Guest jim s-w Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 Jim, what matters to us all is that what you do makes YOU happy, We all bring something to the table. Yes absolutely. As i said earlier, just because someones layout doesnt interest me personally shouldnt make a blind bit of difference. However i think what some people are getting at is its important to remember that a lot of people that are new to the hobby dont know what to do and think something along the lines of 'those TMD layouts look easy enough, ill do one of those to practise'. Which is fine but there are other options, your 'practise' doesnt have to be a layout at all. Cheers Jim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torr Giffard LSWR 1951-71 Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 Mornin' all, Whilst a member at Barrowmore and working on Mostyn (P4) a fellow enthusiast came to help and said that he had a similar standard of layout at home, therefore he'd like to bring some of his models to run on Mostyn. On the next date that we gathered he turned up with a shoebox full of his models, thrown in one on top of the other. He proceeded in all seriousness to try and put his collection of soap bottles equipped with airfix 'OO' wheels onto the track. At first we thought he was joking and started to laugh but he was so offended that he didn't come again. That single snapshot said all that was needed, without words. Sorry to hear of your trials Black Rat. Dave Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackRat Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 And practice will hopefully (but not in my case) will make perfect. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold PhilH Posted January 20, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 20, 2013 I think it's all taken far too seriously. What do we want out of this hobby? It is a broad church covering a huge spectrum of people, talent, budget, available time and aspiration. There are those who just want a train set to do a bit of shunting, to a roundy roundy watching an express loco with ten on go whizzing past, to those who want a bit more detail. Then on to those to whom cantrail liveries on a 37 are important, to those who don't do it for themselves but need the admiration of others. It's just a hobby, for those whose talents lie elsewhere very often imagination fills in the gaps. For those who have the time, talent and stickability to produce masterpieces, do they actually enjoy it more than those who can't or don't aspire to do so? Judging by some of the threads in forums such as this one it does seem that the pursuit of perfection can be as much of a worry as it is can be fun. I don't know what the answers are - I just know we should all enjoy what we do at whatever level we choose or are dictated by talent or budget to be at. Otherwise there doesn't seem to be much point in indulging in the hobby. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngryMeerkat Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 Yes absolutely. As i said earlier, just because someone doesnt interest me personally shouldnt make a blind bit of difference. However i think what some people are getting at is its important to remember that a lot of people that are new to the hobby dont know what to do and think something along the lines of 'those TMD layouts look easy enough, ill do one of those to practise'. Which is fine but there are other options, your 'practise' doesnt have to be a layout at all. Cheers Jim Jim and BlackRat, you both make excellent points (and sorry to hear about your troubles BlackRat). Just something I'd like to add to your viewpoints if I may? Both Tony Wright and Andy are respected members of our hobby, and the people involved in this hobby listen to their opinions. So lets look at a very plausible scenario that may affect this hobby .... Tony and Andy have aired their views, and people have obviously listened. Lets imagine that as well as us debating this issue, the RTR and kit manufacturers have taken note of what's been said. What if 12 months from now the large majority of 'TDM' layouts are gone in favour of prototype layouts? There is no more requirement for the myriad of Ready-To-Plant buildings we have now, stock for these layouts is not being supplied by the RTR manufacturers due to time-to-release, and kits have become the norm in getting the loco's and carriages we need. The 'big 2' try for another year but in the face of dwindling sales their ranges have become almost obsolete in the view of the 'new age modeller' so they scale back what they do produce to almost nothing in an attempt to keep costs manageable. The people who started all these new prototype layouts have been doing as best they can for the last 12 months, learning to scratch-build and paint, with varying degrees of success. Some modellers have adapted to the 'new age' and are currently producing some amazing layouts, really setting the standard. However due to these amazing models, those who can't adapt due to skill or space or finance are finding themselves falling further behind. Also the people entering the hobby for the first time are seeing a massive decline in the availability of Ready-To-Plant buildings and stock that they like, are struggling to pick up the required level of scratch-building quality, and are embroiled in the 'class split' that has now become prevalent in the hobby - those that can scratch-build authentic modelling masterpieces, and those who can't. So 2 years from now it all comes to a head - the manufacturers are on the bones of their back sides due to scratch-building, new people entering the hobby are finding it elitist and can't get comfortable, those who can't build a masterpiece find themselves giving up due to the derision of their peers, and the place where most of these modellers would go - the lowly TDM - has disappeared from our hobby completely. Yes all of this is completely fictitious, but lets not forget that the RTR manufacturers build what we want them to, because if we don't want it we don't buy it and they lose money. And during these hard economic times and while massive high street companies are going under at an amazing rate, we the customers of our hobby need to be very careful about which direction we push it in. Mark Edited as I inferred something that wasn't true, apologies to those concerned. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torr Giffard LSWR 1951-71 Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 Mark, ....the 'bar' will only ever get higher, that is the way of the world. God speed to anyone who can nudge it up even a little. Everybody else find your niche or else aspire to follow the 'bar'. Cheers Dave Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Y Posted January 20, 2013 Author Share Posted January 20, 2013 Mark, although a completely speculative scenario I must emphasise that I certainly do not hold any such influence (nor should I) and neither does Tony. The manufacturers should be given due credit for continuing to provide what people want and wish for. All I have done is given my personal perspective and it's not going to bring any manufacturer to their knees just because I don't particularly like an EWS/DRS/GBRf/FL combodepot somewhere in the Midlands/Banbury area-ish that also sees steam specials dropping by. I've been credited with some guff in my lifetime so let's not put world poverty, the fall of the Roman Empire and small wagon wheels on the list for the haters. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
'CHARD Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 And during these hard economic times and while massive high street companies are going under at an amazing rate, we the customers of our hobby need to be very careful about which direction we push it in. Mark Mark, the heat expended on this thread probably represents 0.005% of the energy reflected on the whole site, the majority of which is light. I don't think you need worry that this debate is going to have any greater influence on the future course of the hobby than a kayak on a supertanker. Relax buddy! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngryMeerkat Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 Mark, ....the 'bar' will only ever get higher, that is the way of of the world. God speed to anyone who can nudge it up even a little. Everybody else find your niche or else aspire to follow the 'bar'. Cheers Dave Hi Dave, I hope the bar does continue to get higher, those who can reach or raise the bar deserve praise. BUT for somebody who has done so well in the hobby to write an article like this is dangerous, it creates a class divide in the hobby that shouldn't exist. Somebody in TWs position should be actively encouraging those at earlier points in modelling instead of rubbishing what they are doing. As a previous poster has mentioned, the TDM (or fictitious branch line or similar) is almost a rite of passage and should be encouraged instead of beaten down. Wells Green being an excellent example, it's an amazing rendition of the exact thing that TW (and Andy In a less vociferous way) is suggesting we remove from the hobby, technically brilliant and atmospherically capturing the feel of a TDM. Raise the bar by all means, but don't put down the people who aren't up there with you. Mark Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngryMeerkat Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 Mark, although a completely speculative scenario I must emphasise that I certainly do not hold any such influence (nor should I) and neither does Tony. The manufacturers should be given due credit for continuing to provide what people want and wish for. All I have done is given my personal perspective and it's not going to bring any manufacturer to their knees just because I don't particularly like an EWS/DRS/GBRf/FL combodepot somewhere in the Midlands/Banbury area-ish that also sees steam specials dropping by.I've been credited with some guff in my lifetime so let's not put world poverty, the fall of the Roman Empire and small wagon wheels on the list for the haters. Ok fair point Andy, my apologies for implying something which isn't true. I will edit my post to reflect this and reiterate now that the example above is purely speculative and a 'could be' situation. Mark Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Oldddudders Posted January 20, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 20, 2013 What an intriguing thread! Our leader being roundly lambasted for daring to come off the nicely-nicely editorial fence, TMDs being in or out of the dock - according to preference, and/or how well you read Andy Y's remarks - and a general feeling of unease on a snowy weekend. Kenton saying he doesn't like weathering and 'Chard saying he Fell into the TMD category at an early stage of his modelling career. Only Blackrat seems to have survived - precisely because he's had a couple of personal near-misses in the last few days. [Great news, Neil!] I regret I haven't read Mr Wright's article - but if we are to have gurus and pontiffs in our hobby, it is at least best that they have a track-record (not sorry!) by which they may be judged, and he seems to qualify. [Armchair-perfectionists, which Mr W patently isn't, often get short shrift on here, I am pleased to note!] Of course modellers struggle to build layouts in our modern dwellings. Young people with affordable flats and houses, maybe a spouse and bambini, have to compromise on space and budget. TMDs, offering a showcase for jazzy diesels, sound