Thank You

This is great stuff - atmospheric and lots of modeling inspiration; many thanks for posting.

Rob Clark
Cornhill & Atherton RR

Yes thank you....

One get's so used to seeing " old time" pictures in black and white that it's an entirely different perspective to see them in color. There's a couple of pictures in there too that I could use to give modelers who complain about "over done weathering"  a good argument to the contrary!

Michael

Agreed - thank you!

Awesome photos. Thanks so much. Being in color, they do provide a better idea of the times. Great for research, but also just fascinating from a historical perspective.

Please take note once again

Please take note once again of the fact that with only a few exceptions showing structures in the ultra-poor rural South, these color images present virtually no evidence of the universal filth and dilapidation so many period hobbyists are so fond of depicting on their layouts representing the 1930's and 40's. Just like film noir, except in small out-of-the-way pockets of America such was simply a fiction created for the purpose of viewer impact by their creators and not a reality any more than the countless modeled structures today showing long rows of obvious nail holes covering their walls.

NYW&B

Wonderful, Historical and very well detailed photos.

These people worked hard and survived overwhelming odds beyond the imagination of today's society.  They had pride in their work efforts and patriotism to their country.  They supported the efforts of their fellow men & women in a time when some others were nearly ready to give up, completely.

They were a great example, to their future generations, of what could be accomplished when everyone worked together against great adversity.

G. T.

Actually....

I was referring to the overall " griminess" of the structures in all the photos, not just the dilapidated ones in the  "ultra-poor rural south". The city structures and some of the structures out in Colorado and Montana are just downright dirty. At any rate, the dilapidated structure pictures do prove they existed even back then. They exist today here in the small town in the "rural south" that I live in, very close to the mainline of the Norfolk Southern, and my town is not "ultra-poor". Of course anything can be taken to excess, my main complaint on some layouts I see is that they are excessively clean.

Michael

the effect of color in photographs

Issues of griminess and dilapidation aside, I find it striking how much more immediate my feeling of connection to the people and scenes is in the color slides than in black and white of the same era. These could have been taken yesterday, everything feels so vividly real. Very cool.

Jeff Allen

Appreciating Photos of America

Never forget that when photo-journaliststs "record" the American situation their work is always a reflection of a personal view of things, or to convey a story with maximum viewer impact that addresses their particular opinion of a situation. It is rare to find such an individual who works in a truly objective manner in the field. You don't win a Pulitzer with an image of the real average everyday life. 

During the era of The Great Depression, for instance, two groups of documentarians emerged. One specifically depicted a crumbling, filth-ridden, all but hopeless America. In contrast, the other group showed images of a bright and shining vision of an increasingly prosperous and spotless country. The contrast between the two, sometimes shot within the very same city, was both startling and perplexing. How could it be so? Of course, the answer is that neither truly represented the real world of their day. Unfortunately, when the difficult times of pre-WWII America are presented today it is almost exclusively through the photos of those who imaged the views of destitute situations and conditions. 

Honestly, I see very little in this photo collection beyond the images of the rural South and the home interiors of the Okies that depicts anything as dirty and run down as what I see on typical layouts. In fact, outside of images from a few of the largest mid-western cities where steam trains were allowed to operate at will, i.e. Chicago in particular, I've never seen examples where all the buildings weren't just about as clean today's.  Now I appreciate that America hasn't truly been pristine since the days of the first settlers, but neither has it looked on average overly grungy since prior to WWI. I grew up in the 1940's in a moderate-sized eastern city and the world that I saw around me was on the whole cleaner than much of what I see on today's visits! So my caution is to use moderation in your weathering and be careful not to get fooled by old photos.. 

NYW&B  

Nailed it....

I think that nails down my feeling pretty well right there.  Because of the color, the pictures don't seem "long ago and far away" and in some cases I could go for a drive today and take very similar looking photos.

Michael

Never forget that when

Obviously your " personal view" of things is far different from mine and apparently that of many other modelers because in the city scenes I see obvious dirt and grime and buildings and awnings that have wear and tear on them. May not be quite as obvious as the rural locations but it's there.  Makes most model railroads I've seen that are it the time period look  pretty accurate to me.The one thing I will agree with you on is that we all see things differently.  You will never get me to agree that there is any such thing as "over weathered".  In my mind that's an oxymoron. I'll leave it at that. 

Again though, these are wonderful photographs and I'm very appreciative to the OP for sharing the link.

Michael

Great photos

George

 Thanks for posting this link the photos are great. The captions were probably applied many years ago. History is what it is and we shouldn't ignore it or as they say if we do we are bound to repeat it. Thanks again George for posting. there are some great RR photos that are very useful for modeling

                                                                                                                                    Ray 

Wow ...

... kind of like looking at another world!  Seeing those familiar images in color does give a completely different perspective to that era ... fascinating.  Thanks for sharing.  

