Date   

Re: Nomenclature - Boxcar or Box Car?

Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Dick Bale wrote:
From various copies of the ARA/AAR Dictionary of Car Terms published from
1919 through 1970: box car, flat car.
Since this period appears to cover the STMFC period fairly fully, I'd say we're done here <g>. And incidentally, those terms didn't start in 1919; they go back at least as far as 1903, in the CBD copy I have.

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


Re: Nomenclature - Boxcar or Box Car?

Tim O'Connor
 

Generally, compound nouns in English have tended to drift over time
> from two words to two words hyphenated to one word, so - as is often
> the case - there is no RIGHT answer here. Richard Hendrickson


Fortunately, long before there was spell checking, "regular expressions"
were used in computing for text pattern matching. Yahoo allows this to a
small but useful degree, so that if you search for

box* [box star?]

that expression will match box, box car, boxcar, box-car, boxcars, box cars,
and so on and so forth. Thus technology helps us to overcome differences in
spelling!

Tim O'Connor


Re: Nomenclature - Boxcar or Box Car?

Tim O'Connor
 

John, it's box car.

The only authorities I know are the editors and writers of the Car Builder's
Cyclopedia of American Practice, circa STMFC era -- and the several mechanical
departments of railroads represented therein -- and they are quite clear that
the term is "box car".

I never use Microsoft spell check. I don't want to constrict my vocabulary to
that of a junior grade software engineer. :-)

Tim O'Connor


Re: NYC PS-2 covered hopper...

rwitt_2000
 

Tim O'Connor wrote:


Steve, although the cars were built by Pullman Standard, they are NOT
PS-2 design covered hoppers. They are nearly exact clones of ACF
1958cft
covered hoppers but are a tiny fraction larger, at 2000cft.

A better starting point for a model is a Bowser or Intermountain kit.

Pullman Standard built many freight cars to whatever design the
customer
wanted -- not just PS-1, PS-2, etc.
According to the information on the Fallen Flags website these cars are
dimensional the same as an earlier batch built by Despatch Shops to
NYC's unique design and are grouped together with the later ones from
Pullman-Standard (NYC 882050-882649) in the series 881200-882549.
According to the table the IL is the same, but width was 4" wider at
9"-9", than the ACF design to provide for the increased cubic capacity.
There is another series 882650-882849 that had the same capacity and
internal dimensions. The link to the table is below. It looks like there
maybe an error in the table with the series numbers such that the first
group should end at 882649, end number for the group of cars Steve
originally inquired about, not 882549.

http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/nyc/nyc-hop.html

Bob Witt


Re: Nomenclature - Boxcar or Box Car?

soolinehistory <destorzek@...>
 

--- In STMFC@..., "stevelucas3" <stevelucas3@...> wrote:

We almost need a "style guide", "style manual", or other mutually acceptable reference for this, don't we??
As has already been mentioned, we currently have one, the Car and Locomotive Cyclopedia, formerly the Car Builder's Cyclopedia, originally the Car Builder's Dictionary. The original purpose of this publication was to standardize the lexicon, a duty it performed until the last edition was published in 1997. I see in the last edition the editors were having a problem with this same issue; the entry BOXCAR is immediately followed by BOX CAR DOOR, which is used on the sides of BOX CARS. But by then, the C&LC was mostly fluff, intended more for railfans (rail fans?) than industry.

By the way, don't get me started on that awful model rail aberration, "throwing a turnout". It will provoke a discussion that will be heated and never-ending!! And Mike will have to re-open the cells in the Moderator's Gaol.
T'was me, I'd defer to the usage in the Railway Maintenance and Engineering Cyclopedia. Pick whichever edition suits your era.

Dennis


Re: NYC PS-2 covered hopper...

Tim O'Connor
 

Tony Thompson wrote

> ... I would be willing to bet that no one but Pullman-Standard built PS-2s,
> not even Despatch Shops. (Though Greenville, if memory serves, did make a
> very similar car to the PS-2.)

