Date   

Re: Jack Delano color photos

Schuyler Larrabee
 


About 30 years ago, the late Leonard Rice allowed me to borrow and
copy many of his color slides. The dates on these ranged from 1939
to the 1950's. As expected, the Ecktachromes were extremely faded
and of little value. Some of the Kodachrome slides looked like they
had been taken the day before, but many from the 1940's had a very
pronounced magenta cast. All were processed by Kodak.

John King
A friend of mine, a well-known rail author, has been for years working with old slides and
converting them to tiff images. Ektachromes do the blue shift thing, but he has more-or-less
figured out a straightforward process to Photoshopping them back to a very credible image. So, when
you say the Ektachromes were of little value, don't be quite so fast on that conclusion. Ditto for
the magenta.

SGL


Re: Jack Delano color photos

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

John King wrote:
About 30 years ago, the late Leonard Rice allowed me to borrow and copy many of his color slides. The dates on these ranged from 1939 to the 1950's. As expected, the Ecktachromes were extremely faded and of little value. Some of the Kodachrome slides looked like they had been taken the day before, but many from the 1940's had a very pronounced magenta cast. All were processed by Kodak.
John, it's well known by archivists that Ektachrome and Kodachrome survive equivalently IF and ONLY IF they have equivalent storage, meaning a cool, dark place. Ektachrome does fade more with light exposure. The magenta cast is unequal fading of the dyes, unusual in Kodachrome, but readily fixed in Photoshop, though the corrected image will show some fading. The ones you can't save are the ones which have become brownish. That means nearly ALL the color dyes have left the building. They can sometimes be usable as B&W images, though even there, contrast sometimes looks odd.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@signaturepress.com
Publishers of books on railroad history


Re: Jack Delano color photos

boyds1949 <E27ca@...>
 

About 30 years ago, the late Leonard Rice allowed me to borrow and
copy many of his color slides. The dates on these ranged from 1939
to the 1950's. As expected, the Ecktachromes were extremely faded
and of little value. Some of the Kodachrome slides looked like they
had been taken the day before, but many from the 1940's had a very
pronounced magenta cast. All were processed by Kodak.

John King
(who hopes this message will not stir up a hornets nest like the last
one I posted)


--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, Tim O'Connor <timboconnor@...> wrote:

Greg
Somewhere I read the great irony that Kodak greatly simplified
and cost-reduced developing Kodachrome film in the 80's or 90's
right at the start of the digital revolution... It sounds like
the technology can be outsourced now -- for example Dwayne's
Photo Service of Parsons KS!
http://www.dwaynesphoto.com/newsite2006/slide-film.html
Tim O'Connor


Greg Martin wrote

We must remember that Kodachrome was a system whereby the
developing was done by a series of dyes unlike other types of
slide
film. My college Photography teacher would say the machine was?
about
2 stories tall (who actually knows) and?Kodack could creat a slide
(transparency) any size they wanted including the one that was on
display in Grand Central Station?of the first man on the moon (As
he
explained supersized anyone remeber it?). Only a Kodak lab could
develop this film, it's not somethig one could do in a darkroom,
like
AGFA or Ecktachrome. It was either spot on or ruined. Kodak
handled
the chemicals in their labs around the country (some by license)
but
never in someones dark room.


Re: FGE Yellow Color

Kurt Laughlin <fleeta@...>
 

----- Original Message -----
From: Anthony Thompson

But let's not go from "impossible to match EXACTLY" to the
belief that "prototype color has no bearing on model colors." Just
tain't so, as far as I'm concerned.

----- Original Message -----

One thing we can agree on Tony, and with a parallel in military modeling. One camp tries to determine what was specified and what was used with the idea that real life variations would be in a predictible/limited band around the "official" color and that the "official" color is the best starting point for modeling weathering and other effects. Another camp has little tolerance for all that book learnin' and throws out the "when I was in the Army we used paint thinned with motor oil/housepaint/dog poop and cat pee to paint our tanks so you are foolish and wrong to even try to be right" line, along with grumbled "damn nit-pickers" comments.

