jeffrey-wimberly wrote: pike-62 wrote: Actually, there is no pinto on that rack. They are all AMC products. Gremlins, Pacers and one Hornet. I do have some of the Mercury "Pinto's" ready to load onto another rack though. I think I will "special order" the load to make sure they are not on the ends.You're thinking of the Mercury Bobcat. In reality, the 1/87 Pinto model that Wal-Mart is selling isn't the one that would explode on impact. That was the hatchback, not the wagon.
pike-62 wrote: Actually, there is no pinto on that rack. They are all AMC products. Gremlins, Pacers and one Hornet. I do have some of the Mercury "Pinto's" ready to load onto another rack though. I think I will "special order" the load to make sure they are not on the ends.
Actually, there is no pinto on that rack. They are all AMC products. Gremlins, Pacers and one Hornet. I do have some of the Mercury "Pinto's" ready to load onto another rack though. I think I will "special order" the load to make sure they are not on the ends.
Bobcat! That's the name I was looking for. I couldn't remember it for the world this morning. You're right on the wagon. They did not have the problems the hatchback had. The Bobcat is nothing more than a rebadged Pinto though and everyone who sees them on my layout calls them Pintos. I didn't buy any of the wagon Pintos as I never saw one with the porthole side window in real life. I know they did exist as a factory custom, but all of the pinto wagons I ever saw in town were the regular variety. maybe i could customize one back to a standard wagon
jeffrey-wimberly wrote: That was taken outdoors, in natural light with the camera sitting on top of a gas grill and the timer engaged. Inside my trailer is a different story. I have fluorescent lighting and it drives the camera nuts! Fluorescent lights flicker at a rate undetectable by the human eye, but the camera can see them and it constantly keeps the setting shifting. Newer cameras have a fluorescent setting. Mine doesn't. In fact, it states in the manual that fluorescent lights WILL cause problems with it. I have to use a low watt flood light held behind the camera to light the subject being photographed. Most of the time I have the camera on a flat surface and use the timer to snap the pic. Even then, it usually doesn't turn out right and must be edited.That's the answer to your mystery.
That was taken outdoors, in natural light with the camera sitting on top of a gas grill and the timer engaged. Inside my trailer is a different story. I have fluorescent lighting and it drives the camera nuts! Fluorescent lights flicker at a rate undetectable by the human eye, but the camera can see them and it constantly keeps the setting shifting. Newer cameras have a fluorescent setting. Mine doesn't. In fact, it states in the manual that fluorescent lights WILL cause problems with it. I have to use a low watt flood light held behind the camera to light the subject being photographed. Most of the time I have the camera on a flat surface and use the timer to snap the pic. Even then, it usually doesn't turn out right and must be edited.
That's the answer to your mystery.
Jeff, you know the old joke about the guy who goes to the doctor and says, "Doc, it hurts when I do this." The Doc says, "Well, don't do that."
Ray
jktrains wrote: jeffrey-wimberly wrote: -Jeff,Where's the pic of your car???? Did enough people finally tell you that it was inappropriate material to post in this thread? Completely off topic so you decide to remove the evidence?? Or maybe after thinking about it in the ER you decided it was so removed it on your own? Let's hope that was the case and that you exercise better discretion in the future. Also, how come the change in avatar? I thought you said that you've used a self-portrait for your avatar for years and had no plans on changing it? Isn't altering a post like altering history to fit your needs? Couldn't I say all the most negative, curse filled things in a post and then go back tomorrow an edit it to look like I said the nicest things on earth? If you make a post, have the kachungas to leave it up. If you need to edit for typos, go ahead, but leave the context unchanged.
jeffrey-wimberly wrote: -
-
Jeff,
Where's the pic of your car???? Did enough people finally tell you that it was inappropriate material to post in this thread? Completely off topic so you decide to remove the evidence?? Or maybe after thinking about it in the ER you decided it was so removed it on your own? Let's hope that was the case and that you exercise better discretion in the future. Also, how come the change in avatar? I thought you said that you've used a self-portrait for your avatar for years and had no plans on changing it?
Isn't altering a post like altering history to fit your needs? Couldn't I say all the most negative, curse filled things in a post and then go back tomorrow an edit it to look like I said the nicest things on earth? If you make a post, have the kachungas to leave it up. If you need to edit for typos, go ahead, but leave the context unchanged.
Dr. Frankendiesel aka Scott Running BearSpace Mouse for president!15 year veteran fire fighterCollector of Apple //e'sRunning Bear EnterprisesHistory Channel Club life member.beatus homo qui invenit sapientiam
loathar wrote:Pike-62-Like the auto rack load. I bet your a little over NMRA weight standard on it though.
My guess is I am a lot over weight. I will have to weigh it to find out. I am not too worried though as I don't think it will be making many trips around the layout untill I get some new tunnel portals. The ones I have currently will not allow the car to fit thru.