Greenville made some near-perfect clones, and ACF made cars that came very
close to being clones of the 2003cft PS-2. The cloning continued with larger
cars too. So these NYC cars are just payback I guess. :-)

Tim O'Connor


Re: Nomenclature - Boxcar or Box Car?

SUVCWORR@...
 

Just my take on this

a box car is a car for transporting boxes

a boxcar is a railroad car shaped like a box

According to Random House dictionary both are correct for a completely
enclosed freight car.

Rich Orr

-----Original Message-----
From: John Golden <golden1014@...>
To: stmfc@...
Sent: Mon, Jun 20, 2011 12:57 pm
Subject: [STMFC] Nomenclature - Boxcar or Box Car?


Gentlemen,

I've often seen both terms in print--"box car" and "boxcar".  I have
always felt

that boxcar was incorrect use of the English language since use of the
term would lead to words such as tankcar and hoppercar and flat car.  However I
routinely see the term boxcar in both the professional and hobby
press.  Can
anyone cite an English language reason why we would use such a term?

Yes, I know the English language isn't perfect--that argument doesn't
count.

Wikipedia lists the term as "boxcar" and then describes it as a "goods
van". 
Following the logic, wouldn't that therefore be goodsvan?  And why stop
there--why not railroadcar or switchpoint or tieplate? 


Help me stop the madness.  If Ben can stop the United States from using
dashes,
then maybe together we can stop MS Word from spellchecking box car to
boxcar.

John
 
John Golden
O'Fallon, IL
 
2011 St. Louis RPM Meet Info:
http://icg.home.mindspring.com/rpm/stlrpm2011.htm


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



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links


Re: Nomenclature - Boxcar or Box Car?

stevelucas3 <stevelucas3@...>
 

We almost need a "style guide", "style manual", or other mutually acceptable reference for this, don't we??

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Style_guide

"Types of style guides

Publishers' style guides establish house rules for language use, such as spelling, italics and punctuation; their major purpose is consistency. They are rulebooks for writers, ensuring consistent language. Authors are asked or required to use a style guide in preparing their work for publication; copy editors are charged with enforcing the publishing house's style."

By the way, don't get me started on that awful model rail aberration, "throwing a turnout". It will provoke a discussion that will be heated and never-ending!! And Mike will have to re-open the cells in the Moderator's Gaol.

Steve Lucas.

--- In STMFC@..., Richard Hendrickson <rhendrickson@...> wrote:

On Jun 20, 2011, at 11:09 AM, Anthony Thompson wrote:

John Golden wrote:
I've often seen both terms in print--"box car" and "boxcar". I have
always felt that boxcar was incorrect use of the English
language . . .
My view, like John's, is that the correct term is "box car,"
but I recognize the problem of compound adjectives, such as when we
talk about the car color, "boxcar red," and the connecting of such
terms in that way, with or without a hyphen between them, is
commonplace and often avoids confusion. It makes clear that "boxcar"
modifies "red." That shouldn't lap over into connected use of the
terms when NOT in compound adjective form.
I'm going to put on my linguist hat (I was a professor of English
lingustics for thirty-three years before I retired) and agree with
Tony's remarks here, as well as his assertion that, when writing
about railroad subjects to a railroad-oriented audience, the practice
of the Car Builders' Dictionaries and Cyclopedias should be
followed. General use dictionaries, e.g. the Merriam-Webster 3rd
cited by Andy Sperandeo, follow majority practice in written
documents as a whole, and in this case the dictionary editors
themselves aren't in agreement; among the modern dictionaries on my
bookshelf, both boxcar and box car appear as entries. That Kalmbach
uses Merriam-Webster 3rd as a standard isn't surprising, since they
have to have some sort of standard and they publish periodicals for a
wide range of readers. However, I'm going to continue to write box
car and let whoever publishes my stuff change it to boxcar if they
insist, as Kalmbach in fact did in the most recent of my writings
that they published.

Generally, compound nouns in English have tended to drift over time
from two words to two words hyphenated to one word, so - as is often
the case - there is no RIGHT answer here. usage among the literate
being divided. My personal advice to John Golden and others would be
to stick with whatever practice they're comfortable with, recognizing
that whatever it is may not conform with a particular publisher's
style book/reference dictionary and the publisher may change it.

