Putting Backscene Painting into Perspective

[Siberian Snooper]

On 14/12/2019 at 09:28, grahame said:

 

Sounds like a discussion subject for your own gratification (or maybe perverse pleasure).

 

It may be difficult and there are certainly challenges, but aren't they just issues to be overcome? Graham Muz has provided examples of effective perspective backscenes and here's a couple of less successful ones that I undertook:

 

 

 

 

I have supped a few ales in the Market Porter, I think that it must be a first, that I have been in building featured on a layout.

 

 

[Siberian Snooper]

3 hours ago, PJBambrick said:

True, the first layer of near scale structures behind the railway are often conveniently parallel to the line, so they don't usually need any unrealistic and conflicting perspectives.  Beyond these, I find the trick is to do a gentle, layered middle distance two point illusion with a painted skyline and 3D building facades in relief.  Restricting any unrealistic angles of observation on either side using view blockers usually results in visitors tending to just study that scene, then moving along to the next feature without disappointment.  It's my closest method of forcing an 'X marks the spot' and this cheating can be done all the way along many freelance landscapes as long as there is a little depth allowance.

 

 

For me, photo backscene prints work very well as stand alone 'distance' representations, but they are more difficult to actually blend into 3D.  Prints can work perfectly well as individually cut collage elements, as long as their perspective matches the layout's horizon datum.

 

Two 'in progress' pics of Bucks Hill show view blocking at work, where the unwanted aspect is obscured as soon as the observer moves a few feet to one side. 

 

 

One of the best layouts that I have seen,  it was at Railex a few years ago,  I spent ages looking at it.

 

 

[Colin_McLeod]

A very useful thread. My initial thought was to agree with the OP that it didn't work, but I've just read some very useful solutions on here.

 

What started out with adverse reactions has turned into the constructive and informative thread that I believe the OP intended.

[Scene but not Heard]

6 hours ago, PJBambrick said:

True, the first layer of near scale structures behind the railway are often conveniently parallel to the line, so they don't usually need any unrealistic and conflicting perspectives.  Beyond these, I find the trick is to do a gentle, layered middle distance two point illusion with a painted skyline and 3D building facades in relief.  Restricting any unrealistic angles of observation on either side using view blockers usually results in visitors tending to just study that scene, then moving along to the next feature without disappointment.  It's my closest method of forcing an 'X marks the spot' and this cheating can be done all the way along many freelance landscapes as long as there is a little depth allowance.

 

 

For me, photo backscene prints work very well as stand alone 'distance' representations, but they are more difficult to actually blend into 3D.  Prints can work perfectly well as individually cut collage elements, as long as their perspective matches the layout's horizon datum.

 

Two 'in progress' pics of Bucks Hill show view blocking at work, where the unwanted aspect is obscured as soon as the observer moves a few feet to one side. 

That's very sound advice PJ. I totally 'get' the idea of limiting one's vision by constructing foreground 'effects' to limit the eye. Clearly the earlier in a layout development that this can be planned for, the better! In your two links here (which are stunningly naturalistic) the printed background works remarkably well... maybe because great attention seems to have been given to colour balance and seasonal attention and model/background eye-level balance. Beautiful work, a credit to the modelers. I love the country house, just visible in the valley through the trees.

 

Thanks for taking the trouble to show me, and other interested parties, these excellent examples.

[Scene but not Heard]

17 hours ago, Scene but not Heard said:

The stepped approach! Never thought of that. Interest.

Kevin,

I tracked down that conical perspective thing. Wow that's fun. After Christmas I'll give that a play... let you see the results... or not if I can't fathom it out!

[bgman]

At the risk of causing a few blushes for one of the contributor's may I suggest purchasing a worthwhile Christmas present.

 

Paul Bambrick & John Ellis-Cockell published a book entitled "Creating a Backscene - A Railway Modelling Companion"

 

It's been one of my better purchases.

 

G 

[Scene but not Heard]

On 16/12/2019 at 16:49, bgman said:

At the risk of causing a few blushes for one of the contributor's may I suggest purchasing a worthwhile Christmas present.

 

Paul Bambrick & John Ellis-Cockell published a book entitled "Creating a Backscene - A Railway Modelling Companion"

 

It's been one of my better purchases.

 

G 

Thanks... I have not come across it, but I am sure it will list pitfalls as well as sound practice. All our pressies are wrapped and under the tree, but I'm sure hints will come aplenty in the New Year. A Merry Christmas to yourself, and other companions on here.

 

[CF MRC]

Interesting thread.  I am a great believer in less is more and sketching-in ideas and then improving them over time. 
Making round buildings in perspective can be quite fun.   On Copenhagen Fields, the Midland Roundhouse was a prominent feature in the goods yard that needed to be represented somewhere in the distance. 

