RMweb Premium Andy Hayter Posted August 27, 2019 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 27, 2019 (edited) As the vocal critic of the first shots, I have to say the second set are lightyears better. I too am unconvinced by the photoshopped smoke and steam. I am sure it can be done, but I m still waiting to see anyone do it really well and more importantly really convincingly. There is I think a psychological problem in this in that we all know they are models and therefore the smoke and steam is not real. It (photoshopping) therefore needs to be done with extra precision to have an impact. Edited August 27, 2019 by Andy Hayter 1 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Manxcat Posted August 27, 2019 RMweb Gold Share Posted August 27, 2019 Here is my version of a smoke effect. Not added with Photoshop or anything of that ilk but rather a Seuthe smoke generator in a hole in the baseboard. The car has a hole drilled through the engine block. It always got a favourable reaction at shows. Are you old enough to remember when AA men saluted you as they arrived? Archie 8 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium John Isherwood Posted August 27, 2019 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 27, 2019 13 minutes ago, Manxcat said: Here is my version of a smoke effect. Not added with Photoshop or anything of that ilk but rather a Seuthe smoke generator in a hole in the baseboard. The car has a hole drilled through the engine block. It always got a favourable reaction at shows. Are you old enough to remember when AA men saluted you as they arrived? Archie They saluted you whenever they saw a vehicle displaying an AA badge. If they didn't salute - there was a speed trap ahead! Regards, John Isherwood. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Tony Wright Posted August 27, 2019 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted August 27, 2019 1 hour ago, Barry Ten said: I dropped the shutter speed down to 1/25th for this one: The loco's going quite slowly. If I've done my maths correctly, it's only around 60 mph. Terrific shot! 1 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Tony Wright Posted August 27, 2019 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted August 27, 2019 Enough of f@rting with photoshoppery (at least as far as I'm concerned). I take pictures of the models I and others have made, showing them (I hope) as they are. In the following shots, all I've done is take out the background. Class A4 60017 SILVER FOX (SE Finecast/Wright/Haynes) heads the northbound 'Tees Tyne' Pullman through Little Bytham. This is anomalous because the station was demolished in 1959, at least a year before the MK.1 Pullmans arrived. Still, it's my trainset and Rule 1. applies! The difference in Hornby's rendition and Bachmann's rendition of Pullman umber/cream is very marked. Is either correct? Another A4, this time 60034 LORD FARINGDON (Bachmann/SE Finecast/Wright/Rathbone) races south on an Up express passing an O4/2 (K's/Kinsey/Wright) on an unfitted goods. Note the cut-down rear of the tender of the A4. Class B12/3 61553 (Coopercraft/Wright) prepares to stop with a 'parly' as Class A1 60116 HAL O' THE WYND (DJH/WRight/Rathbone) powers northwards on the Down 'Northumbrian'. Visitors frequently say how much they enjoy the view from the 'far side'. It certainly gives a different perspective on LB. 16 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium St Enodoc Posted August 27, 2019 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 27, 2019 2 hours ago, Barry Ten said: I dropped the shutter speed down to 1/25th for this one: The loco's going quite slowly. If I've done my maths correctly, it's only around 60 mph. In round figures, 60 mph in 4mm scale is about 14 inches per second. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Barry Ten Posted August 27, 2019 RMweb Gold Share Posted August 27, 2019 1 minute ago, St Enodoc said: In round figures, 60 mph in 4mm scale is about 14 inches per second. It did 5 feet and a bit in about 4 and a half seconds (I just did "one missisippi... two mississipi...) so I think that works out about right. 3 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Jamiel Posted August 27, 2019 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 27, 2019 (edited) I too dislike the addition of smoke in pictures, but a lot of that is because it is very often a soft brush selected and then quickly dragged over the image. But as a one off, this is one I have mocked up quickly in Nuke, I could have done it in Photoshop, but I like Nuke better as it is a programme I have used professionally for many years. Some smoke from the Action Essentials package (two separate pieces picked at different times). The image has been graded a bit to take the edge of the colours and an overall grain has been added. I have added some foreground foliage to emphasis the moving camera. Anyway, it is hard