Richard Hendrickson



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


Re: New Intermountain Andrews Trucks?

Richard Hendrickson
 

On Jun 20, 2011, at 11:02 AM, John Golden wrote:

Gentlemen,

I've noticed that Intermountain is using what appears to be an
upgraded, much
finer Andrews truck on their recent HO scale models. Does anyone
know if these
trucks are Intermountain or some other brand, and would you know
where I could
obtain additional copies? Thanks.
John, the USRA Andrews trucks on my IM Santa Fe Caswell gondolas
appear to be made by or for them. They're similar but not the same
as Accurail's Andrews trucks. Both are very good; they have well
formed and detailed, and prototypically slender, side frames but the
brake shoes don't line up with the wheels and there is no brake
rigging. I happen to know that Brian Leppert at Tahoe Model Works is
making dies for a USRA Andrews truck even as I write, and though I
don't know when those trucks will be for sale, you might want to wait
for them, as they will be (as usual) superior to everyone else's
trucks of that type.

Richard Hendrickson


Re: Nomenclature - Boxcar or Box Car?

Richard Hendrickson
 

On Jun 20, 2011, at 11:09 AM, Anthony Thompson wrote:

John Golden wrote:
I've often seen both terms in print--"box car" and "boxcar". I have
always felt that boxcar was incorrect use of the English
language . . .
My view, like John's, is that the correct term is "box car,"
but I recognize the problem of compound adjectives, such as when we
talk about the car color, "boxcar red," and the connecting of such
terms in that way, with or without a hyphen between them, is
commonplace and often avoids confusion. It makes clear that "boxcar"
modifies "red." That shouldn't lap over into connected use of the
terms when NOT in compound adjective form.
I'm going to put on my linguist hat (I was a professor of English
lingustics for thirty-three years before I retired) and agree with
Tony's remarks here, as well as his assertion that, when writing
about railroad subjects to a railroad-oriented audience, the practice
of the Car Builders' Dictionaries and Cyclopedias should be
followed. General use dictionaries, e.g. the Merriam-Webster 3rd
cited by Andy Sperandeo, follow majority practice in written
documents as a whole, and in this case the dictionary editors
themselves aren't in agreement; among the modern dictionaries on my
bookshelf, both boxcar and box car appear as entries. That Kalmbach
uses Merriam-Webster 3rd as a standard isn't surprising, since they
have to have some sort of standard and they publish periodicals for a
wide range of readers. However, I'm going to continue to write box
car and let whoever publishes my stuff change it to boxcar if they
insist, as Kalmbach in fact did in the most recent of my writings
that they published.

Generally, compound nouns in English have tended to drift over time
from two words to two words hyphenated to one word, so - as is often
the case - there is no RIGHT answer here. usage among the literate
being divided. My personal advice to John Golden and others would be
to stick with whatever practice they're comfortable with, recognizing
that whatever it is may not conform with a particular publisher's
style book/reference dictionary and the publisher may change it.

Richard Hendrickson


Re: LV Steam Era Decals

mforsyth127
 

Joel Holmes wrote:

Hi John,
Thank you for the information. However, I cannot bring up a web site for CDS. Do you have a web site or an address?

Joel,

The correct address for TMR is:

http://www.canadasouthern.com/tmr/CDS.htm

I count three available CDS sets for steam-era freight cars, and the twin hopper is one of them.

Matt Forsyth

Modeling the D&H Penn Division
Erie Jefferson Division
in Proto48
Late Summer of 1952

http://mattforsyth.com/


Re: Nomenclature - Boxcar or Box Car?

Richard Wilkens <railsnw@...>
 

Strasburg is also Rail Road.

Richard Wilkens

--- In STMFC@..., john.allyn@... wrote:



With the exception of the Long Island Rail Road, I think that this is a usage that ended before the Civil War.

John B. Allyn


----- Original Message -----
From: "John Stokes" <ggstokes@...>
To: stmfc@...
Sent: Monday, June 20, 2011 1:25:44 PM
Subject: RE: [STMFC] Re: Nomenclature - Boxcar or Box Car?


