Wright writes.....

[Tony Wright]

And who would enforce it.

 

Probably a non starter.

 

G.

Grahame,

 

Most (if not all) modellers I know have self-enforced 'rule books'. By that I mean they set their own realistic standards of what they can personally achieve or as part of a group. When WMRC was building Stoke Summit, Tony Geary (a most- accomplished modeller) was making an MTK Cravens kit to run on it. He brought the 'thing' part-completed up to the club one day. 'What do you think?' said he. It was universally rejected because of the poor door scribings he'd made. 'I knew you'd say that!' he exclaimed, took it away and made a superlative end-product. One must belong to a group with clear understandings of what the members are trying to achieve to first ask for an opinion, be honest enough to give one, act on it and put whatever it is right. Unless all this is fully-understood, then there are inevitable casualties. 

 

How does one 'enforce' standards if one is not a modeller oneself, or farms out much of the work to others?  

 

 

If one has plenty of fiscal resources, then one commissions the very best work, knowing that it'll be good; because the best of the builders has been involved. This is the case with the Gauge 1 model above; built by Geoff Holt for Pete Waterman and painted (I think) by Brian Badger - unless Larry Goddard painted it. As an aside, with the recent discussions on liveries in mind, don't you think (the generic 'you') that this livery is perfect in its simplicity, dignity and harmony with its subject? If this could be got right 100 years or so ago, why can't it be done today I wonder? 

 

Returning to standards of commissioned work, I've had to put right many items (not for Pete Waterman - I'm nowhere near that league, and he's a fine modeller in his own right!) which have been ordered in good faith, either because they didn't work properly or had livery omissions/errors. This is where the non-modellers are always hostages to fortune in my view. If I could offer any advice, if you have to wait a long time for a job to be done, accept it; it's because the guy/girl who's doing it is good. 

Edited January 6, 2017 by Tony Wright

[Tony Teague]

 

"With regard to the overall colours on a model railway, what I've (we've) always tried to achieve is a limited palette. By that I mean, nothing too strident or dazzling, especially if one is attempting to create a representation of a 1950s' scene. 

 

Changing the subject slightly, I made a recent comment about superimposing a neutral sky on my most recent pictures, rather than using a real sky. The picture above has this, and it's cloned from the sky colour I used on the backscene. 

 

Any comments/thoughts/objections/criticisms gratefully received. "

 

--

Tony

 

May I first say how pleased I was to see that you had painted the grass on your backscene in malachite, despite the disparaging comments about that shade made elsewhere on this thread!

 

If I may contribute to the "photoshop or not" debate, I totally agree with you about the addition of smoke etc, as well as the question as to enhancing the model itself; I am in agreement too, with the removal of distracting backgrounds. As others have said, I think the mind tends to do this, but there seems to me to be no harm in helping it along; occasionally, however, it is certainly good to get the overall picture as to what is happening in the railway room, or to see how something was done, what is holding it up, etc.

 

I offer two pictures in support of the 'distracting' backgrounds point; I was privileged to visit the stunning Liverpool Lime Street layout this week, and here is a picture of the massive and detailed hotel that has been added to the front of the layout both with and without 'distractions'. I know which I prefer!

 

 

 

I have put a couple more onto the Lime Street thread if anyone would like to see them. ( http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/33141-lime-street-station/page-61 )

 

Tony

Edited January 6, 2017 by slowcomo

[Tony Wright]

How about modeling in black and white to make a model that feels right?

A good idea Richard,

 

 

 

To produce images like this? Obviously, the models are in colour, but this type of B&W shot is far more common of the prototype in the '50s than any colour one. I also think, in many ways, it works better; especially if you have a loco as good as this one. It's Tony Geary's delightfully scruffy DJH A1 60114 W. P. ALLEN, one of the most beautifully-natural locos I've ever seen (you'll have driven it on many occasions). Have you ever seen a more realistic-looking loco in OO Gauge?

