After the reconstruction of my Bachmann 2-6-6-2 finally finished the weathering I started last week...
sure happy to be rid of the out of the box look. ;D
(http://i293.photobucket.com/albums/mm50/lkemling/006-4.jpg)
Great looking locomotive! Thanks for sharing your efforts. :)
That is one serious layout. Did I count 14 tracks along that stretch?
Regards,
Jonathan
Did a great job
Wish I could do mine but way to many engines and rolling stock
They look so much more real weathered
Nice job.
OUTSTANDING!! (SHOUT it from the rooftops)
hi gn
this is really outstanding,, great work ,, keep it coming
Below are before & after pictures my Frisco Russian by Bach'm and my 3800 class Santa Fe 2-10-2 by BLI. relief to get them done ,now starting the weathering on my EM-1 and finally my Y6B from BLI.
(http://i293.photobucket.com/albums/mm50/lkemling/2552.jpg)
(http://i293.photobucket.com/albums/mm50/lkemling/18.jpg)
(http://i293.photobucket.com/albums/mm50/lkemling/001.jpg)
(http://i293.photobucket.com/albums/mm50/lkemling/19.jpg)
GN
WOW!
One day I hope to get around to weathering my loco's as it sure does make them look nice. You and jonathan's work inspire me to get started soon but I think I will practice on older stuff first. I still have not got the knack for it yet.
Jerry
Do indeed look like they have seen a few hours out on the road.
Quote from: florynow on February 17, 2012, 11:11:12 PM
Steam engines weren't "weathered" until the very end of steam, when railroads were not maintaining them any more, and were squeezing the very last drop of service out of them that they could.
PF-
Largely, but not completely true. Branch lines and secondary railroads frequently ran their locomotives with LOTS of, shall we say, character. And even some of the biggies which were known for their quality maintenance had lokies which showed the miles. The Santa Fe, for example, ran through hundreds of miles of desert sun which quickly turned the shiny black steamers a dull grey, and Eastern ore and coal railroads could only do so much to keep their motive power looking spiffy. The one thing which can be said with near universality, however, is that the appearance of passenger locomotives was very, very sharp.
-- D
Quote from: Doneldon on February 18, 2012, 12:04:04 AM
Quote from: florynow on February 17, 2012, 11:11:12 PM
Steam engines weren't "weathered" until the very end of steam, when railroads were not maintaining them any more, and were squeezing the very last drop of service out of them that they could.
PF-
Largely, but not completely true. Branch lines and secondary railroads frequently ran their locomotives with LOTS of, shall we say, character. And even some of the biggies which were known for their quality maintenance had lokies which showed the miles. -- D
In general, I have to agree but only to the point that even passenger engines should show some "weathering", however light, as some parts were not cleaned. Tops of tenders for example, a little road grime on the running gear and on the pilot etc., etc.. No locomotive, after a week or so in service, looked or even looks these days like it did when it came out of the backshop after an overhaul nor in fact like it comes out of the Bachmann box. :)
Out of my collection of D&RGW photos which are in the hundreds, most of the steam they had, the consolidations, mikes, heavy duty mountains, 2-10-2's and articulateds, look rarely clean, most of these engines are covered in soot, once I figure out how to make custom decals I'm actually looking forward to weathering my engines rather heavily
Another hint on weathering is NOT to follow slavishly those "How To" articles on weathering in the magazines. Sure, maybe follow the article for your first weathering job but after that use the article and the techniques as a guide but look at photos of the real thing and copy that.
What we tend to see in magazine articles as well as model photos posted on the web are "formula" weathered engines.
Let's take steam engines. The "formula" weathering job is: -
1) Overall slightly grey tone.
2) Water stains down the side of the tender next to the water hatch.
3) Water stains down the side of the boiler either side of the safety valves and possibly whistle.
3) "Bow wave" effect of light grey along the bottom of the tender.
4) Rusty brown stains on the running gear.
5) Soot effect along the top of the boiler.
6) Light grey stains on trucks.
However, if you take the time to look at steam loco photos, many, many of them don't look like the "formula" weathering as the articles in the magazines lead you to believe.
ALWAYS, without fail, let the prototype be your best guide, not some article in a magazine. As I wrote above, use the magazine to learn the techniques. Then, experiment on your own! You'll be pleasantly surprised at what you can do and you'll end up with a fleet of weathered steam that look far more varied and realistic than a bunch of "formula" weather steam.
Quote from: florynow on February 19, 2012, 10:58:34 AM
I've had the privilege of working on a steam locomotive and I have to say that we kept everything ultra clean, especially running gear as much a possible, so that we could see if any problems were developing.
Most of the weathered model engines I've seen over the years don't look much like prototype weathering would have anyway, the airbrush is overused and every weathered element has the resulting soft edge. There's a trend to paint model steam engines grey and airbrush every weathering detail which makes it look like ...... a model. Real engines were black, all of the ones I've seen especially, and had a certain amount of hard edged streaking when weathering occurred, especially where mineral-laden water would run down surfaces.
And, being from the south, we had a tradition on some of the shortlines of highly polished and surgically clean steam engines with brass fittings and lots of extra highlighting paint on valves and extra striping, often gold leaf. That's my preferred appearance, although it seems to be a not widely known or popular one.
PF
Whatever floats your boat! ;D
And finally I finished my EM-1 ;D
(http://i293.photobucket.com/albums/mm50/lkemling/002-8.jpg)
I think most of the weathering was mostly the fading of the paint.
Quote from: GN.2-6-8-0 on February 19, 2012, 05:10:30 PM
And finally I finished my EM-1 ;D
(http://i293.photobucket.com/albums/mm50/lkemling/002-8.jpg)
That looks really nice man :)
Nice work, GN!