Along these lines shouldn't it be "rail road" not "railroad"?

John Stokes
Bellevue, WA

To: STMFC@...
From: thompson@...
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 11:09:20 -0700
Subject: [STMFC] Re: Nomenclature - Boxcar or Box Car?


















 



  


    
      
      
      John Golden wrote:

I've often seen both terms in print--"box car" and "boxcar".  I have  
always felt that boxcar was incorrect use of the English  
language . . .


My view, like John's, is that the correct term is "box car,"  

but I recognize the problem of compound adjectives, such as when we  

talk about the car color, "boxcar red," and the connecting of such  

terms in that way, with or without a hyphen between them, is  

commonplace and often avoids confusion. It makes clear that "boxcar"  

modifies "red." That shouldn't lap over into connected use of the  

terms when NOT in compound adjective form.

        But John is right that even in Kalmbach magazines one sees  

both "boxcar" and flatcar" used. Of course, it was in _Trains_  

magazine recently that the F-M locomotive was referred to as a  

"Trainmaster." Sigh.



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





    
    

    
    






                                                 

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



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links





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


Re: NYC PS-2 covered hopper...

Steve Lucas <stevelucas3@...>
 

Whoops--memo to self--finish post before hitting "send" button!!

Steve Lucas.

--- In STMFC@..., "Steve Lucas" <stevelucas3@...> wrote:

Back in 10 BSTMFC, I shortened an Athearn offset hopper car by three scale feet to model a car similar to this one--
http://www.images.technomuses.ca/searchpf.php?id=83979&lang=en

and also cut off all detail below the slope sheets, making new end sills and bracing. The model's structural integrity was

to my mind, not compromised. But YMMV...


--- In STMFC@..., jerryglow@ wrote:

I would (and have) replaced rungs with stryene rod rathen than removing the ladders entirely and compromising the structural integrety of the model. As for NYC decals, I have a set for a Dispatch Shops built car that I can easily modify for a PS-2

Jerry Glow
http://home.comcast.net/~jerryglow/decals.html


Re: NYC PS-2 covered hopper...

Steve Lucas <stevelucas3@...>
 

Back in 10 BSTMFC, I shortened an Athearn offset hopper car and also cut off all detail below the slope sheets, making new end sills and bracing. The model's structural integrity was.

--- In STMFC@..., jerryglow@... wrote:

I would (and have) replaced rungs with stryene rod rathen than removing the ladders entirely and compromising the structural integrety of the model. As for NYC decals, I have a set for a Dispatch Shops built car that I can easily modify for a PS-2

Jerry Glow
http://home.comcast.net/~jerryglow/decals.html

--- In STMFC@..., "Steve Lucas" <stevelucas3@> wrote:


Jerry and all that have replied--

So much for using that Atlas PS-1 to model this car...but I just happen to have almost finished an Intermountain ACF covered hopper that may get the NYC lettering. I'll have to find another lettering/decal set suitable for fall, 1956.

As for replacing the ladders on the Atlas PS-1, my plan was/is to simply cut them off, smooth what's left on the carbody, and apply D/A FC 6241 ladders to the body. Maybe add some attaching details for the ladders---Mainline Modeler has run several articles on these cars.

Thanks for your Very Quick replies, everyone!!

Steve Lucas.


--- In STMFC@..., jerryglow@ wrote:

http://www.canadasouthern.com/caso/images/nyc-882322.jpg

Jerry Glow
The Villages FL
http://home.comcast.net/~jerryglow/decals.html


--- In STMFC@..., "Steve Lucas" <stevelucas3@> wrote:

Can anyone refer me to a photo of the NYC 882050-882649 series PS-2 two-bay covered hopper cars built by Pullman-Standard in 1953? I have the Atlas HO car (which needs its ladders replaced with D/A P-S ladders) and
C-D-S lettering for it.

I'm particularly curious if this series had a vertical rib of the same style as the others located in the very centre of the car side. PS-2 two-bay hoppers that I've seen photos of do not have a rib in this location.

