PRCo PCC Colors

[John Swindler]

>Frederick J Sauerburger MD commented:
>
>
>Ed Lybarger wrote:
>   But remember that the color appearance can be affected by the
> >lighting and by reflections, etc.
>
>Gentlemen,
>This prompted me to pull out the post I made during a similar discussion on 
>the East Broad Top list:
>
>Yo! Rivet-counters and Tint-tainters!
>
>I don't know much about prototypes, but I'm always amused by discussions of 
>color on models.  I do remember air-brushing several structures and cars 
>under the standard fluorescent tube in my spray booth,--then almost 
>becoming apoplectic when I looked at the model in daylight, on the way to a 
>MER meeting, and then again under incandescent light in my family room, and 
>AGAIN in the fluorescent light of a contest room.  All were different!
>
>Now someone described his PRR models being critiqued for shade of red by a 
>former PRR employee.  By definition, this guy has to be a geezer (defined 
>as anyone my age or older) and is looking at things through older eyes.
>The crystalline lens in the eye becomes more yellow with age and eventually 
>turns brown (cataract).  So this guy is comparing his memory of "true" 
>color through the clear lenses of a 40-something KID with his current 
>perception of a model's color through his geezer eyes.  Unless he has had 
>cataract extraction with intraocular lens implantation with a UV-absorbing 
>implant, what he is doing, is looking at things through the equivalent of a 
>pair of yellow-brown glasses.
>
>Sooo... When people critique color, I want to ask them:  Under what light:
>Incandescent? Fluorescent cool white? Warm white? Ott-light true color?
>Daylight? 3200K?  3600K?  etc. etc.
>
>...And by this time, I feel like saying WHO CARES! Paint it RED. Make it 
>look good to you!
>
>Stepping down from the soapbox and back into lurking,
>
>Fred
>PRys, West Penn, and EBT.....near Annapolis
>
>

Question of lighting conditions could not have been said better. Thanks.
Was thinking about the PRC red "discussion" on way in this morning, and 
debating if I dared "suggest" to Jim H. why not put one of his St. 
Petersburg models in back yard for month to see what sun and rain would do 
to the red paint under natural lighting conditions.  (just kidding, Jim)
The reason was that I grew up on 64 line, and recalled noting some 1500 and 
1600 cars in early 1960s with what looked like various rectangular red paint 
patches on front and sides.  Without checking slides, 1611 and 1518 come to 
mind.  Either paint was fading on cars or tint was different - or both.  
Suspect color shade could change rather quickly with "stuff" coming out of 
Pittsburgh's smoke stacks, particularly during rainy weather.  And Craft 
Ave. was downwind from J&L plant.

So is 1711 painted "accurately?"  Sure it is.  It's red with a white front, 
isn't it?  Looks good to me.

John

p.s. for Jim:  Beechwood Improvement Company, Ltd. developed Beechwood.
Passing sidings on West Liberty were at Dormont Wye (which wasn't in 1905) 
and just short of Clearview Loop (which also wasn't, in 1905).  Got my roll 
of quarters - need to do some serious printing of these 1905 maps.
ps. to ps. Concerning Brookline back line from Overbrook, wasn't originally 
PRC right of way.  Was P&CS right of way to vicinity of Brookline Loop per 
1905 Plat Map.
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at 
http://profiles.msn.com.