The site for it was between York Road viaduct and the back scene itself, an awkward triangular patch. 

The very first rough working was a piece of corrugated cardboard to judge the best size.  I then cut out some stout card and painted it with appropriate muted colours to see if it could work.

The idea was OK, but the execution needed to be improved: it looked like a piece of flat cardboard. Subsequent archaeological research has indicated that it was probably a red brick structure.  Some other ideas were beginning to form in the little grey cells as to how to show the curvature. A more detailed representation of the round house was therefore cut out and painted with windows and some indication of the roof lantern, derived from photos. Shading was also introduced to imply the direction of the sun and increase the effect of the circular nature of the building. 

This showed some resemblance to its predecessor but was designed to be viewed as a curve, stuck to a 10 mm thick plywood former.

When viewed from below it presents quite an alarming prospect.

 

In situ, the effect is a little less distressing and the ground level & textures will be integrated with the structure. The top of the rear roundhouse roof is not quite correct, but satisfactory for my purposes.

Viewed side-on the relationship with the back scene is obvious, as is the extent of the subtle curvature.

From the normal public viewing distance of 4’ it works well enough, but is awaiting many more structures and features to the south (left) of it. The advertising hoardings are strategically placed to ‘catch’ your eye before the scene (or lack of it) behind. 

Tim

 

 

 

 

Edited December 20, 2019 by CF MRC
Problems with images

[Scene but not Heard]

19 hours ago, CF MRC said:

Interesting thread.  I am a great believer in less is more and sketching-in ideas and then improving them over time. 
Making round buildings in perspective can be quite fun.   On Copenhagen Fields, the Midland Roundhouse was a prominent feature in the goods yard that needed to be represented somewhere in the distance. 

The site for it was between York Road viaduct and the back scene itself, an awkward triangular patch. 

The very first rough working was a piece of corrugated cardboard to judge the best size.  I then cut out some stout card and painted it with appropriate muted colours to see if it could work.

The idea was OK, but the execution needed to be improved: it looked like a piece of flat cardboard. Subsequent archaeological research has indicated that it was probably a red brick structure.  Some other ideas were beginning to form in the little grey cells as to how to show the curvature. A more detailed representation of the round house was therefore cut out and painted with windows and some indication of the roof lantern, derived from photos. Shading was also introduced to imply the direction of the sun and increase the effect of the circular nature of the building. 

This showed some resemblance to its predecessor but was designed to be viewed as a curve, stuck to a 10 mm thick plywood former.

When viewed from below it presents quite an alarming prospect.

 

In situ, the effect is a little less distressing and the ground level & textures will be integrated with the structure. The top of the rear roundhouse roof is not quite correct, but satisfactory for my purposes.

Viewed side-on the relationship with the back scene is obvious, as is the extent of the subtle curvature.

From the normal public viewing distance of 4’ it works well enough, but is awaiting many more structures and features to the south (left) of it. The advertising hoardings are strategically placed to ‘catch’ your eye before the scene (or lack of it) behind. 

Tim

 

 

 

 

Tim,   Thank you so much for these pictures... and I agree with your principle... to get a basic 'structure' onto which you can modify and refine in the light of what you see. I came late to the art of model railways and found the whole world of illusion fascinating. Everything you create is forced into compromise, and until one accepts that wholeheartedly, frustration will always be your partner!

More specifically, your lovely layout oozes atmosphere which, I guessing here, partly comes from your painting methods. I do hate paint pots labelled 'skin', 'rust', 'concrete' and the like; clearly your technique allows for a more varied palette.

The round-house. Hurray! It has no straight lines to cause vanishing point vertigo, but never-the-less the elipses test the best in eye-level expertise. Here, the compromise is deciding from what height the spectator will look down on it. Your pictures suggest to me that 'adult standing height' from about five feet away works splendidly. As you admit, the top lookout ring is not perfect when viewed close-up, but overall I would like to say you have achieved a terrific compromise.

Thanks for contributing this, and I look forward to seeing the finished layout.

Mike.

On 16/12/2019 at 16:49, bgman said:

At the risk of causing a few blushes for one of the contributor's may I suggest purchasing a worthwhile Christmas present.

 

Paul Bambrick & John Ellis-Cockell published a book entitled "Creating a Backscene - A Railway Modelling Companion"

 

It's been one of my better purchases.

 

G 

Thanks... I have not come across it, but I am sure it will list pitfalls as well as sound practice. All our pressies are wrapped and under the tree, but I'm sure hints will come aplenty in the New Year. A Merry Christmas to yourself, and other companions on here.