Jump to content

Recommended Posts

....Creating the surrounding woods, fields,waterways and built environment ..... to the same standard as an out of the box SLW class 24 is a pretty large exercise in creativity by anyone's standards.

 

By that token, you need to find RTP scenery to match the RTR stock, no?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you ever get a chance to see some of his notebooks rather than the more usual finished paintings then take it.

I can't help feeling that Turner considered his finished works to be superior to his notebooks.

 

...R

Link to post
Share on other sites

By that token, you need to find RTP scenery to match the RTR stock, no?

 

No not at all - the creation of the surrounding scene around your railway is, like anything else in a hobby, up to you - but I know you just like to stir the pot and never show much, but I still answered your "question".

Maybe one day Ivan we will see something you have actually done, rather than just said?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess JMW Turner would never have had his masterpieces published in MRJ as they would not have had the right number of rivets.  :)

 

There is more to life than fine detail.

 

...R

 

Turner looks wonderful from 10' away. Get closer and it is less so.  The approach you desire would need to be done in both models and photography because such models would not really stand close scrutiny - which takes us back to the helicopter shots so beloved of Railway Modeller at one time.

 

Craig W

Link to post
Share on other sites

I never understand this attitude.

There is far more to creating a convincing model of a railway in its environment that making a few items of rolling stock to run on it - Especially when the quality of so many current diesels is so high to start with.

Creating the surrounding woods, fields,waterways and built environment (Those being the things that are essential to get right to set the scene correctly) to the same standard as an out of the box SLW class 24 is a pretty large exercise in creativity by anyone's standards.

What attitude? My comment was meant to be rather tongue in cheek, but obviously I failed to convey that.

 

I agree that there is much more to creating a cohesive models of the railway infrastructure and the country it runs though. However a look at the new releases threads shows that many modellers on RMweb don't seem keen builders of things, so how do they provide the buildings, track work, signals, etc. that matches the standard of the latest RTR models? Or is it just the wheeled bit of a model railway the don't want to build. Likewise how often do you see layouts at shows where, although full of the this delightful RTR stock, the layout is poorly observed with badly placed and appropriate features. Similarly I have seen well crafted country, town or coastal scenery let down by totally inappropriate stock and poor track layout created by using "standard" track items.

 

Increasingly a large sector of this hobby is about buying, rather than making models. Lack of time, cost (RTR models being cheaper than kits), lack of skill, etc. are oft quoted as being the reason. While cost may be very valid, although people seem to find money to acquire multiples of new models or buy things simply because they look nice, the other reasons are largely just excuses. Most of us have lived periods of our lives where money and time have been in short supply and when skills have yet to be learned and honed but have continued to enjoy model making.

 

And why, if you can acquire the skills to create well modelled scenery, buildings, etc. and enjoy the satisfaction that goes with it, wouldn't you want to do the same with the locos and rolling stock? If it is wrong to believe that building the whole thing is a good idea, gives satisfaction and provides a consistency then I had better go and sit on the naughty step.

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

The approach you desire would need to be done in both models and photography because such models would not really stand close scrutiny

IMHO this mania for close-up photography has ruined the hobby for anyone who is (A) not an expert and (B) does not have the huge amount of time and money needed to avoid the nit-picking flaws that are only visible in close up photos.

 

The normal viewing distance for model railways at exhibitions is about 3 or 4 feet, maybe even more. At that range the Turner equivalent will convey the essence of the model perfectly (assuming the model has an essence).

 

...R

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

IMHO this mania for close-up photography has ruined the hobby for anyone who is (A) not an expert and (B) does not have the huge amount of time and money needed to avoid the nit-picking flaws that are only visible in close up photos.

 

The normal viewing distance for model railways at exhibitions is about 3 or 4 feet, maybe even more. At that range the Turner equivalent will convey the essence of the model perfectly (assuming the model has an essence).

 

In that case, we should be using old RTR from about 1981. After all, that stuff sort of looks right at normal viewing distance....

Link to post
Share on other sites

In that case, we should be using old RTR from about 1981. After all, that stuff sort of looks right at normal viewing distance....

Why not?

 

The newer mechanisms probably work better - but the mechanisms are not prototypical anyway.

 

 

...R

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

IMHO this mania for close-up photography has ruined the hobby for anyone who is (A) not an expert and (B) does not have the huge amount of time and money needed to avoid the nit-picking flaws that are only visible in close up photos.

 

I can only agree that the macro/close-up lens of the modern digital camera is a cruel and relentless tyrant that takes absolutely no prisoners.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can only agree that the macro/close-up lens of the modern digital camera is a cruel and relentless tyrant that takes absolutely no prisoners.

I have fond memories of Brian Monaghan and his helicopter....
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Irrespective of the "bits" used to make it, I would argue that the "average" model railway of today is far superior to that of the 1970s and 1980s.

 

To give but one example, it used to be quite common to see (even on layouts depicted in esteemed journals like the Railway Modeller) track joints where the sleepers on both sides of the fishplate had been cut away completely, leaving a massive gap that looked ludicrous. I don't recall seeing anything like that for ages.

 

Of course, contemporary modelling still varies enormously in quality of appearance, but the best is ever so much better than it used to be. The rest of us do our best. As long as we enjoy ourselves, who cares? It's not a competition.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can only agree that the macro/close-up lens of the modern digital camera is a cruel and relentless tyrant that takes absolutely no prisoners.

