My thought on the subject is that to strive for perfection is to advance one's skills. Every model I do I try to make it the best I possibly can and to improve upon the last one I built or learn a new skill.
Now with that in mind, sure, real railroads are nasty, greasy, rusty and beat to h$ll. Paint is infrequently applied to anything after it leaves the manufacturer, if at all. Dirt is everywhere, as are dings, bends and holes. Why do you think the NS paints their stuff black- could it be that they haul lots of coal and wisely picked a color that wouldn't show just how nasty the grunge is? I've worked on more than enough equipment that had leaking hydraulics or automatic greasers to know that such things get repaired, not cleaned.....ever. Unless something prevents a piece of equipment from operating correctly and safely, you can forget about any repairs being done- and for sure never a strictly cosmetic repair (metro systems are different animals). Just my $.02 from observations I've made from working on railroads.
The Dixie D Short Line "Lux Lucet In Tenebris Nihil Igitur Mors Est Ad Nos 2001"
wjstix One thing to keep in mind is that if a layout is set in a specific year or period, not everything should necessarily be weathered. You would have a certain number of freight cars and engines that would have recently been painted and would be in basically pristine condition. For those cars and engines you couldn't hide the mistakes under weathering.
One thing to keep in mind is that if a layout is set in a specific year or period, not everything should necessarily be weathered. You would have a certain number of freight cars and engines that would have recently been painted and would be in basically pristine condition. For those cars and engines you couldn't hide the mistakes under weathering.
Not only that, remember that you are weathering a perfectly well painted car or locomotive. Jon Grant posted a picture of his Fully Weathered PRR B6sb 0-6-0 once along with a picture of the prototype he was modeling. I pointed out that under all the grime and dirt on the prototype that the glossy out of the shop paint was still there and could be seen.
Rick
Rule 1: This is my railroad.
Rule 2: I make the rules.
Rule 3: Illuminating discussion of prototype history, equipment and operating practices is always welcome, but in the event of visitor-perceived anacronisms, detail descrepancies or operating errors, consult RULE 1!
I've had good luck with spraying the model with a very thin coat(s) of the final color, sometimes over primer, sometimes not if the final color is a flat finish (sprayed directly on the model with no primer first). If sprayed thinly enough, sometimes not all of the places are covered well, like grills and crevices and such. Then, I use an artist's brush to dry brushing my weathering color(s) where the body plastic, or primer, shows through. Any other small bare spots can be covered with dry brushing the color coat with an artist's brush. The texture difference alone between the sprayed color and the brushed color looks a bit like weathering anyway. This way, there is usually only the minimum of paint needed to cover the model.
Always use vertical strokes when dry brushing, so any texture difference looks like dirt streaks.
A matter of semantics I suppose, but in that case, I would say that weathering does improve a "bad" paint job, since the paint job did not cover the model perfectly to begin with.
When all places of the model are well covered with sprayed paint, from large smooth areas to small crevices, a lot of times the paint is applied too thickly. And if there is any poor masking or bleeding, weathering just adds to the gloppy look, IMO. Even factory paint jobs look too thick sometimes, IMO.
Using a stiff brush that makes scratches isn't that big of a deal, unless they are circular.
- Douglas
TA462 I model for both the effect AND the tiny details. Everything I've painted looks perfect from close up and from 3 feet away you can still see all the tiny detail. I've built 100's of 1/24 scale model cars and learned very early on that PERFECT paint makes the model. A turd close up is still a turd three feet away. It always will be. Some people have different standards then others when it comes to painting and it takes a very long time to master a show quality paint job.
I model for both the effect AND the tiny details. Everything I've painted looks perfect from close up and from 3 feet away you can still see all the tiny detail. I've built 100's of 1/24 scale model cars and learned very early on that PERFECT paint makes the model. A turd close up is still a turd three feet away. It always will be. Some people have different standards then others when it comes to painting and it takes a very long time to master a show quality paint job.
There is no way I can see HO scale lift rings, small grab irons, rivet detail, door handles, or minor paint flaws (like broken pin striping) from three feet away. If I don't notice it from that distance, I don't worry about it.
TA462 A lousy looking paint job in my opinion makes a model look like garbage. The base of any good model is the paint job. You can't fix a bad paint job by weathering it.
A lousy looking paint job in my opinion makes a model look like garbage. The base of any good model is the paint job. You can't fix a bad paint job by weathering it.
I model for the effect, not the minute details. Nothing I've ever painted looks perfect close up, but from three feet away I think it looks convincing enough.
My answer is because I learnt what makes a good automotive paint job and I love how a properly done model turns out. If you are going to do anything, I've always been taught to do it right.
If you can read this... thank a teacher. If you are reading this in english... thank a veteran
When in doubt. grab a hammer.
If it moves and isn't supposed to, get a hammer
If it doesn't move and is supposed to, get a hammer
If it's broken, get a hammer
If it can't be fixed with a hammer... DUCK TAPE!
eaglescout Atlantic Central: I think you lost me .....
