Scalefour Forum

A product that's new to me...

One of the things that I love most about modelling is the final touches that weathering brings to a model. In my mind, it brings a vehicle or a building to life. Particularly as I model the early 20th century, coal-powered, pre-Smokeless Zone world.

I've recently finished putting the transfers on this Slaters Midland Railway ventilated van. It's depicted in a fairly new version of Midland Grey - there have been many discussions and illustrations on how the actual grey paint changed and became darker with age, But with a vehicle like this, I did worry about how I was going to bring out the depth of the louvres and the planks. The light grey paint was very much too stark:



So, I was mooching around online, as I'd decided that I needed a bottle of Microset to help the transfers on various models settle down - some of my transfer stock must be over thirty years old, and that's not including the ones in unopened kits. So I had found a good price at a military modelling supplier here:



Having to pay postage anyway, IYSWIM, I was having a look around to see what else might be of use. And in the weathering section I lighted upon this "Panzer Grey" wash. Well, the output of Stuttgart isn't too different to the output of Derby in colour...



There is a more full description of the intended use here https://www.gforcemodels.co.uk/ak-interactive-wash-for-panzer-grey-vehicles-250-p.asp

So I gave it a try, applying small amounts on the model with a fine brush. In some respects, it's like the trusty "dirty thinners" of our distant youth. But whether it has an additive, or I'm just more practised at applying it, it really did seem to collect in the cracks and grooves. I ended up with a gentle wash, which I then almost entirely removed by distilled turpentine on a clean brush, to give an overall tone. It's enamel based, so dries more slowly than the somewhat darker Games Workshop "Badab Black" wash that is an acrylic and can sometimes cause patchiness.

It has changed the colour of the whole model slightly, but I'm pleased with the results. It's certainly given the depth to the moulding that I was aiming for:





Oh, and the box that turned up with my order had a couple of random sweets thrown inside I've had that from people in the running world, but it's a first time for a modelling purchase..

Cheers
Flymo

Hi Paul,

That's an excellent finish. Did you use enamel paint for the Midland grey? I ask because some of these washes don't like acrylic.

John.

I agree this looks great. I'm a big fan of these washes. I also have a set of Vallejo acrylic washes in various colours that achieve the same thing but you do need to be quick to avoid patching if you want an all over cover - although does prototype weathering actually weather evenly all over anyway?

They really do highlight the detail, even in the 2mm stuff I'm doing (sorry!).

Chris

It doesn't hide the difference in numbers between body and chassis which I presume is not as it should be?

Noel wrote:It doesn't hide the difference in numbers between body and chassis which I presume is not as it should be?

That's all part of the finishing

Annoyingly, there is no guide to the numbering of the Slaters' transfers in the instructions or on the transfers themselves. As they are pressfix, and therefore face-down, you don't see what number you have until you float the paper off.

It's a bit like buying 4mm lottery tickets!

I'll be making some smudging adjustments to the number plates in due course

Cheers
Flymo

Lord Colnago wrote:Hi Paul,

That's an excellent finish. Did you use enamel paint for the Midland grey? I ask because some of these washes don't like acrylic.

John,

The paint is an enamel. I only use enamels (or now, cellulose for certain situations) on models. I've never got on with acrylics. The only ones I have are the Games Workshop washes.

I really should keep notes of the paints for each vehicle... But I think it's Humbrol #127. That's US Ghost Grey apparently. I'd never have known...

Cheers
Flymo

CDGFife wrote:I agree this looks great. I'm a big fan of these washes. I also have a set of Vallejo acrylic washes in various colours that achieve the same thing but you do need to be quick to avoid patching if you want an all over cover - although does prototype weathering actually weather evenly all over anyway?

Chris,

I agree with you - these things never weather equally all over. But it's the ability to obtain realistic staining, rather than than that "dunked in dirty thinners" which I aim to achieve.

Two undisputed masters of weathering, Tim Shackleton and Mick Bonwick, always say weather to a photograph. When you're dealing with Victorian and Edwardian prototypes, it is difficult due to the absence of colour images (and no, late 1960s period decrepitude is not the same) but I try and collect references where I can.

Such as this:



Saved from somewhere on the web, but very much the sort of everyday look I'm after with my models.

[Edited]

Actually, if I use GIMP to take the colour out of my model... The lettering would clearly need a bit of "knocking back" to match it.



Although I've done that before - apologies for the graininess here, it's a crop from a larger image.