to improve on the model of Little Bytham, and indeed many layouts that are reworked in Photoshop. There is always an exception, and that is the wonderful work of Robmcg who has such a personal take on railway modelling through the use of Photoshop, and bringing a hint of Terence Cuneo into digital imagery. On the subject of digital reworking of trains, here is an unfinished piece I did as part of my M.A. in visual effects over which I took a lot more time. I must finish this off and put the correct roof on York Station. This is from a short film just over 1 minute. Much of the station is York today run through Nuke and Photoshop, the Standard 4MT and some of the platform and tracks are from Pickering, the WD is Backmann, the wagons Cambrian, and the loco in the platform is a still my uncle took at York in the 50s. I know the suitcases are too near the edge of the platform, but they are there to mask the people on Pickering platform, the lamp on the right of the 4MT also needs cloning out from the other one. There are lots of little details to sort out still, but hopefully I can get it done before long (Christmas). Since the joy of modelling for me is making something I can hold and not just a digital file on a computer I am very happy to leave be the photos in this thread. Jamie Edited August 28, 2019 by Jamiel 6 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robmcg Posted August 27, 2019 Share Posted August 27, 2019 1 hour ago, Tony Wright said: Enough of f@rting with photoshoppery (at least as far as I'm concerned). I take pictures of the models I and others have made, showing them (I hope) as they are. In the following shots, all I've done is take out the background. Class A4 60017 SILVER FOX (SE Finecast/Wright/Haynes) heads the northbound 'Tees Tyne' Pullman through Little Bytham. This is anomalous because the station was demolished in 1959, at least a year before the MK.1 Pullmans arrived. Still, it's my trainset and Rule 1. applies! The difference in Hornby's rendition and Bachmann's rendition of Pullman umber/cream is very marked. Is either correct? Another A4, this time 60034 LORD FARINGDON (Bachmann/SE Finecast/Wright/Rathbone) races south on an Up express passing an O4/2 (K's/Kinsey/Wright) on an unfitted goods. Note the cut-down rear of the tender of the A4. Class B12/3 61553 (Coopercraft/Wright) prepares to stop with a 'parly' as Class A1 60116 HAL O' THE WYND (DJH/WRight/Rathbone) powers northwards on the Down 'Northumbrian'. Visitors frequently say how much they enjoy the view from the 'far side'. It certainly gives a different perspective on LB. I fully respect your choice regarding 'photoshoppery' as you describe it. With your panned shots, would not softer, less saturated colours look better in the background? Contributors to RMweb go to great lengths to achieve te right livery on engines. Backgrounds in my experience are rarely made from bright primary hues. I have taken quite a few panned photos of real trains and it's rather difficult, as you have shown. Here is an edited photo of a Bachmann A1 I created some years ago or if you prefer Gresley... I'm perfectly comfortable with a degree of editing of photos, as you can see, and it's not meant to be more than 'a picture' hopefully evocative. Cheers. 15 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium PJT Posted August 27, 2019 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 27, 2019 (edited) On 24/08/2019 at 20:26, Jol Wilkinson said: While the Scalefour Society does not, AFAIK as a member, have any facility in which to store or display layouts, it is possible that one of the membership might be able to help. Reflecting that maintaining a sophisticated and complex model such as Maindee East might be too difficult for most museums or or similar institutions (viz. Heckmondwyke and the NRM), it might be better offered as a diorama. In which case a location with strong GWR connections could offer the best opportunity to find a suitable home, such as Didcot or Pendon. All good points, thank you, Jol. I certainly wouldn't like Maindee East to end up like Heckmondwike (the model railway that was my first great inspiration when I first saw it in Model Railway Constructor Model Railways). While I'd already wondered about talking to Pendon, I hadn't thought of Didcot at all. On 25/08/2019 at 18:44, 4069 said: Pendon does not want or have space for any additional layouts, and I suspect that Didcot would not be interested, especially in a model that is not of a real place. You could well be right, but at the very least for the sake of a few minutes writing an email or making a phone call one or the other might just be able to point me in the right direction. I think the discussions about Maindee East Engine Shed are moving away from being appropriate for Wright Writes, so after consulting Andy York I've set up 'A Future for Maindee East Engine Shed' as a new topic in Modelling Musings & Miscellany. For