Over-weathering

[the-big-blow]

Price of the rolling stock and engines has become weathering prohibitive. I am more likely to gringe up a model I painted.

[FJ and G]

I like my trains, grits and women over-weathered.

Dave Vergun

[jfugate]

QUOTE: Originally posted by deschane

... Joe F, how do we say your last name?

We keep it simple ... Few-gait. Some folks try to call me Foo-gah-tey, or Foo-git. In school with a name that starts with f-u, well, you can imagine how inventive kids can get.

So many people have done the Foo-gah-tey pronunciation that it's become an inside family joke. My wife calls me Jo-sep-ee Foo-gah-tey when she wants to get my attention -- or just Jo-sep-ee (Josepi) for short.

[AggroJones]

QUOTE: Originally posted by rogerhensley

.... the ATSF Dash 8 in Trackside Photos...

That was excellent. When I first saw it, I thought "Bravo!".

[rogerhensley]

Two examples are the MR May 2004 - Roque Bluffs boxcars and the ATSF Dash 8 in Trackside Photos...

[dharmon]

Along the lines of what Mr Deshane stated, I think that folks tend to get ruffled when hardline statements get made. I tend to believe (and quite naively, I'm sure) that we all appreciate the differences in the hobby and individual interpretation...from rivet counters to snap track circle on the floor, whether we follow that style or not. But frequently stuff gets thrown around and statements made that cause strife, because the take away is that whatever style is wrong....when there really is no right or wrong in a hobby. A couple of examples recently .....Malcom Furlow and Dave Barrow...just about as opposite extremes as you can get..both topics have generated heated debate. Now I venture to guess only a handful of us have adopted thier styles as their own, so that means that the rest of us fall somewhere between, but folks have no problem saying that they are doing it wrong or don't merit exposure.....I don't model garden railways, but seeing the article a few months back about the guy in Canada (married to the Better or Worse cartoonist) was neat, just as reading about Furlow or Barrow, though I haven't adoted their styles either, or John Allens, or many of the "greats". But I like to see their work to draw from.

Weathering is like spice, it's done to the modeler's taste to represent his or her interpretation or goal.

[Anonymous]

I agree with you Roger about the flaming going on here. I think it's out of place. It always seems to start by someone taking a fortress like stance on their legitimate opinion of a subject. Then someone else comes along and has legitimate counter point and thus, it begins.

However, I disagree with you about the models in MR being over weathered. Maybe you could email a specific instance of what you feel representative of over weathering and I will look and see what I think. I don't doubt that there are examples, I just don't think it is a general trend. Furthermore (I am not trying to besmirch your good name or under cut your knowledge of model railroading or real railroading) I want to be able to weather my cars and locos the way I want to weather them and I don't understand how this can cause you any concerns! Since you brought this subject to life, I have addressed this question to you.

[rogerhensley]

Ok, let's get a redirect here. Over the years I have visited a number of layouts from flatlanders to some fantastic sceniced layouts. I can say in all honesty, that I never saw a layout that I couldn't find something there to like. There have been fantasy layouts. toy like layouts, and some very specific prototype layouts, and a large number of freelanced railroads. Yes, some were bright and shiny, and others were heavily weathered. They all reflected the owner's ideas and all had something good to offer. That's model railroading, folks.

I merely pointed out that MR seems to focus more on overweathered layouts, locos and rolling stock than is appropriate for the various periods represented. Yep, I still believe that. I do want to say that flaming each other over someone's model choices is really out of place. I did not start this to flame, just to make a point about an aspect of the hobby. So, let's go on from here.

[dharmon]

QUOTE: Originally posted by AntonioFP45

Hey Amigos,

Let's continue to enjoy and put the "Flaming" to rest. BTW: Doggy is o.k and has apoligized on the forum that some of you were referring to.

Onward with the hobby![:D][^][8D][:)][8)][4:-)][tup][swg][tup]

I'm not flaming Doggy. But I am done defending him. I am a big supporter of youth on the forums, but everyone has a line. There have been several young folks on these forums that have been involved with issues with other members, no names, but most seem to eventually find their happy medium. He did apologize, I will give him credit for that. That was a step in the right direction, but a step in the right direction and walking down the path are different things...We'll wait and see.

Now back to the discussion at hand. Had this been an actual emergency, you would have been directed where to tune for official information. ..........