 

 

 

Or, scenes like these, rendered in B&W? To me these are far more realistic (irrespective of the subject-matter) than some of the garish, vivid and livid colours one sees in pictures of model railways more recently. 

Edited January 6, 2017 by Tony Wright

[Killybegs]

Rather than increase the saturation (as favoured by some magazines) I often reduce it to tone down the colours a little.

 

For example see the first photo on this page

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/67-how-realistic-are-your-models-photo-challenge/page-178

[westerner]

Alan (Westerner), on one visit, said how much he like the colour achieved under the room's lights, the pulses of flash and the camera's rendering of the colours

 

 

I did and hence my comment in my previous post about muted colours.

Edited January 6, 2017 by westerner

[micklner]

 

"With regard to the overall colours on a model railway, what I've (we've) always tried to achieve is a limited palette. By that I mean, nothing too strident or dazzling, especially if one is attempting to create a representation of a 1950s' scene. 

 

Changing the subject slightly, I made a recent comment about superimposing a neutral sky on my most recent pictures, rather than using a real sky. The picture above has this, and it's cloned from the sky colour I used on the backscene. 

 

Any comments/thoughts/objections/criticisms gratefully received. "

 

--

Tony

 

May I first say how pleased I was to see that you had painted the grass on your backscene in malachite, despite the disparaging comments about that shade made elsewhere on this thread!

 

If I may contribute to the "photoshop or not" debate, I totally agree with you about the addition of smoke etc, as well as the question as to enhancing the model itself; I am in agreement too, with the removal of distracting backgrounds. As others have said, I think the mind tends to do this, but there seems to me to be no harm in helping it along; occasionally, however, it is certainly good to get the overall picture as to what is happening in the railway room, or to see how something was done, what is holding it up, etc.

 

I offer two pictures in support of the 'distracting' backgrounds point; I was privileged to visit the stunning Liverpool Lime Street layout this week, and here is a picture of the massive and detailed hotel that has been added to the front of the layout both with and without 'distractions'. I know which I prefer!

 

SJPAB9A394602170104-2.jpg

 

SJPAB9A3946_102170104.jpg

 

I have put a couple more onto the Lime Street thread if anyone would like to see them. ( http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/33141-lime-street-station/page-61 )

 

Tony

 

 

I have no problem with the "normal" photo as said many times before, your eye is naturally drawn to the actual model in the photo and ignores the background.

 

Photoshopped photos 99% of the time looks exactly what it is a modified/ false simply not real image. Some of the magazine photos look ludricous, very obvious enhancements and unnatural/vivid colours employed.

[landscapes]

The chocolate box images so beloved of 'freight charter master-shooters twerps' (I say this having heard their chuntering about recreating scenes from the past....which they patently aint!) are a real turn off for buying some magazines. The so-called master-photographers of the steam-era worked with old manual cameras, with which I believe most of today's digital-toting cameramen wouldn't have a clue. Most of them like Eric Treacy took photos for impact to suit the poor reproduction of the magazines of the day, hence the wedge shots that could be cropped for vertical reproduction. Most also used medium telephoto lenses.

 

I don't know about others, but I find the most useful pictures were those taken on standard lenses and show a darn sight more of the overall scene than the loco and the leading three coaches. As for colour saturation, it needs to be played down, but the 'market' appears to dictate the opposite. Maybe the garish liveries and colours are what attract today's readers rather than the motive power, afterall when you've seen one Class 66 you've seen em all. Imagine a steam railway run by Black Fives and 8F's! Oooh, I did back in 1967. Small wonder I turned my back on railways some years before!

 

Hi Coachmann

 

Sorry I have to disagree with you on your 'freight charter master-shooters twerps I use to go on quite a few of the organised steam charters on various preserved railways up and down the country.

 

Most of the people who go pay a lot of money to attend these charters and it all goes back to the railway operating the charter and this can run into thousands of pounds for each individual charter arranged.