With thanks in advance,

Steve Lucas.


Re: Color film

Al and Patricia Westerfield <westerfield@...>
 

The Technicolor movie cameras were immense because they had to handle three strips of film. And very costly which is why most films were still shot in B&W well into the 1950s. By contract there was a Technicolor company consultant on the set at all times. The single strip used today has never come close to Technicolor in quality. At one time you could purchase 35mm Technicolor slide film, processing included. - Al Westerfield

----- Original Message -----
From: gpnrr
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Monday, June 20, 2011 2:43 PM
Subject: [STMFC] Re: Color film



I'm not certain of the motion picture processes such as Technicolor, but in still photography there was a camera that shot three holders of black/white film through red, green and blue filters. It was fairly large if you can imagine a common 4x5 Speed Graphic as a starting point. By removing the three darkslides, then a single exposure was made on each piece of film. Light was transferred to the three film planes via pellical type mirrors. Although the camera required a tripod they were used in the field, so it very possible some early freight cars were photographed in that manner. In the early 70's a local, deceased photographer's estate contained one of those cameras.

In photography school (69-71) everyone learned the process of dye-transfer by essentially the same process via three individual exposures through these separation filters. Through a fairly lengthy process individual colors are then placed on a sheet of white paper in perfect registration. The dye transfer process was considered "thee high end" process until sometime in the late 80's, when Kodak stopped supplying the materials. Color prints in large sizes were sold for thousands. Dye transfer prints are very controllable, have a high saturation/detail level, and will last a 100 years. The downside was the labor intensity and unless protected the colors would run if they got wet.

These same black/white negatives could be used in typical offset 4 color printing for mass distribution. Some photographers who want to preserve color images (transparencies or color negatives) will create these three separation negatives in a conventional darkroom, as black/white films will long outlast any color original.

Bob Werre
BobWphoto.com

--- In STMFC@..., "SMMW" <jimking3@...> wrote:
>
> Color film was around in the mid to late 1930s. Witness "Gone With The
> Wind" and "The Wizard of Oz", both shot in the late 30s. There is a lot of
> color WWII film now surfacing from archives and personal collections, much
> of it has made it to DVD and/or the History Channel. Color slide film was a
> very slow ASA 8 when it came out, then went to 10, then to 25 for a long
> time. The introduction of Kodachrome 64 was a huge advancement for
> photographers and remained a mainstay for pros until production stopped a
> couple years ago.
>
>
>
> Jim King
>
> Smoky Mountain Model Works, Inc.
>
> Ph. (828) 777-5619
>
> <www.smokymountainmodelworks.com>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


Re: Color film

Bob Werre
 

Bill,
You are correct, the system lent itself well to the beginnings of the "color cover era". Before that time, and you can look back to some old Kalmbach books for good examples, color images for books were often hand colored with oils rubbed into the print's surface. Other less successful techniques were also used. The benefit of this system was that black/white film was easily processed in house and the negatives turned over to the engravers!

The camera in question was designed by Harry Warnecke, who was a shooter for the New York Daily News. So I image they produced a limited run of those beasts. An example of his work (published in a Time/Life series) shows a very young Roy Rogers drawing both six guns in a 1943 shot.

Bob Werre
BobWphoto.com

--- In STMFC@..., "lnbill" <fgexbill@...> wrote:

I was a photographer for The Tennessean newspaper in Nashville from 1976 thru 1987 and remember hearing about a retired staffer who shot most of the Food and Home photos for the paper and used this type of camera. We had a separate department that handled all of the color jobs and they spoke fondly of this system because of the results it produced when it was printed.

Bill Welch

--- In STMFC@..., "gpnrr" <bob@> wrote:

I'm not certain of the motion picture processes such as Technicolor, but in still photography there was a camera that shot three holders of black/white film through red, green and blue filters. It was fairly large if you can imagine a common 4x5 Speed Graphic as a starting point. By removing the three darkslides, then a single exposure was made on each piece of film. Light was transferred to the three film planes via pellical type mirrors. Although the camera required a tripod they were used in the field, so it very possible some early freight cars were photographed in that manner. In the early 70's a local, deceased photographer's estate contained one of those cameras.

