Military modelers have a technique where they paint a base color, brush (or spray) on some hair spray, and then do the top coat. Once it dries you can rub off the top coat where the hair spray was applied.
Steve S
arbe1948 CN Geep: http://arbe1948.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=4317107
CN Geep:
http://arbe1948.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=4317107
If most modelers were to try to replicate that look, they would tend to apply paint over the original factory paint to try to get the faded worn look.
IMO, the proper way to replicate that worn look is to remove factory paint. If you took a toothbrush dipped in 90% alcohol and rubbed strategically, you would begin to remove the factory paint and the grey (usually) plastic shell would get revealed in places.
A lot of weathering is overdone because paint is applied over existing factory new paint, making it look like exactly what it is, paint over paint.
REMOVING factory paint helps to achieve that heavily worn look, IMO.
- Douglas
CNSFDo we over-weather our rolling stock? I suspect that most of us overdid it a bit on our first few weathering attempts. Even really heavy weathering requires a very subtle, gradual approach to look realistic. So as far as the technique aspect, I'd say yes, a lot of us do tend to be too heavy-handed until our skills develop and we get a feel for it. I also did some nice-looking weathering effects on cars which turned out too much for my era - they looked like 10-15 year old paint jobs when in the era I'm modeling they would have been only 3-5 years old. Then there's the question of how much weathering should we be aiming for, and I have to side with those who insist it's situational. The Santa Fe-SP thing has already been mentioned. Look at prototype photos of Santa Fe and SP power operating over the same track in the Tehachapis, in the same era, and the difference is striking. Another important aspect is not just how much weathering but what type. In the steam era there was a lot of grime and soot, but railroads tended to repaint freight cars more frequently than today - so you want dirt, but not a lot of rust. Present-day railroads are a much less sooty environment, and the major roads tend to keep their power looking pretty good, but freight cars are rarely repainted, so you need some rust and 'patch job' paintouts on the older cars. And don't overlook graffiti - seems like nowadays new cars are often tagged before they even go into service.
The "G" word is forbidden.......
I feel it depends, on many things, not all inclusive:
Prototype
Era
Age of Equipment
Type of equipment
Location
Viewing distance
As an example, most of my locomotives get little to no weathering. I do a black grill wash for depth when and where it will show. (So, a freshly painted NS Black diesel would not get this, as black wash on a newer black diesel would just not show up.) Trucks and fuel tank get road dust, very lightly. Some older units will get exhaust soot near the exhaust stack. (GE's stacks get rust then soot, as the paint literally burns off most of these.)
I do, however, have one notable exception to this rule: WNYP 431. (Bowser Alco C430 unit.) When I submitted my review of this unit, I had one noticeable complaint: The model color is more "fire-engine red" than the real unit. This is because the model, as painted by Bowser, is in fresh paint. The real WNYP 431 is a patched unit, they received it from M&E, and patched the reporting marks, logos, and road number, while leaving the rest of the unit alone. The only place the color on the model is correct is inside where the patches are. The real unit has a lot of road grime, soot, and oil all over it, which the model clearly lacked. (Even at a distance, the real unit appears quite dirty, where the model clearly is way too clean looking at any distance.) This unit, in addition to the grills, exhaust and road dust treatment, will be getting a "grime treatment", just as soon as I work up the nerve to do more than the basics to a $300 locomotive.... (As a side note, this was the absolute first, and still the only time I have complained of a model railroad anything being "too clean looking".)
My railcars all get a light to medium fade, depending on age and paint scheme, and dust on the undersides and trucks. Boxcars get a "rusty" discolored roof, but no other cars are getting a rust treatment, with only a few prototypical exceptions. (Like a couple of covered hoppers, as shown in a prior photo.) All wheelsets get a dark, dirty appearance, with minimal rust.
For weathering, everything gets a Dullcote overspray, then I use mostly powdered pastels. (Some paint, like on the wheelsets, etc... That just do not look right with the powdered treatment.) If I do not like how the pastels turned out, a quick wash in soapy water does the trick of restoring things for another go around. (PanPastels work very well for this.)
All my track gets a rust wash on the rails, and a few random ties get "replaced" and are darker (blacker) than the rest. (On my handlaid segments, the stained ties also weather the surrounding ballast, so it appears correct.) All rail heads remain shiny.