Atlantic Central:
I think you lost me .....
You are allowed to be lost, I will not come looking for you.
Sheldon
I think you lost me on the 1:1 defect on a 1:87 model. A half inch (actual) paint run or scratch in HO would be equivalent to about 3 feet in 1:1--noticeable but not extremely distracting. A nick with a dental pick might be equivalent to a boxcar getting dinged by a piece on angle iron in real life. If the entire paint job or decals are totally bad then I would agree in should be redone or discarded. But the original thread was just saying let's not get totally upset and reject a project we are working on because it is minimally less than perfect.
The effort for paint jobs or anything else should always be the best possible, including weathering. Weathering looks like faded bloched paint but is actually some of the best work out there when done right.
Springfield PA
eaglescout I guess from what I have seen and read on this forum is that everything is not perfect in the real world of railroading. If a trigger happy painter gets a few runs or not enough paint on a couple spots of a giant diesel locomotive do they send it back to be stripped and repainted or send it out into service? Continue to strive for excellence in modeling but don't sweat it when little oops! happen now and then. I doubt anyone but a bolt counter would even notice and some might even think you did it on purpose so it did look banged up a little bit.
I guess from what I have seen and read on this forum is that everything is not perfect in the real world of railroading. If a trigger happy painter gets a few runs or not enough paint on a couple spots of a giant diesel locomotive do they send it back to be stripped and repainted or send it out into service? Continue to strive for excellence in modeling but don't sweat it when little oops! happen now and then. I doubt anyone but a bolt counter would even notice and some might even think you did it on purpose so it did look banged up a little bit.
Weathering won't hide a poor paint job: if it does, either the paint job wasn't that bad or the weathering is overdone. There may be the odd exception, as shown, but if the paint work is bad, it should be re-done.
Even for heavily-weathered steamers, like the BLI USRA Mike shown here, which I painted for a friend who's modelling the late days of steam...
....I start out with a paint job resembling a loco recently out of the shop, with gloss and semi-gloss finishes where they would have been appropriate...
On my mid-to-late-'30s layout, there's plenty of cheap labour available to keep the shareholders' investments looking sharp and earning money:
Wayne
On this point we are in FULL agreement.
AND, I will add that in my opinion a lot of weathering is WAY over done in the smaller scales. Consider your SCALE viewing distances and compare you finished product with prototypes viewed from similar distances. I can't see specific rust details from 80' away, why should I see them on an HO model at 1 foot away?
And in many era's before the current "run it till it rusts away" thinking, equipment would be dirty - but not deteriorated - there is a big difference.
And, one more point - also regarding scale - almost any 1:1 paint blemish on an 1:87 model is going to stand out as being completely out of scale.
I do perfect paint jobs, and VERY LIGHT weathering. My railroad has great respect for things that cost money.
Prototype anyone?
OK...let's get this straight...this is the only one I've ever seen that had this done to it...however..if done once ...and only once on any roster..I think you might get away with it...
Any argument carried far enough will end up in Semantics--Hartz's law of rhetoric Emerald. Leemer and Southern The route of the Sceptre Express Barry
I just started my blog site...more stuff to come...
http://modeltrainswithmusic.blogspot.ca/
I just do a lousy paint job and then weather the model. What's the point in doing a perfect paint job if the model is going to end up looking dirty, weather-beaten, and sun-baked?
Hi!
I think a lot of us are trying to do the very best we can when building a model - be it structure, car, or loco.
In example, I just finished the Cornerstone Modern Coaling Tower (HO) kit and IMHO it really looked terrific. But, being a coaling tower, I just couldn't put this "new looking" tower on my 50s era layout without weathering. Man, that was a hard decision, both to weather it and the actual slopping on of the various black washes, etc.
Once done, and placed on the layout, it just looked comfortable in its setting, fitting right in. And getting favorable (unsolicited) comments from the wife and #2 son, well that just was the icing on the cake.
ENJOY !
Mobilman44
Living in southeast Texas, formerly modeling the "postwar" Santa Fe and Illinois Central
We had a saying back in my hotrodding days when guys would show up with pristine restored cars. We called them "trailer queens". Just like railroads, "real hot rods have stone chips!"
Marlon
See pictures of the Clinton-Golden Valley RR
cjcrescentYeah, sometimes to be more realistic, you do have to just paint over the old scheme with the new. I can go down to the NS yard and see old southern units that were just painted black and the old southern stripes are there, the old name is there under the new scheme.
Yeah, sometimes to be more realistic, you do have to just paint over the old scheme with the new. I can go down to the NS yard and see old southern units that were just painted black and the old southern stripes are there, the old name is there under the new scheme. But there are also plenty of equipment that has had only one paint scheme, and to get it to look right before the weathering and such, it does have to be painted carefully.