Cheers
Flymo

The barrel load may not be convincing, but the weathering of the open wagon looks top notch from the image provided - the initials look a painted part of the wagon that has been worn away with time - I like the clear difference of wear between the 2 initials. The initials on the weathered van presently look as if they're a later stick-on. However, the van has just received an initial wash coating and is anything but finished so no criticism can be levelled presently. Look forward to seeing how things progress.

Lindsay

The AK range has its uses, used it myself for some years.
The AMMO by Mig range is probably the most versatile.
Subtlety is the game in weathering as we know and these products allow that, with practice and care.
Have to say that the MR wagons look pretty decent thus far

Flymo748 wrote:Two undisputed masters of weathering, Tim Shackleton and Mick Bonwick, always say weather to a photograph. When you're dealing with Victorian and Edwardian prototypes, it is difficult due to the absence of colour images (and no, late 1960s period decrepitude is not the same) but I try and collect references where I can.

Such as this:

post-29416-0-07655200-1545822168.jpg

Saved from somewhere on the web, but very much the sort of everyday look I'm after with my models.

A Selection of a few I have in case they are useful

Fabulous photos, and some of those loads

The fruit van has come out lovely, and the commercial wash clearly does the job. But a wash can also be made up very easily from artist's oil paints and matching thinners. A mix of black and brown paints works well, even over MR grey. When washed over acrylic varnish, this stuff seems not to cause problems.

Left to right: black-brown wash; black-only wash; unwashed.

The photographs give confirmation, if any was required, that goods wagons didn't remain in ex-works condition for long, even in pre-grouping days, unlike the situation all too many layouts suggest.

I'm not sure if this is the endpoint of the weathering, Paul, or if you would go further. In any case, I wouldn't start with a dark wash. First of all, dirt is dirt: the last set of photos demonstrate that - there's no difference between pre-grouping muck and BR standard muck. And what you see in each case is less dark muck, more light muck. The vast majority of the MR wagons shown (including the prototype open in your photo) have a pale, dusty appearance to them, and black and white photos show that very well; very few have joints etc picked out in dark muck, and those that do have it in combination with much lighter dirt. Observation having got us to that conclusion, we can then extrapolate from that and find colour photos of wagons in that dusty condition albeit in a later period. We then have to work out ways of representing that. The first two here (sorry, one is 00 for my dad) attempt to do this with more or less success - parts of them are OK, other parts less so.





Whereas this one I think gets it right (this is again 00, but will be P4 before this lockdown is much older...).





I think we too often weather models to look like models. But when we look at photos, we have to look - and we need people to tell us when we haven't. Otherwise, we might as well be on **Web.

On the real thing, weathering is built up gradually in many light layers. On a model, to be convincing, weathering needs to be built up in the same way as the real thing, little by little. On the prototype, darker areas will be an accumulation of dirt over a period of time, so to me it does not seem appropriate to apply such weathering in one go or even two. Are darker washes really appropriate?

I find weathering is more convincing if it is understated. Less is more.

Personally I think there is a place for both dark and light weathering and also powders on most (not all though) vehicles and as Noel said very few last long in decent clean condition.

I use the dark washes like the military modellers do to pick out the detail and shadow lines. Then I usually use lighter washes over the majority but in patches. Final stage is to add powder/chalk/ash to build up the whole. Rather as David says - never in one go and always several layers. I also agree with "from a photo" if possible.

Here's a couple of mine (sorry it's 2mm!!):


Cheers

Chris

Daddyman wrote:I'm not sure if this is the endpoint of the weathering, Paul, or if you would go further.

This was just the first step. The base coat, as it were, to bring out the detail in the planking and the louvres.

Daddyman wrote:In any case, I wouldn't start with a dark wash. First of all, dirt is dirt: the last set of photos demonstrate that - there's no difference between pre-grouping muck and BR standard muck. And what you see in each case is less dark muck, more light muck. The vast majority of the MR wagons shown (including the prototype open in your photo) have a pale, dusty appearance to them, and black and white photos show that very well; very few have joints etc picked out in dark muck, and those that do have it in combination with much lighter dirt.

Completely agree - as this is the base coat, the other layers and colours need to be built up on top.

Question for you: I particularly like the look of that NE hopper in the first picture. Have you used one of these military modelling "faders" for the effects from the bottom up? I am a big believer (like Martin Goodall's buildings and backscenes in Burford) of the fading effect of atmospherics as you move into the distance.

But I haven't yet tried one of the fading washes for myself. I'm a little concerned that it may merely exchange one type of "universal bland" for another...

Daddyman wrote: Observation having got us to that conclusion, we can then extrapolate from that and find colour photos of wagons in that dusty condition albeit in a later period. We then have to work out ways of representing that. The first two here (sorry, one is 00 for my dad) attempt to do this with more or less success - parts of them are OK, other parts less so.

