Little Muddle

[KNP]

A couple of shots of 5355 entering the station

 

 

 

 

Edited March 25 by KNP

[KNP]

The story of a tree

 

When the extension part of the layout was started in 2013 a tall, slightly odd shaped seamoss tree was planted by the backscene but a bit to far out so it cast a shadow.

For many years I lived with this and would, when I remembered, photo edit out the shadow.

But as the years rolled on I got more and more fed up doing this so a few days ago a tree surgeon was called in with his trusted nail scissors and work commenced.

 

The original with the shadow (to the right of the bay platform signal)

 

 

 

I know it doesn't look much but was annoying nevertheless.

So I would phot edit it to this but I could always see it.

 

 

 

Then after a visit from the tree surgeon a better shaped and nearly shadow free tree appeared.

 

 

 

Much better and it begs the question....

Why hadn't I done this before?

Edited March 25 by KNP

[5BarVT]

1 hour ago, KNP said:

Why hadn't I done this before?

Too busy “tweaking” photos.

:-)

Much to our delight I might add.

Paul.

[Andrew P]

When you've got a few spare minutes Kevin, I have a certain matter of Tree Trimming on Seven Mills, BUT you will need O Gauge Nail Clippers.

[MrWolf]

The new tree looks much more natural and importantly, helps frame the exit onto the main line, giving the impression that it goes somewhere. Because it is difficult to see, the minds eye fills in the blanks with a track probably curving left into the distance.

Although I hadn't really noticed the tree before, the replacement makes a big difference. 

[Malcolm 0-6-0]

3 hours ago, KNP said:

The story of a tree

 

 

 

 

 

 

I understand the trimming to remove an unnatural shadow on the back scene. But, and please don't take this the wrong way as I am quite in awe of of your modelling skills, there remains a problem and that concerns the strange visual dissonance created by the bridge over the mainline tracks. On the left your back scene depicts a gently rising landscape artfully blended into the trees and scenery in front of it.

 

But as the eye moves right that gentle landscape disappears. beyond the bridge we look at a scene in which the visual topography of the landscape is altogether different - the gently rising hill is replace by the hint of declivity with a plain in the background. And the double track under the bridge just stops as if there is a precipice just a few yards away, or a decline that would make even a rack and pinion railway useless with the problem that one can see the ends of the track. I understand that in the 3 dimensional reality of the layout that is probably not a problem but both it and the scenic dissonance I mentioned are all too apparent in the 2 dimensions of the digital image. I suspect that is because we are seeing views that would not be normally be seen without the flexible nature of the camera positions. 

 

I'd normally refrain from offering suggestions about how to solve this problem, as I wasn't asked and it isn't my layout, but perhaps some form of forced perspective depiction of a double track curving  out of view with a slight modification to the back scene so that the gentle rise on the left is continued beyond the bridge span and then allowed to fall away masked by the foreground to the left of the branch line scenery. In the general visual delight that is Little Muddle the visual effect of the bridge as a scenic break just doesn't convince me.     

[Tony Teague]

2 hours ago, Malcolm 0-6-0 said:

 

I understand the trimming to remove an unnatural shadow on the back scene. But, and please don't take this the wrong way as I am quite in awe of of your modelling skills, there remains a problem and that concerns the strange visual dissonance created by the bridge over the mainline tracks. On the left your back scene depicts a gently rising landscape artfully blended into the trees and scenery in front of it.

 

But as the eye moves right that gentle landscape disappears. beyond the bridge we look at a scene in which the visual topography of the landscape is altogether different - the gently rising hill is replace by the hint of declivity with a plain in the background. And the double track under the bridge just stops as if there is a precipice just a few yards away, or a decline that would make even a rack and pinion railway useless with the problem that one can see the ends of the track. I understand that in the 3 dimensional reality of the layout that is probably not a problem but both it and the scenic dissonance I mentioned are all too apparent in the 2 dimensions of the digital image. I suspect that is because we are seeing views that would not be normally be seen without the flexible nature of the camera positions. 

 

I'd normally refrain from offering suggestions about how to solve this problem, as I wasn't asked and it isn't my layout, but perhaps some form of forced perspective depiction of a double track curving  out of view with a slight modification to the back scene so that the gentle rise on the left is continued beyond the bridge span and then allowed to fall away masked by the foreground to the left of the branch line scenery. In the general visual delight that is Little Muddle the visual effect of the bridge as a scenic break just doesn't convince me.     

 

Are you sure that this is not just because of the angle that you are viewing it from?

From up here in the northern hemisphere one can see over the brow of the summit and into the valley beyond

(Must get myy specs checked).

[Bogie]

On 03/08/2020 at 05:08, Mikkel said:

 

Speaking of umbrellas, is there a story behind the one in this pic?

 

Shows you how much I know - I thought it was a periscope!

