Creating Cameo Layouts

[Captain Kernow]

If it viewable from all sides (and leaning on the emphasis that you are watching a performance), wouldn't that be more of a "Soapbox"...?

Sounds like one of those avante garde theatres with the audience sat all round the stage and being invited to participate.

[2ManySpams]

I think that if you've read any of Mr Rice's books it's fairly clear what he considers a cameo layout to be. Just flick through the pictures, no need to read the text, and you'll see a very clear theme. It's a self-contained​ scene, well presented, modelled to a high standard and realistically​ operated.

 

Finescale is one of those terms that folk seem either hate due to its elitist overtones or seen as something to aspire to. I actually think that it's scale and guage neutral, in my mind you don't have to model in P4 or EM. It's an overall mindset that's applied to how you model, starting with observing the real world and trying to capture the look and feel.

 

Colour, setting and consistency are more important in my eyes than absolute engineering tolerances.

 

I would argue that the finescale look can be achieved using OO, just as it's possible to get the end result horribly wrong using P4 standards. If you read Mr Rice's Cameo book then you'll note that he rates Chris Nevard's work. Does Chris make use of RTP and RTR? Yes he does, but it's the artistry with which he does it and the overall end result where Chris scores highly.

 

So I'd start with a scene in mind, something interesting from a photo, and then think how best to recreate the feel of the scene using whatever materials are best suited (scratch, kit, RTP, RTR) and match it to whatever scale/gauge combination you fancy. It might also be worthwhile using the competition to push yourself as a modeller. Try building some track, stock or buildings - who knows, you might come out the other side with new skills.

[justin1985]

The book really does define the concept ... Not so much in a sentence, but it emerges throughout the whole book. There is a short definition in the first section, but if you read the whole book (and it's very readable) you'll get the idea much better.

 

As others have suggested, the definition is very deliberately about the "philosophy" rather than a simple checklist. Which makes it inevitably, and deliberately, subjective. But read the book and you'll understand.

 

Rice's earlier book "Layout Design: Finescale in Small Spaces" gives a lot more concrete examples of plans that mainly fit this approach (but he wasn't using the phrase "cameo" back then).

 

I think the key points are embracing presentation as integral to your project - whether that is a proscenium arch, theatre style, as Rice has long advocated, or some other way. And aiming for maximum realism - which you might call the "finescale philosophy".

 

That doesn't mean using or not using any particular track standards. But it does mean making your track, along with everything else, look as realistic as possible. So at the most basic, that might mean only using really sharp radius points where they would be used in real life (on a dockside maybe), not on a model of the mainline or within a purpose built TMD. Basically work from the prototype, not from what is available off the shelf (but that doesn't mean you can't use ready made).

 

Justin

[bertiedog]

Well, the description cameo was used in the seventies in connection with Museum displays, where you wander around a model or display, rather than a diorama where the one viewpoint is chosen to give a realistic perspective to the whole view.

 

Many US layouts are double sided, view from anywhere to admire a whole structure rather than just the front view, via a theatrical view. I had to build several museum displays where the viewer could see all surfaces, it is a lot of work! They were moving away from the glass case era to a case in the wall type, and I always though all round viewing was better, especially where the lighting was only on the model, with the surrounds in shade.

 

For the sake of space layouts often have to be against walls so no chance there, but with smaller more concentrated layouts a multi sided view can work well, especially with a more scenic view than with buildings dominating it.

 

So ........Cameo is a smaller concentrated layout that can have a theatre stage look, or not, but should be portable in one unit, with higher than usual finish and standards. I feel a lot of modellers do this already, but Iain's book may raise the bar higher.

 

Stephen

[Argos]

chucking my hat into the ring.......

 

In the absence of a specific topic for the Cameo Layouts competition I have started (well, reawakened ) a thread on what will be my contribution.

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/109742-rnas-glencruitten-relocating-lenabo/page-2&do=findComment&comment=2692130

 

I am not expecting to win, or even be shortlisted, merely taking the opportunity of getting a kick up the ar#e to do something about an idea that has been ruminating for some time.