I think we too often weather models to look like models. But when we look at photos, we have to look - and we need people to tell us when we haven't. Otherwise, we might as well be on **Web.

And lovely models too. Thanks for sharing them. Hopefully we'll see a few more?

Cheers
Flymo

Le Corbusier wrote:
A Selection of a few I have in case they are useful

Tim,

thank you! Downloaded and filed.

I must admit that I've given up bookmarking pages/remembering websites/threads. The brain becomes too full and I can never find them when I need them!

Cheers
Flymo

Two of the most common non-atmospheric causes of dirt would be brake block dust and stone dust from ballast, which tend to present as a very pale beige or brown when new, I would suggest, rather than grey, and both would tend to darken over time, although brake dust would be renewed fairly often [VB or AB wagons were a very small minority, but handbrakes were regularly applied going down inclines]. Also very common would be dust from coal, cinders, etc., which would be dark grey to black. All of these would be subject to vertical displacement by rain and would tend to collect in corners.

However, rain in industrial Britain was quite significantly acidic until the clean air acts improved matters, and that acid would tend to react with the paints used. BR and the four grouped railways used zinc white to make grey, but pre-grouping greys were much more likely to use lead white; the zinc white would be relatively stable, but the lead white would make the grey steadily darker over time, owing to chemical reactions with industrial air pollutants, which would tend to turn the white lead black.

BR bauxite commonly appears dark in photographs; the colour of paint applied to patch repairs is very different to the colour of the untreated body parts. Just for variety, some photographs suggest that the paint has gone to a pinker shade in some cases. I assume, therefore, that the original bauxite paint has also suffered chemical changes, which presumably has implications for the wagons of those railway companies and private owners that used shades of red or red-brown in earlier years.

Body rust seems largely to have been a phenomenon of steel minerals and engineers vehicles and so mostly post-WW2; steel or iron chassis seem to be less affected [the LMSR, at least, used enamel black for chassis], apart from bufferheads and the leaves of springs sometimes, although PO wagons with elderly paintwork would probably have shown some on the body framing. What does show sometimes on dirty axleboxes is oil which has overflowed; whether there is something analogous with grease axleboxes I don't know.

Flymo748 wrote:

Daddyman wrote:I'm not sure if this is the endpoint of the weathering, Paul, or if you would go further.

Question for you: I particularly like the look of that NE hopper in the first picture. Have you used one of these military modelling "faders" for the effects from the bottom up? I am a big believer (like Martin Goodall's buildings and backscenes in Burford) of the fading effect of atmospherics as you move into the distance.

But I haven't yet tried one of the fading washes for myself. I'm a little concerned that it may merely exchange one type of "universal bland" for another...

And lovely models too. Thanks for sharing them. Hopefully we'll see a few more?

Cheers
Flymo

Kind of you to say so - thank you. I don't use washes of any kind partly because I'm happy with the effects I'm getting without them, and partly because I have a general distrust of using wet things to represent dry things - whether we're talking about bark, cement, or muck. Wet products tend to betray their inborn wetness later in life.

I use two-and-a-half colours in most of my weathering (or at least certainly in the vehicles shown here): the first is Humbrol flesh (sic.), which I stockpile like a Facebook user stockpiles loo roll. I airbrush this over all the underframe (with an old vehicle I don't even spray the underframe black first). I then either rely on overspray to lightly cover the lower body sides (same colour - flesh), or else waft a bit more on with an airbrush. If too much gets onto the body sides during underframe painting (it's important to get into all the nooks and crannies of the underframe), it can be washed off [edit: washed off the body side], and then re-wafted.

This first application has to be dry before the next stage begins - that is thoroughly dry (overnight-in-the-airing-cupboard dry).

The second colour I use is my muck mix, which is Railmatch sleeper grime and Humbrol matt black. This I waft on from the top down to represent the darker elements which fall from above - Noel has it exactly right in his last post. These dark elements are coal in the case of the hopper, or loco/atmospheric soot. I wash this off with a downwards motion consistent with Noel's observations, and then re-waft where necessary - old soot washed into cracks is represented by wiped-off muck mix, new soot by the wafting. This is what is not entirely successful on the hopper.
I also waft this muck mix on to the flesh on the body sides and on the underframe, more or less thickly depending on the part of the underframe - thick for oily parts, less so for parts which tended to be lighter/dusty/rusty and dry (springs, brake blocks, W-irons). If overspraying of the muck mix on these lighter, dustier areas occurs, it can be wiped off (this is is why the flesh paint has to be dry) and re-wafted. The muck mix can also be scraped off later with a fibre-glass brush - for example on springs or tender coal rails.