those who are interested I'll post updates there. I'll also continue to be very open to advice and suggestions, so please keep them coming. Thank you all for your interest and goodwill so far. Pete T. Edited August 27, 2019 by PJT Correction of magazine title 4 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Tony Wright Posted August 28, 2019 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted August 28, 2019 10 hours ago, Jamiel said: I too dislike the addition of smoke in pictures, but a lot of that is because it is very often a soft brush selected and then quickly dragged over the image. But as a one off, this is one I have mocked up quickly in Nuke, I could have done it in Photoshop, but I like Nuke better as it is a programme I have used professionally for many years. Some smoke from the Action Essentials package (two separate pieces picked at different times). The image has been graded a bit to take the edge of the colours and an overall grain has been added. I have added some foreground foliage to emphasis the moving camera. Anyway, it is hard to improve on the model of Little Bytham, and indeed many layouts that are reworked in Photoshop. There is always an exception, and that is the wonderful work of Robmcg who has such a personal take on railway modelling through the use of Photoshop, and bringing a hint of Terence Cuneo into digital imagery. On teh subject of sigital reworking of trains, here is an unfinished piece I did as part of my M.A. in visual effects over which I took a lot more time. I must finish this off and put the correct roof on York Station. This is from a short film just over 1 minute. Much of the station is York today run through Nuke and Photoshop, the Standard 4MT and some of the platform and tracks are from Pickering, the WD is Backmann, the wagons Cambrian, and the loco in the platform is a still my uncle took at York in the 50s. I know the suitcases are too near the edge of the platform, but they are there to mask the people on Pickering platform, the lamp on the right of the 4MT also needs cloning out from the other one. There are lots of little details to sort out still, but hopefully I can get it done before long (Christmas). Since the joy of modelling for me is making something I can hold and not just a digital file on a computer I am very happy to leave be the photos in this thread. Jamie Thanks for these, Jamie, Your 'smoke' effect on 60501 is far more impressive than mine. But then, I am 'prejudiced' against the technique, and have no interest in acquiring the necessary skills. One 'criticism', if I may? The late Wilf and little Pete, both ex-of the Bytham 'gang' would be horrified at the inclusion of foreground foliage. The embankments and cuttings in the Bytham area were immaculate just over 60 years ago. No trees or shrubs were present - it was just well-tended grass, kept down by 'controlled burns'. If ever an aspect of our railways has altered beyond recognition during the last two generations, it is the uncontrolled reversion to Nature of the railway periphery. Imagine trying to get an 'equivalent' panning shot on LB today. Impossible, because the main line just runs through a green corridor! Regards, Tony. 3 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Clive Mortimore Posted August 28, 2019 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 28, 2019 22 minutes ago, Tony Wright said: Thanks for these, Jamie, Your 'smoke' effect on 60501 is far more impressive than mine. But then, I am 'prejudiced' against the technique, and have no interest in acquiring the necessary skills. One 'criticism', if I may? The late Wilf and little Pete, both ex-of the Bytham 'gang' would be horrified at the inclusion of foreground foliage. The embankments and cuttings in the Bytham area were immaculate just over 60 years ago. No trees or shrubs were present - it was just well-tended grass, kept down by 'controlled burns'. If ever an aspect of our railways has altered beyond recognition during the last two generations, it is the uncontrolled reversion to Nature of the railway periphery. Imagine trying to get an 'equivalent' panning shot on LB today. Impossible, because the main line just runs through a green corridor! Regards, Tony. Hello Tony The "green corridor" is one of those double edged situations, many plant spices survive in this uninterfered environment, but they leave their leaves on the line. It is a haven for all types of wild life, the different birds that dine off Mo's bird feeders may not be around if the railway was as sterile as much of our cultivated land is. There is a down side it is home to many borrowing animals which can make cuttings and embankments unstable. Anyhow would a LNER A-Zooooma look any better panned or not? Photos of the birds on the trees would look much nicer. 