Discussion in 'Steam Traction' started by 61624, Jan 17, 2018.
The period authentic photography is only valid if you use a period authentic camera........
So would you be happy for a loco to be painted pink with purple spots? That’s what would happen if you followed that argument to it’s logical conclusion.
People prefer different liveries, fair enough. But to say colour doesn’t matter at all? That’s pushing it.
'Silly' perhaps overstates the case, but while I too prefer the loco and coaches (and their paint schemes) to match, practicality often makes this impossible. The SVR, for instance, has five (I think) coaching sets in service: GWR, LNER, LMS and two BR, one cream and red. Now if you don't use the GWR set except when a GWR liveried loco is at the head, it won't get a lot of use, and currently the LMS set none at all. Next year will see the LMS set behind 13268, although the liveries still might not be a 100% match. I was always happier to se her as LMS 2968 at the head of the LMS set, and it did happen, but it couldn't always be so arranged.
My standpoint is that I prefer to see trains formed of locos and carriages whose liveries match but certainly won't turn away if some other combination turns up. After all, many of the smaller lines use industrial power and most of these locos never worked a passenger train in their lives, thus no livery combination is "authentic".
Pre nationalisation, you did get coaches from one company on the lines of another. I’ve seen a photo in LMS days, of a black 5 with a Southern coach in the formation, taken in Yorkshire.
I saw another pannier in GWR brown ,with GWR still visible . that was 1960 ish at old oak . dunno the number , but somebody will
I was hoping that with the T3 rebuild, consideration would be given when it went through works last, OVS was CME so there should be a nod in that direction.
Air smoothed casing, Firth Brown wheels plus high sided tender. If there are problems with the firebox then obviously it would be logical to fit a welded dry firebox as per Leader.
There of course would be no sensible reason not to then paint it in BR black............sorry got to go, time for my injection. Nurse!
Do 563 in Southern olive green please!
The SECR livery is delightful but how about being fully authentic and using 1899 materials to carry out the work, 2 stores requisition notes are attached for painting loco 353. I wonder what the constituents of the paint actually were?
Interesting that that document uses the formulation "South Eastern and Chatham & Dover Railways", a form of the name that was only in use for a brief period after the amalgamation, but evidently long enough for the stores document to be printed. Given that it appears to be note numbers 10 and 11, presumably the old supply of forms ran out just a few weeks earlier.
I looked up the repair record for loco 353, and the relevant entry was:
Arrived at works 18/09/1899
Entered erecting shop 18/09/1899
Left erecting shop - 19/10/1899
Entered paint shop - 19/10/1899
Left paint shop - 30/10/1899
Sent to work - 31/10/1899 (Returned to Ashford Works shed)
So 12 days in the paint shop. The stores requisition for paint was three days in advance of when it was needed.
Incidentally, 353 was a Manning Wardle type Q 0-6-0ST which was employed as the Ashford Carriage Works shunter, so not a large engine. There is a later photo of it in Bradley in the wartime grey livery.
I think it depends very much on the loco in question. While I personally like LMS lined livery, and will be glad to see the Black 5 and Stanier Mogul back in those liveries, the BR lined black (LNWR) livery suits these locos very well (and most others). Likewise a loco which was always unlined black (4F or Q) it doesn't make much difference what numerals and emblems are on it.
However, anyone who has seen the Y14 at the NNR in GER blue would agree it would be downright vandalism to repaint that loco in unlined BR black. Thankfully it's got the wrong cab anyway! Likewise the SECR locos on the Bluebell. As a personal preference I would add LMS red express locos in BR green... although this livery also suits most locos reasonably well, it is workaday rather than handsome.
As someone with no memory whatsoever of BR steam, I just cannot understand the obsession with recreating the dog days at the dying fag end of steam.
On a photo charter, the matching of BR liveries with Mk1s makes sense. In normal heritage railway service the locos (and on some lines carriage rakes) rotate round anyway, and often the stations, etc are from another era.
Personally I'm baffled by anyone trying to take photos in 2018 to look like 1956. In 1956 steam was mundane and everyday, and we have lots of wonderful photos anyway. In 2018 steam is an astonishing and wonderful aberration: now that's worth a photo! But then any combination of loco, train, station, livery, etc. operating now is authentic for now...
I can agree with some of that, Andrew, but not all. Personally, I do try photographically to recreate the past, and believe that that's what preservation is really about. An example:
42968 Glyndwfrydwy 10am Llangollen-Carog passenger 25-04-10
It's perhaps ironic that, given the general unpopularity of the LNER teak set with photographers at the SVR as "there's no loco that matches it", that now the B1 has been repainted into LNER livery, at the forthcoming spring gala, there will be three visiting engines all fighting over the chance to haul it
The dying last days of steam in the North West are my only memories of steam on BR
I find it ludicrous that such a beautifully restored set of coaches could be unpopular with anyone in the hobby, but hey ho!
It does confirm to me a belief that if you paint it right, they [punters, enthusiasts and photographers alike] will come. LNER lined black - the original class livery - hasn't been seen on a B1 for a very, very long time. Happy days.
Oh dear, what a shame. More importantly, they seem very popular with passengers. Anyway, if they're that unpopular with photographers, how come photo charters with them over the years have been sell outs?
Likewise. They may be unpopular with some photographers - heaven alone knows why - but I've yet to meet anyone with a camera expressing such sentiments. I recall photo charters on the SVR featuring 3442/61994, 8572 and 60163 on teak. They all sold out and over multiple days in each case.
Presumably because if a photo charter was organised they had a matching engine!
Of course when you're riding in it it makes no difference, and I can kind of understand photographers not bothering with photos of the teak train on a normal service day of it doesn't look right - I'm not convinced anyone actively hates it though! On a side note I think locos in SR livery look quite smart with the teaks, and of course they haven't got a matching set of coaches on the SVR anyway.
IMO they're not true photographers in that case. As a certain Malcolm Ranieri said to me a few years ago, "we're photographing preserved steam in the 21st century so any combination is "authentic."" What had caused the conversation was 4771 working chocolate and cream MK.1 stock. Not a combination you would have seen outside the heritage railways scene but so what? Pictures taken that day were a record of what was happening on there GWSR that day and yet another chapter in the amazing story of railway preservation.
What the heck is a "true photographer"?!?
Separate names with a comma.