PRR covered hoppers colors


Todd Horton
 

I know there's been some debate about the color on the Kadeee PS-2 (H34) hoppers. I ran across this photo that I thought was interesting. Notice how light the car to the left is compared to the car to the right. Also notice how white the shirt is of the guy riding the locomotive and the striping on the locomotive. 

http://pcapp1.tripod.com/8-13-2005%207-42-34%20PM_0062.jpg

Todd Horton

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


Richard Hendrickson
 

On Aug 13, 2012, at 9:20 AM, Todd Horton wrote:

I know there's been some debate about the color on the Kadeee PS-2
(H34) hoppers. I ran across this photo that I thought was
interesting. Notice how light the car to the left is compared to
the car to the right. Also notice how white the shirt is of the guy
riding the locomotive and the striping on the locomotive.
I hate to rain on your parade, Todd, but the color on that slide is
way off. Doesn't invalidate your point, but I'd photoshop the image
and color-correct it before I used it as a color guide.

Richard Hendrickson


Todd Horton
 

When you say it's way off what do you mean?  I'm not familiar with photo shop. I see that the upper right corner is dark but everything seems normal.


Todd Horton


________________________________
From: Richard Hendrickson <rhendrickson@opendoor.com>
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2012 1:12 PM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] PRR covered hoppers colors


 

On Aug 13, 2012, at 9:20 AM, Todd Horton wrote:

I know there's been some debate about the color on the Kadeee PS-2
(H34) hoppers. I ran across this photo that I thought was
interesting. Notice how light the car to the left is compared to
the car to the right. Also notice how white the shirt is of the guy
riding the locomotive and the striping on the locomotive.
I hate to rain on your parade, Todd, but the color on that slide is
way off. Doesn't invalidate your point, but I'd photoshop the image
and color-correct it before I used it as a color guide.

Richard Hendrickson


Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Todd Horton wrote:
When you say it's way off what do you mean? I'm not familiar with photo shop. I see that the upper right corner is dark but everything seems normal.
Todd, it's way green. Everything in the photo is greenish. That means the dyes have shifted or that the light was funny when the photo was taken. The color balance is readily corrected in Photoshop.

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


Todd Horton
 

Tom, I know what you mean with the lighting.  There's seems to always have been a debate about the color Kadee chose for their models. Regardless of the color being off there's creditable evidence here (at least in my eyes) that all the PRR cars weren't the almost snow white color seen to the right. I wasn't saying the photo was 100% correct I was pointing out the differences in the shades of the two cars.  


Todd Horton


________________________________
From: pullmanboss <pullmanboss@yahoo.com>
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2012 2:12 PM
Subject: [STMFC] Re: PRR covered hoppers colors


 

Todd Horton wrote:

When you say it's way off what do you mean?  I'm not familiar with photo shop. I see that the upper right corner is dark but everything seems normal.
See here:
http://www.pullmanproject.com/PRR%20Hoppers.jpg

Same location as the photo you cite (Martins Creek, PA), similar lighting conditions (lousy, late in the day, which is when 613 was often puttering around the Alpha Cement yard), don't have a Kadee PRR PS2 so can't comment on colors but I suspect the car on the right is the one you mean. Upper image is uncorrected, lower is corrected, take your pick on shades of gray paint - they're all over the map!

Tom Madden




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


Mikebrock
 

Hmmm. Interesting photo. First, Tony and Richard may be correct that the color is way off. Tony says:

"Todd, it's way green. Everything in the photo is greenish. That means the dyes have shifted or that the light was funny when the photo was taken. The color balance is readily corrected in Photoshop."

And, yet, everything in the photo that is "whitish" colored appears VERY white...except the Pennsy hopper on the right. I mean, the guy who appears to be standing on the diesel's pilot appears to have just returned from a lengthy stay at Los Alamos. I suppose the light source COULD have influenced some of the results. It is strange that the dyes in the photo where the pilot guy is standing have changed while those where the rightmost hopper car have not. It is almost as if someone has ALREADY altered the slide's image.