My advice when planning weathering is to find as many photos of the prototype of your model as possible, especially color photos, and paint accordingly.
Les
Quote from: florynow on February 24, 2012, 05:36:52 PM
I've looked in my book "MoPac Power" by Joe Collias and there are a few heavily weathered steam engines but they are very, very rare and then very late in the steam era.
I'm not weathering my engines. Might dull-coat them a little but that's all. The Mopac took pretty good care of their engines and what's good for the MOP is good enough for me.
PF
To each their own. I think he did an excellent job. And FYI, there were tons of heavily weathered steam engines. SP, B&O, N&W were notorious for not cleaning their engines. I went on google images and typed in B&O EM-1 and found tons that were very dirty. Unless pulling passenger service, most of the freight steam engines I've seen were covered with filth.
(http://www.railroad.net/photos/vintagemid-atlanticsteam/media/steam-9.jpg)
But ya know...all steam engines were clean at one point or another; like just out of the factory. So either weathered or not are both considered "accurate".
Steam locomotives could get dirty in the course of a day's work. The only time one will be perfectly clean is if it is fresh out of the paint shop, or if it has just been pressure-washed.
It's just a matter of taste, if you want your steam locos to be sparkling clean, or not. I have only four steam engines, but all are weathered except for my UP 119, the historic 4-4-0.
I would suggest, even on a clean engine, that the running gear and drivers be dry-brushed with a light color for the purpose of making the fine details visible. I do the same to black car trucks, just enough to make the details visible.
QuoteSP, B&O, N&W were notorious for not cleaning their engines
In the mid to late 50's this might be true of the N&W, but earlier than that the were know for keeping them pretty clean.
-Brad
Just visit the Strasburg RR where they run them regularly
They keep them pretty clean
You can see them here
http://bandb3536.com/strasburg/strasburg.htm (http://bandb3536.com/strasburg/strasburg.htm)
Quote from: uncbob on February 25, 2012, 09:03:35 PM
Just visit the Strasburg RR where they run them regularly
They keep them pretty clean
You can see them here
http://bandb3536.com/strasburg/strasburg.htm (http://bandb3536.com/strasburg/strasburg.htm)
Sorry guys but you cannot compare modern day steam tourist railroads with what happened in the steam era. Places like Strasburg et al treat their locos like babies and the standard of cleanliness does not in anyway reflect what happened in the steam era.
It's comparing apples to oranges.
My engines were built in the early to late 20th century and ran may to the mid-late 50s PF and you obliviously worked on a tourist road where spit and polish was part of a regular maintenance program.
Not so on regular roads where even a scheduled washing normally consisted of a spraying of high pressured steam and some type of harsh solvent and a good scrubbing with a long handled brush........time permiting.
And as for fancy paint/scrollwork polished brass and gold leaf!......that would have been common in 1850-1860ish
not so much in the 20th century.
If you like your motive power to look brand spanking new ,hey' great go for it their your engines......but don't criticize those of us that preferr a bit of dirt and road grime that helps showing the many fine details that are hidden by the glossy black paint OUR" models come in.
This will be my last word on this matter I've better things to do ;D
This weathering discussion reminds me of the days in the 1950s, when this was a much more controversial subject if the letters in the columns of Model Railroader were any indication.
Some people--most at the time, in fact--didn't like weathering. Part of it was that so many went to the effort to build really nice engines (we're talking about the craftsmen scratchbuilders here) that they couldn't bear to let their models look bad, others I think had enough trouble just getting good finishes on what they had, and others--like some here--were familiar with railroads and an earlier era that kept engines in better shape. Even the late, great John Allen, who was a pioneer in weathering effects, came in for some criticism on these grounds.
I have to say it is still an art as much as anything, and I haven't done well at it at all. It's too easy to overdo effects, or get them to come out bad, as I know from first-hand experience. The excellent finishes available on modern models make me hesitant, too; it was one thing to dirty up (and mess up) an Athearn Blue Box model with the sometimes not-so-hot paint jobs back then, when the model also cost only $3, but nicer cars and locomotives (which are also a good deal more expensive than before) make me hesitant again. If and when I can figure out how to do it decently and not have to worry, I'll take it on; after all, at least freight cars tended to be pretty grimy, especially in the steam era.
The comment by Flory Now about the Southern Railway's engines looking so good brings to mind that part of that was that the Southern continued the practice of "single manning" or "assigned engines" longer than most other roads. An engineer and a fireman were assigned a locomotive, and it was "their" engine for a long time, sometimes for years at a stretch. With a locomotive that was "yours," you could add a little decorative touch to it now and then, and it would always be there. Such touches included extra striping, eagles over the headlight, the brass "candlestick" flag holders, a fancier than normal number plate, or your own distinctive whistle that wouldn't sound like anything else. Of course, such pride in "ownership" also often lead to the impeccable cleanliness that was so characteristic of Southern Railway power, in which the engineers and firemen would spend time off just cleaning their locomotives.
The downside of this was that it seriously limited engine utilization. This wasn't too much of a problem in the 19th century and well into the 20th, when steam locomotives were much more maintenance-intensive than they would later be, but later engines (such as the EM-1), which were more dependable in high-mileage service, and also more expensive to purchase (and pay the banks' interest on), could be used a lot more than the crews, and so engines went into "pools," and you came onto a run with whatever the roundhouse foreman would give you--which is the normal practice today with diesels.
Not like the old days, which according to railroad historian H. Reid, and engine crew got an engine for "800 days." That's a bit over two years, and I wonder if that was a shopping interval for locomotives before mandated inspections and the like from the 1920s.