Re: [Non-DoD Source] Re: [RealSTMFC] Was there ever a clinic on Delano-based paint and weathering?


Gatwood, Elden J SAD
 

Dave, Tony, and all;

 

I agree with everything being said, with the addition that while true for the PRR (I grew up in Pittsburgh in the sixties and seventies, and well remember the air, water and ground pollution), I also traveled the nation, and other area landscapes were far less filthy, but not entirely for freight cars.  Some freight cars that were more restricted were not as filthy, some western roads in particular.  And it did vary by car type.

 

I also agree with the >90% filthy observation.  Absolutely.

 

My lesson out of that was:  model from photographs of the specific car, in its period!

 

And yes, Delano IS the gold standard:  Kodachrome…..they are the only slides I took that looked like the real thing.

 

Elden Gatwood

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of devansprr
Sent: Friday, November 13, 2020 1:02 PM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Re: [RealSTMFC] Was there ever a clinic on Delano-based paint and weathering?

 

Re: Delano film color

I thought Delano's WWII color film was Kodachrome? Arguably the most accurate and stable color film of that era?

What better reference do we have?

I am not a color expert, but about ten years ago I spent some time pushing and pulling various Delano pictures to "adjust" the colors. There are a few select Delano photos where the colors are "fresh" - a just repainted caboose in bright daylight if I recall, and the running lights on an ore carrier in bright daylight.

My conclusion was that, assuming he used the same film throughout (perhaps not valid) any attempts to shift the color to something more "real" in one photo, created absurd colors in another photo.

My admittedly amateur conclusion was that his photos are effectively a gold standard for car weathering in that era. No one has shown be a better "reference" to model to for WWII.

I think the real problem is the denial by some of just how DIRTY railroad right of ways, and the equipment, were in those days. I think Tony's observation is correct - modelers are not willing to weather their cars to the full extent for the steam era, especially in the heavily industrialized east. And I mean no criticism of those modelers - I think it is tough to take a beautifully detailed model and basically wash a huge amount of soot across it...

My dad recalled that in that era a freshly washed car would be covered in soot the next morning in Pennsylvania cities. RoW pictures of the PRR main look like burned out forests, soot covering everything well beyond the immediate right of way. And the soil so acidic that nothing grew near the tracks - no need to control weeds in that era, nor to even model vegetation close to the tracks...

The key to me is that in a few of Delano's Provisio (?) distant yard photos in early spring (some cars have some snow on the roof), there appears perhaps 1 out of 200 cars that has a fresh paint scheme - that car just leaps out at you.

There is also a color movie out there of a PRR coal drag, I think from around 1940, capturing a gritty string of hoppers rolling by, until a freshly painted PRR Gla hopper flashes by - it is almost blinding - closer to international safety orange than any other color (so yes, the film was biased, but then that means every other hopper had even less "color" to it)...

I will refer to Rob's last sentence - weathering quickly becomes artistry - what does the modeler wish to convey? One possibility is to enlighten people to our industrial history, and that the environment in that era was an absolute mess - far dirtier than it is today. YMMV.

Dave Evans

Join main@RealSTMFC.groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.