Telltales

[MidlandPacific]

I haven't bought any of them, but Musket Miniatures appears to have decent period figures - you might want to take a look at their website.

[jeffers_mz]

QUOTE: Originally posted by marknewton

QUOTE: Originally posted by jeffers_mz

Mark, we model 1890-1895 right now. The railroad folded around 1911 and was was officially abandoned in 1924.

Interesting - I thought had been mandated by then. Perhaps I'm mistaken about the dates?

What happened, that your railroad folded so early?

Cheers,

Mark.

The silver crash of 1893 essentially killed off the whole Red Mountain Mining District. Prior to 1893, the Sherman Act mandated that the US government bought enough silver to keep the price at or above a dollar an ounce. When it was repealed in 1893, the price dropped to roughly half that, and itwas nolonger to ship low or even medium grade ore. The larger and more productive mines were able to invest in concentrators and certain refinement techniques, and this along with the richer ore allowed them, and the railroad that served them, to limp along until dropping metal prices after WWI finished them off.

[jeffers_mz]

MAbruce, depth of field is lacking in many model RR pictures, because of lower levels of indoor lighting. In order to compensate, and to prevent camera shake/motion blur, many photographers open the iris up as wide as it will go, to get the shutter speeds up to eliminate motion blur. A tripod allows shutter speeds measured in seconds or even minutes, with the aperature stopped down tight, opening up much greater depth of field. Tripods also allow much greater care to be taken in composing the shot. I think a tripod is a must have in MRR photography. What I'd really like to see would be a tripod mounted, counterbalanced boom system, to allow for better camera placementover the edge and above the layout. I'm sure someone makes them, but being small demand items, they are liable to be expensive.

Lighting is another issue which can be addressed. Often, layout lighting is designed to yield a wash of bright light, approximating a huge bright point source at effectively infinite distance, the sun. Though this works for operations, I think you're right, the unnatural shadows produce a subtle, but definite "not real" nagging back of the mind impression. For photography, the solution would be a powerful point source, of medium size, far enough away from the layout to approximate a bright point source, and positioned like the sun. Then you have to fill the shadows with a less intense light to prevent them from going black in the image, using a fill light of variable intensity on axis with the camera lense. Finally, you need to deal with color temperature at low primary lighting angles, to simulate the blue absorption that produces red sunsets and pink dawns.

Which brings up another telltale, lighting temperature. The green cast of flourescent lighting is blatant in MRR photography. The red cast of tungsten can be dealt with, but if I saw that odd green light like flourescents outdoors in real life, I'd be running for cover. A solution there is two sets of lighting, fixed flourescent for operations, and two or three portable fixtures just for photography. You could use Walmart clamp lights (automotive section) and GE "Reveal" or "Edison" bulbs for a four light solution under $40, and just leave the flourescents off during photo sessions. I really don't recommend the Walmart clamp lights, the reflector/socket assembly is too fragile to last long, but it illustrates the principle.

Jmac69, interesting. I never thought of the relationship of detail and paint thickness before. Thanks for the new take. On forest floors, you may not like our layout, as there is not a lot of understory there. Believe it or not, above 10,000 feet, at least in SW Colorado, there's just not a lot of plant life in under the trees. I suspect it is a product of the altitude, shorter growing season, and heavy pine duff under the trees. Out in the open there can be areas of heavy vegetation, but oftentimes, little more than a quarter inch of fine lichens. Down in more normal realms, I agree, the forest floor is often buried beneath a double, or even triple canpoy jungle.

MrBeasley, my mistake, that should have read DMP, which is short for Dyna Model Products. Page 668 in the 2006 Walther's catalog. Mostly animals, only a few human figures, but all of them very very nicely cast, painted, and detailed.