a good bet. I think Andy Y's point was that there is no less need for imaginative and skilled modelling in a small space than in the vast empty room of our dreams. Have the people in question looked at Boxenby, or Stewarts Lane, to see how well these things can look when individually crafted? Does Diesels In The Duchy count as a TMD? Look at that and you will find all the hallmarks of class-leading modelling in both layout and the trains. Yes, these are sizeable layouts - but look at the "take" on TMD as a concept. Living in rural France, I have access to the French modelling magazines. This month's Loco Revue features 6 lavishly illustrated pages of a small layout, which clearly hits the French spot, despite being about 6' in length. Oh, you say, Johnny Foreigner can do it, then? Well, I'm sure he can - but this is Chris Nevard's Brewhouse Quay. And while the narrative is written by Chris and translated, the captions to the pics are clearly from the editorial team - the Beattie well-tank is decribed as "adorable". Not all small-space layouts need to be TMDs, just as not all TMDs need to be in small spaces - and good modelling transcends national boundaries. Imaginary location versus near-copy? I have a very weak foot in both camps. My On30 Ophir will try to ape every significant feature of that amazing location (nearly 10,000 feet up in Colorado) - but the trains will be more generic. I have built the station, the General Merchandise store, the House at the Trestle - enough for anyone who knows the location to feel at home. On the other hand - or foot - my OO take on Halwill Junction is a bit more compromised, so it will be called Beaworthy (the original was Halwill for Beaworthy), but again I have procured copies of some key structures through a willing RMwebber (il Dottore) so the signature features will help the reality. I hope the weather cheers up soon - and the grumpy ones on here can smile, too. Healthy debate is needed in our hobby, and if your or my corns get trodden on we may still survive. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted January 20, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 20, 2013 A comment by Ian (Olddudders) came very close to a question which has been running through my mind as we've progressed through this thread. How many of those who have contributed to this thread, including those who have criticised the article's contents, have actually read Tony Wright's article? Including, as I read it, the use of an RTP goods shed on his prototype station based layout (because it is correct for the goods shed at that station). For anyone who hasn't read the article I suggest you ought to - it's a good read and includes some excellent picture which complement the various points he makes (they're not all based on prototypes). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold gwrrob Posted January 20, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 20, 2013 Including, as I read it, the use of an RTP goods shed on his prototype station based layout (because it is correct for the goods shed at that station). I certainly would have no qualms about using a rtp building if it was a prototype on my layout.I wish. I'm envious on how fortunate TW was there in getting what he wanted quite easily.Although having not read the article I don't know what the building in question entails. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edcayton Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 To me the fact that Tony's article has been put on a pedestal by the editor of the site suggests that this is the way it SHOULD be. I have met Tony and he seems a smashing guy, and his modelling is superb; as for Andy if he were to fart on here he would get a Gold Star for "popular" and rightly so! However, I think we need to be careful not to put off newcomers, and I also don't think that any particular genre of layout should be denigrated by the "official" voice of the forum. Of course you can have your opinion Andy, but it ain't the same as me saying "oh, no, not another........." is it? Meant in the best way Ed Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
APOLLO Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 Oldudders, your Ophir layout sounds interesting - have you a thread / photos yet ? I called into Tesco yesterday - horseburgers sold out (!!) but bought BRM, and read Tony's article last night. Now he is as entitled to his opinion as anyone else, he is an established, and excellent modeller and photographer. I agree with one or two of his points, disagree with others. No problem for me. If I posted on here what he wrote about today's railway scene I would be blasted left right and centre - so I will just say I tend to agree with Tony on his points there. In Feb BRM dare I mention the (superb) generic steam depot with a line up of shiny green A4's and Deltics ?, or the othe generic GWR / Scottish layouts ?. Nowt much up with them in my eyes though, The Cromer is based on a real location and is also nicely done. I agree it's getting rare that a new layout 'concept' emerges. I would like to see more industrial type branch line layouts based on real locations, and perhaps for a change a Midland Roundhouse shed layout like Bristol Barrow Road (this is actually being built to scale by a poster on here). Burton (with half the wall demolished - easy to see inside) or Holbeck etc. Lets face it - with the vast network of railways we had / still have (but much reduced), we have no excuses for lack of prototype location / choice wherever your interest lies. I am building a small layout based on the "Springs Branch" at Wigan - not the MPD but the old industrial line up to New Springs and Kirkless. It's all muck and grot, 1950's based. I haven't the time or neccesary skills to