The modelers of the second camp also tend to get upset when, *in a model contest*, they lose points for painting a Sherman tank some shade of chartreuse. . .

KL


Re: Jack Delano color photos

Tim O'Connor
 

Greg
Somewhere I read the great irony that Kodak greatly simplified
and cost-reduced developing Kodachrome film in the 80's or 90's
right at the start of the digital revolution... It sounds like
the technology can be outsourced now -- for example Dwayne's
Photo Service of Parsons KS!
http://www.dwaynesphoto.com/newsite2006/slide-film.html
Tim O'Connor


Greg Martin wrote

We must remember that Kodachrome was a system whereby the
developing was done by a series of dyes unlike other types of slide
film. My college Photography teacher would say the machine was?about
2 stories tall (who actually knows) and?Kodack could creat a slide
(transparency) any size they wanted including the one that was on
display in Grand Central Station?of the first man on the moon (As he
explained supersized anyone remeber it?). Only a Kodak lab could
develop this film, it's not somethig one could do in a darkroom, like
AGFA or Ecktachrome. It was either spot on or ruined. Kodak handled
the chemicals in their labs around the country (some by license) but
never in someones dark room.


Re: FGE Yellow Color

feddersenmark
 

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, Anthony Thompson <thompson@...> wrote:

Larry Jackman wrote:
You missed what I said. No mater what the blueprints called for
back
then you can not match it today. Even the 2nd batch back then did
not
match the first batch. No mater what the light is.
Quite true, Larry, but we actually are not insisting on
EXACT
paint matches. We do want to be in the right ballpark, and often
the
prototype paint chip does give a starting point. As we have
discussed
repeatedly on this list, this is less helpful for the darker
colors,
but one can get into the right kind of range for color hue and tone
with the help of prototype info.
Many SP freight car purchase specifications include a list
of
particular paint vendors, and specific color names from those
vendors,
which were considered "acceptable" matches to the SP standard color
drift panel (from Bowles). But of course, as Larry points out, even
successive batches of paint in the same factory were not IDENTICAL,
and
in any case the railroad was obviously willing to accept a certain
range of "correct" colors.
But let's not go from "impossible to match EXACTLY" to the
belief that "prototype color has no bearing on model colors." Just
tain't so, as far as I'm concerned.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@...
Publishers of books on railroad history
We should also point out that successive batches of "model" paint
are not always identical and therefore, using the same formula for a
specific color may not produce the same results. Mark


Re: FGE Yellow Color

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Larry Jackman wrote:
You missed what I said. No mater what the blueprints called for back then you can not match it today. Even the 2nd batch back then did not match the first batch. No mater what the light is.
Quite true, Larry, but we actually are not insisting on EXACT paint matches. We do want to be in the right ballpark, and often the prototype paint chip does give a starting point. As we have discussed repeatedly on this list, this is less helpful for the darker colors, but one can get into the right kind of range for color hue and tone with the help of prototype info.
Many SP freight car purchase specifications include a list of particular paint vendors, and specific color names from those vendors, which were considered "acceptable" matches to the SP standard color drift panel (from Bowles). But of course, as Larry points out, even successive batches of paint in the same factory were not IDENTICAL, and in any case the railroad was obviously willing to accept a certain range of "correct" colors.
But let's not go from "impossible to match EXACTLY" to the belief that "prototype color has no bearing on model colors." Just tain't so, as far as I'm concerned.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@signaturepress.com
Publishers of books on railroad history


Re: FGE Yellow Color

Schuyler Larrabee
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Larry Jackman

It is also impossible to remember a color.
Larry, you have not met my wife. She can go to a paint store, and look at all the samples, and come
home with the ONE sample that exactly matches the tile or the wall, or whatever it is needs
matching.