Rob, given the period our layout models, another option is military figures, from the cowboy and indians genres. Much lower cost, a much wider range of options, and boxes of diorama type figures are usually less per figure than ones for MRR. Many times a box of 50 to 100 goes for around $10. Problem there is finding stores that sell them in 1/87. My buddy, who's a former marine, does military dioramas, and he has found numerous sources, but I wouldn't know where to start. No need so far, I buy the Roco 1/87th armored vehicles, for a military train my kids enjoy, and he gets so excited painting them that he donates the figures to complete the scenes, both modern military, and old time west.

[MAbruce]

QUOTE: Originally posted by jeffers_mz

MAbruce, depth of field is lacking in many model RR pictures, because of lower levels of indoor lighting. In order to compensate, and to prevent camera shake/motion blur, many photographers open the iris up as wide as it will go, to get the shutter speeds up to eliminate motion blur. A tripod allows shutter speeds measured in seconds or even minutes, with the aperature stopped down tight, opening up much greater depth of field. Tripods also allow much greater care to be taken in composing the shot. I think a tripod is a must have in MRR photography. What I'd really like to see would be a tripod mounted, counterbalanced boom system, to allow for better camera placementover the edge and above the layout. I'm sure someone makes them, but being small demand items, they are liable to be expensive.

Yes, in film this is very true.

In digital media there is software (like Helicon) that will allow you to take a number of shots from the exact same place but at different focal points (starting close and stepping back to infinity). The more shots the better. The software then integrates them into one photo. It's simply amazing, especially for shots in N-scale. It provides a stunning depth of field.

[jeffers_mz]

I added some to my last post since you responded to it.

I'm...uneasy with Helicon. I'm not saying it crosses any lines, but it is edging close to the questionable area of digital manipulation. In adding it up for my personal standards, I try to reproduce what is atually there.

That means that exposure compensation, color balance, and reducing or eliminating camera artifacts, including depth of field issues, is "legal" in my book, but not heavy processing to create what was never there to begin with. As such, Helicon falls into the legal category in my book, but the problem is that standards have not been widely discussed and accepted by the MRR world, and until they are, any heavy number crunching may open the modeler up to later backlash as this issue moves more to the forefront.

Besides, a tripod buys you a lot of depth of field, and the added benefit of careful and selective composition makes it my first choice in resolving those questions. Digital offers impressive depth of field to start with, if properly applied, and since Helicon software requires the images to be shot from a fixed position anyway, you're already most of the way home with just the tripod. Of course, long exposure times introduce sensor noise, which brings up the subject of noise reduction algorithms, which brings us full circle back to heavy processing questions.

Judging from what I've seen in other photography interests, notably outdoor/nature photography, there is some...discussion and possible...angst...in the collective MRR future on this subject.

[MAbruce]

QUOTE: Originally posted by jeffers_mz

I added some to my last post since you responded to it.

As such, Helicon falls into the legal category in my book, but the problem is that standards have not been widely discussed and accepted by the MRR world, and until they are, any heavy number crunching may open the modeler up to later backlash as this issue moves more to the forefront.

Just out of curiosity, when you mentioned that this needs more discussion in the MRR world, who or what organizations are you referring to?

I’ve found Helicon handy in situations were a macro setting is needed to focus on a close foreground subject (in N-scale), but falls short on depth of field. Maybe it’s a limitation on my digital camera, but I’ve never been able to get decent focus on anything past the first few centimeters of the macro focal point. Helicon seems to solve this quite nicely.

I don’t consider it adding anything in that was not already there to begin with. Rather it’s just overcoming a basic depth of field issue with scales that small.

[SpaceMouse]

Jeffers,

Have you tried Musket Minatures for figures. I've gotten some really nice 19th century stuff. They have a lot of mining scenes--like men pushing carts, digging, etc.

I started this thread then worked with a client. I don't know how far back I'm commenting on.

[MidlandPacific]

QUOTE: The silver crash of 1893 essentially killed off the whole Red Mountain Mining District.

So I gather you're modeling the Silverton Railroad? I hiked the line (what I could find of it) a few years back and camped at Red Mountain Town for a night. A beautiful spot.