[AntonioFP45]

Hey Amigos,

Let's continue to enjoy and put the "Flaming" to rest. BTW: Doggy is o.k and has apoligized on the forum that some of you were referring to.

Onward with the hobby![:D][^][8D][:)][8)][4:-)][tup][swg][tup]

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by orsonroy
.... What I do have a problem with is what we CALL this hobby. Model Railroading implies modeling. Are people that do no modeling really model railroaders? It also implies railroads. Are those who don't actually model a real railroad really model railroaders? (how can you model a railroad that doesn't exist?). Allen was a fine artist, craftsman, and modeler. Was he any good at representing anything but fantasyland? Nope. That's the truth, which is impossible to debate. Sorry.
And going beyond reasonable debate? Sort of like your name calling? And speaking of names, at least I'm posting mine, "Mike".

What IS my problem yesterday ?
That would be you, and everyone like you.
You represent the new brand of elitistism in the hobby, a collection of jackbooted revisionists, categorizing everyone who does not espouse your particular values and beliefs as something less than yourself. True to this genre, and according to your twisted sense of what is right, you infer, as quoted above, that all freelancers are "not really model railroaders".

I am just an average, unknown freelancer with some prototypical leanings, much like a huge number of model railroaders.Most of my inspiration over the past 50-odd years came from the truly legendary hobbyists, who were pretty well ALL freelancers, and who made vast contributions in mostly unpaid time and effort, to the hobby, ensuring the growth and development that we currently ALL may enjoy.
Their reward for this service, in this and other forums infected by the elitists, is all too frequently to be derided in thought, slandered in speech, and libelled in print.[xx(]

If "Steam is the only choice", Mr. Breyer, may yours forever be superheated and applied posterially.
Mike Robertson.

[BentnoseWillie]

I agree that one has to temper weathering efforts so as to not "caricature" the prototype. Unless it's a unit train, a cut of cars with varying degrees of weathering patterns and colours looks a lot better to my eye than a solid train of the same colours in the same patterns. That's why I try to weather equipment singly, or in small groups of similar cars (such as scrap gons or ballast hoppers).

I tend to weather to match what I see and photograph. In this part of the country the only shiny freight cars are those less than a year out of the paint shop or carbuilder. Everything else is at the least dulled from paint oxidation, and more often carries at least a light coat of dirt below sill level. Also, at least 30% of the cars have at least one tag, and about one in twenty has more elaborate graffiti.

As to the statement that only cars that sit still get dirty - on the contrary. Dirt comes from motion. Hereabouts it's mainly dust and mud kicked up by the wheels, and precipitating diesel exhaust on the roof.

[dharmon]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Roadtrp

Wow!! The flames here aren't ANYTHING compared with the 5 alarm fire next door.

I don't know the history, so I shouldn't comment. But it seems that ol' DOGGY is getting his butt nailed to the wall for the unforgivable crime of being young.

I'm sure glad I was never young. [;)]

Well..sometimes the young ones post something and they get beat up, learn from it and go on. Doggy keeps poking sticks through the bars and his allies are finding it harder and harder to stick up for him. There's being young and there's being young.

[Roadtrp]

Wow!! The flames here aren't ANYTHING compared with the 5 alarm fire next door.

I don't know the history, so I shouldn't comment. But it seems that ol' DOGGY is getting his butt nailed to the wall for the unforgivable crime of being young.

I'm sure glad I was never young. [;)]

[dharmon]

QUOTE: Originally posted by deschane

Well, this might be what the Britts would call a "bit of a sticky wickett". Tom D, I like the model! Joe F, how do we say your last name? The upset folks headen down this track, We havin' some fun now!!

Mr Deshane...grab the sticks, I'll bring the marshmellows......we got flames going here and next door at Trains......sit back enjoy the show...[:)]

[Anonymous]

Well, this might be what the Britts would call a "bit of a sticky wickett". Tom D, I like the model! Joe F, how do we say your last name? The upset folks headen down this track, We havin' some fun now!!

[orsonroy]

QUOTE: Originally posted by robmik

To Ray Breyer ;

Your intentionally inflammatory comment, classifying John Allen's work as "toy train playing" goes beyond reasonable debate, as was obviously your intent.

You insult the man, his memory, and untold tens of thousands of hobbyists, past and present, who hold John Allen's model railroading innovation, skill, philosophy, and enormous contribution to the hobby, in the highest regard.

