I recently purchased a second hand HO scale Overland Models brass Union Pacific ALCO DL-640 diesel locomotive. It was not originally delivered factory painted but was “custom” painted at some stage prior to my purchase. It is painted in the usual Union Pacific Armour Yellow and Mist Gray with red pin-striping.
That painting and decaling both appear to be of quite a high quality in daylight but I have found that under fluorescent lighting the three colors change and all become much lighter hues. Not only that, but the armour yellow and the red stripes also seem to glow or have a pearlescent appearance.
I have not been able to find out what paints or matt finishing coat were used on this model.
I would be grateful if anyone can suggest what is causing this problem colour change and glowing to occur - I have assumed it is the final matt coat.
Please let me have your ideas as to the cause and any suggestions as to how I can correct the problem by removing the current matt finish and/or applying a suitable matt finishing coat rather than stripping all the paint off and starting from scratch.
It would probably be simpler to change your fluorescent lighting to “daylight” or “sunlight” tint bulbs. I have changed the tubes in my fluorescent lights at home, and am in the process of replacing track lighting CFLs to daylight bulbs as they need to be replaced at the club.
I wonder if the paint isn’t reacting to UV light from the fluoro’s. If so, perhaps changing the bulbs might fix it. The exsisting ones may be passing too much UV. Or perhaps adding UV filter sleeves over the tubes might work.
In my opinion, it would be easier and cheaper to simply re-paint the locomotive. Changing the tubes in my layout room lighting, for example, would cost at least a couple hundred bucks.
If the loco is unweathered, you might try overspraying it with an airbrushed matte or semi-gloss finish, but beyond that, I’d do the re-paint.
It sounds like whatever paints were used fluoresce under Ultra Violet (“Black”) light. Unless you are willing to completely repaint the diesel, you will need to replace your light fixtures with ones that emit less UV light. Incandescent or “Daylight” lighting should work, but be sure to bring your loco along to the home improvement store to check test it out under one of their color test lamps before you buy anything.
A quality paint job on an unpainted Overland Models’ diesel costs a lot more than $100, unless you have a friend who happens to be a professional painter. Stripping a painted model adds even more cost, and then all the windows, lights, numberboards etc. that you paid for in the cost of the custom finished model would also be trashed and need to be completely redone. Bead blasting to remove paint can also damage the fine etched details if overdone.
Change the lightbulbs, instead.
Depending upon the era, in real life, the Union Pacific red lettering and stripes are expensive reflective tape material–and are fluorescent at night–and can even knock your eyes out in daytime lighting, depending upon the sun angle. This is true even on old weatherbeaten, secondhand UP SD-60’s (recently seen in rows at Enola Yard, in PA–the red striping still is very bright in late afternoon sunlight).
If you could bring a prototype loco into your train room, its colors would not look right under the artifical lighting.
The appearence of a color can even vary greatly in natural light. For instance, to achieve the “same color” Disney has to use different paint mixes in California and Florida.
It certainly doesn’t sound to me as if it’s a quality paint job, and I figure that the modeller would do the painting himself, anyway. From what I’ve seen of the UP paint schemes, decal sets should cover pretty-well all the niceties of the lettering and the safety striping, too.
To change the lighting in my layout room, the cost would be prohibitive, as I’d likely need an additional dozen-or-so fixtures to make up for the lumens lost in changing to colour balanced tubes, plus the cost of the tubes themselves and another circuit with which to power them. Strip, repaint, and letter, doing it myself, probably about $20.00
The OP asked for suggestions, and what I suggested is what I’d be prepared to do, given the same situation. [swg]
Even simpler … if you’re not happy with it and all your other engines look fine - sell it. There’s other engines to be had out there that don’t glow in the dark.
Thank you for the lighting suggestions. Since I have yet to build my layout, I will certainly bear your lighting suggestions in mind when I get to plan the lighting.
Thank you also to those who have replied with suggestions about painting/repainting - I think that is the way I will probably proceed because the loco is a very nice example of brass work.
The original poster stated the painting and decal work appears to be high quality in the first post, so I was assuming that he was indeed correct.