Excessive Weathering Is A Modeling "Style"

"Obviously your " personal view" of things is far different from mine and apparently that of many other modelers because in the city scenes I see obvious dirt and grime and buildings and awnings that have wear and tear on them. May not be quite as obvious as the rural locations but it's there.  Makes most model railroads I've seen that are it the time period look  pretty accurate to me.The one thing I will agree with you on is that we all see things differently.  You will never get me to agree that there is any such thing as "over weathered".  In my mind that's an oxymoron. I'll leave it at that." - Michael 

Not to hijack the thread, but no such thing as over weathering? Mike, have you never taken a good long look at the city scenes on the famous Franklin & South Manchester, especially as illustrated in George's own book? His weathered buildings make the urban one's in the 1940's photos look positively brand spanking new and utterly spotless by comparison!

In fact, to me much of the weathering on the F&SM renders the 1930's New England city scenes looking nearly post-apocalyptic they are so dark and grimy. This intense weathering style is truly a caricature of reality - an example of using excessive weathering purposely to evoke a certain "feeling" in the viewer, as with film noir. It is a clever technique in the hands of a modeler who understands it, but it is not meant to taken as anything other than a dark and grim reflection of the real world and not an accurate depiction. Unfortunately, in the wrong hands it can also be taken to a considerable grimacing excess.

NYW&B

"You will never get me to

"You will never get me to agree that there is any such thing as "over weathered".  "

   Well you need to look at it from a neighborhood viewpoint. Some locations are very nicely maintained and some are not.  Certain industries  can only exist in dirty environments and there's no point in trying to beautify them as they'll be dirty again in 10 minutes. Others need the cheap land of low cost areas to turn a profit so they can't be picky about their neighbors. Some industries are clean and well maintained due to the product and inspections they entail. I recall surveying food plants that were spotless even outside around the grounds. Most layouts would likely include  some of both extremes along with a lot of the middle ground unless they are just set in one specific neighborhood? ...DaveB  

Thanks for the link George

I really appreciate that.  There's a great shot in there of a rural fillin' station that screams to be reproduced, and I've been wanting to do one for some time.  I see those images and it makes me think of what my parents (in their < 12 days) and my grandparents saw every single day (the small town stuff, not the RR stuff).  And as a history buff I love it over-all.  Gonna spend some time going through them and maybe grab a "save-as" for a Wallpaper too.

Again, I really appreciate that link!

The point is....

that mother nature is constantly weathering everything.  "She" even weathers your body, although it's a slow process because the human body is resilient. "She" will continue to weather things without stopping until the day the earth ends.  In my mind it's impossible to "over weather" something. I've seen too many examples  of things that have deteriorated in the weather to believe there is such a thing. No argument can be made to convince me otherwise. Of course there is probably a point we need to stop at on our models. Logic dictates that, but it's still up to each individual where that point is. My interpretation of these photos is that that point is pretty far to the heavy side.

Michael

The Charles Cushman

The Charles Cushman collection has over 14,000 Kodachrome slides that he shot between 1938 and 1969. 

http://webapp1.dlib.indiana.edu/cushman/index.jsp;jsessionid=4F01A27588C1A783315EDC905CFC9085

Steve S

This intense weathering style

A few of the photos from the Cushman collection that I linked to above.  Things look pretty grimy.

http://webapp1.dlib.indiana.edu/collections/cushman/full/P02722.jpg

http://webapp1.dlib.indiana.edu/collections/cushman/full/P03200.jpg

http://webapp1.dlib.indiana.edu/collections/cushman/full/P04217.jpg

http://webapp1.dlib.indiana.edu/collections/cushman/full/P04286.jpg

http://webapp1.dlib.indiana.edu/collections/cushman/full/P04259.jpg

http://webapp1.dlib.indiana.edu/collections/cushman/full/P04211.jpg

Merchandise Mart back then....

http://webapp1.dlib.indiana.edu/collections/cushman/full/P03134.jpg

And today...

http://images.placesonline.com/photos/48781_chicago_merchandise_mart_a_chicago.jpg

Steve S

Regarding griminess...

It's pretty remarkable the difference between when burning coal was a typical power and household heating source and nowadays.  

From what I understand, pre-electric building heating was responsible for a lot of the grime in the air. 

I personally see a difference between grimy - and dilapidated. The 30s gets portrayed a fair amount as dilapidated more so than just grimy. 

And I'm sure in some places that applies - maintenance tends to be the first thing reduced in a budget when things get tight. 

Interpreting Old Photos

One must be very cautious when it comes to interpreting what old photos seem to indicate, a point that I've attempted to convey here several times previously.

