Points arising

[Penrhos1920]

The "further thoughts and guidance" are in the latest MRJ (256) which I flagged up on the "what is a cameo" thread on 20th July.

 

We will be contacting everyone, at the moment we are still seeing a few new entries together with the odd withdrawal. Rest assured it's going ahead, there are lots of great ideas coming through.

 

I have been a bit distracted by Larkrail, hols and also getting the new Wild Swan book "The Wantage Tramway" out, I pick up stocks tomorrow.

 

Simon

 

Simon

That's ok if you're a MRJ subscriber. But for those who aren't can we have a summary please.

[Robin2]

That's ok if you're a MRJ subscriber. But for those who aren't can we have a summary please.

You don't need to subscribe. It's in the shops now.

 

...R

[Not Jeremy]

Herewith the "further notes and guidance" which appeared in MRJ 256:

 

Cameo Competition Update

 

From Iain Rice and Simon Castens

 

We have been delighted – nay, o’erwhelmed – by the number and variety of the models  proposed and the originality of many of the concepts, which cover scales from 2mmFS to Gauge 3! We’re also impressed by the enthusiasm shown in the responses and the number of people who have already put saw to wood and made a start. There are also a number of projects which are well-advanced, pre-dating the idea of the contest but nonetheless conforming to the parameters set.

 

On which point, we have been asked to be a little more prescriptive and provide more guidance as to acceptability of entries, particularly with regard to size and footprint. So going through each original definition of a Cameo Layout as set out in the announcement in MRJ 254:

 

1)  It is small and concise, typically in the range of 1 - 2 metres length for the modelled scene with an integrated or add-on  fiddleyard

 

The figure of 1 - 2 metres length quoted is for the modelled scene and does not have to include the fiddle-yard(s), which can be additional to this. We are however looking for such addenda to be in proportion to the size of the modelled scene and are looking for the total ‘offstage’ portions to not exceed the length of the modelled scene.  A ‘through’ cameo could thus have a fiddleyard of half the scene length at each end, as on ‘Longwood Edge’. For single-ended layouts, we would suggest the offstage addenda should be in the order of a  half to two-thirds of the scene length.  These figures are not mandatory; the overall objective is to keep a pleasing visual and practical/operational balance between the elements of the layout as a whole and the judges will be looking for good proportions rather than mere conformity to some arbitrary number.

 

2)  It seeks to present its subject in as realistic and natural a manner as possible, using ‘staged’ presentation and eye-level viewpoints

 

A ‘realistic viewing height’ should seek to put the ‘horizon line’ incorporated in the model as close as possible to the eye level of the viewer – typically, to a tolerance of +/- 2 inches. So the height at which the layout needs to be displayed for this to be achieved has to take account of how it is intended that it should be viewed, e.g., standing/seated on a high stool or seated at normal chair height.  For persons of average stature, those alternatives typically equate to eye levels of about 63ins standing/high seat and 45 ins normally seated. 

 

In the context of the competion, either approach is perfectly acceptable. As the viewing height is determined by the stance of the viewer, there is no effective difference in the model itself or its presentation; so long as the display height relates correctly to the audience eye level, the required natural viewpoint will be achieved.  Hope that makes sense!

 

3)  The model is integrated with a display and support structure – including lighting and electrics – that seeks to set it off to best advantage.

 

Nothing to add here, except perhaps to point out that the display design needs to take account of factors like concealing light sources to avoid glare and also to eliminate anomalies (such as visible exits through backscenes) that impair realism.

 

4)   The modelling is executed to a high standard: ‘small but exquisite’, favouring fine-scale wheel and track standards and a high level of detail

 

The opportunity for good modelling, high levels of detail and finer standards are one of the virtues of the cameo format (or any other form of small model railway). But that is not to say that the use of fine scale standards in the context of this competition  is mandatory or that layouts using more mainstream standards will be ‘marked down’. Rather, marks will be awarded for the success of the model as an integrated whole rather than merely for numerical adherance to a particular set of scale dimensions.

 

5)   The layout is engineered and specified for realistic, reliable and refined running and prototypical operation

 

The operational success of a layout in the context of this competition will be judged on the ability of the model to replicate convincingly the working of the prototype depicted.