2 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackRat Posted August 28, 2019 Share Posted August 28, 2019 11 hours ago, Barry Ten said: It did 5 feet and a bit in about 4 and a half seconds (I just did "one missisippi... two mississipi...) so I think that works out about right. You could always try.......Thousand and one, thousand and two, thousand and three.........and no need to 'check canopy' either! 3 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold john new Posted August 28, 2019 RMweb Gold Share Posted August 28, 2019 One of the other issues with digitally added steam that makes it often look wrong is it is usually added starting at the chimney rim - look at the prototype and there is usually a clear gap (albeit small) between the hot vapour emerging in the blast and it condensing enough to form the white we see. So we then get the issues of scaling - to make it visible it probably has to be an over-scale gap but if you leave out the gap it looks wrong. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Popular Post Tony Wright Posted August 28, 2019 Author RMweb Gold Popular Post Share Posted August 28, 2019 10 hours ago, robmcg said: I fully respect your choice regarding 'photoshoppery' as you describe it. With your panned shots, would not softer, less saturated colours look better in the background? Contributors to RMweb go to great lengths to achieve te right livery on engines. Backgrounds in my experience are rarely made from bright primary hues. I have taken quite a few panned photos of real trains and it's rather difficult, as you have shown. Here is an edited photo of a Bachmann A1 I created some years ago or if you prefer Gresley... I'm perfectly comfortable with a degree of editing of photos, as you can see, and it's not meant to be more than 'a picture' hopefully evocative. Cheers. I've said before Rob............. I find your work incredibly clever, but it is so far away from my approach to model railway photography as to hold virtually no interest to me. The two shots you've posted aren't 'accurate' representations of a Bachmann or a Hornby ER Pacific. They look more like paintings (which, I assume, is the effect you're after), and you do call them just 'pictures' to be fair. A couple of points, if I may, please? You mention 'less-saturated' colours in the background of my panning shots. Would it interest you to know how I achieved those colours? They're painted from life! The horizon to the west of the track formation at Little Bytham (if one were standing on the formation) is no more than a quarter of a mile away. Thus, there's no atmospheric perspective at all. The railway runs along the west side of the very shallow valley of the River Glen. I just stood at the same height as the railway (not trespassing), made colour sketches, took photographs and used these for my painting of the backscene. Have you physically-added the round keeps to the Cartazzi and tender axleboxes on 60157? By that I mean, fix discs by glue to the model. If so,may I compliment you, because you've gone a lot further than I do with my representations of these distinctive roller-bearing A1 features? You've actually added the studs and bolts. Not only that, they're incredibly consistent. Model-making prowess way above what I've achieved on my kit-built roller bearing A1s. If not, and they're just Photoshop illusions, why not take the process a stage further and remove one of the mechanical lubricators? Or alter the valve gear on the A3 so that it's correct, or 'paint' the cab eaves black, instead of how they're supplied in green? If all the 'physical alterations' are in Photoshop, then the models (to me) have no real 'meaning'. One sees more and more 'simulated' model railways; nothing more than computer-generated things. Is this the way forward with still photography of actual models as well? Artificial smoke/steam, different backgrounds added (some real) and so much computer manipulation that the picture we're observing is nothing (or very little) like the actual thing. Might I describe my approach to model railway photography as 'forensic'? I use my model photography to 'test' my own building. I'm often disappointed at the 'crudity' of what I make, so analytical is the camera's 'eye'. It encourages me to 'do better', because things like rough solder joints are so much more apparent under the lens. Taking this 'forensic' approach further, when I take pictures of my layout or the layouts made by others, all I ever do by way of computer-alteration is to take out any background clutter. The layout, the models and everything left in the image is as it is in reality, warts and all! If a model of a roller-bearing A1 doesn't have the correct axlebox keeps, then that's how they stay. I've got a good mate coming round soon, and we'll run the railway. Yes, actually run it. A real, 3D miniature representation of this fast (very fast) section of the ECML in steam days. None of the locos will produced 'smoke' (unless a motor burns out!) and if there are any errors of detail or fact, then that's how they'll be. I won't