scratchbuild everything, so a carefull selection of Wills and Bachmann resin signalboxes, Wills level crossing gates, skytrex terraced houses etc etc makes the scenes at Belle Green Lane Level Crossing and Rose Bridge Jcn at least recogniseable. And that, for me, is what the hobby is all about. Brit15 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Kazmierczak Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 ..... a fellow enthusiast came to help and said that he had a similar standard of layout at home, therefore he'd like to bring some of his models to run on Mostyn. On the next date that we gathered he turned up with a shoebox full of his models, thrown in one on top of the other. He proceeded in all seriousness to try and put his collection of soap bottles equipped with airfix 'OO' wheels onto the track. At first we thought he was joking and started to laugh but he was so offended that he didn't come again..... I don't think I'd have gone back to that Group if that was the attitude prevailing at the time. We all want to do our best and each of us has different tallents. Encouragement is better than derision. But I'm not advocating dumbing down either. I have total admiration for those trying to recreate a small piece of a real location at a point in time (or a rather large piece of one in Jim's case.....). If WE can't be passionate about our modelling, then what's the point. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
backofanenvelope Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 I feel as others have said that this is a broad hobby and I think no one person is right or wrong, yes there are very talented people who produce work that most others can only dream of aspiring to, but this is the point for me in that it should inspire us to better modelling. I haven't read the article as I am not able to buy mags at the moment but I have found TW articles and videos to be thought provoking and informational. I have been accused of wishy washy views before but I do hold out that it is about that persons enjoyment of their hobby that is all that matters. I am reminded of Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Y Posted January 20, 2013 Author Share Posted January 20, 2013 The prototype article in BRM was deliberately written to be provocative, rather than antagonistic. I think most people accepted it as that, and it has certainly stimulated discussion. If I've antagonised Kenton, then that was not my intention, and for that I apologise. As for being some sort of god-like figure in the hobby (his words, definitely not mine), that's only his opinion. An opinion expressed (perhaps) in the same way as were mine in the article. I think he goes too far in considering that the piece in some way discredited the magazine. If it did, then I must say BRM has done very well to survive for 20 years, after hundreds of articles written by me have appeared in it. With so much 'discredit', how could it have possibly succeeded? My intention was certainly not to 'dictate' to folk what they should model and how, rather to suggest the possibilities of actually modelling a prototype, especially if they have the requisite skills (which need not be superhuman). Perhaps my 'suggestions' were put too stridently. Though I'll always follow the (self-righteous?) path of 'actual' prototype modelling, I hope the acknowledgement of the pioneering work of Peter Denny was made clear in the article. And, as for the 'assumption' that prototype modelling requires lots of space (not made by Kenton, to be fair), just examine the brilliant work on Cromer in the same issue of BRM. I also don't want to belittle the outstanding work of the likes of Steve Hall or Gordon and Maggie Gravett (all far ahead in terms of modelling capability than anything I could fudge together) but having photographed 100s of layouts (maybe over 1,000) down the years, I'm always swayed towards a depiction of what was actually there. In fairness, I don't believe that to be a critic one has to be able to match (or even do better than) what one is criticising. I used to play cricket, but never in a million years could I have ever played for England. Yet, I feel I have a right to be 'critical' of a performance which is dire (like yesterday). That said, particularly in the realm of railway modelling, I've always been more prepared to accept the opinions of those who've actually made/improved/developed/demonstrated, etc, something or contributed to a procedure or technique, than those who merely talk about it. I'm sure Kenton makes things (forgive me if I'm not aware of his status on RMWeb), though he appears not to weather things. He'll have to accept my cynicism, but I'd much rather take the word of someone who actually does something as a criticism than one who only opines. I don't want this to get personal (though Kenton's assessment of me certainly is), but might we see some of his work? If he's already posted examples of it in the past, then my apologies for my being ignorant of it. Might we also know who he actually is? Again, if this has already been established, then my apologies for my ignorance. Finally, might he be taken more seriously if his image didn't suggest that he wasn't prepared to listen? In conclusion, at least Andy's introduction of this thread has produced a mass of common sense responses. A few have actually put into perspective the relative status of the importance of railway modelling when confronting 'real' issues. At least it's opened my eyes not to take myself too seriously, nor for others to take too much notice either, especially in my being 'critical' of folk who actually want nothing more than to enjoy themselves. Neither I, nor anyone else, has a right to deny them that. My thanks to all who've responded. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium 2ManySpams Posted January 20, 2013 RMweb Premium Share Posted January 20, 2013 I've been credited with some guff in my lifetime so let's not put world poverty, the fall of the Roman Empire and small wagon wheels on the list for the haters. What? Small wagon wheels are YOUR fault?!? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adams442T Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 I've been credited with some guff in my lifetime so let's not put world poverty, the fall of the Roman Empire and small wagon wheels on the list for the haters. Come on now! I well remember Gluteus Maximus saying in the Forum just the other day, "That Andreas Eboracum! Keeps on insisting that the cart tracks are perfectly good at 4' instead of the Imperial Dictum of 4' 8 1/2", I can see the whole Empire crashing down!" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torr Giffard LSWR 1951-71 Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 Raise the bar by all means, but don't put down the people who aren't up there with you. Mark ....Mark, my project is sufficiently complex such that there are ongoing aspects in which I have no experience at all and I'm doing my best to 'get a handle on them' whilst I have some expertise in other areas and progress happens more quickly. I'm much more likely to be looking for assistance than "putting anyone down". Class barriers are erected in the minds of the martyrs just as frequently (or more often) as by anyone else at any other stage of their modelling career. Cheers Dave Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngryMeerkat Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 The prototype article in BRM was deliberately written to be provocative, rather than antagonistic. I think most people accepted it as that, and it has certainly stimulated discussion. If I've antagonised Kenton, then that was not my intention, and for that I apologise. As for being some sort of god-like figure in the hobby (his words, definitely not mine), that's only his opinion. An opinion expressed (perhaps) in the same way as were mine in the article. I think he goes too far in considering that the piece in some way discredited the magazine. If it did, then I must say BRM has done very well to survive for 20 years, after hundreds of articles written by me have appeared in it. With so much 'discredit', how could it have possibly succeeded? My intention was certainly not to 'dictate' to folk what they should model and how, rather to suggest the possibilities of actually modelling a prototype, especially if they have the requisite skills (which need not be superhuman). Perhaps my 'suggestions' were put too stridently. Though I'll always follow the (self-righteous?) path of 'actual' prototype modelling, I hope the acknowledgement of the pioneering work of Peter Denny was made clear in the article. And, as for the 'assumption' that prototype modelling requires lots of space (not made by Kenton, to be fair), just examine the brilliant work on Cromer in the same issue of BRM. I also don't want to belittle the outstanding work of the likes of Steve Hall or Gordon and Maggie Gravett (all far ahead in terms of modelling capability than anything I could fudge together) but having photographed 100s of layouts (maybe over 1,000) down the years, I'm always swayed towards a depiction of what was actually there. In fairness, I don't believe that to be a critic one has to be able to match (or even do better than) what one is criticising. I used to play cricket, but never in a million years could I have ever played for England. Yet, I feel I have a right to be 'critical' of a performance which is dire (like yesterday). That said, particularly in the realm of railway modelling, I've always been more prepared to accept the opinions of those who've actually made/improved/developed/demonstrated, etc, something or contributed to a procedure or technique, than those who merely talk about it. I'm sure Kenton makes things (forgive me if I'm not aware of his status on RMWeb), though he appears not to weather things. He'll have to accept my cynicism, but I'd much rather take the word of someone who actually does something as a criticism than one who only opines. I don't want this to get personal (though Kenton's assessment of me certainly is), but might we see some of his work? If he's already posted examples of it in the past, then my apologies for my being ignorant of it. Might we also know who he actually is? Again, if this has already been established, then my apologies for my ignorance. Finally, might he be taken more seriously if his image didn't suggest that he wasn't prepared to listen? In conclusion, at least Andy's introduction of this thread has produced a mass of common sense responses. A few have actually put into perspective the relative status of the importance of railway modelling when confronting 'real' issues. At least it's opened my eyes not to take myself too seriously, nor for others to take too much notice either, especially in my being 'critical' of folk who actually want nothing more than to enjoy themselves. Neither I, nor anyone else, has a right to deny them that. My thanks to all who've responded. An excellent and fair reply. While 'god-like' is maybe an exaggeration, I think it is fair to say that both yourself and Andy are held in very high esteem here. Having now seen more of your articles and modelling, and understanding Andy's point of view a little more, I can understand more where your opinions come from. Unfortunately ( for you two gents at least) your current standing means that what you say will be taken in (taken to heart? Recited as gospel?) in ways that others on here aren't. Not to say that all opinions aren't equal, just that some are worth listening to more