That's not to say sunlight must be consistent across an image. I can well recall waiting for ex-N&W 1218 up on the Shenandoah N&W line with clouds moving very rapidly causing shadows to move as rapidly across my target view. One second the image would be quite bright appearing, then half might be in dark shadow, the other half very bright as another cloud moved by. I lucked out, BTW. It IS noteworthy how dependent one is on mother nature when shooting photos of any kind.

Mike Brock


Todd Horton
 

I'm speculating here, look at the hopper coupled to the one that is glowing white behind the locomotive cab. "IF" that's a PRR hopper then there's clearly different shades of these cars. Again, I'm purely speculating but I have to agree with you Mike. Everything that is close to white has that nuke effect to it.


Todd Horton


________________________________
From: Mike Brock <brockm@cfl.rr.com>
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2012 4:43 PM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] PRR covered hoppers colors


 


Hmmm. Interesting photo. First, Tony and Richard may be correct that the
color is way off. Tony says:

"Todd, it's way green. Everything in the photo is greenish. That means the
dyes have shifted or that the light was funny when the photo was taken. The
color balance is readily corrected in Photoshop."

And, yet, everything in the photo that is "whitish" colored appears VERY
white...except the Pennsy hopper on the right. I mean, the guy who appears
to be standing on the diesel's pilot appears to have just returned from a
lengthy stay at Los Alamos. I suppose the light source COULD have influenced
some of the results. It is strange that the dyes in the photo where the
pilot guy is standing have changed while those where the rightmost hopper
car have not. It is almost as if someone has ALREADY altered the slide's
image.

That's not to say sunlight must be consistent across an image. I can well
recall waiting for ex-N&W 1218 up on the Shenandoah N&W line with clouds
moving very rapidly causing shadows to move as rapidly across my target
view. One second the image would be quite bright appearing, then half might
be in dark shadow, the other half very bright as another cloud moved by. I
lucked out, BTW. It IS noteworthy how dependent one is on mother nature when
shooting photos of any kind.

Mike Brock


Bruce Smith
 

Mike,

Actually, I felt that the developing or exposure might not have been consistent across the image - there seems to be an edge effect to me



Regards

Bruce


Bruce F. Smith

Auburn, AL

https://www5.vetmed.auburn.edu/~smithbf/


"Some days you are the bug, some days you are the windshield."

__

/ &#92;

__<+--+>________________&#92;__/___ ________________________________

|- ______/ O O &#92;_______ -| | __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ |

| / 4999 PENNSYLVANIA 4999 &#92; | ||__||__||__||__||__||__||__||__||

|/_____________________________&#92;|_|________________________________|

| O--O &#92;0 0 0 0/ O--O | 0-0-0 0-0-0

On Aug 13, 2012, at 3:43 PM, Mike Brock wrote:


Hmmm. Interesting photo. First, Tony and Richard may be correct that the
color is way off. Tony says:

"Todd, it's way green. Everything in the photo is greenish. That means the
dyes have shifted or that the light was funny when the photo was taken. The
color balance is readily corrected in Photoshop."

And, yet, everything in the photo that is "whitish" colored appears VERY
white...except the Pennsy hopper on the right. I mean, the guy who appears
to be standing on the diesel's pilot appears to have just returned from a
lengthy stay at Los Alamos. I suppose the light source COULD have influenced
some of the results. It is strange that the dyes in the photo where the
pilot guy is standing have changed while those where the rightmost hopper
car have not. It is almost as if someone has ALREADY altered the slide's
image.

That's not to say sunlight must be consistent across an image. I can well
recall waiting for ex-N&W 1218 up on the Shenandoah N&W line with clouds
moving very rapidly causing shadows to move as rapidly across my target
view. One second the image would be quite bright appearing, then half might
be in dark shadow, the other half very bright as another cloud moved by. I
lucked out, BTW. It IS noteworthy how dependent one is on mother nature when
shooting photos of any kind.

Mike Brock








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

Yahoo! Groups Links


Ed Hawkins
 

On Aug 13, 2012, at 3:54 PM, Todd Horton wrote:

I'm speculating here, look at the hopper coupled to the one that is
glowing white behind the locomotive cab. "IF" that's a PRR hopper then
there's clearly different shades of these cars. Again, I'm purely
speculating but I have to agree with you Mike. Everything that is
close to white has that nuke effect to it.
Todd,
I don't know if this at all germane to the issue. Original paint
samples from the ACF-built covered hopper cars reveal an incredibly
wide range of gray shades used from 1940 to 1952. I see no reason to
believe that variations in the shades of gray didn't continue with the
PS-2s built during the 1950s.