be able to 'alter' or 'improve' anything by way of a computer - if something fails, derails or we cock-up the operation, that's it. It's 'real', or at least as 'real' as we can make it. Anyway, pictures of one of my kit-built roller-bearing A1s. The basic bodywork on this was made by a mate. I completed it, made the chassis and Ian Rathbone painted it. Nothing on it has been altered in the photo programme. Each to their own, I suppose, and I do acknowledge the Photoshop skills you possess. Kind regards, Tony. 17 1 1 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium MJI Posted August 28, 2019 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 28, 2019 On 26/08/2019 at 15:06, polybear said: An appeal to those clever and most knowledgeable people that frequent Tony's excellent thread - can anyone shed any light as to the origins of the following mouldings (Manufacturer and prototype) please? Another of those items collected at some long-forgotten exhibition in the dim and distant past.... Many thanks, Brian Looks like a mix of Kirk body and DC Kits floor. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Tony Wright Posted August 28, 2019 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted August 28, 2019 32 minutes ago, Clive Mortimore said: Hello Tony The "green corridor" is one of those double edged situations, many plant spices survive in this uninterfered environment, but they leave their leaves on the line. It is a haven for all types of wild life, the different birds that dine off Mo's bird feeders may not be around if the railway was as sterile as much of our cultivated land is. There is a down side it is home to many borrowing animals which can make cuttings and embankments unstable. Anyhow would a LNER A-Zooooma look any better panned or not? Photos of the birds on the trees would look much nicer. 'Photos of the birds on the trees would look much nicer.' Will these do Clive? I can't immediately find the images of two types of woodpecker, tree creepers and nuthatches. The sparrow hawk was too fast!!!!!!!!!!! What will Wright Writes come up with next? Regards, Tony. 18 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Clive Mortimore Posted August 28, 2019 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 28, 2019 46 minutes ago, Tony Wright said: 'Photos of the birds on the trees would look much nicer.' Will these do Clive? I can't immediately find the images of two types of woodpecker, tree creepers and nuthatches. The sparrow hawk was too fast!!!!!!!!!!! What will Wright Writes come up with next? Regards, Tony. They are lovely Tony. Pity the sparrowhawk was behaving like an A-Zooooomer. When I lived in Essex I would go to the railway line to take photos of the OLE on the GER, and often end up sitting still just watching the comings and goings of the birds and animals along side the line. Just ordinary wild life, nothing too exotic. I found it very relaxing. 4 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steamport Southport Posted August 28, 2019 Share Posted August 28, 2019 1 hour ago, cctransuk said: I agree wholeheartedly with Tony's comments !! We have been here more than once - and I thought that it had been agreed last time that Rob would confine his altered images to his own thread. For my part, I pressed the IGNORE tab long ago. However, lately it seems that whichever thread I turn to, I find numerous 'YOU HAVE CHOSEN TO IGNORE POSTS FROM rpbmcg' markers. Once again, Rob seems to be invading threads with his images, regardless of their relevance to the subject matter. I appreciate that a significant sector of the membership enjoy and admire Rob's images, but they know where to find them - in Rob's own thread. I can only assume that Rob is dissatisfied with the size of his audience, and is seeking to impose his work on those of us who have little or no interest in it. MODS : Please can you bring pressure to bear in order to ensure that Rob's work is easily accessible to interested members IN HIS OWN THREAD, and not interspersed at random amongst what most of us regard as real modelling. .... and yes - I do know that Rob has issues that severely limit his ability to participate in 'real modelling', and he has my genuine sympathy in that respect. Regards, John Isherwood. But the discussion was on photoshopping and altering images so the pictures were relevant. Or is it only certain people who are modellers or "experts" that can post images or comment? Just scroll past them if you don't like them. Simple. Jason 11 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Barry Ten Posted August 28, 2019 RMweb Gold Share Posted August 28, 2019 1 hour ago, Tony Wright said: ' I can't immediately find the images of two types of woodpecker, tree creepers and nuthatches. The sparrow hawk was too fast!!!!!!!!!!! What will Wright Writes come up with next? Regards, Tony. May I humbly offer a pair of great spotted woodpeckers? The one on the left is a