Wright writes.....

[coachmann]

When looking at photos, there are some things we expect to be out of focus. When they are not is when things start looking unreal, so i think stacking should be treated with caution. Far from sharpening things, I often use the softening tool to give a sense of distance. It was used a lot on my Greenfield layout to put the distant hills well into the distance even though in fact they were on the backscene behind the track.

 

Some really nice  modelling there in those shots on the 7mm scale 'mixed period' shed interior.

Edited December 23, 2015 by coachmann

[gr.king]

 

Satisfaction with Peco and Tracklay not faltering, surely?

 

I'll leave immediately......

 

Shock-horror, you have not been paying attention young man......SMP and C+L flexible between the Peco points....

 

 

 

It's a fair cop guv....

[coachmann]

Don't feel too badly Graeme, I'm fed up with sanding out recesses in the cork underlay to lower Peco points to match SMP rail height. So I now have a few weeks to make up my mind whether to use all-Peco track or Markway points and SMP flexible next year. I contemplated Code 100 for a while to match track on the garden extension planned for early next year. Quite honestly, scale bullhead chaired track is wasted on my eyes at my age even though it is nice to keep up with the Little Bytham's and Peterboro's when posting images of my layout.

[LNER4479]

So does one build a layout so that it can be photographed from a realistic viewpoint to create a 'just like the real thing' image ... or does one build a layout to enjoy seeing trains run?

 

(Probably invites the inevitable answer: 'Both!')

[wagonbasher]

Either or Both...

 

Andy

[jonny777]

That's an interesting shot and gets me thinking of the physics...

 

Firstly No need to glue the coal down, there is gravity on the moon just not as much as the earth, probably need to shovel carefully. Obviously there is no gravity in space so if the locomotive was towed there it could have lost the lot.

 

So with no atmosphere / air pressure.... would less steam pressure be required to make the locomotive move?

 

 

Andy

 

 

Oh dear. This is taking me back to O Level Physics, and I have forgotten most of it.

 

The boiling point of water falls in some proportion to the air pressure; and as there is virtually no air pressure on the moon, I think that means that water would boil simply from the heat of the sun.

 

Therefore the biggest problem would  be getting the water into the loco in the first place, because it would tend to boil away as it was poured into the tender.

 

I now have a headache, and need to lie down for a while.

[Porcy Mane]

One or the other or any of the alternatives.

 

Build what you want to build. I think very few people consider the taking of photographs when planning and building their layouts and that's probably the way it should be. Surely it's the snappers job to adapt to his circumstances and surroundings.

 

Then there are those who build specific photo dioramas.

 

One thing is for certain in that due to advancing technology when its comes to photographing models, we have it easier today that the like likes of Brian Monaghan and his ilk ever had.

I might be wrong, but I think that taking photographs of our railway models is becoming an ever increasing part of the hobby and to an extent modelling skills are improving because of it.

 

My first model railway pic. Probably taken in 1971 on a camera that came inside my Secret Sam Briefcase. Some would say my modelling & photography haven't improved much.

 

P

Edited December 23, 2015 by Porcy Mane

[Porcy Mane]

Oh dear. This is taking me back to O Level Physics, and I have forgotten most of it.

 

I thought I had forgot most of my physics but some of it must have stuck as i started to think along similar lines, e.g.

 

Therefore the biggest problem would  be getting the water into the loco in the first place, because it would tend to boil away as it was poured into the tender.

 

... even though the crew wouldn't need to work very had to shovel the coal their blood would be boiling. (Maybe at the reduction in adhesive weight?).

Edited December 23, 2015 by Porcy Mane

[stewartingram]

Oh dear. This is taking me back to O Level Physics, and I have forgotten most of it.

 

The boiling point of water falls in some proportion to the air pressure; and as there is virtually no air pressure on the moon, I think that means that water would boil simply from the heat of the sun.

 

Therefore the biggest problem would  be getting the water into the loco in the first place, because it would tend to boil away as it was poured into the tender.

 

I now have a headache, and need to lie down for a while.

So would Magnahesion be necessary on the loco?

 

Stewart

[Porcy Mane]

So would Magnahesion be necessary on the loco?

 

Stewart

You've been reading my Hornby 2016 wishlist.

 

P

[Dunsignalling]

One or the other or any of the alternatives.

 

Build what you want to build. I think very few people consider the taking of photographs when planning and building their layouts and that's probably the way it should be. Surely it's the snappers job to adapt to his circumstances and surroundings.

 

Then there are those who build specific photo dioramas.

 

One thing is for certain in that due to advancing technology when its comes to photographing models, we have it easier today that the like likes of Brian Monaghan and his ilk ever had.

I might be wrong, but I thinks that taking photographs of our railway models is becoming an ever increasing part of the hobby and to an extent modelling skills are improving because of it.

 

P

I'm not sure our modelling improves because of photography but it certainly helps us spot the omissions which our amazing brains are capable of filling in!

 

How easy or difficult layout photography is often depends on the size of equipment in use but, whether you choose a capable compact as used by Andy Y or a bulkier DSLR, the common factor is the need for a good, stable (which generally equals heavy and expensive) tripod.

 

As ever, buying the right kit for the job is an investment and well worth skipping a camera upgrade to pay for. My old (and by no means top-of-the-range) Manfrotto cost more than my first 35mm SLR but has survived 30+ years of sometimes quite rough use with barely a scratch and has outlived five cameras; I'll certainly never wear it out.

 

John

[Dunsignalling]

I thought I had forgot most of my physics but some of it must have stuck as i started to think along similar lines, e.g.

 

 

... even though the crew wouldn't need to work very had to shovel the coal their blood would be boiling. (Maybe at the reduction in adhesive weight?).

However easy it would be to shovel the coal, it wouldn't burn without oxygen...............

[Porcy Mane]

However easy it would be to shovel the coal, it wouldn't burn without oxygen...............

But the crew would have plenty of cheese to eat whilst trying to light the fire.

 

P

[Tony Wright]

So does one build a layout so that it can be photographed from a realistic viewpoint to create a 'just like the real thing' image ... or does one build a layout to enjoy seeing trains run?

 

(Probably invites the inevitable answer: 'Both!')

An interesting point Graham.

 

When Little Bytham was being planned, it was important that I be able to photograph the main line from both sides. Thus, I don't, as you know,  have a backscene. This is not a problem photographically because I just put a 'sky' behind where the trackbed is higher than the surrounding scenery or on the top of the cutting. I've thought of suspending photographic backscenes (I can take pictures of the immediate environment to the west of the railway and east of Station Road because almost nothing has changed). These could be moved as appropriate to poke a camera in place. It would certainly add to any realism. Or, I could paint suspended backscenes, as I've done at the ends, though these are fixed.

 

I suppose it comes down to 'good' modelling, in every area. If the modelling is good (that's subjective up to a point, I admit), an actual prototype has been modelled (so model pictures can be directly compared with shots of the real thing) and the photography is good, then a 'just like the real thing image' can be created.

 

Just like Grantham! 

[Porcy Mane]

Anyone else got pictures inside model loco sheds?

 Not so much inside the shed but there are a few snaps around and about Blackgills loco-shed in this post.

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/6450-blackgill-tyne-dock-to-consett-in-p4/page-8&do=findComment&comment=1202215

 

Photographs taken by Eddy Fords (the layout builder) youngster.

 

P

[Tony Wright]

I'm not sure our modelling improves because of photography but it certainly helps us spot the omissions which our amazing brains are capable of filling in!

 

How easy or difficult layout photography is often depends on the size of equipment in use but, whether you choose a capable compact as used by Andy Y or a bulkier DSLR, the common factor is the need for a good, stable (which generally equals heavy and expensive) tripod.

 

As ever, buying the right kit for the job is an investment and well worth skipping a camera upgrade to pay for. My old (and by no means top-of-the-range) Manfrotto cost more than my first 35mm SLR but has survived 30+ years of sometimes quite rough use with barely a scratch and has outlived five cameras; I'll certainly never wear it out.

 

John

John,

 

I don't use a tripod when I take eye-level shots on LB. The shear weight of the camera means it's stable as it sits on the trackbed. I just set the shot parameters, lock the mirror up and fire the shutter via a ten second delay. 

 

For tripod shots I use an Benbo Mk.1, the best I've ever had. 

Edited December 23, 2015 by Tony Wright

[Focalplane]

After a couple of weeks off I am back in the saddle. First and foremost, my 7mm Jinty was taken to Hillingdon Railway Modellers test track day last Saturday and performed well with some kind comments from the very friendly regular members. The only problem was very slow running over the joins in the modules with an occasional stall. With all six wheels picking up power, this seems to be an insurmountable problem.

 

Second, as Tony will attest, I used to know the first incarnation of Birmingham New Street quite well. On Monday we visited the second re-incarnation and it was hard to even find the station for all the shops and fast food outlets. Give me the original layout any time and I will be proud to be called a nostalgic. It looks like Brum, with or without its daily B1, is now just one large shopping mall.

 

Third, all projects are on hold for a while, with a half completed 60ft turntable awaiting my return and a new David Andrews kit expected in March.

 

But for now what I would like to do is wish Tony and friends a very Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.

Edited December 23, 2015 by Focalplane

[Anglian]

You will indeed Tim, both of us.

 

I'm acting as a 'loco doctor', where people can bring their poor running/dud locos along and I'll see if I can fix them. I've done this now at Peterborough and Spalding this year, and it's been successful up to a point. I qualify 'up to a point' by stating that occasionally 'loco funeral director' would be a more appropriate title!

 

Obviously, no guarantees can be given and I won't have a huge supply of spares, but things like adjusting pick-ups, cleaning wheels/motors, etc, can be undertaken with relative ease. I got a Hornby Thomas going again at Peterborough by just soldering a contact back on, a Jamieson hand-cut kit L1's valve gear operating again by buying some lace pins and using them as pivots and even got a DCC Class O8 to operate properly. At Spalding, a Bachmann 2-6-2T was resurrected, as was a Hornby Coronation. 

 

Not all was success - if anyone brings a Grafar loco, it'll be handed right back with apologies and anything with DCC I'll avoid. If I'm successful, a donation (entirely voluntary) will be suggested to be given to a CMRA-nominated charity. 

 

I'll also be demonstrating my loco and kit-building techniques in between attending to my 'patients'. 

 

See you there.

 

Your figures are admired by everyone who visits the layout. Thank you once more for painting them so exquisitely and donating them to the project. You are one of many now who've made things for LB, entirely without request or reward. I count myself very privileged indeed. 

 

As for Photoshopping, since I only know the rudiments of how to use it, I just get by with it. As I've said, I've had my day and have no wish to learn any more complexities. . 

 

All the best for Christmas and the New year. 

 

 

Tony,

I shall come and say hello and quietly watch and learn. The notion of 'first principles,' is firmly embedded in my psyche having been shown your then work in progress – the 2P. Thank you for passing further comment on the figures – it's nice to know they've been spotted. Having seen the wonderful Willoughby Arms it's inspired me to think that perhaps one of the regulars could thinking of his usual somewhere in the vicinity…

Edited December 23, 2015 by Anglian

[johnarcher]

I've been happy to agree with and enjoy your posts a good few times during the year so, Merry Christmas Tony, thanks for the most interestingly readable thread around. (Though I admit that the technical photography stuff sails distantly over my head).

[Tony Wright]

I've been happy to agree with and enjoy your posts a good few times during the year so, Merry Christmas Tony, thanks for the most interestingly readable thread around. (Though I admit that the technical photography stuff sails distantly over my head).

I've been entirely in agreement with everything you've said, John.

 

Keep on building and keep on encouraging others to build. RTR? Ready-to-refuse, if comments posted elsewhere about Hornby's latest A3 are to be believed! 

 

Yes, the record's stuck again, but if folk aren't prepared to have a go for themselves, then there'll forever be a hostage to fortune as to what they can get complete from a box. The other day , Andy York and I mused over just about everything to do with railway modelling. We admired a Hornby A3 which I'd detailed and Tom Foster had weathered to perfection. But, on a heavy train, though it took it (with some slipping), it waggled, wiggled and waddled down the track. Out with a 30 year old A3 I'd built - just a hint of side-to-side motion. Out with a 40 year old A3 I'd built - rock steady and not a touch of slip. It must be nicely run in by now! 

[St Enodoc]

An interesting point Graham.

 

When Little Bytham was being planned, it was important that I be able to photograph the main line from both sides. Thus, I don't, as you know,  have a backscene. This is not a problem photographically because I just put a 'sky' behind where the trackbed is higher than the surrounding scenery or on the top of the cutting. I've thought of suspending photographic backscenes (I can take pictures of the immediate environment to the west of the railway and east of Station Road because almost nothing has changed). These could be moved as appropriate to poke a camera in place. It would certainly add to any realism. Or, I could paint suspended backscenes, as I've done at the ends, though these are fixed.

 

I suppose it comes down to 'good' modelling, in every area. If the modelling is good (that's subjective up to a point, I admit), an actual prototype has been modelled (so model pictures can be directly compared with shots of the real thing) and the photography is good, then a 'just like the real thing image' can be created.

 

Just like Grantham! 

I recall reading years ago about a layout built pretty well solely for the purpose of photographing models. If my memory isn't playing tricks (a very big if...) the builder was someone called Alan Gibson (the other one).

[johnarcher]

I've been entirely in agreement with everything you've said, John.

 

Keep on building and keep on encouraging others to build. RTR? Ready-to-refuse, if comments posted elsewhere about Hornby's latest A3 are to be believed! 

