It was in an earlier post about the Spectrum coaches and what some folks thought. I run some on the WTRR, both heavy weights and smooth sided coaches. I also wanted to take an IHC engine and see what I could do with it, along with an N&W “J”.
Both pictures are taken at the same f/stop-8 but I changed the lighting adjustment that is on my camera, ever so slightly.
In the second picture you can see the detail a little better. Same shot with the same f/stop of 8 but a change in lighting and shutter speed. The engine in an old IHC that I have had for ten years, it runs good, has a can motor is quiet and tracks well. But with chalk weathering I believe it looks repectable.
The “J” is ready to leave as passengers take their seat, the heavy weights are Spectrum and the smooth sides are also from Bachman made by Rivarossi years ago. The may not be MTH’s new breed but for me they are o.k.
The “J” unit is a Bachman and is weathered, it too has a can motor and runs good. It is pulling the same passenger cars and is leaving Jackson, Tennessee on the WTRR.
They may not be high end steamers but with a little work and weathering they fill the bill, run great and they really track well.
Only thing really negative about the IHC engine is the bizarre tender they used on it. I guess they years back had to widen out the front of their vanderbilt tender to fit in a large motor or something. The ones with the rectangular tender look much more realistic.
I’m using those Spectrum N&W coaches on my own rendition of the Powhatan Arrow after seeing one photo of the train with heavyweight coaches as “dead-head” cars. The Spectrum cars aren’t prototypical for N&W but I do not care! they’ll work just fine for me.
In your third picture there are two devices beside the N&W coach that are fenced off. They look like tanks with some sort of protective cover on top and with a control box to the side. Please tell those of us who are unenlightened what they are.
the headlight is just below the boiler front and above the pilot beam. The IHC loco is based on a Chesapeake and Ohio prototype 4-8-2. C&O was prone to placing the headlight low on a lot of it’s steamers.
That IHC loco was a real ‘bang for the buck’–quiet, smooth running and a very decent hauler.
Good-looking scenes, Robert, but I have to agree with dehusman regarding the weathering. Most locos active near the end of steam might have been pretty dirty, but weren’t usually so visibly rusted, especially on operating appliances such as the power reverse. I’ll give you full marks, though, for at least attempting to weather your loco, as many never get to that stage. Your subsequent attempts will, no doubt, improve.
I bought one of the IHC steamers just before they closed down. Their last locomotive the 2-10-2 was while generic still very appealing.
The engine was quite well detailed with add on parts. It is a good runner, excellent slow speed control and it is DCC ready. I only wished I had bought a couple before the very quick fire sale of their items.
These actually came from a Kibri kit and they appear to be storage tanks, so I placed them there for detail, I have had them for years when I bought a large passenger station kit which I will get a picture of and put up on the forum. In the box art they were tanks that sat beside the tracks infont of the station. I am not sure if they are fuel tanks hooked up to an underground system or if they were some power station or water storage supply that the yard crew would hook up to trains when they arrived.
Admittedly I like them as detail so I put them there and justify them as water tanks to fill up the coaches with a water supply, As they say, “works for me”.
Point well taken. It is a “bit” over done and it can be toned down. It is interesting though, in a recent Model Railroader there is an article about weathering steam engines and I thought when I read the article that the weathering was over done.
The article describes the use of airbrushing, the use of multiple paints, chalk dusting and the like with very detailed artists renderings of where to place the weathering. It seemed like a lof of trouble and again I thought the weathering was a little stark and to controlled.
What I have done can certaily be subdued, to much rust and it does look like it is heading for the scrap yard, yet I can remember the old Iselin (spelling) Yard in Jackson, Tennesse, where there were some old steamers sitting on the side tracks, still in use, but quite dirty with some rust running down from the rivets.
Not enough light, this is a brass engine with mainly chalk to give the boiled steam look, work on the engine early in the evening getting ready for a night run.
Will work on the photography, just learning how to use my camera and unstanding f/stops and exposure time especially with the recent forum discussions by experts. I have always admired your photography with the less than stark appearance in so many of your picture. Always excellent exposure, lighting, and scene set up.
Always like the tips as I am sure others do as well,
I hope you weren’t offended by my earlier comments. Some modellers prefer their trains to be in pristine condition, while some who claim that to be their preference are simply too unsure of their abilities to attempt any weathering. I have been in that position, too, and I do realise how difficult it can be to make that first attempt. And it doesn’t really matter if the model is an expensive one or not - it can be difficult to try new things and we all want to succeed if we’re going to make the attempt.
I don’t have (mercifully) a photo of my first attempt, nor of a lot of subsequent not-so-good ones either, but the success of those early attempts should be, in my opinion, not measured so much by the results, but rather by the fact that one makes the effort. That makes the next attempt a little bit easier, and each subsequent one leads not only to more confidence, but, hopefully, an increasing pool of knowledge from which to work.
I still can create a “stinker” of a weathering job once in a while and I certainly can’t claim to be an expert weathering. However, I’m comfortable doing it and satisfied with my results.
You need only please yourself with your weathering results, but I’ve also learned that what pleases you initially often appears less-so as your skills increase. Don’t be afraid to go back and redo earlier work if you feel it’s merited.
Here’s a brass loco which I painted and weathered for a friend some time ago:
I was fairly pleased with the results and he was overjoyed, so “mission accomplished”. [:-^] However, some years later I started painting and weathering my own locos to a much more well-maintained appearance. He commented one day about how much better he now liked su
Any comment you make are truly welcomed, by all means. I was looking at the composition of the photographs above, again great lighting, postioning, set up, as well as the correct camera settings.
The lighting to me is superb and how you keep it all in focus. What f stop and the type of lighting did you use for example.
Thanks for your very kind words, Robert, but I can take little credit for the photos, as both were shot with a cheap Kodak “point-and-shoot” camera, under the fluorescent lights of the layout room. The camera does have a setting for such lighting and a means to increase or decrease the apparent available light, but there’s no reference to F-stops or shutter speeds. [(-D]
That is amazing. My camera is a digital Kodak, 5-6 years old, megapixal 6.3. One can change the F stops and change aperture and focus as well as lighting exposure. I can see the changes on the screen before I shoot. Did not realize all of this until the recent threads on taking pictures.
It is truly amazing how you take such wonderful pictures with that camera. They are so professional.