Who are you to say without even seeing the model, just because the color looks odd under fluorescent lighting, that it is a poor quality paint job? How do you know?
I have owned other Overland Models diesels that also had the same “glow” to the paint finish the original poster described–and it was indeed a very high quality factory paint job in those cases (not just custom painted in this country)–that came closer to matching the correct CN bright red-orange color than most other HO models I’ve ever seen.
I too have painted my own brass models, and I learned it is better left to the professionals who do it for a living. A few are most exceptional.
In any case, the simple facts of brass collecting and trading are that most who do their own painting and decal work do not add value to the model–and will learn that when they sell–as they will lose real money and not just a modest 10% or 20% amount.
Perhaps Wayne is among the minority who actually know what they are doing, and can do a fine job, but I can not advise “rolling your own” for most people.
I had a $20,000 lessonin what not to do with HO brass over the years, so that’s where I’m coming from. In the process I also learned what not to buy and who not to buy from, but I digress…
John, while the paint initially appeared to be a good quality job, ordinary lighting, which can be found in many layout rooms (and rooms in which locomotives reside in display cases), revealed a serious shortcoming. Usually, when we buy a locomotive or piece of rolling stock, especially r-t-r stuff, we wouldn’t expect the item to take on an unusual and unacceptable appearance when viewed under common artificial lighting. So no matter how artfully the paint may have been applied, the painter, in my opinion, used an inappropriate paint, and that makes the paint job one of poor quality.
Colour perception, as evidenced by many threads here, is a very subjective thing, with many modellers claiming an inability to mix colours matching that of pre-painted equipment, yet they are somehow capable of knowing when that factory paint is “incorrect”. It’s my contention that if you can “see incorrect”, then you should be able to mix “correct”, too. [swg] I would certainly be upset if I had paid someone to paint my locomotive and discovered it to look noticeably “unusual” when placed on the layout or in a display case. I’m assuming that the OP was initially happy with the price and appearance of his purchase, and would simply like to be able to correct the deficiencies he now sees.
As for the value of brass, that’s another area of subjectivity. To a brass collector, it’s often one of prime importance, and I agree that a paint job can either increase or decrease the value. For me, the value in my brass is that it represents a prototype which I might otherwise not be able model, and if it requires re-working, either mechanically or cosmetically, I would not hesitate to do so. Mine has been cut and altered as necessary and I’ve done similar work for other like-minded modellers. For me, that is wherein lies the value, and what it would fetch on the open market is of no great consequence.&
I guess I’m just somehow just very fortunate that when my father custom cut and installed my benchwork, basement fluorescent light fixtures–and the drop ceiling–in his 70’s–he chose the very 6500 k light bulbs discussed in the one post above. I have very few issues with colors appearing differently in my basement from the store, or even outside–except of course the natural sunlight shows any and all imperfections.
I personally have to recommend the higher grade lightbulbs, as for me they seem to work quite well. I buy them by the carton–the last carton was only about $65, and I’m only half way through it, so that’s less than one carton of fluorescent light bulbs in 9 years or so since installation.
The paint colors I see on models under my lights generally are very close to the actual pilot model photos provided by some of the better manufacturers (excepting allowance for flash photography).
John, I used colour balanced tubes on a previous layout, built in the '70s and at that time paid, if I recall correctly, about $10.00 per tube. With only 8 tubes needed, it still put a sizeable dent in my hobby budget of the time. One of the main reasons for choosing that lighting was to accommodate colour photography without the need of photofloods.
On my current layout, I opted for cool white tubes based solely on their superior lumen output, and when all of the layout is in place, there will be between 48 and 56 tubes in service in a total room area of only 560 sq.ft. If I could somehow justify the expenditure, I’d add even more. While the light quality is typical of cool white, there’s enough of it to see the work which I put into the trains and layout, and it doesn’t take long for ones eyes to accept the light as “correct”. Colour photography with a digital camera is easy, as the camera (a cheap point-and-shoot type) automatically compensates for the available lighting.
I certainly wouldn’t want to deter the OP or anyone else from choosing colour-balanced lighting, but based on my experiences, it’s not the best choice for my own needs.