You are a nobody, but a nobody who has some sort of axe to grind against modelers who have achieved something you never will.[V]

A cup of All-Bran in your diet, each and every day, on a permanent basis, might mitigate at least some of the effects of your condition. It will, I fear, never cure it completely. [xx(]

Mike

So what IS your problem today? So I said Allen played with toy trains. Frankly, we all do in this hobby. I would have called him an HO tinplater, but that isn't really accurate either, considering his stuff held to better scale fidelity than tinplate.

If you read my posts, I also called Allen a fantastic artist. He was, and is still probably one of the best the hobby has ever seen, at least for his generation (there are a lot of newer modelers that can produce much better cars, engines, scenery, etc. these days, but they don't have to do it from scratch. And those that do, like today's Westerfields, Hodinas and Roses are light years better than Allen).

Sorry, no axe to grind. I never met Allen, Sellios, or any of the other modelers we've mentioned in this thread, and I never will. I have no problem with anyone participating in this hobby in any way they see fit. It IS a hobby. What I do have a problem with is what we CALL this hobby. Model Railroading implies modeling. Are people that do no modeling really model railroaders? It also implies railroads. Are those who don't actually model a real railroad really model railroaders? (how can you model a railroad that doesn't exist?). Allen was a fine artist, craftsman, and modeler. Was he any good at representing anything but fantasyland? Nope. That's the truth, which is impossible to debate. Sorry.

And going beyond reasonable debate? Sort of like your name calling? And speaking of names, at least I'm posting mine, "Mike".

[jfugate]

Speaking of Santa Fe warbonnets, I was watching a video a while back, on Cajon I believe, with the 4449 steamer in front of two freshly washed SF warbonnets. The train went into a tunnel and the engineer of the 4449 sanded the flews while in the tunnel and threw soot all over those nice clean warbonnets!

Guess the ol' SP / SF rivalry isn't dead after all .... [:)]

[Roadtrp]

Any amount of weathering you would want to do on BNSF pumpkins is fine with me...

[;)][:D][;)]

[tdanneman]

I guess I'm guilty! Not so much for over-weathering a locomotive, but for de-facing a once-beautiful Santa Fe Warbonnet! I suppose it's true that someone could find many examples of newly-painted, freshly-washed or brightly-colored locomotives, freight cars or structures, but unfortunately, that may be the exception, not the rule. Especially in today's railroading. I chose to model this particular locomotive the way I remember seeing them in recent years. Sometimes these locomotives are even referred to as "Pinkbonnets." Here is a photo on Charles Biel's excellent website to show an example of a similar locomotive.

http://archive.trainpix.com/ATSF/GE/B40-8W/563C.HTM

Trust me, I always cringe when I start applying the weathering to any model. But more often than not, these are the most realistic and attention-getting models I have. I guess my point is that weathering is subjective. If you like to weather your models a little, great! If you like to weather a lot, great! Or maybe you like them out of the box. That's great too! I believe you should model in a way that makes you happy. Remember folks, Model Railroading is fun!

By the way, I bought two of those Atlas Santa Fe locomotives. One is the example pictured in Trackside Photos, the other one is very clean, bright red, and looks “showroom new.” The way most Santa Fe fans like to remember them.

Tom

[dharmon]

I guess it's been a couple of weeks without a tiff again.......so it's apparently time for another episode of "Model Railroading My Way or the Highway"

Let's see we don't like Malcom Furlow because he overdoes the art and down plays realism.........we don't like Dave Barrow because he down plays scenery and goes for operations......we don't like George Sellios or John Allen because they "over weather" or god forbid....have a dinosaur on the pike as a joke........mind you some of the folks debating this have posted negatively about all of the above.....

What gives? To each his own...it's a hobby.

[Anonymous]

To Ray Breyer ;

Your intentionally inflammatory comment, classifying John Allen's work as "toy train playing" goes beyond reasonable debate, as was obviously your intent.

You insult the man, his memory, and untold tens of thousands of hobbyists, past and present, who hold John Allen's model railroading innovation, skill, philosophy, and enormous contribution to the hobby, in the highest regard.