[KNP]

I never did fully resolve the exit point for the main line so I left the ground of the backscene remain unaltered, perhaps its time to give it some more thought.

When first conceived I was going to do a tunnel mouth but then thought the embankment would need be quite long to look real so the occupation bridge was adopted with a shorter bank.

At the time my then camera a Nikon DLSR was way to big to fit close to the track so the idea of standing on on the track didn't even come into my mind so all the photos where meant to be from the front so the exit point would be hidden behind the woods.

It wasn't until I got the compact TZ100 was the concept of standing one in the layout came into being which then highlighted a whole raft of issues that weren't a problem beforehand, main one being some of the track is only painted on one side.

Little Muddle keeps evolving so this might one of those situations.

 

 

Edited August 4, 2020 by KNP

[KNP]

All action today.

 

 

Edited March 25 by KNP

[Mark Townend]

Kevin, I've just registered on the site as a 47 year old child who's had very little to do with model railways for over 30 years. I gradually skim read through the whole thread during lockdown and only registered to be able to tell you how astonishingly good your scenery is, my absolute favourite part of your layout is the brambles up the fences. I see people have compared it to Pendon, well I was taken there a couple of times as a kid and it blew me away, but looking at modern pictures I'd say you've actually blown Pendon out the water with your realism.

 

I don't know much about the actual toy trains, so although I appreciate your efforts in making them as accurate and realistic as possible it's a bit wasted on me, but I'm in awe of your skills to create every aspect of your little world.

 

Oh, and you can take a good pic too!

[Oldddudders]

Well said Mark. It is good for us regulars, familiar with such fine models - although in my case lacking most of Kevin's skill-set! - to be reminded by a newcomer just how good it is. Welcome to RMweb!

[Mark90]

Hello, another (relatively) new member here, also named Mark. I've been lurking on this thread for a couple of weeks and prompted by the post above I thought I'd chime in my own appreciation for your modelling, Kevin. It's absolutely superb and along with a couple of other layouts on here (Peterborough North, ANTB and Stoke Courtenay come to mind), you've been a real inspiration for my own (so far very modest and clumsy) efforts. 

 

Thanks for sharing your wonderful layout!

[phil.c]

Lovely shot, good composition

 

[KNP]

Thank you all for the kind and thoughtful comments, much appreciated.

Not much modelling going on at the moment as I am waiting for a parcel to arrive from Modelu....

but I am in photographic mode at the moment.

 

 

[KNP]

 

Edited March 25 by KNP

[Mick Bonwick]

21 minutes ago, KNP said:

Thank you all for the kind and thoughtful comments, much appreciated.

Not much modelling going on at the moment as I am waiting for a parcel to arrive from Modelu....

but I am in photographic mode at the moment.

 

 

 

That figures.

[KNP]

 

Edited March 25 by KNP

[Andrew P]

2 hours ago, KNP said:

Lovely shot Kevin, but WHO put that Tree there?

[KNP]

36 minutes ago, Andrew P said:

Lovely shot Kevin, but WHO put that Tree there?

I did.....
 

In a high brow voice 

 

It is an artistic pose using the visual blocking effect of the tree to partially obscure the main subject of the photograph, you have peer around and through the object in order to see, interpret and compose the whole concept of the composed picture which allows the viewer to interpret the said picture in the way they see it in their minds eye.....

 

Simple really.

[Tony Teague]

47 minutes ago, KNP said:

I did.....
 

In a high brow voice 

 

It is an artistic pose using the visual blocking effect of the tree to partially obscure the main subject of the photograph, you have peer around and through the object in order to see, interpret and compose the whole concept of the composed picture which allows the viewer to interpret the said picture in the way they see it in their minds eye.....

 

Simple really.

 

I feel you missed an opportnity to use "juxtaposition" here.

[Simond]

Juxtaposition?  Juxtaposition?  How can you possibly consider the effects of juxtaposition when the essential thrust of the artistic context hasn't been fully explored?

 

 

I can't cope.  I'm off for a lie down in a darkened room...

 

 

Edited August 6, 2020 by Simond

[MrWolf]

5 hours ago, Tony Teague said:

 

I feel you missed an opportnity to use "juxtaposition" here.

 

You also forgot "antithesis", "cathartic" and "zeitgeist"... 

 

Must try harder. 

Have a look at www.artybollocks.com

 

[MrWolf]

It's all right for you lot. I've got an exhibition coming up and I will have to force myself to be nice to a lot of pretentious twunts.

I am relying upon SWMBO to ramp up her her naturally well bred accent to go full on jolly hockey sticks and distract them whilst I grunt and wish I had gotten all of the motor oil out from under my fingernails...

[Oldddudders]

1 hour ago, MrWolf said:

Have a look at www.artybollocks.com

Do I detect a vague whiff of Captain Kernow's learned discourses in some of this?