Are some models "overly weathered" by this standard? Yes. But, the standard should not be what I make it, but what looks correct based on the above mentioned items, of prototype, era, age, type, location and distance from viewer.
So, for a yes, no, or maybe answer alone, it is a maybe, depending on the above mentioned factors.
Ricky W.
HO scale Proto-freelancer.
My Railroad rules:
1: It's my railroad, my rules.
2: It's for having fun and enjoyment.
3: Any objections, consult above rules.
I think some people do tend to over-weather a lot of their stock - I know it's always tempting to add "just a little bit more", and then before you know it, it's too much.
However, I think the bigger issue is that we don't often strike the right balance of equipment in various states of repair. There is a place for heavily weathered cars - yes, there are prototype examples for what a lot of people might initially consider "over-weathered". The problem shows up when we try to weather every locomotive and freight car to match the more heavily weathered prototype examples. There is a balance in any train you watch going by, with some locomotives utterly filthy and others with just a bit of grime on the frame, and some freight cars looking like rust buckets, and others factory fresh (even of the same road and car type).
That's what can really make a model train end up looking over-weathered - when every car that rolls by looks so consistently filthy, it doesn't match real-world experiences of watching trains go by.
This also goes along with some other people's comments that we often ignore appropriate weathering of other aspects in a scene, like buildings, vehicles, etc. It's easy to get tunnel vision when working on one model and not think about how it fits into the rest of the miniature world we're trying to create.
-Tim
I would say that often the weathering is too heavy compared with the rest of the scene. Or not done in the same, coerent way.
It then falls out that it is not in armony with the other elemets of the layout.
If a rr is one inch from bankrupcy not ony one engine/car but also tracks and buildings needs to look like it: overgrown tracks, rails in bad shape, dirt and wastes everywhere... Very challenging in any case!
The question is then only if it is fun to modell such a reality.
sebastiano
Where I happen to (?)work I saw a train of about 150-180 NEW ore cars go past my post. It sure was a pretty sight. No weathering at all. The next day these same cars returned loaded and what a differance a day made. One trip of taconite ore had aged those new cars so as to not appear new at all. Now, a couple of weeks later you can hardly tell them from the older ones.
On the other hand, while traveling alongside the RR yard of BNSF in Duluth,MN I saw them switching a tank car that the only places not rusted were the reflective stripes and an area of the stenciling on the sides. The rust had gotten under the reflective tape and they were begining to come loose. Have never seen a car in that kind of shape paint(less) wise.
So do we over do it on our own RR's? Some times "Yes" and sometimes "No" as experienced by these two examples.
God's Best & Happy Rails to You!
Bing (RIPRR The Route of the Buzzards)
The future: Dead Rail Society
arbe1948, (Bob), I think I've seen something like that before. But weathering is what we see. Just watch any of the web cams online, and you will see a variety cars in great condition, to the worst, graffitie, rust, (mostly on the PS covered hoppers), fading, etc.
So, I don't think we over weather, we try to replicate what we see.
Just my thoughts,
Mike.
My You Tube
Don't Ever Give Up
To the original question - Do I think we over weather our models - the answer would be no. However I believe (as Sheldon had said) we don't compensate for the size difference. One of my secondary hobbies is scale model ship building. Ship modelers will take the original color of their subject and lighten it (their term is "scale effect") to compensate for the scale. On models that we might say are over weathered, the modeler probably color matched against a photo or subject and applied that color to the model. When viewed on the model, because it's only 1/87th the size (assuming HO scale) of the original, the color is far to intense. Thus "over weathered". On models that people would agree on that are weathered well, the colors are more subtle or lightened from the original color to compensate for scale. Whether the modeler intentionally adjusted for scale or went with what looked right their eye, it goes back to the term "scale effect". Adjusting for the difference in scale.
dknelsonBut the colorful era began before the IPD program. In the early to late 1960s I can remember my friend Bill and I noticing the eye-popping NYC jade green cars, the Union Pacific yellow box cars with the map, the Illinois Central cars in bright orange with the new "rail" logo, the GN green boxcars with the cartoon goat, and the Santa Fe cars with the huge logo.
I remember those cars quite well.. I like the NYC Jades and GN's with the standing Rocky the goat most beautiful looking cars.