You are a nobody, but a nobody who has some sort of axe to grind against modelers who have achieved something you never will.[V]

A cup of All-Bran in your diet, each and every day, on a permanent basis, might mitigate at least some of the effects of your condition. It will, I fear, never cure it completely. [xx(]

Mike

[jfugate]

Everybody has their own tastes.

While I find George Sellios' work interesting, it does not inspire me the way more modern era proto-freelanced layouts do like the old/new V&O, old/new Utah Belt, Bruce Chubb's new Sunset Valley, or the L&N layouts of Rick Rideout/Gary Segel.

John Allen's work fascinated me as a new modeler in the hobby, but my interests changed to be more modern prototype over time. Now looking back at John's work it looks more tongue-in-cheek and "cutesy" than it did in my early days in the hobby.

[Roadtrp]

QUOTE: Originally posted by deschane


Disparaging some of the greats of the hobby has no honor, either.

I would never disparage the greats. As I said in a prior post, if I ever have 1% of the skill and modeling talent that George Sellios has, I will be a happy man indeed. Just the same, I don't see anything wrong with saying that I think his towns are more uniformly grungy than anything I've seen in real life. I'm not necessarily saying that is bad. Art, and I would certainly classify Sellios' work as art, is a very subjective thing. But it isn't reality any more than Picasso's figures look like real people.

[Anonymous]

Robmik, I think you have hit the nail square and hard and the job is done, in my opinion! The rail line I live closest to is the old N.P., G.N. mainline, which is now BNSF. I have to say that the Track side photo of the SF diesel looks much closer to what I see running on this line than any *** & span equipment, I really never see.

I don't understand what all this rude and pointless squabbling accomplishes! Weathering is over done/not enough weathering! Who cares, who cares, who CARES!

Disparaging some of the greats of the hobby has no honor, either.

[orsonroy]

QUOTE: Originally posted by robmik
The "rivet-counting-realism" , when it exists, is generally confined to specific pieces of rolling stock, or a foreground structure, and is a minor Special-Interest of the hobby itself.....not the actual hobby.

Definitely not true. If we "rivet counters" are such a minority in the hobby, then why have virtually every HO scale product, and most of other scales, come out with almost perfect scale fidelity and detailing? If proto accuract isn't important, why are resin manufacturers doing so well? Why have Branchline and Intermountain, which basically sell improved Athearn rolling stock, done so well? And why is Athearn ignoring their old blue box line of cars and diesels to crank out the Genesis line of accurate models? Why bother to accurately manufacture, paint and sell Highliner F-unit shells, when "most" modelers are happy with the BB F-7? Aren't all 40 foot boxcars the same?

The hobby trend is clear. While most modelers aren't proto modelers, most want to be. That's where the hobby's been heading ever since the early 1980s and the first McKean freight cars. The big money in the hobby is being spent on DCC, sound, and ever more accurate freight car models.

QUOTE:
If a layout is involved, the actual hobby is highly illusory in nature, meant to convey a "feeling" rather than represent actuality.

This is a often-used responce made by tinplaters to defend their ever-shrinking world. Of COURSE every model railroad is a representation of reality, and not a perfect scale model of reality. So what? The point of accuracy is to get as close as YOU CAN to reality, while keeping your limitations, time and experience in mind. So what if you only have nine feet between towns? So long as you're attempting something realistic, you're modeling believably, which is the whole point of proto modeling.

QUOTE:
BUT....so many good layouts have a 'realistic look"...because good modelers are conveying a "feeling" with their work.

And the best ones do this by modeling as close to reality as possible. No 12 car yards, no three levels of bridges in "el gorgo mongo", and no swaybacked stock cars.

QUOTE:
John Allen portrayed a late 1940's "Colorado" style operation....mountainous country, no frills, no money to waste, so heavy weathering showed on the OLDER home-road rolling stock, like the geared engines and narrow gauge stuff, BUT...his more modern equipment had substantially less weathering.
In the case of the G & D's crack mandarin-red passenger train, it was downright "spiffy", as would be the case in real life. [:D]

Actually, a railroad that was floundering would try to get rid of the passenger trains as fast as possible to stay as solvent as they could. That's why passenger trains came off the LV in 1960, and one reason the Rock Island went belly-up (they should have gotten rid of their trains years earlier). John Allen modeled a mish-mash of fantasy, including elephants, Mexicans at siesta time, and a stegosaurous switcher. While fun for some, that's really not "model railroading". That's "toy train playing".