Those cherries really make that auto carrier look great. Looks like a nice layout. All you have to do is put facia on and your'e done?
I need to spend some time doing that. I still have not figured out what I want to use. Of course I still need to finish the scenery. Most of the layout is still in raw L girder or plywood.
SteamFreak wrote: Dan, I like that autorack too, but if you rear-end it does the Pinto explode?
Dan, I like that autorack too, but if you rear-end it does the Pinto explode?
Dan Pikulski
www.DansResinCasting.com
UP2CSX wrote:Loathar, nice start on those clouds. If you don't mind advice from an amateur meteorologist, you're painting cumulus clouds of the fair weather variety. They should all have bases at pretty much the same altitude and should be kind of flat and grey on the bottom. The rest of the cloud has some really nice color contrast. It should be easy to fix the bases and then you can add some feathery cirrus above them with a deck of altocumulus in between...oops, sorry, the meteorologist in me got carried away.
Jim, you might be able to help me here. is it dark part in front of white. or white in front of dark? I have been trying to paint clouds for weeks now and they end up looking like a 1 dementional blop . sometimes in a picture they look good but when your looking at them they don,t. Is it possible for you to get some paint and try? maybe you can find the secret to cloud painting so they look more real.
thanks
Glenn
UP2CSX wrote:Glenn, nothing wrong with those pine trees that I can see. Or, let me rephrase that. They look just like mine, so they must be good. I've been looking with envy at that Zephyr set of yours. How does it run? Are the interior lights really as bright as they appear in the photo? Sure makes it stand out but it kind of looks like a tanning booth if they are really that bright. Oh, and is that a {gasp!} Plasticville coaling tower I see in the back. Looks pretty good when you paint and detail it, huh?
the pine trees have a casting mark at the base. Being N scale you don,t notice them untill you get a closeup picture. learning how to use F stop will bring that out. They were also trees from my first layout I built about 12 years ago. that was a learning experance. I,ve been making trees from sagebrush. need to get a pictue of them. I just walk across the street with the clipers and clip a forest.
The Zepher. Con cor has a winner there. I always wanted one having see the real one in chicago as a kid. I think they have it restored now. The lights inside are a little bright but I think the picture make them look just a little brighter then they really are. And it runs smooth and quiet. DCC.
Thats a cheepo coal tower. A little repaint and weather goes a long way .
Thanks for the compliments
mikelhh wrote: Simon I recall seeing your thread about the construction of that ballroom. I for one wouldn't mind if it was repeated! Great stuff! Mike
Simon I recall seeing your thread about the construction of that ballroom. I for one wouldn't mind if it was repeated! Great stuff!
Mike
Thanks Mike, that is quite a compliment coming from you! It is well over a year since I made the ballroom and it never fails to get noticed when it shows up in a photo. For me it demonstrates how valuable it is to have unique models of real places on the layout. I get squeals of delight from folks who actually know the place and went to it back in the early years when Glen Miller et al played there. Pics of my model have even been published in the local newspaper. If there is interest, I would be happy to compile a construction thread.
Simon Modelling CB&Q and Wabash See my slowly evolving layout on my picturetrail site http://www.picturetrail.com/simontrains and our videos at http://www.youtube.com/user/MrCrispybake?feature=mhum
UP2CSX wrote: Simon,That was your first scratchbuilt structure? My first scratchbuilt structure was a handcar shed that finally ended up standing in for an outhouse behind a farm building. You have some real talent. I'm glad you have some pictures of how it's built. Is it permanently mounted or can you just pick it up from the layout? I'm trying to come up with some convincing store signs and your method of doing the ballroom sign gave me some good ideas. Outstanding work!
Simon,
That was your first scratchbuilt structure? My first scratchbuilt structure was a handcar shed that finally ended up standing in for an outhouse behind a farm building. You have some real talent. I'm glad you have some pictures of how it's built. Is it permanently mounted or can you just pick it up from the layout? I'm trying to come up with some convincing store signs and your method of doing the ballroom sign gave me some good ideas. Outstanding work!
UP2CSX, thanks for the compliment. I had been building the Walthers plastic kits for a while and then discovered the fun of JL Innovative laser kits. These structures gave me the courage to have a shot a scratch building. I had found a tutorial on the web that used the foam board inner structure method and tried it for this Ball room model and found it to be quick and easy method. IMO, a bit of care with measurements and the ability to hunt down parts like the correct windows (or at least good substitutes) and anyone can have a stab at scratch building.
loathar wrote:
This looks similar to the Windows XP default desktop setting (look). BTW, the desktop is not mine, it's a net picture. Anyway, I like how it's progressing for you, keep up the good work.
