PC: Re: Penn Central Digest V5 #71

["Jim Kingston" <Tincanman@xxxxxxxxxx>]

I have read the messages posted herein which caused me to look closer at the 
calendar in question.  For what it is, and what it is supposed to do, the 
product is fine.  Sure beats the dickens out of the photos that I have of 
the PC. I guess that some folks will complain if their ice cream is cold. 
There I said it!

Jim K
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Penn Central Digest" <owner-penn-central -AT- smellycat.com>
To: <penn-central-digest -AT- smellycat.com>
Sent: Monday, February 20, 2006 5:10 AM
Subject: Penn Central Digest V5 #71


> Penn Central Digest     Monday, February 20 2006     Volume 05 : Number 
> 071
>
>
>
> Subjects in this issue:
>     PC: Thoughts on 2006 PC Calendar
>     PC: Re: Thoughts on 2006 PC Calendar
>     Re: PC: Re: Thoughts on 2006 PC Calendar
>     Re: PC: Re: Thoughts on 2006 PC Calendar
>     Re: PC: Re: Thoughts on 2006 PC Calendar
>     Re: PC: Re: Thoughts on 2006 PC Calendar
>     Re: PC: Re: Thoughts on 2006 PC Calendar
>     Re: PC: Re: Thoughts on 2006 PC Calendar
>     Re: PC: Re: Thoughts on 2006 PC Calendar
>     Re: PC: Re: Thoughts on 2006 PC Calendar
>     Re: PC: Re: Thoughts on 2006 PC Calendar
>     PC: Gone until Monday
>     Re: PC: Re: Thoughts on 2006 PC Calendar
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 10:33:53 -0500
> From: zootowerprr -AT- webtv.net
> Subject: PC: Thoughts on 2006 PC Calendar
>
> Guys..
>
>           I just want to say that I wasn't pleased with the Society's
> 2006 calendar. I was pretty excited about getting them but when I looked
> through them, three of the pictures were black and white. Turns out all
> of the calendars are this way.
>            IMHO, all of the calendars should have been sent back to the
> printer to be reprinted. Just my 2 cents worth.
>
> Dave
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 11:38:37 -0500
> From: "Craig E. Hatter" <ns4610 -AT- bluegrass.net>
> Subject: PC: Re: Thoughts on 2006 PC Calendar
>
>>           I just want to say that I wasn't pleased with the Society's
>> 2006 calendar. I was pretty excited about getting them but when I looked
>> through them, three of the pictures were black and white. Turns out all
>> of the calendars are this way.
>>            IMHO, all of the calendars should have been sent back to the
>> printer to be reprinted. Just my 2 cents worth.
>
> Remember, the main color in all but a couple of these photos is black. All
> the shots are in color, even the GG1 that looks to be in black and
> white(note the green boxcars trailing). Without seeing the originals, and 
> I
> assume they are all most likely Kodochromes, you cannot judge how the
> printer interpreted the files given to them. Reproduction may not be the
> best, but for a small print run I think it's an outstanding job. Want 
> better
> color? Better paper? Price has to go up as well as the print run. Probably
> have to do 500-1000 and the price will have to go up 50%-100%. I would pay
> it, but what are we going to do with the other say 300-800 leftovers?
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 11:55:17 -0500
> From: "Charles J. French Jr." <PennCentral -AT- Taconic.Net>
> Subject: Re: PC: Re: Thoughts on 2006 PC Calendar
>
> I thought the calendar looks fine. It's certainly better than no
> calendar at all!
>
> Chuck
>
> PennCentral -AT- Taconic.Net
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 12:59:26 -0500
> From: zootowerprr -AT- webtv.net
> Subject: Re: PC: Re: Thoughts on 2006 PC Calendar
>
>          Ok, lets do it this way. April 2006 photos is only about 10%
> color. I saw the original slide. July 2006, I own the original
> Kodachrome. It's a bright sunny day with blue water in the lake. My
> photo is only 5% color.
>          November 2006, those RDG cars should jump out at you. Only the
> sky has a trace of color. I paid for an all color calendar and got a
> calendar with 3 B&W photos in it. Just because it's a run of 200 doesn't
> make it ok to botch the color photos. You're right,you didn't see the
> original slides. So how can you comment on the color? I guess those who
> didn't contribute to the cause, the calendar is great. I guess if the
> whole calendar was B&W that would be grteat too,right?
