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.

Pugsley

How realistic are your models? Photo challenge.

Recommended Posts

An idyllic view of an idle engine idly idling........

Rob

I'd like to say that is ideal and was a great idea..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh my word........lovely models in a lovely setting...

 

 

Rob.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

20 067 + 20 226, 20 213 + 20 217 and 26 032 at rest.post-3218-0-47061000-1539138281_thumb.jpgpost-3218-0-28461000-1539034017_thumb.jpg

Edited by ayrmrg
  • Like 13

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spectacular setting, wow.

 

Here are some 'old' style ones, the black and white one is a Chris Nevard original.

 

 

post-21244-0-33727300-1539554081.jpg

post-21244-0-50879600-1539554119.jpg

  • Like 16

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good Morning

 

I am not sure if this topic has been covered on RMWEB before, if it has I am sorry for repeating it.

 

As much as I enjoy all aspects of Railway Modelling I do enjoy just as much photographing models and playing around with different effects using photoshop.

 

It would be really nice to know other members honest views on photos like the one I have put below showing smoke added, whether you feel there is a place for this type of model railway photography on RMWeb?

 

Regards

 

David

post-6557-0-43034700-1539593465_thumb.jpeg

  • Like 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is as far as I'm concerned!  especially with a scene as good as that. 

 

See if you can get the weather to look overcast,wild & windy, maybe blow the smoke away directionally?

 

Nowadays there might well be enough fans to have an 'altered image' section, i find it's quite time consuming, but good fun.

 

If I could get a model to do it believably I would, but this will have to do as my best shot instead.

post-21244-0-92218400-1539597614.jpg

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is as far as I'm concerned! especially with a scene as good as that.

 

See if you can get the weather to look overcast,wild & windy, maybe blow the smoke away directionally?

 

Nowadays there might well be enough fans to have an 'altered image' section, i find it's quite time consuming, but good fun.

 

If I could get a model to do it believably I would, but this will have to do as my best shot instead.

Hi

 

Thank you for the reply and your compliments, the black & white photo you have posted is excellent with lots of atmosphere from the days of steam.

 

I must admit I have always tried not to include a Sky as it’s very hard to make it look right and the background I use fits in perfectly with the model surroundings, but I may have ago at a stormy sky as it can look very dramatic especially if the sun is full on with a dark background.

 

Thanks for posting your photo let’s hope more follow you, in my opinion Andy Y is a master at this type of photography maybe we can persuade him to contribute some of his excellent work to generate some interest.

 

Regards

 

David

Edited by landscapes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good Morning

 

I am not sure if this topic has been covered on RMWEB before, if it has I am sorry for repeating it.

 

As much as I enjoy all aspects of Railway Modelling I do enjoy just as much photographing models and playing around with different effects using photoshop.

 

It would be really nice to know other members honest views on photos like the one I have put below showing smoke added, whether you feel there is a place for this type of model railway photography on RMWeb?

 

Regards

 

David

Fantastic backscene, not quite sure where you find mountains that big and double track....     Shouldn't the A2 (train engine) be in front of the B1 (pilot) on the NB/ LNER?

I feel added smoke is Ok as long as people realise the pics have been doctored.  Its a bit unfair to have them advertising model railways when the smoke effects are not readily available, but with "Vaping" it can't be long before realistic choking acrid vape smoke emanating from steam locos and Deltics becomes the norm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

        .... .  Shouldn't the A2 (train engine) be in front of the B1 (pilot) on the NB/ LNER?

  ... .

 

 

       Ref. the above and the relative pos'ns.. of the pilot and of the train engines I thought that it was only on the GWR., in the rare instances of double-heading being req'd.,  that the train engine led the way?

 

         :locomotive:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fantastic backscene, not quite sure where you find mountains that big and double track....     Shouldn't the A2 (train engine) be in front of the B1 (pilot) on the NB/ LNER?

I feel added smoke is Ok as long as people realise the pics have been doctored.  Its a bit unfair to have them advertising model railways when the smoke effects are not readily available, but with "Vaping" it can't be long before realistic choking acrid vape smoke emanating from steam locos and Deltics becomes the norm

Hi

 

Many thanks for your comments.

 

regarding loco positions when double heading I am not sure but assumed that the larger locomotive would be the train engine.

 

Also regarding the backdrop it’s one I have that matches the photo plank very well in texture and colour, also it’s a photo taken up near Fort William so as I am modelling a Scottish MPD I thought I was appropriate but you make a good point regarding double track in the highlands.

 

Regards

 

David

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought the pilot loco was always in front too. It was interesting to read that an ageing Midland 2P 4-4-0 was used on the S&C for pilot duties until the 60's but the drivers of the Scots and Jubilee's on the Scottish expresses preferred  to go it alone and not seek it's "assistance" as it would be pushed all the way to Blea Moor. 

 

  Here's D6152 at the stops.

 

attachicon.gifdownload (6).png

Hi

 

Please excuse my ignorance but is that photo a real life Diesel, if not that’s one of the most realistic model railway photos I have seen.

 

Regards

 

David

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good Morning

I am not sure if this topic has been covered on RMWEB before, if it has I am sorry for repeating it.

As much as I enjoy all aspects of Railway Modelling I do enjoy just as much photographing models and playing around with different effects using photoshop.

It would be really nice to know other members honest views on photos like the one I have put below showing smoke added, whether you feel there is a place for this type of model railway photography on RMWeb?

Regards

David

Personally I like seeing any photos and models made with enjoyment, passion and skill. Your model is brilliant both with and without the smoke effects. I would suggest just keep doing what you enjoy and as long as you are not trying to pass off the smoke effects as part of the model then I see no problem at all.

 

Thanks for sharing,

All the best,

 

Dave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Define pilot; it can be used to describe a light engine running ahead of traffic to establish line clearance, as in Royal Train duty or inspection after a blockage or block failure, or a loco used to ferry a pilotman from one end of a section to another in temporary single line working on double track sections, or a loco coupled to the front of a train to save a light engine path, as in Windward Islands in the Harrow disaster, or an assisting loco at the front of the train.

 

Pilot engine position is one of those rules that are often 'broken' by other rules allowing a different practice in the Sectional Appendix.  The GW is supposed to have held that the train engine should be leading and the pilot coupled inside as the train engine driver is in charge of the running of the train and needs the best view of the signals and road ahead.  This was certainly the practice on the South Devon banks.  But the railway did not follow this rule in regard to Severn Tunnel pilot assistance, where the assisting loco was simply coupled leading, and taken off at either Pilning, Stoke Gifford, or Badminton in the up direction.  Returning locos were used to assist down freight trains on the steeper Welsh side gradient out of the tunnel, again coupled in the front..  

 

Banking assistance at Abergavenny was uncoupled in rear, and various arrangements were employed in the South Wales valleys, all under the auspices of the Sectional Appendix, but none involving pilot locos coupled inside train locos.  A particularly interesting banking arrangement was used between Aberbeeg and Ebbw Vale steelworks on the iron ore traffic; the banker attached at the rear at Aberbeeg, and banked the loaded train all the way to the hopper unloading facility at the steelworks, then headed the train back down the bank to Aberbeeg without shunting, the brake van now being the leading vehicle and the original train loco at what is now the rear end carrying the tail lamp and acting as a steam powered brake van.  At Aberbeeg, the banker came off and took up position for it's next duty, and the train engine ran the van around and positioned itself at the head of the train, right away Newport.

 

Churchward and derivative locos with single leading pony axles were modified, and later ones built, with strengthening rods to re-enforce the front buffer beam attached to the smokebox, as they were found to be prone to frame distortion in this area; I imagine assisting in rear was one of the practices that brought this to light!

 

I do not possess the necessary erudition to comment on railways other than the GW and WR in this regard.

 

To come back to topic, I like seeing photos of other people's work.  It cheers me up when mine is better, which isn't often, and inspires me when mine isn't better, which is most of the time, and helps me isolate issues with my own layout in terms of modelling, lighting, sightlines, and presentation.  I do think that post-edited photos, with steam effects and other digital enhancements, should be in a category of their own, not so much 'how realistic are your models' but 'how realistic can you make your models look'.   And I'm enough of a pedant to include black and white images as post-editing!

Edited by The Johnster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

       Ref. the above and the relative pos'ns.. of the pilot and of the train engines I thought that it was only on the GWR., in the rare instances of double-heading being req'd.,  that the train engine led the way?

 

         :locomotive:

 

A well known (to some of us) and rather hoary old chestnut.  It was not the GWR's or WR's policy to attach the assistant engine inside the train engine.  The relative positions depended on the size and type of engines involved, and in some places on the location and distance over which assistance was being provided thus in some instances the train engine was on the front but in many more instances the assistant engine went on the front.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Define pilot; it can be used to describe a light engine running ahead of traffic to establish line clearance, as in Royal Train duty or inspection after a blockage or block failure, or a loco used to ferry a pilotman from one end of a section to another in temporary single line working on double track sections, or a loco coupled to the front of a train to save a light engine path, as in Windward Islands in the Harrow disaster, or an assisting loco at the front of the train.

 

Pilot engine position is one of those rules that are often 'broken' by other rules allowing a different practice in the Sectional Appendix.  The GW is supposed to have held that the train engine should be leading and the pilot coupled inside as the train engine driver is in charge of the running of the train and needs the best view of the signals and road ahead.  This was certainly the practice on the South Devon banks.  But the railway did not follow this rule in regard to Severn Tunnel pilot assistance, where the assisting loco was simply coupled leading, and taken off at either Pilning, Stoke Gifford, or Badminton in the up direction.  Returning locos were used to assist down freight trains on the steeper Welsh side gradient out of the tunnel, again coupled in the front..  

 

Banking assistance at Abergavenny was uncoupled in rear, and various arrangements were employed in the South Wales valleys, all under the auspices of the Sectional Appendix, but none involving pilot locos coupled inside train locos.  A particularly interesting banking arrangement was used between Aberbeeg and Ebbw Vale steelworks on the iron ore traffic; the banker attached at the rear at Aberbeeg, and banked the loaded train all the way to the hopper unloading facility at the steelworks, then headed the train back down the bank to Aberbeeg without shunting, the brake van now being the leading vehicle and the original train loco at what is now the rear end carrying the tail lamp and acting as a steam powered brake van.  At Aberbeeg, the banker came off and took up position for it's next duty, and the train engine ran the van around and positioned itself at the head of the train, right away Newport.

 

Churchward and derivative locos with single leading pony axles were modified, and later ones built, with strengthening rods to re-enforce the front buffer beam attached to the smokebox, as they were found to be prone to frame distortion in this area; I imagine assisting in rear was one of the practices that brought this to light!

 

I do not possess the necessary erudition to comment on railways other than the GW and WR in this regard.

 

To come back to topic, I like seeing photos of other people's work.  It cheers me up when mine is better, which isn't often, and inspires me when mine isn't better, which is most of the time, and helps me isolate issues with my own layout in terms of modelling, lighting, sightlines, and presentation.  I do think that post-edited photos, with steam effects and other digital enhancements, should be in a category of their own, not so much 'how realistic are your models' but 'how realistic can you make your models look'.   And I'm enough of a pedant to include black and white images as post-editing!

Hi Johnster

 

Thank you for your reply and you make a very good point in your last paragraph and that is why I asked the question in the first place.

 

Regards

 

David

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.