TONY
"If we never take the time, how can we ever have the time." - Merovingian (Matrix Reloaded)
rayw46 wrote: I'm mystified, about that photo of your car? The quality of the image is far superior to that of even your best layout photos (even the ones that have not been closeups and should have been clearer) which are consistently soft, fuzzy and mushy (no hard sharp lines which is not an indication of camera movement due to a shakey hand) with horrendous color reproduction. What's really going on here.
I'm mystified, about that photo of your car? The quality of the image is far superior to that of even your best layout photos (even the ones that have not been closeups and should have been clearer) which are consistently soft, fuzzy and mushy (no hard sharp lines which is not an indication of camera movement due to a shakey hand) with horrendous color reproduction. What's really going on here.
Modelling the UK in 00, and New England - MEC, B&M, D&H and Guilford - in H0
jeffrey-wimberly wrote:Al. I'm not a photographer and don't claim to be. .... better than what I'm capable of at this point in time with the antiquated equipment I have. I would like to be able to take pics like those, but with a 1.3 megapixel VGA camera, it ain't gonna happen. Now do me a favor and quit bashing me.
I'm mystified, about that photo of your car? The quality of the image is far superior to that of even your best layout photos (even the ones that have not been closeups and should have been clearer) which are consistently soft, fuzzy and mushy (no hard sharp lines which is not an indication of camera movement due to a shakey hand) with horrendous color reproduction. What's really going on here. Could it be that's it's time for you to quit falling back on your, "I don't have the ability," "I know they're bad but I'm getting better," "I have inferior equipment," excuses.
This is not easy to write, not because I think I'm going to get bashed (some of your most vocal online supporters have said worse that me) but because you have so often pointed out that you are disabled. That's unfortunate. But to be honest, this entire affair on this forum is getting tiresome and boring, including your part in it, and now, unfortunately, even my part in it.
Ty,
Interesting juxtaposition with that modern Amtrak train in the background and the old farmhouse and classic car out front. Nice lighting too - was it taken outdoors?
That's clever! You're going to wind up with a great sky!
loathar I think those clouds look very good individually, just not sure about the spacing of them. It's only my opinion, but I was wondering if you grouped or overlapped some the overall look might be better. Just a thought. They do look good and vaporous though.
Check last weeks thread and this weeks. Last week, one post of pics per page. This weeks thread (the first one), I made two or three pic posts on a couple of pages, on one of those it was the next day and on the others several hours had passed so I felt justified in posting a pic and keeping the thread on page one. On two or three pages I made no pic posts at all. In this thread, I made one pic post per page. I'm not counting what I posted in the diner and on other forums, that doesn't relate to this thread. Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to the ER. With all this stress I'm having really bad chest pain.
loathar wrote:First backdrop attempts. Still need to paint the trees in yet.
First backdrop attempts. Still need to paint the trees in yet.
arn,t those clouds fun to paint? I still working on my new backdrop. I have a test board I have been painting and repainting. I,m not an artist but by the time I,m done I will be. Did you airbrush your clouds? Stensil?
glenn
jeffrey-wimberly wrote: jktrains wrote: For the past two weekends you've had 2, maybe 1, people be highly critical of both the quality of the images and the excessive posting that you do.Now look. Two weeks ago, yes, I went nuts and posted a lot of pics of page. Last weekend I cut back to one pic post per page. This weekend I kept it to one pic post per page, and my pics ARE improving. What do I get? You're posting too excessively! Five pic posts in a thread of 100 posts is excessive? I don't think so! I'm trying to improve my photography skills and all I'm getting is bashing and criticism in a thread that's supposed to be fun. Instead there are people running around critiquing everything I do and apparently not taking into account what I have to work with. Maybe you should take a look at my pic post on page four and see how how I've improved by following your advice as best I can. I'm trying to learn from you and you're making me think it was a big mistake to follow your advice at all.
jktrains wrote: For the past two weekends you've had 2, maybe 1, people be highly critical of both the quality of the images and the excessive posting that you do.
For the past two weekends you've had 2, maybe 1, people be highly critical of both the quality of the images and the excessive posting that you do.
Come on Jeff. Let's go back on count the posts/pics in the original WPF thread - I did. You get 20 posts with 30 pics. The add to that the Diner posts and pics add your another 15 posts with 14 pics. Almost all repeats from the WPF thread. So I don't know how you're getting 5 pic posts in the thread and only one per page. I don't think so either.
Where has the fun honestly gone from this topic, I wish there was a way that you could make it so only photos could be posted in WPF and that non photo topics where not possible. People just don't get the "fun" part. This thing was something I would look forward too every friday. Now all it is, is post upon post bashing each other. And I don't care whose fault is whoose or who started what. It still continues, and Until people learn to accept each other and watch what they say when and where. The fun will never return to this weekly ritual.
On a lighter note: Everyone who did post pictures had some nice ones :)