>          The shot of Horseshoe from the watertank is one of my favorite
> shots. And the shot at Spruce Creek (Mark's slide) is a great rare shot.
>            Yeah, I know, I'm just complaining about nothing right? If I
> said nothing and just ask for a refund that would make it all better.
> But I'm not going to do that. My 15 cents worth.
>
>   And BTW, others who bought the calendar feel exactly the way I do. I
> guess they were worried about saying something about. What gave them
> that idea. Add 1 cent.
>
> Dave Hopson
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 13:27:28 -0500
> From: "Charles J. French Jr." <PennCentral -AT- Taconic.Net>
> Subject: Re: PC: Re: Thoughts on 2006 PC Calendar
>
> Hello Everyone,
>
> Maybe we should contact the printer and see if we're entitled to some
> kind of refund on the calendars. Yes, three pictures are mostly black
> N white which should have been in color, we did pay the color price
> for 600 pictures. We should be entitled to something, 25% are not in
> color. This isn't really going to help those that have purchased a
> calendar at the $15 price though.
>
> Perhaps in the future, before taking anything printed or made such as
> Posts, calendars, hats, clothing etc., we should inspect them
> thoroughly so this doesn't happen again.
>
> Chuck
>
> PennCentral -AT- Taconic.Net
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 10:37:55 -0800
> From: G/Andy <otay90 -AT- netscape.net>
> Subject: Re: PC: Re: Thoughts on 2006 PC Calendar
>
> I work with print buyers and if the printer messed it up, they are
> obligated to reprint the entire run. This goes for any run, no matter
> what the size.
>
> I haven't seen the calendars, so I can't speak to the specific issue.
> But I appreciate the effort that went into it....
>
> - --George
>
> PennCentral -AT- Taconic.Net wrote:
>
>> Hello Everyone,
>>
>> Maybe we should contact the printer and see if we're entitled to some
>> kind of refund on the calendars. Yes, three pictures are mostly black
>> N white which should have been in color, we did pay the color price
>> for 600 pictures. We should be entitled to something, 25% are not in
>> color. This isn't really going to help those that have purchased a
>> calendar at the $15 price though.
>>
>> Perhaps in the future, before taking anything printed or made such as
>> Posts, calendars, hats, clothing etc., we should inspect them
>> thoroughly so this doesn't happen again.
>>
>> Chuck
>>
>> PennCentral -AT- Taconic.Net
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 15:21:28 -0500
> From: Jim Hebner <hebnerj -AT- clarkstate.edu>
> Subject: Re: PC: Re: Thoughts on 2006 PC Calendar
>
> The most likely point for the problem is the person that laid it out,
> tweaked the photos and approved the proof.
>
> And that person is me.
>
> I am sorry that some of the shots do not meet everyones expectations.
>
> This years calendar was better than last years. Next years will
> hopefully be better than this years.
>
> Jim Hebner
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 16:33:03 -0500
> From: "Gary Farmer" <gary -AT- mssinc.com>
> Subject: Re: PC: Re: Thoughts on 2006 PC Calendar
>
> I think the entire PCRRHS paid staff that was assigned to the calendar
> project should be fired immediately and their salaries revoked
> retroactively! Not only that, their paid holidays and vacations should be
> stripped as well!  :-)
>
> Seriously, I think the calendar is fine. If it was a problem with the
> printer that we paid to publish the calendar, we may have a beef to get 
> some
> $$ back. Keeping in mind this was a all-volunteer effort, you did a good 
> job
> Jim. Nothing in this world is perfect & we don't expect you to be. Thanks
> for all your efforts.
>
> Gary
>
>
> - ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jim Hebner" <hebnerj -AT- clarkstate.edu>
> To: <penn-central -AT- smellycat.com>
> Sent: Friday, February 17, 2006 3:21 PM
> Subject: Re: PC: Re: Thoughts on 2006 PC Calendar
>
>
>> The most likely point for the problem is the person that laid it out,
>> tweaked the photos and approved the proof.
>>
>> And that person is me.
>>
>> I am sorry that some of the shots do not meet everyones expectations.
>>
>> This years calendar was better than last years. Next years will
>> hopefully be better than this years.