So true, Captain.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can only agree that the macro/close-up lens of the modern digital camera is a cruel and relentless tyrant that takes absolutely no prisoners.

But not a new phenomenon. I can remember many years ago (60’s?) reading an article in Model Railroader about one modeller who went to show the late John Allen his latest attempt at scratchbuilding. Allen’s reaction was to take a picture of the model, blow it up, and present the man with the print the idea being that the man could see for himself what needed to be done. Photography can be used as a helpful tool for anyone who wants to improve their models but as you say, it can be cruel.

 

Cheers,

 

David

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree 100% with taking photos to check work as things which your own addoring eye consider fantastic suddenly don’t look so square/clean/straight etc etc. But use photography, especially on a phone as a tool to improvement. It’s your slave not your master. I have taken many a photo, posted on here and then looked at said photo and thought ‘oh dear’! Still, life is very short, and we are supposed to be enjoying ourselves!!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree 100% with taking photos to check work as things which your own addoring eye consider fantastic suddenly don’t look so square/clean/straight etc etc. But use photography, especially on a phone as a tool to improvement. It’s your slave not your master. I have taken many a photo, posted on here and then looked at said photo and thought ‘oh dear’! Still, life is very short, and we are supposed to be enjoying ourselves!!

Spot on David, digital photography is a tool to be used. I find photographing my work as I go very useful to quickly find the bits that aren't quite right. It is however up to each individual how far they take it.

 

If some want to run clockwork tin plate on 9" curves, so be it. If others want to model every detail 100% spot on for a specific date, that's up to them. As others have said it's all about enjoying what we do and thankfully not everybody gets their joys the same way.

 

Unfortunately it's the nature of forums, and so many threads on here of late, that we seem to end up with two opposing camps on every topic, with each trying to convert the other to the one true righteous way.

 

The whole arguing over nothing gets a bit dull after a while, particularly when the same circular discussions crop up time and time again. Live and let live folks.

 

I'm off to fix various types of chairs onto a 7mm double slip. Joy?

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately it's the nature of forums, and so many threads on here of late, that we seem to end up with two opposing camps on every topic, with each trying to convert the other to the one true righteous way.

I don't get the impression that many people really think to try to 'convert' anybody. Isn't it just that we're in a discussion forum, so people like to express their own preferences? That doesn't necessarily imply criticism of those who think otherwise though.

 

Personally (re post 138) for me the 'best' (ie most interesting to look at) model is one that is the product of someone's skill and craftsmanship,, even if something bought ready-made is in some ways (appearance, detail?) 'better'. But I can say that without implying any criticism of those who feel otherwise.

Edited by johnarcher
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm struggling to understand why only old seems to look wrong?

 

Mike.

 

Horse will clearly be disappointed that Leighton Buzzard will be at Scaleforum in September.  Not only EM, but *very* old as well!

 

It must be rubbish ;-)

 

Cheers

Flymo

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

But not a new phenomenon. I can remember many years ago (60’s?) reading an article in Model Railroader about one modeller who went to show the late John Allen his latest attempt at scratchbuilding. Allen’s reaction was to take a picture of the model, blow it up, and present the man with the print the idea being that the man could see for himself what needed to be done. Photography can be used as a helpful tool for anyone who wants to improve their models but as you say, it can be cruel.

 

Cheers,

 

David

 

A true story, and that man was Cliff Grandt, who went on to found Grandt Line, manufacturer of wonderful details in plastic.

 

Apparently John Allen's actual words were on the lines of, 'Find whatever it is that shows this is a model and see if you can fix it; that'll make you a better modeller,' so they were words of encouragement rather than criticism. Of course, that didn't stop John from having a dinosaur as a switcher, or from carefully staging his photographs so that the out-of-scale bits like couplers didn't show...

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 'Find whatever it is that shows this is a model and see if you can fix it; that'll make you a better modeller,'

Since most people build model trains with a view to the trains moving wouldn't it make a lot more sense to determine the quality of the modelling based on a movie film rather than still images?

 

Or are people really just interested in making static dioramas for still photos - which would be a perfectly reasonable thing to do.

 

...R

Link to post
Share on other sites

A true story, and that man was Cliff Grandt, who went on to found Grandt Line, manufacturer of wonderful details in plastic.

 

Apparently John Allen's actual words were on the lines of, 'Find whatever it is that shows this is a model and see if you can fix it; that'll make you a better modeller,' so they were words of encouragement rather than criticism. Of course, that didn't stop John from having a dinosaur as a switcher, or from carefully staging his photographs so that the out-of-scale bits like couplers didn't show...

Unfortunately the Grandt Line business is closing as of June 1. Have not heard of anyone buying/taking over the business yet. Sadly there goes another grand(t) supplier....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Since most people build model trains with a view to the trains moving wouldn't it make a lot more sense to determine the quality of the modelling based on a movie film rather than still images?

 

Or are people really just interested in making static dioramas for still photos - which would be a perfectly reasonable thing to do.

 

...R

 

Well, since John Allen was a film industry still photographer of considerable talent, it's not much of a surprise that he took a still photo; back then, anything else would have involved a full lighting rig and a movie camera, and Cliff could only have watched it by projecting it on a wall or screen.

 

But I agree that at shows, for instance, people are usually drawn to the working layouts than to the display cases of static models, however lovely they may be.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.