In photography school (69-71) everyone learned the process of dye-transfer by essentially the same process via three individual exposures through these separation filters. Through a fairly lengthy process individual colors are then placed on a sheet of white paper in perfect registration. The dye transfer process was considered "thee high end" process until sometime in the late 80's, when Kodak stopped supplying the materials. Color prints in large sizes were sold for thousands. Dye transfer prints are very controllable, have a high saturation/detail level, and will last a 100 years. The downside was the labor intensity and unless protected the colors would run if they got wet.

These same black/white negatives could be used in typical offset 4 color printing for mass distribution. Some photographers who want to preserve color images (transparencies or color negatives) will create these three separation negatives in a conventional darkroom, as black/white films will long outlast any color original.

Bob Werre
BobWphoto.com

--- In STMFC@..., "SMMW" <jimking3@> wrote:

Color film was around in the mid to late 1930s. Witness "Gone With The
Wind" and "The Wizard of Oz", both shot in the late 30s. There is a lot of
color WWII film now surfacing from archives and personal collections, much
of it has made it to DVD and/or the History Channel. Color slide film was a
very slow ASA 8 when it came out, then went to 10, then to 25 for a long
time. The introduction of Kodachrome 64 was a huge advancement for
photographers and remained a mainstay for pros until production stopped a
couple years ago.



Jim King

Smoky Mountain Model Works, Inc.

Ph. (828) 777-5619

<www.smokymountainmodelworks.com>







Re: NYC PS-2 covered hopper...

Steve Lucas <stevelucas3@...>
 

Tony--

Pardon me, my big fingers should have typed "PS-2".

For PS-1 boxcars, I usually prefer the Kadee car, having five of them.

Steve Lucas.

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

Steve Lucas wrote:
So much for using that Atlas PS-1 to model this car...but I just
happen to have almost finished an Intermountain ACF covered hopper
that may get the NYC lettering. I'll have to find another lettering/
decal set suitable for fall, 1956.
Um, Steve, the PS-1 is a box car. Have we wandered off subject
or is something else going on?


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


Re: Nomenclature - Boxcar or Box Car?

Stokes John
 

Actually there were a number of lines that used the two word form and some still do today. Most initials use RR, not just R (unless it is RY for railway). My somewhat tongue-in-cheek point was that to be consistent with the box car approach one should also use rail road. But then again, the old quote is "a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin or small minds" so while many might like boxcar and flatcar, we also use hopper car and passenger car, or railroad instead of rail road in general use. In the big scheme of things this is a trifle.

John S.

To: STMFC@...
From: john.allyn@...
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 19:19:07 +0000
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: Nomenclature - Boxcar or Box Car?
































With the exception of the Long Island Rail Road, I think that this is a usage that ended before the Civil War.



John B. Allyn

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

From: "John Stokes" <ggstokes@...>

To: stmfc@...

Sent: Monday, June 20, 2011 1:25:44 PM

Subject: RE: [STMFC] Re: Nomenclature - Boxcar or Box Car?



Along these lines shouldn't it be "rail road" not "railroad"?



John Stokes

Bellevue, WA



To: STMFC@...

From: thompson@...

Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 11:09:20 -0700

Subject: [STMFC] Re: Nomenclature - Boxcar or Box Car?

















John Golden wrote:



I've often seen both terms in print--"box car" and "boxcar". I have


always felt that boxcar was incorrect use of the English


language . . .


My view, like John's, is that the correct term is "box car,"



but I recognize the problem of compound adjectives, such as when we



talk about the car color, "boxcar red," and the connecting of such



terms in that way, with or without a hyphen between them, is



commonplace and often avoids confusion. It makes clear that "boxcar"



modifies "red." That shouldn't lap over into connected use of the



terms when NOT in compound adjective form.



But John is right that even in Kalmbach magazines one sees



both "boxcar" and flatcar" used. Of course, it was in _Trains_



magazine recently that the F-M locomotive was referred to as a



"Trainmaster." Sigh.