>>
>> Jim Hebner
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 16:33:21 EST
> From: Haagtk -AT- aol.com
> Subject: Re: PC: Re: Thoughts on 2006 PC Calendar
>
> In a message dated 2/17/2006 3:35:48 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
> hebnerj -AT- clarkstate.edu writes:
>
> I am  sorry that some of the shots do not meet everyones  expectations.
> Well I did not notice any "problem" with the calendar until it  was just
> brought up.  However if it was my picture that did not come out to  my
> expectations I probably would be a bit miffed.
>
>
>
> This years calendar was better than last years. Next years will
> hopefully be better than this years.
>
>
>
> However the 2006 calendar is still very, very good.  I  know it takes a 
> lot
> of work to put one of these out.  I have the easy  part....I only had to 
> send
> my check in.
>
> - -Tom H
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 17:06:21 -0500 (EST)
> From: "J. Henry Priebe Jr." <root -AT- net.bluemoon.net>
> Subject: Re: PC: Re: Thoughts on 2006 PC Calendar
>
> I bought a 2006 calendar, I like it and I am glad it helps out the PCHS. 
> It
> could be terrible and I would still be glad it helps out the PCHS. I 
> certainly
> wouldn't get nasty about it as I know that it was created with volunteer
> labor. If the paid printer screwed up then give 'em hell, but I'd buy the
> calendar even if it was all B&W.
>
> Henry
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 17:57:49 -0500
> From: zootowerprr -AT- webtv.net
> Subject: Re: PC: Re: Thoughts on 2006 PC Calendar
>
> Jim,
>
>         I just want you to know that you're doing a GREAT job with the
> Post magazine and the PC calendars. It's not a strike at you. I'll
> always donate slides for the calendars.
>
> Dave
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 18:39:37 -0500
> From: "Gary Wright" <wrighttrak -AT- alltel.net>
> Subject: PC: Gone until Monday
>
> Guys,
> I am going out of town and won't be able to respond to any=20
> emails until I return on Monday.
> Just wanted you all to know in case anyone needs to contact me, to ask =
> questions, place orders, or for any other reason I
> just wanted you to know that my lack of response is due to my not being =
> in.  I carry my notebook computer where ever
> I go but my destination does not have a internet connection.
> Will answer all emails upon my return Monday provided that
> the predicted snow/ice doesn't strand us and prevent our
> return.  When I return I will respond to any emails.
> Thanks and I hope everyone has a safe and happy weekend!
> Gary Wright
> Wright Trak Railroad Models
> P O Box 158
> Clarkesville, GA  30523
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 23:28:27 -0500
> From: "Craig E. Hatter" <ns4610 -AT- bluegrass.net>
> Subject: Re: PC: Re: Thoughts on 2006 PC Calendar
>
> Subject: Re: PC: Re: Thoughts on 2006 PC Calendar
>
>
>> The most likely point for the problem is the person that laid it out,
>> tweaked the photos and approved the proof.
>>
>> And that person is me.
>>
>> I am sorry that some of the shots do not meet everyones expectations.
>>
>> This years calendar was better than last years. Next years will hopefully
>> be better than this years.
>>
>> Jim Hebner
> So let me first apologize to Mr Hopson, a $15 all-color caledar with 
> washed
> out Kodachromes is not a good thing.Not that the originals were washed out
> mind you, just the tweaking Mr Hebner refers to apparently created this
> effect. I had a few photos published in CTC a long time ago and invariably
> CSX would be produced in b/w, while NS would come out in color..Doh!!  And
> not to step on anyone else's toes, but for a low quality paper calendar, 
> it
> is actually very good, color not withstanding. Is it as good as the C&NWHS
> offering I have on the wall? Not no, but heck no! But.....with 1000+ 
> members
> they can afford to go the best printer, White River, Eudaly's outfit IIRC,
> and use a better quality paper.
> And again, was this vehicle a fund raiser for the society, with the $15
> price tag, or was that most reasonable SRP to recoup investment? If it was
> the former, great, mission accomplished. But if the latter statement was
> closer to the truth, then assuredly someone should be looking for a 
> printer
> that would be able to produce a better product within our budget
> constraints.
>
> BTW, I thought the fire truck was the best shot in the whole
> year........because how often has that subject been published anywhere 
> else?
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of Penn Central Digest V5 #71
> *********************************
>
>