SGL


Re: FGE Yellow Color

Larry Jackman <Ljack70117@...>
 

See below
Thank you
Larry Jackman
ljack70117@comcast.net
Boca Raton FL 33434
My parents did not raise
any stupid children. They
sent the ten of us to the
neighbors to play and then
moved. They raised the four
of us that found them.


On Feb 4, 2008, at 7:29 PM, George R. Stilwell, Jr. wrote:

Hear. Hear. Matching colors is beating a dead horse.
On top of that, why are you guys settling for improper lighting and then
trying to make the paint correct for that?

Get the spectrum of your layout lighting to match sunlight. Then use the
original paint specified on the railroads blueprints.
You missed what I said. No mater what the blueprints called for back then you can not match it today. Even the 2nd batch back then did not match the first batch. No mater what the light is.
Sorry

You can't get closer
than that.

If you want to see your cars on a cloudy day, change the layout lighting,
not the paint.

Ray




Yahoo! Groups Links



AC&F tank car types

Dave Nelson
 

I see AC&F produced their type 7 car around 1907, their type 21 car around
1921 and their type 26 car around 1926. And while I've not heard of any
other "types" it's clear they continued to make tank cars ;) over the years.
So what came after the type 26?

Dave Nelson


New file uploaded to STMFC

STMFC@...
 

Hello,

This email message is a notification to let you know that
a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the STMFC
group.

File : /NP82630.jpg
Uploaded by : robmanley3006 <robev1630@sbcglobal.net>
Description : Weathered_CV_NP_Stockcar

You can access this file at the URL:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/STMFC/files/NP82630.jpg

To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit:
http://help.yahoo.com/l/us/yahoo/groups/original/members/web/index.htmlfiles

Regards,

robmanley3006 <robev1630@sbcglobal.net>


Re: Athearn 50' fishbelly flat car

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Ben Hom wrote:
Taken as a whole (and hindsight being 20/20), the 50-foot cars from Athearn's "classic blue box" line were a prototype modeling disappointment, resulting in a 50 ft gon and flatcar that have no
prototypes, a Santa automobile boxcar with an incorrect roof, and an XI/RBL that at first glance resembles a large number of prototypes, but in reality models nothing. This wouldn't be so bad if other manufacturers hadn't copied these models, producing thousands more incorrect models and incorrectly coloring the perceptions of modelers for at least two generations.
Exactly true, Ben, but I've heard that Irv Athearn liked to say that without specific prototypes he could equally paint those kits for ANY popular lettering he wanted to market (and evidence indicates that he did exactly that). So let's not think that NO ONE benefited. <g>

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@signaturepress.com
Publishers of books on railroad history


Re: X2F ...

up4024 <thekays100@...>
 

Also there was a company called Blackhawk (I think) that painted
Athearn cars, and supplied them with a set of Herald King deacals
and Kadee couplers. You applied the decals and assembled the kit.
I did a number of them before I got my own airbrush. I remember the
Kadee couplers came in a Kadee envelope, but there was only one pair
inside....

Steve Kay


--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "Charlie Vlk" <cvlk@...> wrote:

You guys are forgetting about Kar-Line, who happily supplied built-
up Athearn (and MDC) box cars RTR with Kadee #5s
painted and decaled for roadnames and paint schemes not available
from Athearn or MDC (who took about 40 years to catch on to
the idea that people didn't want to buy duplicates of the same
paint schemes and road numbers!!!).
Charlie Vlk

Jim Betz wrote:
"We didn't really see Kadees start to be supplied on cars until
real
competitors were on the market."

...except in the case of cars manufactured by Kadee, they're NOT
Kadee
couplers, but Kadee compatible couplers such as Bachmann or
McHenry,
and it wasn't so much competition driving this as patent
expiration.

Ben Hom


.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: FGE Yellow Color

George R. Stilwell, Jr. <GRSJr@...>
 

Hear. Hear. Matching colors is beating a dead horse.
On top of that, why are you guys settling for improper lighting and then trying to make the paint correct for that?