As someone with a long interest in history as conveyed through photography I've found that one must never lose sight of the fact that period photographer's (even amateur ones) typically had a distinct purpose for taking the original shot he or she did. In most instances was to record something unusual or exceptional about the scene/subject. Few individuals are to be found who were into truly documenting average everyday scenes. As I indicated previously, professional photographers working under the auspices of the NRA in the 30's were not at all objective with their images. Rather they were trying to convey their own perspective on various situations. This same thing is seen currently with Internet and commercial news outlets. Images too often reflect the photographer's, their editor's, or station's viewpoint with the images. This is why the very same story often produces very different conclusions on different outlets. Objectivity in those professions often comes and goes, with grabbing the public's attention ranked as far above any absolute reality - it's a practice that  goes back all the way to Mathew Brady's Civil War images! 

Another factor folks only familiar with photography since the advent of the internal metering camera is that many older amateur color photos are (1) decidedly under exposed, rendering the scenes looking darker than would have been the case for someone actually viewing it in person, and (2) color images, particularly transparencies, deteriorate markedly in color over time. Few of my own Kodak transparencies from the 50's and 60's retain their original vibrancy of color. Some urban scenes even resemble the images Steve chose to post, making them look as if that era was likewise dark, drab and dirty, which it was not.

The lesson to be taken away from the above is that hobbyists/historians should never blindly accept what scenes in vintage color photos seem to depict too literally without first appreciating the potential variables involved that may influence what the viewer sees.

NYW&B

. 

Another factor folks only

Adjusting for exposure doesn't make the soot and grime go away.   And blaming it on color fading doesn't work either.  The color in most of Cushman's slides has held up remarkably well as evidenced by the bright signage in many of them (especially Coca-Cola signs.)  One of the reasons that Kodachrome was so popular with professionals was because of it's archival qualities.

Look at the pic below.  Exposure is okay.  The color is excellent.  And the buildings are covered in soot.

http://webapp1.dlib.indiana.edu/collections/cushman/full/P04184.jpg

BTW, that corner building looks like it's right out of a Walthers catalog.

Steve S

Thanks for posting the

Thanks for posting the photographs. One picture in particular stood out to me for realism. It was a market or something with a bit of a step down to the side walk and no railing. Other than being a lawyer magnet today it was note worthy that there was no one hanging out on the stoop or laying on the sidewalk. The most interesting feature to me was the griminess of the bright painted surface on the side of the building where the step down was. It is easy to imagine all the hands both young and old that trailed down the side of that building when exiting that store.

To the guys that posted other photos I'll look at them when I gat the chance and thanks for posting them as well.

Steve, the fact of the matter

Steve, the fact of the matter is that the image you posted is severely under exposed by photo standards of today. In addition, modern color films and digital cameras have a dramatically wider latitude in contrast than did Kodak's early versions. The early film created images that are quite different looking and much harsher in light and shadow than we are used to seeing currently. I could certainly generate a very similar image today at many locations in Manhattan simply by taking underexposed shots of Brownstones in even up-scale areas of the city and manipulating the contrast range and color balance to render them like what is seen in your image. Perhaps folks who are not into photography have difficulty accepting this, but that is still a reality.

As to grime not being enhanced through under-exposure of a scene, that is also a misconception. Darkening any scene where the subject is of a dark color will enhance the intensity of even an only slightly dirty surface and even create the impression of dirt where little, or none, exists! Likewise, quite often it can even render normal subtle tonal variations on surface structure of a building to looking oddly dark, patchy and dirty.

Now as I indicated earlier, I don't deny that grimy buildings were to be found in the 30's and 40's if you looked for them, particularly in a few specific cities and in the immediate vicinity of some rail yards, but this was  far from the universal situation or as extreme in nature as many hobbyists are so fond of depicting on their period layouts. Many cities in the east utilized mostly clean burning anthracite coal, as did a number of railroads, creating far less soot than some of the coals burned in the Midwest. Great eastern cities like New York even outlawed steam locomotives completely within city limits as early as 1910. And any amateur movies of L.A., Frisco, etc. on the West Coast dating from the 1930's and 40's typically show little or no signs of any extensive dirt, or decay many envision common to the era. In fact most depict movie set clean looking scenes, especially  downtown.

NYW&B 

Chicago 1948-1951

When I lived in Chicago 1958-1951, if you set the table for dinner, it took only a few minutes before black flecks of soot appeared on your white china.  If you put on a clean pressed white shirt to wear to work, the edges of your collar would be black before you stepped out of your door.  That was because everyone burned coal to heat their homes and to make hot water.

Going home in the evening on the EL and looking West, you would have thought that Chicago was burning again.  All North Eastern cities looked the same until they changed from coal to oil for heating.  That is why the Furniture mart in Chicago looks so clean now as compared to the 50s.

Steam locomotives were a different thing.  Even during the depression the RR hired "wipers".  Workers whose job it was to keep the steam locomotive clean.  During WWII many women were hired to do this job, besides doing all of the greasing and lubricating that a steam  engine required.  From the beginning of steam engines, the engineers took great pride in their machines and did their best to keep them sparkling clean.  And, as any mechanic knows, a dirty engine hides many problems.

Out West it was the calcium build up that was hatd to control.