I have 4 gray paint samples for Missouri Pacific covered hoppers built
by ACF during the relatively short period of 1942 to 1948. Keeping in
mind this was a single railroad, the four shades of gray are not
remotely close.
Regards,
Ed Hawkins


Scott H. Haycock
 

Todd and all
The car behind the cab looks to be similar in color to the one on the right. It also looks to me that the exposure was metered off of the dark engine causing the image to be over exposed. This explains the glowing white shirt. I suspect that all the cars are actually darker than they appear in this image. A lso remember that age differences in the paint job, and weathering will change the appearance of freight cars. If you were to line up several cars of the same type and look at them under the same lighting conditions, no two would be exactly the same color.
Scott

----- Original Message -----
From: "Todd Horton" <toddchorton@rocketmail.com>
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2012 2:54:51 PM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] PRR covered hoppers colors






I'm speculating here, look at the hopper coupled to the one that is glowing white behind the locomotive cab. "IF" that's a PRR hopper then there's clearly different shades of these cars. Again, I'm purely speculating but I have to agree with you Mike. Everything that is close to white has that nuke effect to it.

Todd Horton


Richard Hendrickson
 

On Aug 13, 2012, at 1:43 PM, Mike Brock wrote:
It IS noteworthy how dependent one is on mother nature when
shooting photos of any kind.
True, Mike, and that's only one of numerous variables. With color
slides, the outcome also depends on the camera and camera settings,
the film, the color processing, and how - and how much - the dyes may
have faded or otherwise changed since the image was printed.
Modelers who resort to color slides as a guide to prototype paint
colors, as Todd did in this instance, are taking a lot of risks.
Having a number of color slides showing the same cars with the paint
aged and weathered about the same amount can reduce those risks but
certainly not eliminate them. Furthermore, as we've noted on this
list any number of times in the past, knowing with some certainty
what color paint was on the prototype doesn't mean you want to paint
the model that color, as no indoor lighting exactly duplicates either
the character or intensity of sunlight, and there are other variables
as well (e.g., small objects don't look the same as large objects
when painted the same color). Several of us yanked Todd's chain (in
a friendly way, of course) for trying to settle an argument about
color with a single slide, especially one where the color was so
obviously "off." He may well be right, but he needs more evidence
than a single slide to prove it, even it it were a better slide than
that one.

Richard Hendrickson


Dennis Storzek
 

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "Bruce F. Smith" <smithbf@...> wrote:

Mike,

Actually, I felt that the developing or exposure might not have been consistent across the image - there seems to be an edge effect to me

Regards

Bruce
Actually, the dark corners are familiar to anyone who carried an Argus C-2 back in the fifties and sixties... that camera consistently underexposed the corners and ends of a 35mm frame.

Dennis


Scott H. Haycock
 

Dennis,
This effect is called "vignetting" and is caused by a lens mismatched to a camera body. In modern photography, for example, using a lens designed for a digital camera with its smaller sensor, on a full frame 35mm camera body can cause this effect.
Scott Haycock

----- Original Message -----
From: "soolinehistory" <destorzek@mchsi.com>
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2012 4:03:51 PM
Subject: [STMFC] Re: PRR covered hoppers colors









Actually, the dark corners are familiar to anyone who carried an Argus C-2 back in the fifties and sixties... that camera consistently underexposed the corners and ends of a 35mm frame.

Dennis


Bill Welch
 

For some reason, I am unable to view the photo in question, I just the the "Tripod" logo.

The darkening could also be caused by using a lens hood or shade meant for a longer lens than the one it is mounted on.

Bill Welch

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "soolinehistory" <destorzek@...> wrote:



--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "Bruce F. Smith" <smithbf@> wrote:

Mike,

Actually, I felt that the developing or exposure might not have been consistent across the image - there seems to be an edge effect to me

Regards

Bruce
Actually, the dark corners are familiar to anyone who carried an Argus C-2 back in the fifties and sixties... that camera consistently underexposed the corners and ends of a 35mm frame.