than others based on experience and standing. Either way, an excellent and thought provoking discussion. It has even led me to look more at prototypes!! I do hope nothing I've said here is seen as 'taking it serious' as that was never my intention. It's a lively debate, which can only be good for our hobby and the future. While my opinions differ from many on here, it doesn't change my opinion of the same people as people. Despite how things may seem, I have nothing but respect for TW, Andy, and everyone else on this site, and hope people don't think different. Mark Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Y Posted January 20, 2013 Author Share Posted January 20, 2013 It has even led me to look more at prototypes!! That's the best thing I could have heard to come out of this Mark; if it makes a few readers take time to do some research and create something less like a model of a model which doesn't have any basis in fact that's got to be a win for everyone. There's no reason why manufacturer's products can't be included as long as they contribute to the scene as opposed to looking like a catalogue shot. Hardly a brainwave but as I typed that last statement it makes me wonder how much responsibility, in this context, that a manufacturer should take for scenes that do not exist and buyers (probably less 'right-wing' than most) replicate what they see therein. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jim s-w Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 Not to say that all opinions aren't equal, just that some are worth listening to more than others based on experience and standing. Indeed so but again that experience is important. For example the thoughts of someone on this particular subject if they have never attempted to model a real place, might be considered less relevant than that same persons thoughts on another topic that they do know. Dont assume for one moment that someones 'standing' mean their opinions are worth listening too more than others on every subject because thats not true either. You only have to look at my layout archive to see that go a decade off my timescale one way or another and I just dont know. My interest has merely become a passing one. Someone once emailed me claiming that I am an expert in modelling buses, I know a bit about brummy ones in the 80's but thats it. Cheers Jim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted January 20, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 20, 2013 That's the best thing I could have heard to come out of this Mark; if it makes a few readers take time to do some research and create something less like a model of a model which doesn't have any basis in fact that's got to be a win for everyone. There's no reason why manufacturer's products can't be included as long as they contribute to the scene as opposed to looking like a catalogue shot. Hardly a brainwave but as I typed that last statement it makes me wonder how much responsibility, in this context, that a manufacturer should take for scenes that do not exist and buyers (probably less 'right-wing' than most) replicate what they see therein. That alas has always been a 'problem with manufacturers - particularly the large r-t-r companies - as they presumably want to show their products in a setting which shows what they can do and not necessarily in a setting which shows what you ought to do with them. Many years ago we had 'Meccano Magazine' trying to show us how to use Hornby-Dublo models more in the way the real thing would be used rather than as illustrated in the catalogue. Similarly some of today's magazines also try to do that, in all sorts of ways and at varying levels but you could also ask if it is it not also the case that there are times when the magazines portray scenes which are highly improbable in the prototype railway world and laud the layout(s) that portray(s) such shortcomings. A point which Tony Wright made very well is the difference between the railway of today and that of not much more than a generation ago - and her again we are sometimes misled by model which often portray the past as overgrown lineside dereliction when that is often more true of today than it was of much of the lineside of, say, 40 years ago. Equally we see track layout complexity portrayed in layouts representing an era when we on the real railway were busy 'simplifying' and rationalising as fast as we could go and on such layouts we see levels of traffic which we would have welcomed with open arms but was in reality trying ti get away (or be got away) from the railway as fast as it could. This of course is where 'modelling the prototype' can be very effective because it takes a point, or shortish period, in time and reproduces it - 'Peterborough' looks right because it is right, even if it happens to be compressed from an exact replication, 'New Street' looks right even without the ohle (thus far) because it is right and - as on Great Northern's 'Peterborough' - you see trains you would expect to see on the railway of that period. Others can of course do exactly the same without modelling a real place - so on Treneglos' you see the trains and locos you would expect to see in the era it portrays, the whole thing fits together. And just look at the effort being put into BCB - not just getting that Black Country appearance and atmosphere both of the railway and lineside but down to traffic and hence wagon types and locos for the period that matches the scenic treatment. What we will see will be eminently believable even though it is a work of fiction. There are plenty of good examples around and they are, I think, something the model railway media (and not RMweb etc) should be using to illustrate the way things can go. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.