 

6)   The whole thing should be as self-contained as possible and easy to transport, set up and store

 

This means just what it says. We’re looking for thought and practicality in the design of the layout infrastructure and the ease with which it can be moved and set-up. As a guide point, we’re looking for models that can be handled by 1 - 2 people and the use of a car, car-trailer or small van for transport. Experience with Longwood Edge at 2.1m x 0.75m, 30 Kg in weight suggests this is about the upper limit for a an integrated cameo. Hence our suggestion that this order of bulk (think a generous casket…) is about the practicable limit of cameo-dom.

 

Hopefully these notes have put a bit more meat on the bones, if you’ve got any further queries or questions don’t hesitate to drop us a line or send an e-mail to cameocomp@wildswanbooks.co.uk.

[PaulRhB]

Herewith the "further notes and guidance" which appeared in MRJ 256:

 

Cameo Competition Update

 

From Iain Rice and Simon Castens

 

 

In the context of the competion, either approach is perfectly acceptable. As the viewing height is determined by the stance of the viewer, there is no effective difference in the model itself or its presentation; so long as the display height relates correctly to the audience eye level, the required natural viewpoint will be achieved.  Hope that makes sense!

 

I think that quite nicely sorts out the claims of height being too tall, just set the context i.e. specify chair or no chair

[Stubby47]

Doesn't help if you're planning three baseboard levels....

[PaulRhB]

Doesn't help if you're planning three baseboard levels....

Standing, stool and chair?

 

With your reputation Stu the stool level could be a model of a . . . ;)

Edited August 6, 2017 by PaulRhB

[NHY 581]

Standing, stool and chair?

With your reputation Stu the stool level could be a model of a . . . ;)

 

No doubt somebody will be along shortly to pooh pooh the idea........

[Stubby47]

(Keep calm, keep calm, it'll all go away soon...).

 

At moment, I'm planning to include an ablutions block on DM Four Mill something, an end of garden privy on The Garden, and a Moorswater firebox on The Circle.

 

So there   

[Captain Kernow]

(Keep calm, keep calm, it'll all go away soon...).

 

At moment, I'm planning to include an ablutions block on DM Four Mill something, an end of garden privy on The Garden, and a Moorswater firebox on The Circle.

 

So there   

Just accept what you can't change, folks, and move on down the car.

[Not Jeremy]

A further update on the maximum size of competition entries.

 

Following a number of queries and much pondering, Iain has decided that 2.0 metres is the absolute upper limit of the size of the scenic frontage of cameo competition entries.

 

Simon

 

Edit, we have since made a couple of "exceptions to the rule" as noted in the welcome to the cameo competition thread, neither of which exceed 2.1 metres.

Edited August 15, 2017 by Not Jeremy

[Stubby47]

A further update on the maximum size of competition entries.

 

Following a number of queries and much pondering, Iain has decided that 2.0 metres is the absolute upper limit of the size of the scenic frontage of cameo competition entries.

 

Simon

 

I'm guessing that's length and not height ?

Edited August 10, 2017 by Stubby47

[Tove]

A further update on the maximum size of competition entries.

 

Following a number of queries and much pondering, Iain has decided that 2.0 metres is the absolute upper limit of the size of the scenic frontage of cameo competition entries.

 

Simon

And they say size does`nt matter...!!

 

Brian.

Edited August 10, 2017 by Tove

[cbrailways]

A further update on the maximum size of competition entries.

 

Following a number of queries and much pondering, Iain has decided that 2.0 metres is the absolute upper limit of the size of the scenic frontage of cameo competition entries.

 

Simon

Simon,

 

I'm totally confused now. You accepted my 0 gauge entry the scenic section of which is 2.42m long, so are you know saying it cannot be included?

 

cbrailways

Edited August 11, 2017 by cbrailways

[Not Jeremy]

Simon,

 

I'm totally confused now. You accepted my 0 gauge entry the scenic section of which is 2.42m long, so are you know saying it cannot be included?

 

cbrailways

Yes that is the case.

 

As I said, Iain has thought long and hard about it and decided that anything beyond 2 metres really isn't a cameo in the sense that the book and competition means it.

 

Can you re-jig the design to shrink it a bit, or just build it as it is and enjoy the process? It's a great idea you've got there I think.

 

Best Wishes

 

Simon Castens

[Stubby47]

Simon,

 

I'm totally confused now. You accepted my 0 gauge entry the scenic section of which is 2.42m long, so are you know saying it cannot be included?

 

cbrailways

 

 

Yes that is the case.

 

As I said, Iain has thought long and hard about it and decided that anything beyond 2 metres really isn't a cameo in the sense that the book and competition means it.