QUOTE:
George Sellios' city scenery portrays run-down neighborhoods and grubby equipment during the Depression, and conveys exactly that "feeling", much as art or art-photography always seems to convey. Less weathering might well take away from the image presented.

Actually, George Sellios may have a worse grip on reality with his model railroad than did Allen. The Depression didn't look as depressing as most of think. There was a lot of cheap labor available, and people still tried to care about the way their businesses, communities and houses looked. Spend a week digging through the Library of Congress' online photo database, or the Denver Public Library's Western image gallery (also online). Look at what the 1930s REALLY looked like, and you'll see washed cars, street sweepers cleaning gutters, and fresh white paint on everything. Depression era modeling should have some of the cleanest models ever (much cleaner than modern modeling), since people mostly WEREN'T destitute and mostly DID give a damn about appearances.

QUOTE:
As for for that previous post finding fault with the weathering on the G&D or the F&SM, I don't like to see masterworks criticized just for the sake of trying to be fashionably cutting-edge, or to sound knowledgeable or authoritative.
Anyone who finds the need to be negative about the work of an Allen or a Sellios, to try and make a point, means they HAVE no point.
regards;
Mike

Ever notice that the Mona Lisa doesn't have eyebrows? Or that Da Vinci has no clue about power-to-weight ratios in any of his flying machine plans? Just because someone comes up with good ideas, is well publicized, and is well liked, doesn't mean that what they're doing is anything more than creative expression. And why shouldn't we critisize? In modeling, you should look at EVERYTHING from three perspectives; technical perfection, artistic ability, and realism. I've seen models that have been measured out exactly from a real freight car, but don't "look" like the real thing. I've also seen simple cardboard buildings that look better than most craftsman kits.

[Anonymous]

Here's a link that will give newbies a few ideas on weathering, balasting and scenery.
http://www.gingerb.com/cnj_back-track.htm

[Anonymous]

Roadtrp: I don't think there really IS any incongruity.
The "rivet-counting-realism" , when it exists, is generally confined to specific pieces of rolling stock, or a foreground structure, and is a minor Special-Interest of the hobby itself.....not the actual hobby. If a layout is involved, the actual hobby is highly illusory in nature, meant to convey a "feeling" rather than represent actuality.

-Most highly-detailed models exist in a highly compressed, non-scale setting on virtually all layouts.
-Most exceptionally detailed and/or "accurate" locomotives and cars are generally operated on semi-scale prefab track, often with Atlas turnouts that are closer to tinplate than they are to scale.
-Our trees bear little or no resemblance to actual trees, either in overall size or in leaf and limb detail...our grasses and ballasts are non-scale approximations.
-Our distances between towns are laughable, and the sizes of our yards and division points are modest indeed.
-Our mountains are puny in height, and we find excuses to build bridges where the real engineers would find ways to avoid them.

BUT....so many good layouts have a 'realistic look"...because good modelers are conveying a "feeling" with their work.

John Allen portrayed a late 1940's "Colorado" style operation....mountainous country, no frills, no money to waste, so heavy weathering showed on the OLDER home-road rolling stock, like the geared engines and narrow gauge stuff, BUT...his more modern equipment had substantially less weathering.
In the case of the G & D's crack mandarin-red passenger train, it was downright "spiffy", as would be the case in real life. [:D]

George Sellios' city scenery portrays run-down neighborhoods and grubby equipment during the Depression, and conveys exactly that "feeling", much as art or art-photography always seems to convey. Less weathering might well take away from the image presented.

I remember a rather outstanding layout from the very first issue of Great Model Railroads in 1991 : John Swanson's Nebraska Main Lines. Very well done indeed....but it had almost no weathering at all, on anything. Everything looked brand new. He was conveying his own feeling with that layout, not to my taste, but not for me to find fault either.[8D]

As for for that previous post finding fault with the weathering on the G &D or the F & SM, I don't like to see masterworks criticized just for the sake of trying to be fashionably cutting-edge, or to sound knowledgeable or authoritative.
Anyone who finds the need to be negative about the work of an Allen or a Sellios, to try and make a point, means they HAVE no point.[V]
regards;
Mike

[Anonymous]

The Trackside Photo of the bleached-out Santa Fe diesel shows there's an exception to the old rule that "Everything looks better with Warbonnet on it."

--John