[MisterBeasley]

There was an issue of RMC a while back (January 2006) where Helicon was discussed in depth. Actually, I was kind of surprised to see that this was available as a "consumer level" product, rather than some $900 piece of "professional" software. To me, software and processing like Helicon is doing nothing more than compensating for one of the fundamental differences between prototype and model photography - the required focal length. On "real" pictures, a distance of 50 feet is effectively at infinity for most camera work, but in HO scale 50 feet is only a few inches away from the camera, so the optical parameters are very different. Helicon compensates for this, and this allows us to "model" the optics and depth of field of a prototype photo.

For those unfamiliar with Helicon, it is software which allows you to shoot a series of photos, all with different focal depths. It will then combine these into one composite photo, automatically selecting the best photo for each distance, so that everything appears in focus, regardless of how far it is from the camera.

I don't work for Helicon, I don't use it, and I have no financial interest in it. However, I do think it's pretty neat, and the results can be pretty impressive.

And thanks for clearing up the misunderstanding about DPM and DMP. You had me worried for a while.

[jeffers_mz]

MABruce and Mr. Beasley,

The discussion I refer to, pursued to a conclusion, would produce a general attitude, and responses to certain subjects, a general body of attitude, that I do not see here at this forum. I believe I have seen instances of such discussion, but it has yet to coalesce into either generally held standards, or even armed camps of differing opinion.

Because I've observed that process in other fields, and because my boss lost his job over "photo-editing" (short of daily feature pics for a paper, he burned in a diamond shaped kite that over-exposure had vanished, and was fired when the kite flyers wrote in to say it was actually a box kite) a long time ago, I am perhaps more sensitive to the subject than warranted.

Until the entire subject becomes old hat, say, like the question of knuckle versus all other coupler types, I prefer to avoid ALL algorithm based photograpic processing, other than what has been deemed "legal" processing in a film and chemicals darkroom. This is a practical, rather than ethical decision. If I establish a collection of work over the course of years that is later determined to be "illegal" I am committed, however, unprocessed work can always be processed later on.

That is a personal decision, and as noted, I think the Helicon process violates no ethical standard, unless taken to extremes that the human eye could never accomplish. I will say that I am less than satisfied at what can be accomplished with a tripod and minimal aperature at extreme close range, but part of that stems from the f/16 minimum aperature on my digi-cam.

On further reflection, I think my hesitation with this process is that it requires multiple images to achieve the effect. In the darkroom, that is a no-no unless the product is specifically labelled as a print derived from multiple exposures.

These are deep waters. Digital opens so many new doors that it is difficult to define standards, and because of that, for now I'll err on the side of caution. As for other's work, I don't think I would feel "cheated" if a Helicon derived image was presented without disclaimer, at least not like I would if say, the moon was added to an image from a second exposure, when no moon was visible in the original.

If this sounds a little vague, well, it is vague, not only in MRR, but humanity in general has a long way to go in confronting the digital information age, and given the complexity, I'm not sure that ethical standards will ever reach the levels of acceptance that older technologies were able to.

Chip,

That's two votes for Musket Miniatures, and your description of OT miners, difficult to find elsewhere, decides the case. I'll be looking into them ASAP.

Thanks.

Rob,

I'm jealous. I'd like to take a month and hike, no, a whole summer and do, no...maybe a couple years and hike , well actually, I'd like to just quit everything else and hike all of the San Juan road grades, but I'd start with the Silverton line. That is for sure beautiful country.

I'm not sure it's even possible to do it any more. The guy who owns the Yankee Girl now has a rep for not appreciating trespassers, since almost everyone around there is hostile to him. Not surprising, since he has a history of buying historically valuable properties, and holding them for ransom unless the Forest Service trades him land of much greater value. He burned down...I think it was the Joker Tunnel boarding house, to make his point and frankly, I don't see how he can relax outdoors these days, as the number of people around there who want to zero their rifles using him as the sight picture is approaching 100%.

