Date   

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


Re: FGE Yellow Color

Richard Hendrickson
 

On Feb 4, 2008, at 2:04 PM, Mike Brock wrote:

Larry Jackman says:

"It amuses me when people start talking about paint. No two pair of
eyes sees the same."

I think this is an overlooked element in all this. To add to it,
while there
are those that are determined to quantify color AND by necessity the
effect
of various types of light being reflected off of painted surfaces
producing
the colors being quantified, we then have the problem of determining
what
our eyes pass on to our little grey cells. It does lead, though, to
perhaps
the best...albeit very imperfect...solution AND one that we probably
use
most often. Merely take a look at an object in the great outdoors.
Perhaps a
photo will work. Then compare it to what you see on the model in its
environment. If it bothers you then somewhere in the process
something is
wrong. Work it. In the end, you'll get it into the ball park which
is, BTW,
rather large. As Larry and many others have said...there ain't no
perfect
answer. If it looks right...it is.
I'm with Larry and Mike here, and I would like to add something that,
in our (largely justifiable) concern about prototypical accuracy, tends
to get overlooked. Ultimately, what most of us are trying to do is to
run our models on an operating layout where the models look like the
real thing. We are, in short, trying to create (at least for
ourselves, and usually for others who are knowledgeable as well) the
visual illusion of reality. Hey, guys, at best it's an ILLUSION.
Details, including paint colors, that are grossly unprototypical
obviously spoil the illusion. But getting colors right isn't something
you can do mechanically with prototype paint chips or spectrographic
analysis; there are way too many variables. Research is, of course,
necessary and helpful, which is why we subscribe to this list. But in
the final analysis, what we're doing is an art form. That doesn't mean
it's mysterious or unlearnable, but the modeling equivalent of painting
by the numbers doesn't get you there. Where the effectiveness of color
at creating the desired illusion is concerned, we can trade information
and opinions but nobody has THE answer.

Richard Hendrickson


Re: Freight car weathering [Was: Jack Delano color photos]

Lawrence Rast
 

Thanks Ben, Kurt, and Paul for the suggestions.

Best,
Lawrence Rast

On Feb 4, 2008 8:45 AM, <pennsyrrfan@comcast.net> wrote:




Lawrence -

You can probably order a photocopy of the article from the NMRA's Kalmbach
Library -

http://library.nmra.org/

I believe that this is the article which you are seeking:

A Change of Scene: Modeling History's Mileposts, Vintage-dating Freight Cars
Railmodel Journal, June 1997 page 12
Finishing freight cars to match specific eras
( ATSF, C&O, CB&Q, DT&I, GT, "HENDRICKSON, RICHARD", P&LE, PAINT, PFE, PRR,
SUPERDETAIL, WEATHERING, FREIGHTCAR, PROTOTYPE, HO, RMJ )

Paul


-------------- Original message --------------
From: "Kurt Laughlin" <fleeta@verizon.net>
Well, that's not surprising as there were only 14-15,000 printed. You can
try www.railpub.com who had it for $6 + shipping in their last flyer
(1/1/08) or Ebay, which is where I got mine. Be advised there was a
follow-up article in the June 1997 issue.

KL

----- Original Message -----
From: Lawrence Rast
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, February 02, 2008 1:52 PM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: Freight car weathering [Was: Jack Delano color
photos]

I just checked the RMJ website and December 1995 is NOT available.
Any suggestions on how to obtain Richard's article?






Re: FGE Yellow Color

Mike Brock <brockm@...>
 

Larry Jackman says:

"It amuses me when people start talking about paint. No two pair of
eyes sees the same."

I think this is an overlooked element in all this. To add to it, while there are those that are determined to quantify color AND by necessity the effect of various types of light being reflected off of painted surfaces producing the colors being quantified, we then have the problem of determining what our eyes pass on to our little grey cells. It does lead, though, to perhaps the best...albeit very imperfect...solution AND one that we probably use most often. Merely take a look at an object in the great outdoors. Perhaps a photo will work. Then compare it to what you see on the model in its environment. If it bothers you then somewhere in the process something is wrong. Work it. In the end, you'll get it into the ball park which is, BTW, rather large. As Larry and many others have said...there ain't no perfect answer. If it looks right...it is.

Mike Brock


Re: Who is the manufacturer of the plastic bettendorf t section trucks?

Richard Townsend
 

Walthers makes them, too.


Richard Townsend
Lincoln City, Oregon

-----Original Message-----
From: gary laakso <vasa0vasa@earthlink.net>
To: STMFC <STMFC@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 11:52 am
Subject: [STMFC] Who is the manufacturer of the plastic bettendorf t section trucks?