Get the spectrum of your layout lighting to match sunlight. Then use the original paint specified on the railroads blueprints. You can't get closer than that.

If you want to see your cars on a cloudy day, change the layout lighting, not the paint.

Ray


Re: Jack Delano color photos

MDelvec952
 

In a message dated 2/4/2008 11:15:12 PM Eastern Standard Time,
schuyler.larrabee@verizon.net writes:

A friend of mine, a well-known rail author, has been for years working with
old slides and
converting them to tiff images. Ektachromes do the blue shift thing, but he
has more-or-less
figured out a straightforward process to Photoshopping them back to a very
credible image.


There are several software packages that offer old-photo-repair type
features that do a fine job. Some even get rid of the dirt and scratches. It's
easy to spend hours tweaking old slides.

I remember having to do that a pixel at a time in the early 1990s -- very
time consuming.

Mike Del Vecchio





**************Biggest Grammy Award surprises of all time on AOL Music.
(http://music.aol.com/grammys/pictures/never-won-a-grammy?NCID=aolcmp003000000025
48)


Klasing Purchased by New York Air Brake

Jeff English
 

This is modern news, but it brings up the name of a manufacturer whom I
had no clue was still in existence. See:

http://www.progressiverailroading.com/prdailynews/news.asp?id=14973

It says Klasing has been in business making hand brakes since 1913.

Jeff English
Troy, New York


Re: Athearn 50' fishbelly flat car

rdietrichson
 

Bill,
Contact me offline @Rdietrichson@ec.rr.com
Rick

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, William Keene <wakeene@...> wrote:

Rick,

Interested? You bet! Please do!

Thanks,
-- Bill Keene
Irvine, CA


On Feb 4, 2008, at 1:14 PM, rdietrichson wrote:

Years ago Richard Hendrickson used this car as a basis for several
classes of ATSF flat cars. If you are interested I'll dig out the
dates and publications foe you.
Rick Dietrichson
Wilmington, NC

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "Carl J. Marsico" <Carlmarsico@>
wrote:

From the top of my memory, MILW and MP had similar flats. The MILW
flats could be shortened from the Athearn flat and have the correct #
of stake pockets. The MP flat was a few feet shorter, but has the
same number of stake pockets as the Athearn car. I think a kitbash of
the MILW cars has already been published, and I recall pics of both
the MILW and MP flats (albeit after the '30s) being included in the
Classic Freight Cars book (Volume 7, IIRC), now out of print.

My understanding is that Athearn was trying to squeeze as much as
possible out of existing molds when these cars were done to re-use
existing parts from other cars, e.g. 50' gondola and 50' box, and
there really is no exact match to the Athearn 50' flat.

Hope this helps you make some good use out of these cars!

CJM

----- Original Message ----
From: Jonathan Grant <jonagrant@>
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, February 4, 2008 1:20:37 PM
Subject: [STMFC] Athearn 50' fishbelly flat car

I have a couple of these fishbelly flat cars and was wondering if
there
was anything prototypically similar that I could kitbash them into,
that perhaps ran in the 1930s

Thahks

Jon




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Jack Delano's Kodachromes

MDelvec952
 

In a message dated 2/4/2008 10:37:27 PM Eastern Standard Time,
thompson@signaturepress.com writes:

John, it's well known by archivists that Ektachrome and
Kodachrome survive equivalently IF and ONLY IF they have equivalent
storage, meaning a cool, dark place. Ektachrome does fade more with
light exposure. The magenta cast is unequal fading of the dyes, unusual
in Kodachrome, but readily fixed in Photoshop, though the corrected
image will show some fading. The ones you can't save are the ones which
have become brownish. That means nearly ALL the color dyes have left
the building. They can sometimes be usable as B&W images, though even
there, contrast sometimes looks odd.