In any event, he is said to be quite confrontational in dealing with tresspassers, and it's hard for outsiders like me to know exactly what he owns. Add in all the other private property up that way and it becomes hopelessly complex. However....not to put too fine a point on it...I also understand that...lone or paired hikers are...difficult to detect in such large terrain country, and...well...you know.

Can I assume you mean you camped "behind the knob"? There are up to three possible sites that could mean "Red Mountain Town" (or "City"), but from what I've seen, the best known and prettiest of them is that one, near the National Belle site. I've only been up there twice, on day trips, but would love to spend more time. I want to see the Corkscrew Turntable site, and I want to spend the night up about 12k high in Gray Copper Gulch, that is another gorgeous area.

Where did you start and finish? How much of the grade is still in place, at least enough to find and walk it? Got any pics from the trip? Yah, yah, I'm greedy, but you've been there, so you know why.

:-)

[SpaceMouse]

I guess I should have mentioned the wagon and driver in signature are Musket Minitures.

http://www.musketminiatures.com/

[MidlandPacific]

Actually, that's pretty much what I did - the summer I left the Army I had three months' accumulated leave, so I spent most of it in Colorado visiting every spot of interest to a railfan that I could find (then I went to Ecuador to ride the Guayaquil & Quito, then to Boston to find a place to live in, and then school started and I was well and truly broke).

I walked straight up the Million Dollar Highway, and in most spots the grade was gone, although you could see it in a few spots on the lower canyon. I picked it up at the Chattanooga loop and decided to try to hike it around to Red Mountain town, but the mountain was mostly loose talus and it quickly vanished, so I dropped down to the road and walked on in. I climbed up from the road at the "Red Mountain Pass" sign - there was a small bluff with a couple of houses on it and I pitched my tent back in the trees. I was a little worried about it - particularly when an engine woke me up a little after midnight - but it was rainy so whoever was up there wasn't looking for trouble. That's a good walk, though - I was in pretty good shape at the time, and I was able to do it in about four hours, but it took the starch out of me; your base elevation is over nine thousand feet, and Red Mountain Pass is, I think, ten two something.

I had meant to walk on up to Corkscrew Gulch the next day, but there was so much snow on the north side of Red Mountain Pass that I had to give it up - it was June, and I sank in the snow up to my armpits a couple of times - if I had been thinking I would've brought snowshoes, but I wasn't, so it took me a long time to work my way around to the back side of the Knob - got some photos of an old mine building there that I'll have to scan and post someday - I'd have to recheck my copy of "Rainbow Route" to see whether it was the National Belle or the Yankee Girl.

I spent a couple of days up there but I drove the SG&N and the SN - allowed me to get a lot more photos with a lot less physical effort! There's very little left of the SG&N, but there are lots of remnants of the SN.

[marknewton]

QUOTE: Originally posted by jeffers_mz

The silver crash of 1893 essentially killed off the whole Red Mountain Mining District...(snip for brevity)

Interesting history. Thanks, Jeff.

All the best,

Mark.

(Self-Confessed Rivet Counter)

[jeffers_mz]

Rob,

June's a little early, typical kickoff is the July 4th weekend, earlier than that is best in lean snow years. National Belle is behind the knob, Yankee Girl's further down, near Champion Gulch.

You can get to Corkscrew from the Gladstone side, with a possible sidetrip or overnight into the upper end of grey Copper Gulch, maybe a quarter mile out of the way. You can't get all the way down Grey Copper, it is private and gated, but the pretty spots up top are on BLM land.

I remember having lunch on the old SN grade roughly near the Howardsville turnoff, and think I remember seeing old ties there, but I'm not sure. The real hike, of course, would be the RGS grade, but I've never been over to that side, at least not yet anyway.

[MidlandPacific]

Yes - that would be a big hike - most of it on highway, these days. I did hike the "Galloping Goose Trail" from roughly Vance Junction to Lizard Head and return, and that was a pretty good walk - a surprising amount of stuff to see, too.

My favorite spot on the SN would be the remnants of Mears' big snowshed - there's still some cribbing there.