I just completed decaling 4 OMI Great Northern Canton Car Company re-built hopper cars in the 73200 series and cant find the manufacturer of the plastic bettendorf t section trucks in HO.

gary laakso
south of Mike Brock
vasa0vasa@earthlink.net







________________________________________________________________________
More new features than ever. Check out the new AIM(R) Mail ! - http://webmail.aim.com


Re: Athearn 50' fishbelly flat car

Todd Stearns <toddsyr@...>
 

I've seen posts on the Erie Lackawanna list that the Tyco cars convert into decent 50' EL TOFC flats with some mods. Check their archives.

Todd K. Stearns


Re: Athearn 50' fishbelly flat car

William Keene <wakeene@...>
 

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







Re: Athearn 50' fishbelly flat car

rdietrichson
 

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]


Re: Athearn 50' fishbelly flat car

benjaminfrank_hom <b.hom@...>
 

Carl J. Marsico wrote:
"I think a kitbash of the MILW cars has already been published..."

Richard Hendrickson, "The prototype modeler's notebook: Milwaukee
Road 45 foot flatcars," Prototype Modeler, November/December 1983,
page 12.

"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."

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.


Ben Hom


Ben Hom


Re: Jack Delano color photos

Greg Martin
 

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?

-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Hendrickson <rhendrickson@opendoor.com>
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sat, 2 Feb 2008 12:51 pm
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: Jack Delano color photos







On Feb 2, 2008, at 10:02 AM, proto48er wrote:

Richard -

I wonder if the backgrounds in your Maxwell photos look correct from
a color perspective. To me, many of the Delano photos seem to have a
color shift in the background which seems to be darker than normal.
Could this be due to the use of the early Kodachrome films? Some of
his shots in the Rockies have the background mountains looking not at
all like what I have seen on location. Surely soot from locomotives
could not have darkened snow on mountains in the distant background
to such a degree. The skies are also much deeper, darker blues. I
wonder if some of this is darkroom "art" on the part of Delano. I
wonder whether he developed his transparencies in a way that
accentuated their artistic (as opposed to realistic) qualities, like
Ansel Adams did with B&W prints.
[snip]

Just wondering what the Maxwell photos show. Different photographer,
different developing regimen??
Actually, the color in the Maxwell slides seems very accurate to me.
These transparencies were shot on early ASA 10 Kodachrome and processed
by Technicolor in Hollywood; in 1941 local color processing was
nonexistent, and Technicolor worked to the highest professional
standards - their primary business was, after all, processing motion
picture film. Jack's exposures were excellent and he stored his
originals very carefully; I see no evidence in my copies of color
shift. I will add that, unlike many subscribers to this list, I spent
a lot of time hanging around railroads and rail yards in the 1940s
where the freight cars were every bit as grimy as shown in Delano's
photos.

To the terminological quibble raised by Mike Brock and others that the
steam era extended into the 1950s, when there were many more new or
repainted cars and the advent of diesels rendered the environment less
dirty, I will just say that I do, in fact, consider the '50s the
transition era, as Mike suggested. On the railroad I model, steam was
still prevalent almost everywhere in the late 1940s but was largely
gone by 1952-'53 and entirely gone by '55.

The point I keep trying to make about weathering freight car models is
that conditions on the prototype changed over time, sometimes quite a
bit over relatively short spans of time. Hence large scale
generalizations are misleading, especially when based on evidence from
later periods. Realistic aging and weathering for the late 1950s and
later is absolutely wrong for the 1930s and '40s (and, to some extent,
the early 1950s).

Richard Hendrickson







________________________________________________________________________
More new features than ever. Check out the new AOL Mail ! - http://webmail.aol.com


Re: Who is the manufacturer of the plastic bettendorf t section trucks?

Brian J Carlson <brian@...>
 

Gary;
Red Caboose has them. I have 5-6 pair looking for a new home after removal
from some PFE Reefers. Contact me off list if you are interested.
Brian Carlson


Re: X2F ...

Charlie Vlk
 

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


.


Re: Athearn 50' fishbelly flat car

Carl J. Marsico <Carlmarsico@...>
 

While on the topic of old flat car tooling, anyone know of any prototypical matches/similarities to the 50' flatcars made by Tyco, Life Like (old Life Like vs. Proto 2000, to be clear) or Bachmann? I have several of these held for "recycling" also.

CJM

----- Original Message ----
From: Jonathan Grant <jonagrant@supanet.com>
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

119141 - 119160 of 188733