 

Can you re-jig the design to shrink it a bit, or just build it as it is and enjoy the process? It's a great idea you've got there I think.

 

Best Wishes

 

Simon Castens

 

Given that the stage opening at the front of the cameo can be narrower than the actual scenic area (as evidenced by the use of the parabolic backscene (can't remember the technical name) Iain shows as an option in the book, if wider side screen/panels reduced the front opening to 2m, would that still be accepted ? 

[Echo]

A further update on the maximum size of competition entries.

 

Following a number of queries and much pondering, Iain has decided that 2.0 metres is the absolute upper limit of the size of the scenic frontage of cameo competition entries.

 

Simon

That's totally bu99ered up my entry too! 

 

Nothing much I can do to reduce the size. Put quite a lot of effort into planning it, too. Very disappointed that the rule was changed so long after entries were invited!

 

p.s. I already had a copy of the Cameo book, so won't be seeking a refund.

[BG John]

I'm building several layouts up to 2m long on one baseboard. None of them were planned to have a fascia/proscenium arch, and even without that they are right at the limit of what I can manoeuvrer in and out of my workshop and my railway room. If anything I think they may be harder for two people to move. I also have the luxury of a motorhome to transport them in. It's a long time since I did any exhibitions, but I think it's probably a practical limit to get into some exhibition halls too. I was surprised to see entries longer than this, based on the rules before the 2m limit was set.

 

Now it looks like I'll be entering after all, I may even stretch my plan a bit, as it was originally 4'6" including fiddle yard!

[Not Jeremy]

I apologise for what is effectively a change in the "rules" since the start of the competition, but there were an increasing number of "oversize" entries that Iain felt were taking the competition into non cameo territory and both he and I wanted to bring things back "into focus".

 

I genuinely don't think the book and the ideas in it lead towards larger layouts and we have both been a bit surprised at how many whoppers we were netting.

 

If any entrants affected by this change have purchased a copy of the book as a "token of entry" and they now don't want it, then I will happily take them back and refund etc.

 

Simon

[Robin2]

What about extending the closing date for entries by several weeks to give time for the "big boys" to have a re-think about a smaller project.

 

Given that the judging end-point was extended by 12 months an extension of the closing date for entries is unlikely to inconvenience the organizers and I can't see how it gives anyone an unfair advantage.

 

...R

[Echo]

I apologise for what is effectively a change in the "rules" since the start of the competition, but there were an increasing number of "oversize" entries that Iain felt were taking the competition into non cameo territory and both he and I wanted to bring things back "into focus".

 

I genuinely don't think the book and the ideas in it lead towards larger layouts and we have both been a bit surprised at how many whoppers we were netting.

 

If any entrants affected by this change have purchased a copy of the book as a "token of entry" and they now don't want it, then I will happily take them back and refund etc.

 

Simon

 

It is very good of you to offer to refund for purchases of the book. I wish however to bring to your attention, just for the record, that some people (including myself) will have already spent money on other things too, like baseboards and track components - perhaps even stock specifically for the 'cameo' layout. I was only building this layout for the competition.

 

 Just making the point. Obviously, I don't expect to be reimbursed for anything.

[davefromacrossthepond]

Could there be perhaps "two divisions" for the competition?  One for those layouts 2m and under and the other division for those larger than 2m?  This way everyone can participate?

 

Dave

[Captain Kernow]

Or you could have the 'Legitimate, Street-Legal' entries, and then there's the 2m+ Underground Resistance. 

Edited August 12, 2017 by Captain Kernow

[NHY 581]

Ab! The Cameo Layout Competition......or.....The Competition for Cameo Layouts......A splinter group.

 

Brian.

[Captain Kernow]

Ab! The Cameo Layout Competition......or.....The Competition for Cameo Layouts......A splinter group.

 

Brian.

Huh! What have the CfCL ever done for us?

[melmoth]

A further update on the maximum size of competition entries.

 

Following a number of queries and much pondering, Iain has decided that 2.0 metres is the absolute upper limit of the size of the scenic frontage of cameo competition entries.

 

Simon

 

Hi Simon, is that 2 metres for all entries or just for 4mm scale entries? The scenic frontage of my entry is only 48 inches, but that's for a 2mm scale model. It arguably gives me a starting advantage as I have more space in which to fit the design than someone attempting the same thing in 4mm would have.