While weathering does hide a myriad of mistakes, it can't hide them all. I've seen too many models where the painter was careless in the application of his base color and decals, and the weathering did nothing to hide this fact. You could still tell that the painting was done poorly and carelessly. A poor paint job can do more to "damage" the impression of realism you're trying to make with the model, whereas a paint job that has been carefully applied can enhance that same impression.
Carey
Keep it between the Rails
Alabama Central Homepage
Nara member #128
NMRA &SER Life member
Eaglescout
I think the answer to your question is that each of us models to our own standards. I like details like metal hand rails so I spend a lot of time scraping off molded details and fabricating wire replacements. I also strip my rolling stock before renaming them when it is not appropriate for the old lettering to show through the new paint. If it is appropriate for the old paint scheme to show through then I think you are modeling very accurate detail.
In any case, I think we all make the right choices for our own tastes and no-one should try to tell us otherwise. And besides, as I am sure many have heard me say before - if you run your trains faster then nobody will notice!
Dave
I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!
Why not?
The idea for me is that I want mmy layout to look as realistic as possible. If that means that some of the cars look like they have been through a few mills in their times and others look brand new..as in just out of the mfg's shop then that is what the thing is...
I model the CMStP&P through several era's. This includes transitional period (which I have 1st hand memories of). I'm sure there was probably a lot of weathering going on with the prototypes of those times but it's not in my memory. I also couldn't tell of the subtle differences in colors back then. In my mind the maroon, orange, and black were darn good looking. I try to match prototypes as best I can but if I'm a few shades off it won't be noticeable to me. As far as visitors go I doubt any will notice either unless they're fanatic.
John - W Jackson County GA
Modeling Milwaukee Road up to the 60's
For me, I always try to do the best job I can. Whether I'm modeling an old dinged up car or a brand new one, I strive to deliberately achieve the end result. That's not to say my modeling is the best because it isn't, but I try to always have it be the best that I can do to achieve the end result I desire. I'm not a perfectionist either, I use what I build without apology and try to make the next one better.
Enjoy
Paul.
Why the effort for perfect paint jobs? Because I like perfect paint on my trains!
_________________________________________________________________
unca roggie I've never worked on an actual railroad, so I have no idea how repainting happens...possibly it is done by some person who is not really a "painter"--just some schlub handed a brush and a can, and told to make the safety stripe along the engine's lower portion, stand out better.
I've never worked on an actual railroad, so I have no idea how repainting happens...possibly it is done by some person who is not really a "painter"--just some schlub handed a brush and a can, and told to make the safety stripe along the engine's lower portion, stand out better.
I once saw a fellow at the Illinois Railway Museum in Union, Illinois, hand lettering a restored passenger car. From some of the markings on the car where this guy was working, it looked like he was trying to reproduce period lettering style, and that some meticulous work was involved.
I seem to remember occasionally seeing a prototype car or locomotive whose lettering wasn't sharp, and looked like the spray got under the stencil.
I'm sure our working railroaders will have something to say about current paint/lettering practice.
Dan
What a coincidence: I noticed on a photo of a "real" train engine, that the stripes along the side of it, looked like I painted them by hand.
I DID paint a similar engine, by hand, recently, and only when I did a super macro closeup shot, and saw it displayed on my 30 inch monitor screen, did I see just how poorly a job I did of applying the paint exactly right.
That would explain the crummy job done...as for MY crummy job, well, I'm surprised (with eyesight and finger coordination getting worse by the day) that my result came out looking quite "prototype."
It depends.
Some colors, usually lighters ones, do not cover well over other, usually darker, colors.
Multiple coats of paint may obscure fine details, especially in the smaller scales.
Weathering is one thing: deep scratches, obliterated details, and evidence of the stubborn original paint job detract from appearance, and realism in ways that a proper weathering job, and intentional distressing do not.
At a certain point though, you do want to avoid overkill. I'm not sure I would take a brass brush to a plastic model, no matter how stubborn the paint was. (A fiberglass brush or a bright boy might be better choices in this instance.)
With some models, usually metal, etching the bare metal surface may be necessary to get the paint to adhere properly. There are both mechanical and chemical ways to do this.
The reality of railroads hit home when I became a 18 year old student brakeman..I was amaze at the dings,weld spots,oil and grease stains on the running board,chip and faded paint,crack door glass etc that reveal its self in workaday viewing.
I learned cars and locomotives wasn't so perfect after all.
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
That's why I didn't worry about the dents is this old Varney metal boxcar when re-working it with better details and new paint and lettering:
The same goes for this Stewart hopper: when I re-worked the grabs, ladders, and sill steps with new metal parts, I didn't worry about matching the new paint to the old - these things got repaired and replaced all the time.
...and when some home-road hoppers went through a re-numbering programme, management couldn't afford to tie them up for a complete re-paint when a quick paint-over and re-stenciling would do the job just as well: