Jump to content

Recommended Posts

42 minutes ago, lezz01 said:

Very nice Tricky mate. From the pics I have of Tewksbury shed you can't see much of the timbers most of it is buried up to the rails in all sorts of surfaces including inset in sets, you could take all sorts of liberties with the track and no one would have been any the wiser. If you can't see it cheat like crazy I say LOL

Regards Lez.

Yes, I tend to agree...!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have had a productive few days in between ‘work’...all the trackwork is built and laid. Quite pleased with the clean ‘flowing’ lines. I’m even quite pleased with the highly improbable but functional Y. As usual, none of this lot will please the purists but then Rule 1 always applies! Apart from interlaced timbering, the straight turnouts are off-the-template B6s. Next up wiring and turnout control. Happy days!

F9C4ACBE-F3CB-4FEA-A699-D21132054777.jpeg.33c3242e541b79df578aaa596fceaed0.jpeg0595876C-A1E5-49E1-90A7-8ABFA39FAEC9.jpeg.549b69b58d01c7b73f605c9d6e6466b4.jpeg92AA5C26-E6F5-4AA5-A200-86ECC5D9A325.jpeg.99d1b421af703f94fda71b87cb7841df.jpegCD4A251F-F44C-4175-97AD-EA0E4885F7D4.jpeg.2e738b8bc05bb2af5d824d35a0867ae1.jpeg436A32C4-2242-4C84-B688-997BFF424B08.jpeg.85fcca363658f9a45e601af3dc59dcb7.jpeg

Hopefully you can just about see in these pics how it all joins up with Monk’s Gate (aka Midland in Birmingham). The empire is expanding...

395D7F95-0457-40C7-8672-69B5B0F2D8C2.jpeg

  • Like 17
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...
On 14/09/2019 at 18:31, Tricky said:

I wonder if anyone has any historical information about the Blizard Colman Tewkesbury Brewery building? It clearly had the railway running in front of it with what appears to be a high level loading door, possibly at a convenient height for wagon loading...? If so, do we know the nature of the traffic and if so the type of wagons used? I have it in mind to model a version if this building but at the moment I can’t quite wangle it to have the line running right in front of it as it would have done. But a suggestion of the traffic that once would have been present would be great. Along with numerous barrels in front of it I presume? 

I have been working on some notes about railway traffic to and from breweries for some time. Notes here if you are interested: http://perrygrovefarm.co.uk/Brewery_traffic.pdf

I've learned from this thread that grain and malt traffic in sacks wasn't often carried by the Midland in vans (because they didn't have many) but was that true of all railways? Presumably if sacks were carried in open wagons they were sheeted.

One source of confusion is that many old maps refer to "Malthouses" without making it clear whether they were Maltings (where grain was germinated to become malt) or simply stores for malt which had been produced elsewhere. The leading authority on brewery buildings, "Built to Brew" is silent about that, and so is Peaty IIRC.

The modelling on these threads is amazing.

 

Edited by Michael Crofts
moved file to my website and changed link
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Michael Crofts said:

 

I've learned from this thread that grain and malt traffic in sacks wasn't often carried by the Midland in vans (because they didn't have many) but was that true of all railways? Presumably if sacks were carried in open wagons they were sheeted.

Very few railways invested in large numbers of vans: sheeting an open provided for greater flexibility. Vans became more common as the 20th century wore on, but then bulk shipping became possible in covered hoppers.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

Slowly. Very slowly. Too slowly. 

However, a couple of days ago having been lent Paul Bambrick’s amazing book on creating backscenes I decided to have another go. It’s progressing well but not quite at the stage of being ready to photograph and reveal to the world! Thanks for asking though. It’s quite difficult juggling my own modelling with paid modelling! 

  • Like 4
  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Tricky said:

Slowly. Very slowly. Too slowly. 

However, a couple of days ago having been lent Paul Bambrick’s amazing book on creating backscenes I decided to have another go. It’s progressing well but not quite at the stage of being ready to photograph and reveal to the world! Thanks for asking though. It’s quite difficult juggling my own modelling with paid modelling! 

 

Well if yours is too slowly, mine is static!  No I am making a little bit of progress slowly - hasn't helped that my PC Laptop has died, so I am unable to do any templot or CAD work at the moment, so thinking about investing in an Intention weighbridge to keep things moving.  I'll be in touch for some various basket and bits at some point soon. :) Looking forward to seeing what your going to do with the backscene.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

At long last, some Tewkesbury progress! I’ve finally got round to making some 6mm MDF mock-ups of the buildings. 

This first photo shows the flour mill with the track running into it (highly irregular) with the Blizzard mill behind. 

C3FA1B3B-2065-4541-90F4-81C1B581E1C5.jpeg.c7786028a720dec1c96e22097c1c3daf.jpeg Next is the middle ground with the engine shed. 

4C78EFFB-1345-4FA4-8AED-8A3ED16D6155.jpeg.155e49122d1074cc91f70e07f59748b3.jpeg

These next two are of the troublesome right hand end. I’ve cobbled together something which will mostly hide the track exits but I’m not too hung up about really. To the back is a low relief building and then a bridge crossing the tracks where the road then disappears behind a small building in the foreground. 

23C3371A-F59D-493B-93F6-2611C4B363C3.jpeg.22e4ef553fafa6495a41099a3b997cd6.jpeg07634804-063B-4E7F-B65C-A207EDCB22DA.jpeg.5482ca005596e0a05f9c8a6dd3535522.jpeg

You can also see my efforts so far with the painted backscene. I’m not sure if the horizon and distant buildings are set too high. There will be some decoupage buildings sandwiched between the painted buildings and the low wall. What do you think? I’ve been staring at it for so long now I can’t decide! 

 

  • Like 16
Link to post
Share on other sites

Richard,

 

If the viewpoint that the photographs are taken from will be the normal viewing height when the layout is exhibited, then I would say that the horizon and distant buildings are set at the right level. It all looks good.

 

Dave

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Dave Hunt said:

Richard,

 

If the viewpoint that the photographs are taken from will be the normal viewing height when the layout is exhibited, then I would say that the horizon and distant buildings are set at the right level. It all looks good.

 

Dave

That’s reassuring, thanks Dave.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Hal Nail said:

I don't know the location but gives the impression of much higher surrounding hills in the distance, if that's what you were after.

Thanks, the painting is based on a drone photo of Tewkesbury I happened to come across. My concern was always that being a drone view it is naturally high up. The hill to the right is the Malverns. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Tricky,

 

Im so glad you are back working on Tewkesbury as your modelling is so inspirational.

 

I see your building mock ups are made of 6mm mdf. 

Am I correct in thinking you then apply plastikard to these or are your buildings structured differently?

 

Thanks,

Paul

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MarstonVale said:

Hi Tricky,

 

Im so glad you are back working on Tewkesbury as your modelling is so inspirational.

 

I see your building mock ups are made of 6mm mdf. 

Am I correct in thinking you then apply plastikard to these or are your buildings structured differently?

 

Thanks,

Paul

Hi Paul,

 

Thanks for your comments. No, the 6mm mock-ups are purely for setting out and are very rough and ready. I'll probably make the real buildings from 3mm MDF, using my laser cutter where appropriate to form the main wall parts and engraving brick patterns etc.  I tend to make minimal use of plasticard these days. 

 

This last week I've bought Tortoise point motors and wiring wire, so hopefully this coming week I'll be able to crack on in between proper 'work'.  

 

Richard

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 27/03/2020 at 11:39, Tricky said:

At long last, some Tewkesbury progress! I’ve finally got round to making some 6mm MDF mock-ups of the buildings. 

This first photo shows the flour mill with the track running into it (highly irregular) with the Blizzard mill behind. 

C3FA1B3B-2065-4541-90F4-81C1B581E1C5.jpeg.c7786028a720dec1c96e22097c1c3daf.jpeg Next is the middle ground with the engine shed. 

4C78EFFB-1345-4FA4-8AED-8A3ED16D6155.jpeg.155e49122d1074cc91f70e07f59748b3.jpeg

These next two are of the troublesome right hand end. I’ve cobbled together something which will mostly hide the track exits but I’m not too hung up about really. To the back is a low relief building and then a bridge crossing the tracks where the road then disappears behind a small building in the foreground. 

23C3371A-F59D-493B-93F6-2611C4B363C3.jpeg.22e4ef553fafa6495a41099a3b997cd6.jpeg07634804-063B-4E7F-B65C-A207EDCB22DA.jpeg.5482ca005596e0a05f9c8a6dd3535522.jpeg

You can also see my efforts so far with the painted backscene. I’m not sure if the horizon and distant buildings are set too high. There will be some decoupage buildings sandwiched between the painted buildings and the low wall. What do you think? I’ve been staring at it for so long now I can’t decide! 

