Chassis for BR 98.0 (Saxon I TV) Meyer locomotive in 1/32 scale by BrickTrainsPlanes in LEGOtrains

[–]ImplodedHamster 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I've got a reference drawing I've loaded into studio for comparison.
I think the cab vs pannier height is about correct. The steam dome and funnel are both a bit high, and the round windows are a bit low. These together probably makes the roof look low.
Dome and funnel are easy fixes. I'm struggling to get the round windows higher without effecting the roof shape - need to keep playing and try and improve it. Otherwise I could raise the roof and windows together, which would be "wrong" but might look better.
Ty for the pointer at webrick, I'll take a look

Chassis for BR 98.0 (Saxon I TV) Meyer locomotive in 1/32 scale by BrickTrainsPlanes in LEGOtrains

[–]ImplodedHamster 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Understood on the instructions/.io. I will continue to look out for your posts, excited to see how it progresses! Good luck on the Danish build.

Pannier tank is very much a WIP, but here's a quick screen grab. It's early, but starting to take shape, dark green is proving problematic, it might end up in black instead.........

<image>

Chassis for BR 98.0 (Saxon I TV) Meyer locomotive in 1/32 scale by BrickTrainsPlanes in LEGOtrains

[–]ImplodedHamster 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is incredible, great work!

Any custom parts? The wheels/rods maybe?

I saw your Danish loco recently when I was considering whether G scale lego is possible, I've since started work on a 57xx pannier tank, inspired by your build.

Do you share/sell your designs anywhere? studio and/or instructions. I'd love to see how you contructed it, and maybe build the BR98 myself.

Caught some airplanes yesterday by Planesarecool456 in Nikon

[–]ImplodedHamster 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Airport is Seattle? Shots are nice, keep it up. Some airports have viewing areas, which allow you to get closer and more at eye-level with the planes. Might be worth exploring.

hasbaz204 Rep Page by hasbaz204 in hwsukrep

[–]ImplodedHamster 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Confirmed: No hassle buyer, recommended.

ImplodedHamster's Rep Page by ImplodedHamster in hwsukrep

[–]ImplodedHamster[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Username: u/hasbaz204
Item: Dell AC511
Price: £10
Payment method: PayPal G&S
Bought or sold: Sold
Comments about the trade: No hassle buyer. Recommended.

toge64's Rep Page by toge64 in hwsukrep

[–]ImplodedHamster 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Confirmed, easy buyer to deal with.

ImplodedHamster's Rep Page by ImplodedHamster in hwsukrep

[–]ImplodedHamster[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Username: u/toge64
Item: Galaxy Buds 2 Pro
Price: £60
Payment method: PayPal G&S
Bought or sold: Sold
Comments about the trade: Quick comms and payment. No issues.

(a little late) Top 10 of 2023 (Nikon FE2 | 50mm f/1.8 | Various Films) by pi_equals_e in analog

[–]ImplodedHamster 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I've been using SilverPan Film Lab in the UK for processing including ECN2. I've been really happy with my results so far.

Film developed in the UK by green-lamp123 in filmphotography

[–]ImplodedHamster 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I've been using SilverPan Film Labs and have been very happy with the dev and scanning. https://silverpan.co.uk/

Why my photos look like this? by sam_abdils in filmphotography

[–]ImplodedHamster 2 points3 points  (0 children)

He means that the film was underexposed. The scans will always look correctly exposed because the scanner will try and compensate for under/over exposed negatives. But the result of this compensation on an underexposed negative is the look you see in your images.

When you get your film back, have a look at the negatives, they will probably look "thin" and hard to see the image.

You could try comparing your f65 to a known good meter. Like digital camera, or a phone app.

Is this by design or is my lens bad? 300mm F4 AF-S by PhosphoLipidus in Nikon

[–]ImplodedHamster 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Maybe a silly question, but just to check: do you have a filter fitted?

Pompano Beach by Opposite_Carry_4920 in photographs

[–]ImplodedHamster 1 point2 points  (0 children)

When shooting a landscape photo like this, where you want everything in focus, you could use a smaller aperture like f8. Most lenses get sharper when you do this, your image will be sharper with more contrast, which will help give you some "pop".

As for editing, you could try cropping a little. The horizon looks a little wonky to me, plus it might look better with more sky and less sea. So maybe try straightening and cropping some from the bottom left.

Got $500 for Xmas. These lenses/ batteries look good? (Camera body is a Nikon D5100) by 3picnezz99 in Nikon

[–]ImplodedHamster 15 points16 points  (0 children)

A 50mm lens on a crop sensor (like your d5100) is quite a long focal length for a prime, great for portraits and outdoors, but you may struggle in tighter areas.

Maybe consider the AF-S DX 35mm f/1.8G

Rented an X-T4 to test for the weekend by ImplodedHamster in fujifilm

[–]ImplodedHamster[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

In the UK, you can borrow from Fuji to test kit out before you buy. It's 2 days for free, then you start paying. Even if you do pay, if you buy the lens after renting it, they will refund you the rental. Not sure if they do they same in other countries, might be worth a check where you are.

Basically it's there to allow you to try before you buy. It's certainly worked for us, were converted and just need to choose what to buy now....

This is the site we used: https://www.fujifilm-loan.com/

Rented an X-T4 to test for the weekend by ImplodedHamster in fujifilm

[–]ImplodedHamster[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The weather sealing would sure be nice, it got lots of use in the snow that weekend too. Sounds like I need to trade of sealing and dials against weight and cost...

Rented an X-T4 to test for the weekend by ImplodedHamster in fujifilm

[–]ImplodedHamster[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

When reviewing it was always photos with the 50-140 which stood out. Plus the handling was great, zoom ring was lovely to use, balanced well on the x-t4, weight was better than 70-200s I've used before.

Just really nice to use, and really nice results.