However,that not the same as the IPD era with all those colorful shortline boxcars. One couldn't swing a ball bat in a terminal without hitting five or six shortline and another 6 Railbox boxcars..
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
But the colorful era began before the IPD program. In the early to late 1960s I can remember my friend Bill and I noticing the eye-popping NYC jade green cars, the Union Pacific yellow box cars with the map, the Illinois Central cars in bright orange with the new "rail" logo, the GN green boxcars with the cartoon goat, and the Santa Fe cars with the huge logo.
James Kinkaid's Morning Sun book "Pullman-Standard Color Guide to Freight Equipment" is subtitled "The Decade of Color: 1960-1970." There are some almost outrageous paint schemes in that book - and yes since they are all builder's photos at the factory, all the cars gleam and shine like automobiles on the showroom floor.
As to the original topic, I am still not convinced most modelers over weather their cars. But it may be that those modelers who DO weather their cars (which I suspect is at best half the modelers, although that is purely an impression based on layout tours) might well be attracted to the most heavily weathered prototype cars as their patterns simply because they are the most interesting. And perhaps heavy weathering is easier to do than subtle weathering.
Dave Nelson
jecorbett BRAKIE There's another era I call the "shiny 50' boxcar era" that lasted around 2 years.. The IPD short line boxcars that was seen from coast to coast was the most colorful and shiniest boxcars I ever recall seeing other then a odd freshly painted or built boxcar. Of course there was normal road grime but,still shiny. Was this the time when they started to paint boxcars in a rainbow of colors instead of the dull boxcar red? Do you remember the approximate year this started?
BRAKIE There's another era I call the "shiny 50' boxcar era" that lasted around 2 years.. The IPD short line boxcars that was seen from coast to coast was the most colorful and shiniest boxcars I ever recall seeing other then a odd freshly painted or built boxcar. Of course there was normal road grime but,still shiny.
There's another era I call the "shiny 50' boxcar era" that lasted around 2 years..
The IPD short line boxcars that was seen from coast to coast was the most colorful and shiniest boxcars I ever recall seeing other then a odd freshly painted or built boxcar. Of course there was normal road grime but,still shiny.
Was this the time when they started to paint boxcars in a rainbow of colors instead of the dull boxcar red? Do you remember the approximate year this started?
Yes,The IPD era started in 1978 due to a shortage of boxcars.
For those that may not know IPD stands for Incentive Per Diem. Investors under National Railroad Utilization Corporation and SSI Corporation approach 300 short lines with outbound boxcar loads to justify their cars and these IPD cars was given priory loading for quick returns on their investment.
superbe Pictured is a hopper that derailed on a siding some time in 2015. This certainly justifies those who like rust. Of course most of the other cars show light weathering Bob
Pictured is a hopper that derailed on a siding some time in 2015.
This certainly justifies those who like rust. Of course most of the other cars show light weathering
Bob
That seems to be a fairly new car for having such a high amount of rust, especially confined to the panel surfaces.
I suspect that the paint used these days is not as good as paint used back in the day, or at least applied as thinly as possible.
I don't know how many rairoads would have washed their grain cars to keep them clean, so the rather high level of deterioration must be because of paint or its application.
That originally happened in the early 50's but I think Larry is refering to a more recent period of brightly painted modern 50' cars.
Sheldon
Andre,
It also seems to me that in my history timeline above I commented that the 60's and 70's was the begining of one of the worst eras of dirt and neglect...........
Not an era I care to model anyway - despite all the claims that most of us model the trains of our youth.........
PS - my travels today took me though downtown Baltimore on the Interstate highway system, which goes right above several major railroad yards, including a large rail to ship transfer yard for coal.
From the viewing distance of the expressway, all the cars looked to be in pretty good repair. Yes they were dirty, but not so dirty as to obscure the lettering or hide their actual color..........even moving coal in the gritty industrial east coast city......
ATLANTIC CENTRAL andrechapelon If you model the diesel era SP, there is NO amount of weathering that can be considered too much. http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=317718 https://swrails.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/ssw-9155-bealville-ca-7-23-77-b.jpg Andre Andre, those pictures actually support my view. Those locos are dirty, even very dirty, but they are not rusty or in disrepair. And dirty as they may be, you can still clearly see red, grey, and the lettering....... Sheldon
andrechapelon If you model the diesel era SP, there is NO amount of weathering that can be considered too much. http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=317718 https://swrails.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/ssw-9155-bealville-ca-7-23-77-b.jpg Andre
If you model the diesel era SP, there is NO amount of weathering that can be considered too much. http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=317718
https://swrails.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/ssw-9155-bealville-ca-7-23-77-b.jpg
Andre
Andre, those pictures actually support my view. Those locos are dirty, even very dirty, but they are not rusty or in disrepair.