 

​Also many of these cameramen were taking photos of steam locomotives long before the preservation movement really go going in the seventies and certainly long before digital cameras were available, and though not as famous as names such a Eric Tracey I can assure you they do now how to take a stunning photo of a steam locomotive.

 

These are people just like railway modellers, they are just trying to recreate images from a past now long gone.

 

I do agree that many of the images which now appear in the journals such as Steam Railway or Heritage Railway are certainly over saturated from a colour point of view and as someone has already stated making them look more like a painting rather than a photograph.

 

Regards

 

David

[coachmann]

Hi Coachmann

 

Sorry I have to disagree with you on your 'freight charter master-shooters twerps I use to go on quite a few of the organised steam charters on various preserved railways up and down the country.

 

Most of the people who go pay a lot of money to attend these charters and it all goes back to the railway operating the charter and this can run into thousands of pounds for each individual charter arranged.

 

​Also many of these cameramen were taking photos of steam locomotives long before the preservation movement really go going in the seventies and certainly long before digital cameras were available, and though not as famous as names such a Eric Tracey I can assure you they do now how to take a stunning photo of a steam locomotive.

 

These are people just like railway modellers, they are just trying to recreate images from a past now long gone.

 

I do agree that many of the images which now appear in the journals such as Steam Railway or Heritage Railway are certainly over saturated from a colour point of view and as someone has already stated making them look more like a painting rather than a photograph.

 

Regards

 

David

I actually know or knew some of them...John Whitely, Gavin Morrison, Brian Morrison, Les Nixon and was in touch with other well known names in railway photography for many many years. We were also in two of the railway photographic Societies and I saw their work and stories in the portfolios that we passed around. I was more involved in covering BR activities where there were no set pieces.....You planned and got the shot, rain or shine, daylight or darkness....... No second chances.  The charter master-shooters I am talking about are familiar enough to all the gents I mentioned. Money going to good causes is not in question. But specially posed set ups with clag and thinking they are recreating scenes from the past is futile. I grew up in the past they think they are recreating.

Edited January 6, 2017 by coachmann

[The Stationmaster]

I actually know or knew some of them...John Whitely, Gavin Morrison, Brian Morrison, Les Nixon and was in touch with other well known names in railway photography for many many years. We were also in two of the railway photographic Societies and I saw their work and stories in the portfolios that we passed around. I was more involved in covering BR activities where there were no set pieces.....You planned and got the shot, rain or shine, daylight or darkness....... No second chances.  The charter master-shooters I am talking about are familiar enough to all the gents I mentioned. Money going to good causes is not in question. But specially posed set ups with clag and thinking they are recreating scenes from the past is futile....I know becasue I was there in the past!.....Many of them weren't even born.

 

I don't know any of them but if they think they canrecreate scenes from the past - which I see as one of Larry's main points in his comments - then they would seem to be deluded.  I have yet to see any picture of one of these 'freight charters' showing a train which actually looks like a freight train of the past and i seriously doubt that however hard they try they'll never manage it.

[landscapes]

Hi Chaps

 

Sorry I still disagree with both comments but this discussion could go on and on so it's best left there.

 

Regards

 

David

[TrevorP1]

For what my tuppence worth adds I'm very much in agreement with muted colours, especially in the distance. Nothing else is right! Of course this is difficult if photographing a layout lengthwise as light does not 'scale' but is perfectly possible with backscenes and scenery.

 

I'm quite happy with photo backscenes - and use them myself - if they follow the above 'rules', especially if they are of the place that is being modelled. Even more so if the modeller has been clever enough to get out with his camera, take some photos, stitch them together and then work with a printer to get what he wants.

 

Digital smoke doesn't do it for me but I accept that some like it. Further, steam, or more correctly water vapour, also appears at other places on a locomotive or train. For instance drain cocks, leaking glands, safety valves, injector overflows, leaking joints and drip valves on carriages. I don't recall seeing this done digitally but no doubt I will be proved wrong!  