Dennis


Scott H. Haycock
 

----- Original Message -----
From: "lnbill" <fgexbill@tampabay.rr.com>
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2012 4:36:44 PM
Subject: [STMFC] Re: PRR covered hoppers colors






For some reason, I am unable to view the photo in question, I just the the "Tripod" logo.

The darkening could also be caused by using a lens hood or shade meant for a longer lens than the one it is mounted on.

Bill Welch





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


al_brown03
 

I can't see it either. I can never remember what " %20 " in a link translates to.

Al Brown, Melbourne, Fla.

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "Scott H. Haycock " <shhaycock@...> wrote:

Bill, try it again.
http://pcapp1.tripod.com/8-13-2005%207-42-34%20PM_0062.jpg
Scott

----- Original Message -----
From: "lnbill" <fgexbill@...>
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2012 4:36:44 PM
Subject: [STMFC] Re: PRR covered hoppers colors






For some reason, I am unable to view the photo in question, I just the the "Tripod" logo.

The darkening could also be caused by using a lens hood or shade meant for a longer lens than the one it is mounted on.

Bill Welch





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


rwitt_2000
 

Bill,

On my MacBook Pro it didn't work with Firefox as I only received the
"Tripod" logo, but did with Apples' Safari. I have no idea why.

Bob Witt

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

For some reason, I am unable to view the photo in question, I just the
the "Tripod" logo.

The darkening could also be caused by using a lens hood or shade meant
for a longer lens than the one it is mounted on.

Bill Welch

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "soolinehistory" destorzek@ wrote:



--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "Bruce F. Smith" <smithbf@> wrote:

Mike,

Actually, I felt that the developing or exposure might not have
been consistent across the image - there seems to be an edge effect to
me

Regards

Bruce
Actually, the dark corners are familiar to anyone who carried an
Argus C-2 back in the fifties and sixties... that camera consistently
underexposed the corners and ends of a 35mm frame.

Dennis


Bill Welch
 

Still nothing using Safari

BIll Welch

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "Scott H. Haycock " <shhaycock@...> wrote:

Bill, try it again.
http://pcapp1.tripod.com/8-13-2005%207-42-34%20PM_0062.jpg
Scott

----- Original Message -----
From: "lnbill" <fgexbill@...>
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2012 4:36:44 PM
Subject: [STMFC] Re: PRR covered hoppers colors






For some reason, I am unable to view the photo in question, I just the the "Tripod" logo.

The darkening could also be caused by using a lens hood or shade meant for a longer lens than the one it is mounted on.

Bill Welch





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


Scott H. Haycock
 

Bill, Try This, another way in:
http://pcapp1.tripod.com/martinscreek.htm
The photo in question is the center one.
Scott

----- Original Message -----
From: "lnbill" <fgexbill@tampabay.rr.com>
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2012 6:18:24 PM
Subject: [STMFC] Re: PRR covered hoppers colors






Still nothing using Safari

BIll Welch





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


Todd Horton
 

So would this account for the hopper car being dark while the guy riding the footboards have a glowing white shirt? I've looked at this pic numerous times. I'm not trying to use it for a painting guide for PRR PS-2's. I'm looking at this as a photo showing that all PRR covered hoppers weren't snow white in color. I know that Kadee caught some flack because of the color choice they made for their offerings.
 
If I'm reading this correctly then everything to the left of the guy riding the foot boards could have been developed darker than normal. Is that wrong or right in my assumption?

Todd Horton


________________________________
From: soolinehistory <destorzek@mchsi.com>
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2012 6:03 PM
Subject: [STMFC] Re: PRR covered hoppers colors



 



--- In mailto:STMFC%40yahoogroups.com, "Bruce F. Smith" <smithbf@...> wrote:

Mike,

Actually, I felt that the developing or exposure might not have been consistent across the image - there seems to be an edge effect to me

Regards

Bruce
Actually, the dark corners are familiar to anyone who carried an Argus C-2 back in the fifties and sixties... that camera consistently underexposed the corners and ends of a 35mm frame.

Dennis