And dirty as they may be, you can still clearly see red, grey, and the lettering.......
You don't live in SP territory. The engines in the pics were not nearly as bad as some of the ones I saw up close and personal. Weathering and mechanical maintenance (or lack thereof) don't necessarily go hand in hand. SP was notorious for engines that were absolutely filthy, rusty and looking like they belonged on a scrap line even if still operable. Some of SP's F7's were still in their original paint when they were finally traded in or scrapped in the very late 60's. As late as 1967, I saw an ABBBBA set of F's on a piggyback train near Mt. Shasta with all units still in Black Widow. There are pics of F7's in Bakersfield two years later still in Black Widow in John Signor's "Tehachapi".
As for the first generation, GP's and SD's, a number of them survived well over 40 years in regular service and looked it. In actual fact, this Willamette & Pacific ex SP SD7 http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=543219&nseq=2 doesn't look all that much different from when it was last in SP service.
In any case, the OP's question was about over-weathering, not modeling equipment that was in the process of self-destructing as it moved along. SP wasn't big into external appearences. A trip through the snow sheds over Donner or the climb up to Tehachapi through multiple tunnels could turn a freshly painted unit into a filthy mess. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wXpTRpn_fuQ says it all. BTW, Tunnel 5 is just under 1200 feet long.
Now if you were to do that kind of weathering job on a Santa Fe locomotive, the Santa Fe Railway Historical & Modeling Society would put a contract out on you. And with good reason.
I model several freelanced narrow gauge shortlines in the mountains and deserts of southern Utah, and my chosen timeframe is 1907. One big draw of that era to me is the care that was put into locomotive maintenance.
#20 is a good example.
Sister engine #19 is a bit dustier but not much, although her snowplow looks to have spent the past few months rusting in the yard before being re-mounted to prepare for the upcoming winter.
#51 is the San Pablo Valley RR's lone standard gauge engine and has a recently wiped-down Russia Iron boiler jacket, but the rest of her is a little grimier.
#16 has been in service as the yard switcher and thus her appearance has been a bit neglected lately.
Freight cars are also quite a bit different in weathering than more modern equipment, more due to their being wood than any special care.
Here are a handful of my cars. With all of my equipment, I try to keep in mind the environment it exists in - it's a dry area, so there's little rotting wood, and desert dust and sun fading are the primary weathering agents, with plenty of coal soot on the roofs of cars and locomotive cabs.
Lots of nice work in this thread by the way.
Chris
I am a lucky one. My prototype railroad keeps engines and rolling stock spotlessly clean, so little to none weathering id required to capture the prototype look. My prototype is a major tourist carrier, hauling herds of tourist from all over the world through breathtaking Swiss Alpine scenery.
The only exception to this rule were the ex Furka-Oberalp Railway boxcab electrics of the first generation, which had a rather faded look before they were retired after nearly 60 years of service.
Looking at some of the weathering presented here, my answer is yes and no. No for those who are modeling a run-down shortline at the time of the Great Depression or shortly before closure in the 1950´s or 60´s, and a yes for those who model modern day UP, BNSF, NS or CSX, which tend to care more about a "quality" look these days than in the past.
BATMAN riogrande5761 The title of the topic is "Do we over weather our locos and rolling stock? " he is looking for a yes or no, No
riogrande5761 The title of the topic is "Do we over weather our locos and rolling stock? " he is looking for a yes or no,
he is looking for a yes or no,
No
Or maybe it's yes!
Brent
"All of the world's problems are the result of the difference between how we think and how the world works."
BATMAN I think it all boils down to personal preference.
I think it all boils down to personal preference.
The title of the topic is "Do we over weather our locos and rolling stock? " So it does seem in the spirit of the topic that he is looking for a yes or no, and why, not a "do whatever floats your boat" non-response. Someone else had a similar response on the first page and it may me wonder, do people even read what the topic is about?
Rio Grande. The Action Road - Focus 1977-1983