 

Yes, the record's stuck again, but if folk aren't prepared to have a go for themselves, then there'll forever be a hostage to fortune as to what they can get complete from a box. The other day , Andy York and I mused over just about everything to do with railway modelling. We admired a Hornby A3 which I'd detailed and Tom Foster had weathered to perfection. But, on a heavy train, though it took it (with some slipping), it waggled, wiggled and waddled down the track. Out with a 30 year old A3 I'd built - just a hint of side-to-side motion. Out with a 40 year old A3 I'd built - rock steady and not a touch of slip. It must be nicely run in by now! 

Thanks Tony, I intend to keep on building but at the moment have just sold off my Irish 00n3 stuff, and am in a state of desultory research and chronic indecision regarding a UK prototype.

Still, as other people post pictures and there's been no evidence here that I've ever actually made anything, here's my (now sold) T&D Hunslet (Branchlines kit).

 

.

 

She had been in a box for a few years when the picture was taken (photography not up to your standard) so the paintwork has suffered a bit.

I mentioned this one around here somewhere recently, saying that buying something has never given the sort of satisfaction I got when she ran OK, only my third chassis and first set of Walschearts.

Edited December 24, 2015 by johnarcher

[Tony Wright]

May I ask for some assistance, please? 

 

Last week Barry Oliver dropped off seven ex-LMS carriages built (we think) from BSL kits. All were finished in BR carmine/cream, but none had bogies. I could recognise most types (three are available RTR), but a couple have me stumped. 

 

 

The left-hand car in this shot appears to be a Composite Open (to judge from the interior). Am I right in this assessment? The right-hand car is a BTK. I made up the bogies this morning (PC ones from a scrap-box so old, they were three shillings and eight pence per pair!). I always have supplies of wheels, so these were fitted and the carriages given a trial on the MR/M&GNR bit of my railway. They work perfectly, so will now be painted. I always test running gear before painting; just in case adjustments are necessary. 

 

 

 

This one has me even more stumped. It appears to be a BTO from an earlier period (?), but it has no trussing. If that's right, is it an all-steel prototype. Roof section detail appears to have been applied in paper strips, some of which are coming off/apart. 

 

The carriages are reasonably well finished, though stray bits of glue and finger marks on (and inside!) the glazing do rather militate. That said, with bogies and a bit of tarting up, they should pass the three feet test, as long as the viewer doesn't have fantastic eyes. I'll make up five more pairs of bogies and see what the end result is.

 

The others are a CK (long), BCK (long), TK and FK (Porthole).

 

How does one value items such as these? Obviously, without bogies and couplings they're of no use to the plonkers. Fully-finished (and perfect) equivalents from Hornby or Bachmann (and Dapol?) come out between £35.00 and £40.00 (am I right?). BSL/Phoenix kits are in the mid-£20.00s (ex-wheels) and Comet equivalents are over £40.00 complete. Of course, they've got to made and painted, but some of these cars will have to be taken apart and re-glazed in part. 

 

My copy of the LMS carriage bible by Essery and Jenkinson was lent to a scoundrel (I didn't know he was one then!) and I haven't seen it since.

 

Over to you Mr Goddard; not that Larry's the scoundrel! Not at all.   

Edited December 24, 2015 by Tony Wright

[The Stationmaster]

Bought in that state at auction I think they could average anything between £5 and £35 each as a complete lot.  The reason for saying that is that stuff which is 'incomplete' tends to go for much lower prices as the dealers don't like taking on work; they like unmade kits (big profit margin) and will go for some complete kits or things like Lawrence/Goddard coaches but prices vary enormously.   I reckon these would probably go at the lower end of the scale I gave unless there were two modellers who saw them in the way you do in which case the bidding would be more brisk.

[coachmann]

Behind the maroon coach is a LMS D1905 corridor brake third, and a D1984/1903 open composite (the earlier D1862 had shallow sliding window vents). The 2-window 'All-Steel' brake third is to D1746, which I suspect may be a Birmingham RC&W series judging by the short roof rain strips.

 

Structurally I would say they are from BSL pressed aluminium kits, as I can see the longer faces of the solbars are glued to the floor and the roof is a clip-over the coach type. The treatment of the roof with wide tape is very similar to that used by Lawrence Scale Models. The 'all-steel' battery boxes, vacuum cylinders and lookout duckets look like my 'Larriparts' castings from around 1982 onwards. The circular bolsters are either David Gillotts @ Davids Coaches & Castings or Errol Surmans at the old 247 Developments. It is not my paintwork as I never used such a dark 'cream'. A close up shot of the Stones Vents would tell me if they are my nickel silver etchings or not.

Edited December 24, 2015 by coachmann