correct just as much as the photographer. If the layout owner wants their layout to be portrayed in a favorable light then they should be just as much on the ball as the person taking the photos.

 

Having had Tony taking photographs of one of my own layouts I can certainly say that he is very professional in the way that he captures his images. Yes, he questions what he sees before him but this is always given in a constructive manner. He also makes it quite clear how the images will be used.

 

Tony W has photographed some of my layouts too and produced some lovely photos. That is why I am surprised that he didn't notice the positioning of the trains, signals and points. He usually has a really good eye for spotting such things and making a scene look as realistic as possible by putting them right. I would hope that we know each other well enough to have a degree of mutual respect, even if we don't always agree on everything.

 

I am very much in favour of firstly models that have been made rather than bought and secondly of making every effort to produce a scene that, even if it is of a fictitious place, doesn't include any glaring faults that would never have happened on the real thing.

 

I just don't like the use of the term "unacceptable". I had a boss who used it often at work in the days when I had a real job. If you really think about it, the word is almost meaningless in the context of a layout. Something is either right or it isn't. A layout either has faults or it doesn't. As we all have different things that we will accept or not, there is no measure of what is acceptable.    

Edited by t-b-g
  • Like 3
  • Agree 1
  • Friendly/supportive 1

Share this post


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

 

Tony W has photographed some of my layouts too and produced some lovely photos. That is why I am surprised that he didn't notice the positioning of the trains, signals and points. He usually has a really good eye for spotting such things and making a scene look as realistic as possible by putting them right. I would hope that we know each other well enough to have a degree of mutual respect, even if we don't always agree on everything. 

Thanks Tony,

 

Do I have any excuses? Probably, but they're tenuous......

 

I was rushed for time (the pictures were taken at a show), I was getting tired and the signals didn't work. That said, I should have shoved that 'Arthur' back!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Share this post


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

Thanks Tony,

 

Do I have any excuses? Probably, but they're tenuous......

 

I was rushed for time (the pictures were taken at a show), I was getting tired and the signals didn't work. That said, I should have shoved that 'Arthur' back!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

Good evening Tony,

 

it's rather a shame about the controversial Atlantic image. The layouts scenic modelling is stunning and the photograph itself is a rather a lovely composition. Two bits of creativity are worth celebrating I think.

  • Agree 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

Mick,

 

I think it's important that youngsters (and others) are encouraged in their railway modelling, and that mickey-taking only works if it's mutual. 

 

You say it's embarrassing for you to read some recent posts (possibly some of mine?) and it doesn't matter what anyone runs on their layout. With regard to the latter point, I'm in complete agreement, but I think there is a much greater responsibility at shows to get things 'right'. Not in the 'hair-shirt' sense, where nothing ever gets finished because of the zeal for absolute accuracy, but on two levels in my opinion.

 

Firstly, we should display what's been made/modified, not just something bought. Tony Gee took issue with my criticism (he has every right to) of a scene where a straight-out-of-the-box loco was literally plonked on a very nicely-modelled (my emphasis) railway. It was entirely incongruous in my view - tantamount to having beautifully made and accurate locos/stock running on perfect track, through realistic scenery, where someone has just plonked down an inappropriate, and unaltered RTP building. 

 

Secondly, the whole scene should be believable, inasmuch as it's accurate to period and place. 

 

Nobody has the right to dictate what anyone does with regard to their model railway in the privacy of their own home (I don't believe anyone has suggested that, by the way). However, if an individual or club has their 'work' on display at a show (where folk have spent money in order to see it), then I believe there is a much greater responsibility with regard to 'modelling' and accuracy. It really doesn't matter whether folk know if something has been actually made or is accurate or not (they'll enjoy it, anyway), but to those 'in the know' so to speak, it'll give great satisfaction if things are made and are correct, and, surely, it's also about education.

 

Finally, I wonder just where this thread would go if all posters took the attitude that "It really doesn't matter whether I make anything (I'll just buy it or get others to do my modelling for me), I won't care whether anything I make is accurate or not and I won't be 'critical' (however constructively) of any model I see in case some are embarrassed". 

 

I've found out far more about my own modelling limitations because of critical observation/comment than any sycophancy or anyone not wanting to 'offend'. With that in mind, I learned what a 'snowflake' was the other day. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Tony

  It wasnt aimed at you in particular , but when you read some of the comments made earlier I had to make a serious reply .

 

 

 In my opinion Model Railways is a kind of Holy Grail to some people , who in some cases also  like to give the impression only they know, what they are doing etc etc, its all been said on here and elsewhere time and time again. As to some of the said self appointed experts/keyboard warriors , I have never seen one photo of what they have ever made. Where everything shown no matter by whom it , is criticised ad nauseum, no matter how trivial the fault, why do people need to do that ? it achieves very little 99% of the time.

 

Model railways are supposed to be a hobby, the same as any other ,where people are simply supposed to enjoy making things or whatever they do relating to their chosen hobby. It isnt about the attitude ,I need to be the winning, I am clever than you in the points contest created by some, and why not add on some sarcastic comments to give them even more  pathetic added pleasure at the same time.

 

    I have always thought that any exhibtion is supposed to be fun , why does everything have to be how a real railway is/was run ? where is that rule written down ? how may people actually go so deep into the subject to have this extreme concern ?. I have no idea how many and I dont need to know either, and I am sure the punter with his kids having a day out are blissfully unaware of such intracies or bothered/ expect them to be present , I know I dont. If something runs well and looks good, thats enough for me perhaps I am too "normal" in my attitude?

     I agree re kits being made, I have been doing them for far too many years, on all kinds of subjects. That does'nt stop me buying r.t.r if i want it  , and being grateful for the time saved and in some cases  they are far better items  than I could ever manage to produce  , with some of the prehestoric kits still being sold at inflated prices.

 

As I have said before on here each to their own and enjoy, lifes too short .

 

 

Mick

  • Like 6
  • Agree 9
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Headstock said:

 

Good evening Tony,

 

it's rather a shame about the controversial Atlantic image. The layouts scenic modelling is stunning and the photograph itself is a rather a lovely composition. Two bits of creativity are worth celebrating I think.

Agreed and a beautifully made Loco as well, I ignore tension locks !! . Well done to Bachmann in this case.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 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.