 

There is something that I feel would improve many layouts and I accept that this is difficult. This is the actual position of the light source i.e. imitating what the sun does. The position of the sun in the sky affects colour temperature and the direction the light comes from. Photographers know this and will refer to the 'Golden Hour' before sunset. Overall even lighting is not real life but it is what many models have, even Pendon. Any thoughts on this?

[Tony Teague]

Hi Chaps

 

Sorry I still disagree with both comments but this discussion could go on and on so it's best left there.

 

Regards

 

David

 

David

You are not alone!

I too have been on many photcharters because photography is one of my hobbies, alongside railway modelling, and both feed my lifelong interest in railways.

I am old enough to remember steam and what it looks like, and just as I try to recreate scenes through my railway modelling, so I do through my photography.

 

 

In the same way, I have little interest in the current railway scene which I neither model nor photograph.

I am not delusional about recreating scenes from the past, I simply like looking at, hearing, smelling and photographing steam trains to the best of my ability.

Clearly that won't be to everyone's taste, but then I don't like fishing, dancing or playing darts - to give just 3 examples - but others do.

 

Tony

[Tony Wright]

I don't know any of them but if they think they canrecreate scenes from the past - which I see as one of Larry's main points in his comments - then they would seem to be deluded.  I have yet to see any picture of one of these 'freight charters' showing a train which actually looks like a freight train of the past and i seriously doubt that however hard they try they'll never manage it.

Thanks Mike,

 

I wonder on occasions how 'accurate' my depictions of goods trains are on Little Bytham. Some years ago, the late Andy Rush visited and set me straight on how wrong I'd made up some of my formations - I quickly acted upon this. For instance, fruit vans on the main line; 'Highly-unlikely' said he, 'Put them on the M&GNR.' 

 

Having spent hours/days/months/years making-up accurate ECML passenger train formations (using BR's official documents in part), I'd like to get the goods trains as near right as well. I tend to use prototype pictures as a guide, identifying types of wagons and inserting them into the right places in trains. I have the BR lamp code for describing trains and apply this as well as I can when 'lamping-up' locos. I've not long come across yet another picture of a goods train hauled by a loco with one lamp at 12 o'clock and one at 6 o'clock (I hope my description doesn't offend, but it's obviously one on the top bracket and one in the centre, above the coupling). Fine, because the train is a long rake of empty, unfitted minerals. However, another loco carrying exactly the same lamp code was on a rake of (what appeared to be) fitted vans. Did several of the goods train categories overlap? Please forgive my ignorance on this. I suppose similar 'anomalies' (if that's what they are) occurred on passenger trains, with long trains of gangwayed stock with the loco carrying a single lamp at the top and shorter trains of non-gangwayed stock with the loco showing Class 1 lamps. 

 

One thing I am doing as a matter of priority is fitting white/red lamps to the outsides of my brake vans when they're behind stock which is non-fitted. 

[landscapes]

David

You are not alone!

I too have been on many photcharters because photography is one of my hobbies, alongside railway modelling, and both feed my lifelong interest in railways.

I am old enough to remember steam and what it looks like, and just as I try to recreate scenes through my railway modelling, so I do through my photography.

 

SJPIMG_836702150121.jpg

 

In the same way, I have little interest in the current railway scene which I neither model nor photograph.

I am not delusional about recreating scenes from the past, I simply like looking at, hearing, smelling and photographing steam trains to the best of my ability.

Clearly that won't be to everyone's taste, but then I don't like fishing, dancing or playing darts - to give just 3 examples - but others do.

 

Tony

 

Hi Tony

 

Very nice photo, Great Central Railway I believe.

 

Regards

 

David

[Tony Wright]

David

You are not alone!

I too have been on many photcharters because photography is one of my hobbies, alongside railway modelling, and both feed my lifelong interest in railways.

I am old enough to remember steam and what it looks like, and just as I try to recreate scenes through my railway modelling, so I do through my photography.

 

SJPIMG_836702150121.jpg

 

In the same way, I have little interest in the current railway scene which I neither model nor photograph.

I am not delusional about recreating scenes from the past, I simply like looking at, hearing, smelling and photographing steam trains to the best of my ability.

Clearly that won't be to everyone's taste, but then I don't like fishing, dancing or playing darts - to give just 3 examples - but others do.

 

Tony

Tony,

 

That's very impressive. 

 

Was the 8F especially 'dirtied' for the photographic charter? 

 

Like you, I don't fish, dance or play darts - among loads of other things I don't do. 

[TrevorP1]

Once upon a time I did 4 or 5 charters a year but now find other things to spend my hard-earned on. I enjoyed this day at the GC back in 2007. I don't think it stopped raining all day and it was freezing but like Tony's image above I got results which pleased me a lot. It just happens to be the 8F again and yes, the wagons are far too clean! My pet hate on charters was the 'over lit' night scenes. But hey, as has been said, more money to good causes!

 

[Tony Wright]

For what my tuppence worth adds I'm very much in agreement with muted colours, especially in the distance. Nothing else is right! Of course this is difficult if photographing a layout lengthwise as light does not 'scale' but is perfectly possible with backscenes and scenery.

 

I'm quite happy with photo backscenes - and use them myself - if they follow the above 'rules', especially if they are of the place that is being modelled. Even more so if the modeller has been clever enough to get out with his camera, take some photos, stitch them together and then work with a printer to get what he wants.

 

Digital smoke doesn't do it for me but I accept that some like it. Further, steam, or more correctly water vapour, also appears at other places on a locomotive or train. For instance drain cocks, leaking glands, safety valves, injector overflows, leaking joints and drip valves on carriages. I don't recall seeing this done digitally but no doubt I will be proved wrong!

 

There is something that I feel would improve many layouts and I accept that this is difficult. This is the actual position of the light source i.e. imitating what the sun does. The position of the sun in the sky affects colour temperature and the direction the light comes from. Photographers know this and will refer to the 'Golden Hour' before sunset. Overall even lighting is not real life but it is what many models have, even Pendon. Any thoughts on this?

Thanks Trevor,

 

Your comment about the 'Golden Hour' is very interesting. I assume there'd be an equivalent in the morning? I ask this with reference to the picture below.

 

 

A dear friend, Roy Vinter, visits regularly and brings models he's made with him from time to time. A little under three years ago, he brought this Pro-Scale A3 he'd made. I usually take pictures of what friends bring along (their models are often much more interesting than mine), and this was no exception. The effect on the loco is actually a fluke, caused by reflected sunlight. The orientation of the picture is looking slightly north/west (west, north west to be precise), and the real sky is correct for that. Thus, this looks like a morning picture, but it was actually taken in the afternoon. I'd left the shed doors open and the sun was being reflected towards it from one of our bedroom windows (the house faces east-west). Because Roy had painted 60046 in a glossy finish, it looks as if it's illuminated from the side by the sun; which, in a roundabout way, it was. Could this be, then, near the golden hour in the morning? 

 

 

I have to say, as a model railway record shot, more-even lighting is much more effective, and (dare I say it?) much more flattering. 

Edited January 6, 2017 by Tony Wright

[Theakerr]

OK Tony, perhaps not perfection just 999/1000 of perfection.  Seriously though, Little Bytham does stand out as one of the better layouts and one for others to try to emulate.  By the way I am not trying to make you put in wider doors with the compliment.

Best Jim

[LNER4479]

Thanks Mike,

 

I wonder on occasions how 'accurate' my depictions of goods trains are on Little Bytham. Some years ago, the late Andy Rush visited and set me straight on how wrong I'd made up some of my formations - I quickly acted upon this. For instance, fruit vans on the main line; 'Highly-unlikely' said he, 'Put them on the M&GNR.' 

 

Having spent hours/days/months/years making-up accurate ECML passenger train formations (using BR's official documents in part), I'd like to get the goods trains as near right as well. I tend to use prototype pictures as a guide, identifying types of wagons and inserting them into the right places in trains. I have the BR lamp code for describing trains and apply this as well as I can when 'lamping-up' locos. I've not long come across yet another picture of a goods train hauled by a loco with one lamp at 12 o'clock and one at 6 o'clock (I hope my description doesn't offend, but it's obviously one on the top bracket and one in the centre, above the coupling). Fine, because the train is a long rake of empty, unfitted minerals. However, another loco carrying exactly the same lamp code was on a rake of (what appeared to be) fitted vans. Did several of the goods train categories overlap? Please forgive my ignorance on this. I suppose similar 'anomalies' (if that's what they are) occurred on passenger trains, with long trains of gangwayed stock with the loco carrying a single lamp at the top and shorter trains of non-gangwayed stock with the loco showing Class 1 lamps. 

 

One thing I am doing as a matter of priority is fitting white/red lamps to the outsides of my brake vans when they're behind stock which is non-fitted. 

Good evening Tony,

 

I'll get in quick before Mike the Stationmaster gets here.

 

Your starting point is the first table in this link:

http://www.uksteam.info/gwr/hcodes.htm

 

Although it is actually from a GWR-orientated site, BR standardised headcodes across all regions from 1950 (a few quirky exceptions lingered, the S&D being one), so these codes would be applicable to your time era. They changed again in the 1960's - and have been continually changed since - when the letter designation of trains changed to numbers (ie Type A became Type 1, and so on).

 

You will see from the table that the different classifications were all to do with braking power and speed and generally had little to do with what was actually in the wagons! Type 'H' (12 o'clock and 6 o'clock as you put it!) was actually quite a common type and was simply a through freight that didn't comply with any of the 'C', 'D', 'E' of 'F' conditions(!)

 

In terms of what vehicles were in the rake, there wasn't really any equivalent to passenger train formations. A freight train simply conveyed what traffic was on offer on the particular day. The order in which they were marshalled was determined according to whether they had automatic brakes or not (ie fitted or unfitted), any specially instructions (eg barrier wagons protecting dangerous loads) and might be marshalled up in 'rafts' according to ultimate destination if it was a train that was due to be remarshalled further on in its journey.

 

The simplest way - as always - is to find photos of the train you wish to recreate and try and figure out the patterns of marshalling on different days (if that's possible) to come up with a representative rake.

 

If it helps, what little we've been able to glean from researching similar trains for Grantham is that, after the more important trains, such as the Scotch Goods and the Fish trains, there were a lot of Peterborough (New England) to York (Dringhouses) services for the more generally traffic. This is classic railway 'hub and spoke' operation whereby traffic would converge on a strategic marshalling yard and be formed up for onward travel elsewhere.

 

Hope that helps a bit. I can see that a new reply has just been added; I wonder if that was Mike just beating me to it?

Edited January 6, 2017 by LNER4479

[APOLLO]

 

Tony the loco in the photo above should should have been a Thompson A2/3, either 60515 Sun Stream or 60523 Sun Castle !!

 

You certainly have a Steady Aim (60512) with your camera !!.

 

Brit 15

[Headstock]

Thanks Mike,

 

I wonder on occasions how 'accurate' my depictions of goods trains are on Little Bytham. Some years ago, the late Andy Rush visited and set me straight on how wrong I'd made up some of my formations - I quickly acted upon this. For instance, fruit vans on the main line; 'Highly-unlikely' said he, 'Put them on the M&GNR.' 