 

 

I'm in no position to comment given my lack of any modelling skills!   But as you invited views, I think that the horizon may be set too high - sorry.   The landscape here is a very flat, broad floodplain and I'm not sure that the sweep of the river and bend would be so visible behind the buildings in real life.   Since writing this I have dug out some of the views of Tewksbury that I took last year, concentrating on the scenery rather than the buildings this time.    The second and final photos were taken on the far river bank.  I think they confirm that the landscape is indeed very flat for a long distance.  As regards the prominent hill on the back scene, this is of course a feature of this region.   I think a lot depends on how far you want to reflect the actual location.   If you do want super realism, and if you have a high viewing position, I suspect that you could get away with less detail, especially the river.   Sorry Richard if this is not what you wanted to hear!

 

Stephen

backscene.jpg

backscene1.jpg

backscene2.jpg

Edited by Stephenwolsten
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Stephenwolsten said:

 

I'm in no position to comment given my lack of any modelling skills!   But as you invited views, I think that the horizon may be set too high - sorry.   The landscape here is a very flat, broad floodplain and I'm not sure that the sweep of the river and bend would be so visible behind the buildings in real life.   Since writing this I have dug out some of the views of Tewksbury that I took last year, concentrating on the scenery rather than the buildings this time.    The second and final photos were taken on the far river bank.  I think they confirm that the landscape is indeed very flat for a long distance.  As regards the prominent hill on the back scene, this is of course a feature of this region.   I think a lot depends on how far you want to reflect the actual location.   If you do want super realism, and if you have a high viewing position, I suspect that you could get away with less detail, especially the river.   Sorry Richard if this is not what you wanted to hear!

 

Stephen

backscene.jpg

backscene1.jpg

backscene2.jpg

On the contrary Stephen, this is exactly what I want to hear! You confirm my doubts. Worst case is to remove the backscene and lower it by cutting off a strip at the bottom. Hey ho! 

  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

By the way Stephen, what you may have mistaken for river is in fact blank where I haven’t painted anything yet. It just looks like sweeping blue water on the photo! But your points are still most definitely valid. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tricky said:

By the way Stephen, what you may have mistaken for river is in fact blank where I haven’t painted anything yet. It just looks like sweeping blue water on the photo! But your points are still most definitely valid. 

Hes worded much better what i was trying say earlier. Your back scene is very good but gives the impression of a range of hills all the way along (not just the obvious hill to the right) with the layout in a dip. Rather like Bath for example. 

 

If that isnt what you want then lower it but I rather like it!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it depends on high you plan to set your baseboard. The scenic photos were taken by someone standing at ground level, and get the same viewpoint on your layout you would need to have your layout placed quite high, nearly at eye level and then the horizon would look right if it was low, with plenty of sky. On the other hand, most layouts are  lower, say about four foot above ground level, and looking at the layout it’s rather as if you’re in a balloon 200’ above the ground. Then the horizon needs to be higher, generally I go for midway up the scenic back. Even then there is a lot of foreground, and the distant detail fills in quite a narrow band.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Northroader said:

I think it depends on high you plan to set your baseboard. The scenic photos were taken by someone standing at ground level, and get the same viewpoint on your layout you would need to have your layout placed quite high, nearly at eye level and then the horizon would look right if it was low, with plenty of sky. On the other hand, most layouts are  lower, say about four foot above ground level, and looking at the layout it’s rather as if you’re in a balloon 200’ above the ground. Then the horizon needs to be higher, generally I go for midway up the scenic back. Even then there is a lot of foreground, and the distant detail fills in quite a narrow band.

My photos were taken from the intended viewing height. So my horizon is too low? Stephen thought it was too high. Maybe I'll see how my mid-distance low-relief buildings look?

  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

As I posted earlier, from the viewing height at which the photographs of the layout were taken (which is not a scale 5 feet from the ground) I maintain that the setting of the horizon on the back scene is correct. If this is to be the normal viewing height when the layout is exhibited it should be as Richard has it.

 

Dave

Link to post
Share on other sites

The perspective in the 3 photos is a bit different to my eyes although regardless its hard to tell from photos compared to in the flesh. 

 

They may all be taken at the same height but as you get closer to the layout, having a portrayal of "flat" landscape up in the air would look wrong. If you are stood 3 feet away even at the same it wont be the same perspective as the same height but 6 inches, but the backscene cant change angle so playing safe would have the back scene lower, I think.

 

They are a bit like referees and have worked best when not really noticed!

 

 

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.