juvenile, the other is an adult male. And now back to trains... Last night I took my King onto the workbench and reworked the loco-tender connection to bring the tender closer, jacked up the rear of the body by a fraction of a mm, and started adding some details to the underneath of the cab. Unfortunately all my reference books cast very little light on this area so an element of guesswork will be required, but the main thing will be to fill in the void and suggest the presence of stuff, rather than modelling it accurately. Heresy, I know. Al 10 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Tony Wright Posted August 28, 2019 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted August 28, 2019 2 hours ago, Steamport Southport said: But the discussion was on photoshopping and altering images so the pictures were relevant. Or is it only certain people who are modellers or "experts" that can post images or comment? Just scroll past them if you don't like them. Simple. Jason I agree the photos (in context) were relevant, and I don't have the slightest problem in their being posted on here. However, they interest me very little (other than in their technical expertise, but not as pictures of actual models). In the same way that what I post probably doesn't interest many, many others. I'd hope anyone can post on here, regardless of their level of 'expertise'. I hope one can say that Wright Writes is egalitarian. Regards, Tony. 6 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecgtheow Posted August 28, 2019 Share Posted August 28, 2019 8 minutes ago, Tony Wright said: I agree the photos (in context) were relevant, and I don't have the slightest problem in their being posted on here. However, they interest me very little (other than in their technical expertise, but not as pictures of actual models). In the same way that what I post probably doesn't interest many, many others. I'd hope anyone can post on here, regardless of their level of 'expertise'. I hope one can say that Wright Writes is egalitarian. Regards, Tony. Tony, Well done. It needed to be said & it was best coming from you. Otherwise we would be joining those who try to ban those who they disagree with. Unfortunately it seems to be the flavour of today. William 1 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium John Isherwood Posted August 28, 2019 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 28, 2019 3 hours ago, Steamport Southport said: But the discussion was on photoshopping and altering images so the pictures were relevant. Or is it only certain people who are modellers or "experts" that can post images or comment? Just scroll past them if you don't like them. Simple. Jason Jason, Quite so - though I have never claimed, nor will I ever claim to be an expert. The 'IGNORE' button continues to do it's good work; I simply miss anything that Rob may post that is not an 'altered image'. I can live with that. Regards, John Isherwood. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Tony Wright Posted August 28, 2019 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted August 28, 2019 2 hours ago, ecgtheow said: Tony, Well done. It needed to be said & it was best coming from you. Otherwise we would be joining those who try to ban those who they disagree with. Unfortunately it seems to be the flavour of today. William Thanks William, Like many topics, most things have a 'natural home'. In Wright Writes' case I'd hope what finds a home the most are the works of model-makers, whatever their standard. Personal model-making, surely the ultimate goal, or at least it is to me. As I've alluded to, I have no interest in so heavily-Photoshopped images of models that they cease to be photographs of 'actual' models. They are more like 'clever' paintings, but, in my view, they're so far-removed from actual model-making as to have no 'practical' use. I'd better clarify that last point, so there's no ambiguity. Though one should never make models of models, seeing other folk's work, how they've solved problems and/or made something work, I've found of immense help at times. Completely altered mages offer me nothing, other than I can 'appreciate' the skill-level involved in their creation. A skill I have no wish to learn, nor have any interest in. Each to their own, as always, and nobody has the right to dictate what others should or shouldn't do. Regards, Tony. 8 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Tony Wright Posted August 28, 2019 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted August 28, 2019 2 hours ago, cctransuk said: Jason, Quite so - though I have never claimed, nor will I ever claim to be an expert. The 'IGNORE' button continues to do it's good work; I simply miss anything that Rob may post that is not an 'altered image'. I can live with that. Regards, John Isherwood. Where and what's the 'ignore' button, please? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now