robmcg

For all its faults I have photographed Heljan O2 63952 again and darkened the axle ends , but done precious little else to the appearance of the model. I have added a foreground from a public domain photo of a Gresley A1 at Top Shed of all places, highly improper that an O2 venture there! We all have different criteria by which we judge models, I very much like these Heljan O2s (and 47XXs for that matter), and look forward to the GN versions of the O2. My criteria are much related to compromised modelling ability, primarily old injuries . Photo taken with full-frame Canon RP with 35mm macro lens. Post-exposure editing with Paintshop Pro 6 software, about 18 yrs old I think. Here below is the other side of 63952, same camera and lens, but different lighting, predominantly the adjacent window. In some ways a more 'honest' illustration of a model than those with my added bits. p.s. I very much look forward to photographing the DJH B16/1 which I bought from Tony a few days ago and which is now winging its way to me. While I can easily do unaltered studio-style photos I suspect 61436 will also receive some virtual detail and be set into a suitable NER background.

Here is a better angle on the valve gear of 63952. As with many 00 gauge steam models the eccentric crank (is that the right term?) on the driven wheel is splayed out further than on the prototype to give clearances for rods and wheels on such as 18" radius set-track curves. To a lesser degree I presume this is true for kit-built/scratch-built engines? Either way I respectfully suggest that this is a very fine model for the low price Hattons offered it a couple of years ago and I look forward to weathering this on or one of the others I have. Needless to say the three link coupling is now hanging dutifully downwards. It is an interesting thing, the compromises made in modeling rods and valve gear.

Of course! Why didn't I add that? There would be little room left for the actual caption, but it's all well deserved.

A question if I may, having just bought a second-hand Heljan O2 and photographed it, I was mildly perturbed to see that I had neglected to set the rather beautifully-made three-link coupling on the front dangling downwards as it would normally have been. A result of a 12,000 mile journey and my clumsy box-opening. Were these couplings ever arranged upwards and backwards over the centre lamp stand, or do I need to re-photograph it? I know that in the real word in days gone by some odd things happened.... For what it's worth it cost 80 Pounds and runs like a swiss watch.

Tony, I did just two hours ago put your photo of V2 60847 on my Facebook page with this description of you in the caption; Tony Wright, the accomplished writer, editor, historian, photographer, commentator and brilliant model maker, was kind enough allow me to add smoke to his photo of his Gresley V2 60847 'St Peter's School' But I had missed out the 'husband, father, cricketer, and philosopher', and am worried I might have neglected important qualities... readers may wish to add some? The picture has 82 'likes' after 2 hours, so my readers are I suspect well impressed

On a tentative note, given my expressed opinion that one can overdo things, I couldn't resist a picture of a V2 bringing goods by fast freight to London, 1958 style.... especially since I have recently bought an RTR Bachmann TMC-weathered V2 60845... All done on the principle 'less is more'. Perhaps no smoke at all on a warm day, but the usual excuses apply, making up time, keen driver, strong engine, a V2 at speed really was a beautiful machine, especially with a substantial load. Thankyou Tony for the opportunity to mess around with your photo.

Good evening Tony, It is indeed an impressive model and yes it must have been checked by an errant slow goods or poorly-steaming preceding semi-fast, now diverted to the slow, and Kittiwake has nine minutes to recover before KX arrival 'on the dot'. Very nice to know the provenance of the model, and sorry to read about your lens. I might do a very similar pic of the other A1 going hard on the down express soon, but one wouldn't want to over-do these things, and the A4s are I think rather different in the subtleties of the exhaust shape and signature, quite a challenge.

Well I certainly could. I imagine that one in direction down trains would be 'having a go' at Stoke Bank? That up trains would either be going fast with light exhaust, or in either case, rarely, accelerating from such as signal checks. So my preference would be a down train, forgive my ignorance of Little Bytham but is that left to right or right to left in these pictures...? I like 60120.... and will have a go at that regardless, and justify the effect afterwards.. edit; by the way I was greatly impressed by the photo yesterday of the non-RTR A3 'going away' with you on the platform of LB, very faint dust raised by the train at speed, very hard to render! Here below is a very quick 'effect' with 60120 clearly going hard on a cold day... it needs tidying but was quick to do. Is that radius rod at the right angle, well 'nicked-up' but regulator well open, as per efficient A1 power?

Probably wiser to use my own originals, and even then only sparingly. While I love photography and panned images of steam at speed, I am no fan of much of the smoke added to magazine pictures at times, prefering to add it to my own clearly manipulated 'pictures'. I think I tried a few panned pics of LB some time ago but I don't think the magnificent layout needs smoke effects at all. The line between modelling and image-making is a curious thing, with suspension of reality being rather a odd thing, no doubt there are some who can explain it.

As one who was in the 1960s adept at building smooth-running Kitmaster models but for whom circumstances have left less-than-capable of building kits I can say that I am unashamedly full of admiration for those can. And those who attempy it. I used to be able to build or modify very good heads for BMC A-series engines, having a lovely natually-lit clean workshop for this 'art', and building the odd Jaguar motor, and I imagine that accomplished railway modellers would have their own particular work-space made just the way they like it. There is a sort of calming pleasure in a well-designed work space, a place to relax and create. Just my thoughts, have offered to buy the DJH B16/1 from Tony I'm very concious of the value of something built perhaps 40 years ago and still giving pleasure. Here is my adaptation of Tony's excellent photo, for which to my shame I have not sought permission, but do hope it is granted retrospectively. I have added the odd bit and disguised others with computer tools. Isn't the B16 the last 'large' engine to have ecaped the attention of major RTR manufacturers? Certainly very handsome in its NER 'let's get the work done' sort of way. Thankyou Tony.

.... In a spirit of apology and reconciliation over my earlier insensitive actions, here below is a very quick 'photoshopping' of our O4/8. I hadn't realised the pleasures of watching trains coming and going could be so beautifully presented as in this thread, Gilbert, thankyou.

Did someone mention my name ? Never fear, instead of 'improving' models with a cheap camera I have progressed to doing it with an expensive one. Currently enjoying Heljan's O2s and must thank you Tony for your contribution of many prototype photos you showed back in 2018 in I think the Heljan product thread with regard to the many and various variations in these imposing 3-cylinder machines. (I do admire the various examples or craftmanship and art shown here lately). edit; correction. The O2 photos you showed Tony were from this very thread on page 7 in 2013. Thanks again.

Glass half full or glass half empty...? I think it looks superb, straight out of the box, smooth runner.