Mike Rose Weathering Video

[John]

From Yahoogroups

1. Mike Rose Weathering DVD now available directly from Mike Rose Hobbi
Posted by: "Mike Rose" miker@mrhobby.com mikerosehobies
Date: Mon Dec 17, 2007 5:21 am ((PST))

Please forgive this one-time post if it's considered at all off-topic,
thanks.

I just wanted to let everyone know that I now have my weathering DVD in
stock and ready to deliver in time for Christmas. This DVD covers all
of the topics related to weathering that I've demonstrated in my
prototype clinics, with the added advantage of more detail, and
high-resolution close-up photos clearly showing the techniques. One of
the disadvantages of the live clinics is that if you are towards the
back of the room, it's difficult to actually see what I'm doing with any
detail.

All materials needed are also covered, and the methods apply to freight
cars, locomotives, structures, and even layout scenery.

You can read about and order the disk at this link:
http://www.mrhobby.com/WeatheringDVD.html

Please note that multiple disks can be shipped for one shipping charge,
if you have any questions about that don't hesitate to contact me
directly. Thanks very much!

-Mike Rose

[asciibaron]

nice weathering, crappy website

[Mark5]

Random thought - weathering needs to be positioned as era specific.

For example, it seems to me that heavily "weathered" cars were not as prevalent in say the 1960s as in the past decade. I'm not sure why this seems to be the case.

[asciibaron]

Random thought - weathering needs to be positioned as era specific.

For example, it seems to me that heavily "weathered" cars were not as prevalent in say the 1960s as in the past decade. I'm not sure why this seems to be the case.

here's a bunch from the mid 60's - i think the difference is the "paint" used back then.

http://jimsands2.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=87784
http://jimsands2.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=79722
http://jimsands2.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=79725
http://jimsands2.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=79986
http://jimsands2.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=79997
http://jimsands2.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=80004
http://jimsands2.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=80021
http://jimsands2.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=80109

[Mark5]

Thanks! Not nearly as decrepit as some of the stuff I see these days.

Ya sorta made my point.

[Ryan87]

Thanks! Not nearly as decrepit as some of the stuff I see these days.
Ya sorta made my point.

I'd have to agree with you to a point. There is more "bombed out" cars today than years past, however it is by no means the majority of the fleet, looking at a freight trains it's maybe 10-20 percent (just observation)

Here's a few of my theories as to why...

Paint has changed, we're no longer using heavy metals in paints, that Mercury, Lead and Cadmium definitely helped keep the weather off. (ever see an old wood structure where the new paints washing off but the original lettering underneath looks brand new)
 
Labor was cheap, Up to the 1960's cars were repainted quite often at least every 12-15 years. Today there's cars from the 1970's still in there original paint running around (most have been patched & tagged however )

Abuse, freight cars are taking alot of abuse these days, between boxcars getting beat up by forklifts & hoppers getting pounded by sledge hammers it takes it's toll.

And finally service, what are the freight cars hauling? It has a determining factor on how the car will weather, compare a hopper hauling grain to one hauling potash, a tank car hauling ethanol to one hauling liquid sulfur, railways are hauling some pretty nasty stuff today (and lots of it). 

What do you guys think? I'm sure I have seen some pretty decrepit stuff from <1970 I'd have to look though.
 

[Mark5]

agreeing in any degree makes my point.

there'd be far less "bombed out" equip in 1970 as a percent than today. But plenty of weathering to do still. Sometimes it seems there is a fixation on the extreme examples to the neglect of the more subtle weathering.

I'm thinking out loud here as this is the task before me - to implement weathering to my layout. Clearly what is appropriate for modeling today is not necessarily applicable to 1965.

[Ryan87]

there'd be far less "bombed out" equip in 1970 as a percent than today. But plenty of weathering to do still. Sometimes it seems there is a fixation on the extreme examples to the neglect of the more subtle weathering.

I'm thinking out loud here as this is the task before me - to implement weathering to my layout. Clearly what is appropriate for modeling today is not necessarily applicable to 1965.

It would still be applicable just in different context, paint still fades, cars still had a coat of grime and they still rusted the same way (if not to the same extent) (Note: one thing missing on older era cars is rust from forklift damage)

Look at these photos from,
1973
http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/nkp/nkp81027akg.jpg

1966 (Look at the hatches & roof line)
http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/ri/ri-lo59ajs.jpg

1976
http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/wab/wab90067abp.jpg

Undated (but judging from the fresh lube plate 1974-1978)
http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/wab/wab90479.jpg

While these cars don't look nearly as bad as Tom's last two cars ( ) the same techniques are useful, even on cars with little rust you still need to fade the paint and add dirt and grime...

[Mark5]

I'm not saying no weathering ... 

I was there, things were different - that's all.

[Ryan87]

Ok Maybe I completely misunderstood what you were saying (me no think good :-\)

What I was trying to say is that although some weathering techniques are directed at modern models that doesn't mean the same techniques don't apply to other eras as well...

What I got from your original comment of "era specific weathering" is that how you weather should be different, now I think I understand you were only talking about the end result. Is that it or am I still off base?

[Mark5]

you're on track!

[GonzoCRFan]

Random thought - weathering needs to be positioned as era specific.

For example, it seems to me that heavily "weathered" cars were not as prevalent in say the 1960s as in the past decade. I'm not sure why this seems to be the case.

In addition to the things mentioned in this thread, I think corporate image used to be something more railroads took seriously. Back in the glory days of railroading, companies might have been concerned enough to run their cars through a wash rack every now and then. This could also have something to do with the frequency with which cars were serviced back in the friction-bearing days. If a car had to have it's journals re-lubricated every now and then, it would be easier for a shop worker to see it was looking ratty and in need of a re-paint. I imagine with roller-bearings, cars can venture out for years between shop visits.

[The Donkey]

From what I understand, paint held up better then than it does now, due to lead
based being the rule back then. Now we have "enviromentally friendly" paint, which
seems to wear off an awful lot quicker, hence more rust & "peelers" (Kluke's term-
copyright pending-JK)    MRL cars are great definitions of that, as are some CR
cars. Either way IMO, they make great candidates for models. Just my late nite 2c.