 

Having spent hours/days/months/years making-up accurate ECML passenger train formations (using BR's official documents in part), I'd like to get the goods trains as near right as well. I tend to use prototype pictures as a guide, identifying types of wagons and inserting them into the right places in trains. I have the BR lamp code for describing trains and apply this as well as I can when 'lamping-up' locos. I've not long come across yet another picture of a goods train hauled by a loco with one lamp at 12 o'clock and one at 6 o'clock (I hope my description doesn't offend, but it's obviously one on the top bracket and one in the centre, above the coupling). Fine, because the train is a long rake of empty, unfitted minerals. However, another loco carrying exactly the same lamp code was on a rake of (what appeared to be) fitted vans. Did several of the goods train categories overlap? Please forgive my ignorance on this. I suppose similar 'anomalies' (if that's what they are) occurred on passenger trains, with long trains of gangwayed stock with the loco carrying a single lamp at the top and shorter trains of non-gangwayed stock with the loco showing Class 1 lamps. 

 

One thing I am doing as a matter of priority is fitting white/red lamps to the outsides of my brake vans when they're behind stock which is non-fitted. 

 

Good evening Tony

 

I feel the same way as regards goods trains. A number of people have pointed out what a neglected subject it is but nothing has been covered in much depth on the thread. I would be interested to hear what Andy Rush had to say, also what was the story with the fruit vans?

[TrevorP1]

I have no technical training in photography, I'm very much 'seat of the pants', so hopefully a professional will be along to help us soon! However... The light on the subject varies with the angle of the sun. As you observe, midday light can be more flattering but less 'interesting' . A low sun and, come to that winter sun, can make for much more vibrant images but equally less flattering to certain subjects. To quote the song Maggie May "The morning sun when it's in your face really shows your age".

 

The colours of sunsets and sunrise are caused by atmospheric pollution, man made or otherwise, so that brilliant red sunset is likely 'man made'. Sunrise can be less colourful because there is less pollution in the air at that time of the day. I would assume that your location geographically would also affect this.

 

As to your images, in the first shot the low light has caused that attractive glint along the boiler. However, I find the second one a bit visually confusing. Depending on the time of year the afternoon sun would still be relative high and it has been reflected by the window.... Not sure about that one. The first is very attractive, especially if you crop out most of that sky. Crank up the saturation and you'd have a Steam Railway centre spread!

[Clearwater]

On the subject of goods trains on preserved railways, I'm not a fan. For reasons above, they don't seem "real." What's been more interesting To me, is where a steam engine has been put on a modern freight working.

 

Whether it is 100% authentic or not, I prefer to see preserved locos working on lines they would have worked in service. As such, a Duchess on a rural branch line feels wrong - I prefer a passenger charter over Shap or leaving Euston behind a Duchess was great. But a prairie on the Severn Valley is "right." I'm not a fan of my nearest heritage line, the Epping Ongar. I'd rather ride that behind an ex-LNER loco than a large prairie. Equally the colours jar against those of the fixed infrastructure.

 

David

[Tony Teague]

Hi Tony

 

Very nice photo, Great Central Railway I believe.

 

Regards

 

David

 

David

Thanks - Yes, GCR south of Loughborough.

 

 

Tony,

 

That's very impressive. 

 

Was the 8F especially 'dirtied' for the photographic charter? 

 

Like you, I don't fish, dance or play darts - among loads of other things I don't do. 

 

Tony

 

Yes, at the time, the owners of this particular 8F had decided to paint it red - their choice I suppose - but they had agreed to it being temporarily pained black for photography; this was done by the organisers the night before the charter, using poster paints......it then rained, hard, so that on one side half the paint washed off, and most of the rest looked a mess - "dirtied" in your terms! So the overall look was not exactly what had been intended, but it looks pretty reasonable to me - especially in black & white.

I should add that the loco has since been repainted more permanently in black.

 

Tony

[Focalplane]

One aspect not touched on so far is the fact that in real life, distant views in smoky, grimy scenery will have reduced colour saturation compated with close up objects. So, in real life, over a five track layout, the front track should be more colour saturated than the background, which could almost be smokey grey, depending on the local geography. I have seen this at a few exhibition layouts but rarely in magazine photo-shoots.