...ommited Malcolm Furllow's name, but the other two believe they are conveying the real world.and have a great deal of influence in model railroading today. 

Ken L.

As always...I find amusement within this subject matter whenever the conversation occurs.

Arbitrarily speaking, I find enlightenment in the diversity of both sides of this front.

When I read and have previously read into depth on this debate...I usually conclude that the mild or subtle weathering conscious modeler summarily victors over those who prefer to weather on an "extreme" level

I concur with so much being stated here by so many. I agree on the point of whichever era one replicates....the models deserve as much weathering as deemed for that era. I agree that too many "rustbuckets"...would tend to spoil a prototypical overall appearance of model trains in motion on a layout. I do however feel that a ratio of 50/50 would almost suffice. Then there are those who feel it a near sacrilege to taint even one car in their collection with a weathering medium of any kind. I summarily feel that...it belies on a "two each their own" basis when it comes to weathering.

As for me?...I expound here my personal outtake on the subject. I don't own a layout, I don't run model trains on a layout and I more than likely,....never will. That being expressed, I can boldly stand up for the minority who likes and actually gravitate towards prototype examples of freight cars or locomotives that are completely "nuked". To me, it is all about the exhilaration of the challenge to duplicate a freight car that is submitting to slow death decrepitude due to oxidation! I can safely say that if I were the layout operating type....I would try earnestly to maintain a good judgement on how many "rustbuckets" versus cleaner, graffiti free cars would make the roster or be mixed within a 1/87 scale manifest.

I uphold a propensity to elongate my ramblings when it comes to something I am passionate about....but seeing that there is a model awaiting on my workbench as I type here and now, I must beckon to that call and deliver yet another nuclear meltdown of artists mediums rust and grime effects thereupon. So henceforth without further hindrance, I'd better cut this short and get back to some extreme model replicating.

VIVA RUSTBUCKET WEATHERING!

BTW: Thank you Mike Confalone for the supportive comments concerning my Soo Line boxcar that was featured here last August. Much Appreciated comrade!

Gary Christensen

As for me?...I expound here my personal outtake on the subject. I don't own a layout, I don't run model trains on a layout and I more than likely,....never will.

Gary, as always I read your posts and look at your models with a great deal of enjoyment, but am perplexed over the statement above.  It seems odd to me that an individual with your talents and skills would not be interested in model railroading as opposed to building railroad models. It is akin to Shakespeare being uninterested in theater.

Nick,

You are right, but my point is what is the balance that is most realistic. As others have pointed out, I believe the era modeled has a lot do do with it. Personally, I think far too many of us have teh balance wrong - biased to teh heavily weathered. The problem may be that heavily weathered models allow us to better show off our painting and weathering skills.

Jim Six

Rick,

I certainly respect your and everyone's right to model the way that pleased themselves. I do the same myself. So, I am with you on this.

I believe that when each of us view models of our own making or made by others we filter everything we see with our own likes and dislikes. My filter tells me that I do not like what many modelers do with their weathering because IMO their rosters of freight cars are over weathered, . . . or in some cases under weathered. I am sure everyone of us do the same thing.

Just because I don't particularly care for what someone has done does not mean the model is inferior in any way. If the model builder likes it, that is all that truly matters. Our individual opinions truly only matter to ourselves and need to stay within ourselves. When I see a model that I really like, time willing, I will comment. When I see something I don't care for, I keep it to myself.

Discussing what otherd do and have done os always dangerous!   <grin>

Jim Six

Some great points here all around on a very interesting topic. Here's my take: whether one models a specific prototype down to the last rivet, or one freelances something fantastical that might have been, all model railroading is a vehicle for storytelling. It doesn't matter if one wants to create a documentary or a work of speculative fiction, a model tells a story to the viewer about where it's been and what it does. Weathering, construction materials, style of equipment, paint and graphics are all tools the modeler uses to convey the story. When skillfully blended, the story can be quite compelling and believable. So, does the weathering help tell the story? Does it help fix the model in a specific time and place? Does it add to the illusion of believability? If the answers to those questions are "yes," then the weathering is not overdone.

As for "over weathering" being promoted by the model press, there is a simple answer for that. Editors want new readers. In the case of our small hobby that means new entry-level modelers. Weathering, like tall spindly trestles and soaring mountain scenery, is eye candy. The "typical" does not necessarily sell magazines.

and shoot a few pics around here in Central Georgia where I live.  I'll take some of both buildings and rolling stock that will prove what a total oxymoron the term "over weathering" is..... Wait...someone tell Mother Nature or  the Good Lord...whomever.....that they are "over weathering"  the abandoned building up the road from here or  the Railbox cars that roll by it occasionally. Ugghhhhh .....I can't take it anymore.

Michael

When I weather my cars  they  will be a mix of   some clean  some dirty, and  some  that you would need a  TB shot from  just  touching them. As  that is   how it is for my Era. And the  last one  of the   seagull. I will do  just because  it  looks cool. nothing more nothing   less.

Regards Phil

Someone pointed out that a GP40-2 should look worse today than it did 20 years ago. I model the Southern Pacific, and ex-SP locos are cleaner now. To me they look horrible in yellow.

Jim and all;

Thanks for making such a great topic. As a lifetime modeller of all things but now trains in particular I in general agree with you Jim - too much emphasis can be placed on the oddities, and not enough on the average cars riding the rails during your selected time period.

What I see most is that the colours used are simply too vibrant. Reds are too red, yellows too yellow. In reality reds are not purely red in the sunlight and get washed out on railcars very quickly. Post 1970 and with the withdrawal of Lead (Pb) based paints colours simply did not hold their hue very long at all.

Acrylic based paints breakdown much more quickly in the sun and rain than did lead based colours. What you end up with is colours that leach out to lighter hues very quickly. Blacks are not black, they're more a dirty grey, and so on. Essentially everything will become a very light grey over time.

What's important to me in modelling a car fleet, is the relative difference in the car finishes. So long as you model the proper hue of colours as I've stated above, and you aim for a wide variation (lightly weathered ---> to Heavily weathered) with a preponderance toward the middle of the scale you cannot go wrong in my opinion.

One of the reasons why I still model military vehicles (specifically tanks) is that they too are large metal objects that run on tracks. The skill of armour modellers have driven my painting and weathering along because they understand the effect that a real flat finish (not Dullcoat) has on the viewer of a model finish.

Aiming for better basic painting techniques and finishing makes all the difference. Added to that are the filters, highlighting and washes applied to make your average model really pop and look just like the real thing. You don't need them all to stand out as rust buckets, or as new cars. But there has to be a theme among your painted finishes to give the viewer, be that you or another, an understanding of what you are trying to achieve. For example, modelling an ACF facility is going to mean that you have really only two car types - cars needing a repaint, or cars that have been repainted. Modelling a mainline means that you'll have some of the former, and some of the latter but the bulk of your cars are going to be in between these two extremes.

Thanks again for kicking off the topic Jim. What a cracking conversation we've had so far. I hope that I've added somewhat to it.