As for fading, Humbrol flesh is all I ever use. It makes every colour from bauxite to black lighter. I even use it to represent lighter, ashy areas on a loco footplate or boiler top (though not on the locos below).

So you see, I'm doing things the other way around to you - light first, dark second. This is especially important on locos, where any attempt to paint rust colours over the top of the black will look like ... well, like someone has painted rust colours over the black. I don't have a picture of this process I call "underspraying" on a wagon, but here it is in action on some locos:

Lord Colnago wrote:Hi Paul,

That's an excellent finish. Did you use enamel paint for the Midland grey? I ask because some of these washes don't like acrylic.

Flymo748 wrote:John,

The paint is an enamel. I only use enamels (or now, cellulose for certain situations) on models. I've never got on with acrylics. The only ones I have are the Games Workshop washes.

I really should keep notes of the paints for each vehicle... But I think it's Humbrol #127. That's US Ghost Grey apparently. I'd never have known...

Cheers
Flymo

Thanks all for a thread that has been hugely helpful for a beginner like me. When Flymo first posted this the mere mention of the word "weathering" gave me an uncomfortable twist of minor panic in my stomach...

I have be re-reading it all this morning, and second time round I clicked on the link for more info in the OP (https://www.gforcemodels.co.uk/ak-inter ... -250-p.asp) and was interested to see that this specifically advises against using this enamel wash over enamel paint, and instead says go for acrylic paint.

So actually it seems that bad interactions can happen on like for like as well as contrasting paint types. Does anyone have any thoughts on this?

But otherwise do keep posting folks, this is proving most instructive!

All the best

Neil

Daddyman wrote:
So you see, I'm doing things the other way around to you - light first, dark second. This is especially important on locos, where any attempt to paint rust colours over the top of the black will look like ... well, like someone has painted rust colours over the black. I don't have a picture of this process I call "underspraying" on a wagon, but here it is in action on some locos:

Thank you - that's fascinating. I'm going to have to give it a try when I next have the spraying kit out.

Cheers
Flymo

Flymo748 wrote:I must admit that I've given up bookmarking pages/remembering websites/threads. The brain becomes too full and I can never find them when I need them!

I gave up on browser bookmarks and now use Evernote free edition. There are limits on devices you can use it on and upload limits, but I have never exceeded them despite some intensive use over the last five years. The benefits I find is the ability to get a screenshot, if you save a picture using the browser addon, it saves the url and you can add tags for items saved in it.

It isn't perfect but miles better than saving anonymous images on your hard drive and browser bookmarks.

Neil Smith wrote:I have be re-reading it all this morning, and second time round I clicked on the link for more info in the OP (https://www.gforcemodels.co.uk/ak-inter ... -250-p.asp) and was interested to see that this specifically advises against using this enamel wash over enamel paint, and instead says go for acrylic paint.

So actually it seems that bad interactions can happen on like for like as well as contrasting paint types. Does anyone have any thoughts on this?

I certainly have some thoughts on this. I have been using enamel washes over enamel paints and enamel washes over acrylic paints for some time and have not found there to be any problems with either method. It is imperative, though, that the underneath surface is completely dry before adding the wash.

There are two ways of applying washes such as this, depending on the result you wish to achieve. Brushing it on all over the model surface and then wiping off most of it will highlight detail and slightly discolour the whole surface. Applying it using a thin brush (rigger, for example) and capillary action will highlight detail and leave the original surface colour intact. Horses for courses.

You can find examples of both methods on **web.

Daddyman wrote:So you see, I'm doing things the other way around to you - light first, dark second. This is especially important on locos, where any attempt to paint rust colours over the top of the black will look like ... well, like someone has painted rust colours over the black. I don't have a picture of this process I call "underspraying" on a wagon, but here it is in action on some locos:

I'm very interested in what you've done here because the finished result is really effective. I've been using contrasting base colours, darker areas black and more exposed areas in white, IE like this:



I then apply very thinned coats of the top colours (in this case GWR loco green). The result is nice, but also quite subtle. Once I apply the decals, they look very bright against the faded effect of the top colour, so then I have to start knocking them back, which I do with very thinned greys and sands shot from below. Again it ends up looking okay, but while it tones down the decals it also tones down the original effect of using the contrasting base colours. Then to counter this I'm tempted to start applying powders, oil washes etc, and to be frank I'm not a fan of piling more and more gunk on top of what started as a decent looking faded effect.

I'm going a little bit off topic here (sorry Paul!) but I'd be really interested to see a photo step through how you paint a loco, start to finish.