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



















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



------------------------------------



Yahoo! Groups Links



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


















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


Re: Color film

Bill Welch
 

I was a photographer for The Tennessean newspaper in Nashville from 1976 thru 1987 and remember hearing about a retired staffer who shot most of the Food and Home photos for the paper and used this type of camera. We had a separate department that handled all of the color jobs and they spoke fondly of this system because of the results it produced when it was printed.

Bill Welch

--- In STMFC@..., "gpnrr" <bob@...> wrote:

I'm not certain of the motion picture processes such as Technicolor, but in still photography there was a camera that shot three holders of black/white film through red, green and blue filters. It was fairly large if you can imagine a common 4x5 Speed Graphic as a starting point. By removing the three darkslides, then a single exposure was made on each piece of film. Light was transferred to the three film planes via pellical type mirrors. Although the camera required a tripod they were used in the field, so it very possible some early freight cars were photographed in that manner. In the early 70's a local, deceased photographer's estate contained one of those cameras.

In photography school (69-71) everyone learned the process of dye-transfer by essentially the same process via three individual exposures through these separation filters. Through a fairly lengthy process individual colors are then placed on a sheet of white paper in perfect registration. The dye transfer process was considered "thee high end" process until sometime in the late 80's, when Kodak stopped supplying the materials. Color prints in large sizes were sold for thousands. Dye transfer prints are very controllable, have a high saturation/detail level, and will last a 100 years. The downside was the labor intensity and unless protected the colors would run if they got wet.

These same black/white negatives could be used in typical offset 4 color printing for mass distribution. Some photographers who want to preserve color images (transparencies or color negatives) will create these three separation negatives in a conventional darkroom, as black/white films will long outlast any color original.

Bob Werre
BobWphoto.com

--- In STMFC@..., "SMMW" <jimking3@> wrote:

Color film was around in the mid to late 1930s. Witness "Gone With The
Wind" and "The Wizard of Oz", both shot in the late 30s. There is a lot of
color WWII film now surfacing from archives and personal collections, much
of it has made it to DVD and/or the History Channel. Color slide film was a
very slow ASA 8 when it came out, then went to 10, then to 25 for a long
time. The introduction of Kodachrome 64 was a huge advancement for
photographers and remained a mainstay for pros until production stopped a
couple years ago.



Jim King

Smoky Mountain Model Works, Inc.

Ph. (828) 777-5619

<www.smokymountainmodelworks.com>





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


Re: Nomenclature - Boxcar or Box Car?

mopacfirst
 

At least Webster's helps keep the great unwashed on track, assuming they ever look up things in the dictionary. I get so tired of listening to or seeing the word 'flatcar' turned into 'flatbed railcar' or some other generic mumbo-jumbo by persons who wouldn't know a flatcar from a 'sleeper car' or, better yet, a 'dinning car'.

But, there are also some who think everything with steel wheels is a 'boxcar'.

I vote for boxcar and flatcar, maybe hopper car vs. hopper, but definitely stock car and gondola and caboose.

Ron Merrick

--- In STMFC@..., water.kresse@... wrote:



Andy,



To be consistent you should be consistent with terminology of the era you are writing about . . . . even if it means fighting with "spell checker" in Microsoft Word .  It never likes "wrot" . . . . unfortunately.



Al Kresse


----- Original Message -----
From: "Andy Sperandeo" <asperandeo@...>
To: STMFC@...
Sent: Monday, June 20, 2011 2:28:58 PM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Re: Nomenclature - Boxcar or Box Car?

"Model Railroader" uses "boxcar" as one word because that's how it appears in "Webster's Third New International Dictionary," our general standard for spelling. Webster's Third is a useful reference in our field because it defines many railroad and related engineering terms, perhaps more than any other "standard" dictionary.

Frankly I don't think this is a matter of great import, except for those of us in the publishing field who want to be internally consistent in our publications. But whether one word or two, the term is readily understood by general readers, and especially by members of this list.

So long,

Andy


Andy Sperandeo
Executive Editor
Model Railroader magazine
asperandeo@...
262-796-8776, ext. 461
FAX 262-796-1142


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



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