The sharpness goes with the color dies. If you have slides that are fading
or shifting in color -- scan 'em, copy 'em, do something to preserve what's
left.

The E6 process films -- Ektachrome, Agfa, Ansco, et. al. -- of the 1950s and
'60s used organic materials as part of the color dye formulae
(formaldehyde), and so the images will ultimately fade, discolor and dissapear even in cool
dark storage over time. Freezing them will prolong the image indefinitely,
but that's impractical for big collections. The quality of the process
chemicals has a lot to do with longevity, and cool, dark storage helps a lot. I've
got a lot of experience with older slide collections, and there are many
cases where E6s have survived well. In many more cases they have not. There is
also bacteria common in carpets that thrives on slide emulsions. Those
little fuzz-balls in the sky are actually trails of poo left from the feeding
critters. (If you see this problem, old-fashioned camera stores sell film
cleaner. If you have darkroom experience in washing exposed films, you can simply
re-wash the film; photoflo is recommended.) Too, the E6 films use three
color layers on the film base, and in the early years the three stacked color
layers left an image that wasn't razor sharp.

Kodachrome uses a K-14 process; Kodachrome is basically a black-and-white
film and the colors are added during the processing. With a single layer
reacting to light, Kodachrome was capable of more sharpness than early E6 films.
The actual K-14 process is very complicated with many steps and critical
temperature control -- impressive that it was invented ca. 1937 after years of
tinkering before Kodak bought the process -- terrific story, it's invention. It
had a very slow emulsion, ASA 10 was commercially available by 1939 or soon
after. The Wizard of Oz is said to be the first feature film released on it.
The K-14 films are much more stable over time, and the brilliance of the
1940s and '50s Kodachromes bear that out. Kodachrome had a "brassy" look over
reality and was very contrasty -- blacks blocked up quickly, which was always
a trait, and highlights could be easily lost if overexposed. Kodachrome was
its best when the colors were saturated -- 3:00 p.m. spring or fall sunlight
over the photographer's shoulder was its best, and hardcore hobby shooters
would plan to shoot in that light, or the warmer later-afternoon light. Most
shooters would underexpose a third or a stop or so for added saturation.

It's not uncommon to see a magenta hue in the early Kodachromes. That was a
processing imbalance most often related to the age of the unexposed emulsion
and not a sign of improper storage or fading. Kodachrome emulsion tended to
want to be at least 18 months old for best overall rendition -- pros
wouldn't shoot Kodachrome unless it was within a year of its expiration date. Young
Kodachrome film had a greenish look after processing, and the outdated stuff
went magenta. (If unexposed film is kept in a warm or hot place, it's aging
is accelerated.) The Kodachrome "pallet" was slightly warm, whereas the
Ektachrome pallet was slightly cool, or blue-ish. Because E6 films are actually
exposing three layers of emulsion at once, long exposures would send the
color balance in various directions -- the skies and reflected light in E6 night
shots often looked much more exciting than the real scene as a result of this
reciprocity failure. Night or low-light scenes on Kodachrome films appeared
much more realistic. (Color negative film is also exposing three color
layers simultaneously.)

What happened to Kodachome in the late 1980s was the improvements in the E6
films. Fuji led the way with brighter and more colorful synthetic dyes, but
they exaggerated colors, Fuji's Velvia being the most popular. When
TheImageBank -- the largest stock photo house -- dropped Kodachrome 25 as its
standard film of choice in favor of Velvia 50 ca. 1990, the pros left Kodachrome in
droves. Newspapers were in E6 for years, having purchased the simpler
processing equipment that could turn film around in less than an hour. Big-city
news shooters had runners assigned to them that would literally run exposed
film from the news event back to the office for processing. Fuji's Provia 100F
is about the most real looking E6 slide film available, and it's very sharp.
Provia films are manufactured in Charleston, S.C. (Industry legend has it
that the basic Velvia / Provia films were invented in New England and Kodak
turned the inventors away knowing it was going digital.)

