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: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
Glenn
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
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
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?
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.
Dan Pikulski
www.DansResinCasting.com
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.
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.
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: 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
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.
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
For those forum members who think all the talk about posting quality pics is rubbish. Please go to the AtlasRR.com forum and look at the pics posted on their weekend photo thread. There are no flames, the thread doesn't have people bashing each other - Why? Look at the quality of the images people post. Close-ups of detail loco sideframes where you can make out ALL of the details. Nice layout photos. Shouldn't we as a group want to achieve the same quality? The posters self police themselves. They know there are high expectations and strive to meet them. There are no excuses posted by people; no it's the best I can do so get off back comments; just good quality pics.
Visit and compare.
jktrains 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.
JK,
Give it up, will you? You've been raggin' on Jeff for 2 weeks straight now. He posts something, you give him a hard time. He removes something, you give him a hard time. If it bothers you all that much, either ignore Jeff's posts or bypass the WPF thread altogether.
Your critiques (which weren't originally solicited) have turned into verbal badgering. Badgering rarely works. More often it only enrages people and only causes them to dig their heels in deeper.
Make general suggestions on how others can improve their picture taking but don't single out individuals. If folks want to improve, they will - if encouraged. Brow-beating them isn't the method to us to motivate them.
Just let it go...please?
Tom
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
Glenn,
I get to have the fun of starting on my backdrop in about a month so then I will be running here asking why mine looks so lousy. As to your question about clouds, this only applies to cumulus clouds like the ones Loathar is painting. The darker part is always first and always on the lowest part of the cloud. The darker portion under the cloud is created by the reflection of the darker surface of the earth. The rest of the cloud is basically white to light grey, with just a few areas of darker gray to indicate where one part of the cloud is growing out from the main body of the cloud.
Another thing to remember is the horizon. The further a cloud is from you, they look lower and and generally much darker. Cumulus clouds only apprear to be mostly white when they are within a few miles of the viewer. The picture of cumulus clouds below gives a good idea of the characterstics I've been talking about.
One other thing I notice in a lot of backdrops is the sky is too blue and the blue extends all the way down to the horizon. If you're modeling the desert or high plains, this can be correct but most of us are modeling somewhere in the eastern US. The sky is rarely a dark blue, especially in summer. The closer you get to the horizon, the more grey you see due to haze and humidity. This makes things off in the distance almost look like you're viewing them through fog. I think a lot of people can do OK clouds but they get the sky color all wrong and this makes the clouds unrealistic looking. Just spend some time outside looking at the real sky and you'll see what I mean.
Hyun wrote:As someone who've watched the past two WPF threads with growing dismay, JK, I agree with Tom and David. I honestly don't understand why you are on Jeffrey's case so much. So what if his photos are not up to your standards, or if he posts more than what you'd like him to--obviously he, and numerous others in this forum, enjoy them. Let it go, please.
I disagree. I'm with JK on this one. I think you guys are dillusional.
Driline wrote:I think you guys are dillusional.
Wow, Frank! Now that's a strong statement. But, then again, I guess I wouldn't know - i.e. if I'm really delusional.
Can we just get back to talking about trains again, rather than berating one another over some personal gripes?
Tom, I wonder if he meant something kinder, and more correct...that we are disillusioned.
-Crandell
Crandell,
I hope so...
Jeff, that is a vast improvement. Nice job. Which camera was that photo taken with?
I hope you don't mind a bit of friendly criticism, but I'd suggest using a thin screwdriver to pluck out the ballast adhered to the inside of the rails. You might not have gotten to that step yet, as if I recall correctly you've been working on ballast this weekend.
jeffrey-wimberly wrote:
jeffrey-wimberly wrote:A three megapixel Olympus D550Z
Ahhh... talk about warm fuzzies... great photo, Jeffrey, very evocative--especially the UP. And your PM just arrived while I was writing this. Glad it got there OK, and glad it was a cinch to figure out.
Enjoy!
jeffrey-wimberly wrote:Go tell your friends the novice shutterbug has a new toy. You know what? A five megapixel Vivitar 3935 just arrived. Now I'll really be able to do some damage.
Jeffrey, soooooooooo much better. Isn't it great to actually have some good photo equipment! Now when those tripods get to your house your really going to have some fun. Congrats!
Ray Seneca Lake, Ontario, and Western R.R. (S.L.O.&W.) in HO
We'll get there sooner or later!
You know what chaps, there are some folks on this forum that have a right to feel very proud.
Jeff, the last 2 images are a marked improvement, not just because of the camera, but because you so clearly are trying to make better compositions. Who ever had the generosity to help you out with equipment have shown themselves to be decent men and good friends.
You know what, I actually think our bud JKtrains, with whom many of us have jousted over the years, deserves to feel a little of the glow as well. IMO he absolutely meant well, in that he wants to see Jeff get better at photography, he just needs to work a little on the delivery. There is no doubt his photography advice can help any novice photographer get better.
The firestorm these past weekends, which I managed to stay out of and basically ignore, may have demonstrated some of the very worst of human traits, but perhaps it really has a silver lining after all.
Yea, Now we can finally SEE something