The Kodachrome process works best when the chemistry is constantly agitated.
Partially for cutbacks, Kodak's closing of many K-14 labs actually helped
the processing. Hardcore railfans stuck by Kodachrome, but by the 1990s it was
looking flat and K-14 slides were obvious among E6 slides in a presentation.
Kodachromes from the 1970s and early '80s looked fantastic in comparison.

Surprisingly, the K-14s are more prone to fading from light than today's E6
films. I remember reading that just four hours of bright illumination can
cause a big reduction in the density of the K-14 color dies. Four hours
sounds like a lot, but it adds up if a page of slides is forgotten and left out in
an office under fluorescent lights.

The trade rags say that today's E6 films are in the range of 75 years of
color stability in accelerated aging tests. While at Railfan & Railroad I
tested and compared all of the E6 films in preparation for an era without
Kodachrome. Fuji's Provia 100F looked the most real, like the Kodachrome 25s of the
1970s. I still shoot it, but film will be a novelty very soon.

Digital imaging can do so much more than film in terms or contrast and
ranges of highlight and shadow. No more are photographers subject to the
limitations of film. New shooters shoot, and can e-mail the images instantly, or hand
the memory card to an assistant for e-mailing while the photographer keeps
shooting. Image stability is a huge problem with digital, however. Books have
been written on that subject.

Lesson, grasshopper? Store slides properly and keep the storage boxes off
the floor.

Mike Del Vecchio
(recovering photojournalist)



**************Biggest Grammy Award surprises of all time on AOL Music.
(http://music.aol.com/grammys/pictures/never-won-a-grammy?NCID=aolcmp003000000025
48)


Re: Jack Delano color photos

proto48er
 

Guys -

I appreciate all the input on this! Thank you very much.

I saw steam as a kid - my uncle who died in 1948 was a railfan and
took me around the engine terminals. I was NOT a freight car nut
then, however.

My best recent "data" on the subject was from being allowed to view
several hundred of the Kodachrome slides of Dr. Snell, a prof.
emeritus of transportation at the Univ. of Texas in Austin. Dr.
Snell was an early color photographer. He took the color photos (as
transparencies) for two or three of the pre-WWII Humble Oil &
Refining Co. calendars and was a consummate professional.

Just before Pearl Harbor was bombed, Dr. Snell was teaching
transportation in a San Francisco area university, and happened to
take a great color photo of the last Japanese ship to call at SF
prior to the attack. In fact, it was a tanker that filled up on
bunker C oil to refuel the fleet cruising to Pearl. It had a HUGE
rising sun on it, painted in red and white! The slide had true
colors in it - not at all dark.

Dr. Snell was a high ranking official in the AAR during the war. He
had a pass on the railroads, and an UNLIMITED color film alotment
throughout the war. He made trips across the country several times
during the war, taking photos to document the need for improvements
(in the form of new steam or diesel locos) for specific RR
bottlenecks. One series of his photos was of every train
that "opposed" him on a trip from Chicago to Seattle on the GN (or
NP - can't remember which) - taken from the left seatbox of a brand
new pair of FT's, to justify their purchase to the higher-ups in
gov't planning. There were at least 50 photos of steam locos and
their freight trains. Another set of photos was of the LS&I steamers
(new 0-10-2's?) working the iron pits up unbelievable grades. With
that set, he paused on the way back to D.C. to photograph the barrage
balloons protecting the locks at Sault Ste Marie! I guess they
thought the Nazis were going to invade Canada and bomb the locks!!

Dr. Snell even had several color slides of the AT&SF "Blue Goose" and
two color 35mm slides (on glass plates!) of the first ATSF diesel in
Pullman green with red and yellow front. Also had several shots of
brand new SP GS-4's lined up at LA - all noses were shiny, not pitted
like we are used to seeing on 4449. His collection was truly
amazing, and 100% color. Nothing faded in them.

I saw these slides in the mid-1980's. Dr. Snell did not show them
more than a couple of times in a 40 year period! They looked exactly
as if they were taken yesterday! I was already intensely interested
in freight cars, and freight car painting at the time, having already
measured some 200+ cars, and having long before decided to model the
1948 era. I payed CLOSE ATTENTION to the colors of the cars. The
private slide show was arranged by the late Ed Kasparek for that
reason.

None of Dr. Snell's photos looked like the Delano photos. All were
brighter in "mood", and the cars were all much less weathered than
most of the cars in Delano's shots. That is why I originally asked
whether it was possible that Delano took artistic license with some
of his photography. Snell's skies were brighter, colors less intense
and lighter than Delano's.

Since we have ruled out trick development (I am a B&W photographer
almost exclusively, and still have a large wet darkroom - that is why
that occurred to me first), perhaps Delano used a filter on his
camera that made the shots darker and more moody. Perhaps Snell used
a UV filter to achieve more natural color balance! Perhaps an IR or
UV filter might have made one set of photos more/less realistic from
a color rendition standpoint.

I wish Dr. Snell were still here to ask him! I do not know what
happened to his collection after his passing, and have only seen one
of his shots published (at Tower 55 in Ft Worth of a T&P steam loco
and ART reefer) in a T&P color book.

Something is different, darker, moodier in the Delano slides compared
to Snell's. I saw the Snell slides projected onto a screen - this
may have some relevance, but none of Dr. Snell's slides showed the
heavy weathering on the freight cars during WWII. Steam locos are
another story!

A.T. Kott



--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, tgregmrtn@... wrote:


I have seen the quality of the Maxwell slide colletion that Richard
is fortunate in having, they are absolutely stunning. I could not
dectect any color shift what so ever. The level of color saturation
on these slides is tremendous. Perhaps some Thursday evening in Cocoa
Beach Richard will grace us with a slide show of his collection, you
will all be amazed.
We must remember that Kodachrome was a system whereby the
developing was done by a series of dyes unlike other types of slide
film. My college Photography teacher would say the machine was?about
2 stories tall (who actually knows) and?Kodack could creat a slide
(transparency) any size they wanted including the one that was on
display in Grand Central Station?of the first man on the moon (As he
explained supersized anyone remeber it?). Only a Kodak lab could
develop this film, it's not somethig one could do in a darkroom, like
AGFA or Ecktachrome. It was either spot on or ruined. Kodak handled
the chemicals in their labs around the country (some by license) but
never in someones dark room.
The collection does depict freight car weather that Richard
explains. Again, luck be with us, we?may get an opportunity to see
the collection, with jaws in the suspended position...

Greg Martin


Re: FGE Yellow Color

Tom Madden <tgmadden@...>
 

Bruce Smith:

Let me add a complication to the FGE color question. Where the
other members of "our companies" cars (BRE, WFE) painted in the
same shade of yellow?
The instructions for Sunshine's FGEX/WFEX/NX wood reefer kits (34
series) says: "The yellow of these cars was reefer yellow when new, but
quickly acquired an off-yellow appearance, which is something akin to a
goldenrod. ATSF War Bonnet Yellow is an approximation, but a more
accurate mix is 10 parts reefer yellow, 1 part reefer orange. A later
coat of thin black wash will take this to the proper tone." Rudy
Stadtmiller, FGEX Historian, is cited as a source of prototype info for
the kits.

The additional instruction sheet included in Sunshine's BREX 78200
Truss Rod Reefer kit (#34.14) says: "The car sides were painted yellow.
Floquil Reefer Yellow with 5-10% Reefer Orange added will give the
proper shade of yellow". Al Hoffman and Hol Wagner are cited for
providing historical info and photos.

The PDS for the FGEX/WFEX/NX cars is copyright 1997. The BREX variation
came out in 2004. Take yer choice, but the color sounds like the same
to me.

Tom Madden

116621 - 116640 of 186225