 

If you are struggling of the concept of what a Cameo Layout is, I recommend reading the book (or even buying it......).

All will become clear, it doesn't define conclusively what it is, but I think it is pretty clear what it isn't!

[LBRJ]

I think that if you've read any of Mr Rice's books it's fairly clear what he considers a cameo layout to be. Just flick through the pictures, no need to read the text, and you'll see a very clear theme. It's a self-contained​ scene, well presented, modelled to a high standard and realistically​ operated.

 

Finescale is one of those terms that folk seem either hate due to its elitist overtones or seen as something to aspire to. I actually think that it's scale and guage neutral, in my mind you don't have to model in P4 or EM. It's an overall mindset that's applied to how you model, starting with observing the real world and trying to capture the look and feel.

 

Colour, setting and consistency are more important in my eyes than absolute engineering tolerances.

 

I would argue that the finescale look can be achieved using OO, just as it's possible to get the end result horribly wrong using P4 standards. If you read Mr Rice's Cameo book then you'll note that he rates Chris Nevard's work. Does Chris make use of RTP and RTR? Yes he does, but it's the artistry with which he does it and the overall end result where Chris scores highly.

 

So I'd start with a scene in mind, something interesting from a photo, and then think how best to recreate the feel of the scene using whatever materials are best suited (scratch, kit, RTP, RTR) and match it to whatever scale/gauge combination you fancy. It might also be worthwhile using the competition to push yourself as a modeller. Try building some track, stock or buildings - who knows, you might come out the other side with new skills.

 

I have been familiar with the term and ideology long before Mr Rice's current tome on the matter and this, to me, is pretty much the Cameo concept in a nutshell.

A small layout, done to your highest achievable standards, to create an easy on the eye working image of a slice of reality.

 

or to use the original literary definition of "Cameo"

 

a short descriptive literary sketch which neatly encapsulates someone or something.

[Mark Forrest]

To start with, the book is excellent and I've long been a fan of Iain's approach to layout design and presentation. Hopefully I've learned something from reading his previous books and my Fryers Lane project has something of the cameo style display about it.

 

The idea of a competition is interesting. I quite like the slight vagueness in the definition of what is permitted, it allows for a bit of creativity. All of this has me thinking about a couple of different layout designs I have buzzing around in my head and whether they could be adapted to a cameo style display. Not sure if I'd enter them in the competition, but it certainly has me thinking about progressing these dormant projects beyond the sketch on a notepad stage, so that's got to be a good thing (for me, anyway).

[The Fatadder]

Looking forward to heading out to Sevilla on Monday,

Now the rough idea is pretty clear in my head, I've dug out what will form half of the key building, and thoughts running through my head on presentation

 

Looking forward to the arrival of the book so I can have a think how it influences my ideas further

[unklian]

Sounds like one of those avante garde theatres with the audience sat all round the stage and being invited to participate.

 

 Sounds like one of Brian Harrap's layouts to me, including the audience participation bit too .

[MartinWales]

Cameo in my mind is like a characature. So why does it need to be fine scale? Maybe fine modelling is enough?

The combination of a believable scene to the most demanding standard that the individual is capable of in minimum space is a challenge to many, and that in itself is the attraction

[NHY 581]

Working on the basis of a picture is worth a word or two, here's a photograph of my current layout. Very basic but I believe that the principles are there and my entry will follow the same format, hopefully improving upon what has been learnt with this one.

 

RTP buildings, RTR stock, PECO track and tension lock couplings.

 

Rob.

[davknigh]

Looks very good Rob. If I may constructively suggest that all it needs is a view blocker to disguise the entrance/exit to the fiddle yard.

 

Cheers,

 

David

[Steamport Southport]

Well that clears that all up then.

 

 

The main reason that I wanted to know the definition is I've ended up with a number of smaller engines that would look totally out of place on my main layout which is a loft based mainline and my future project which is a small Southern Region terminus. This type of layout looks ideal.

 

I won't be entering the competition but I'll definitely be following it and all the relevant threads/blogs.

 

 

Jason

[davknigh]

The whole idea of the book, IMO, is not so much to get people to build an all singing all dancing layout but to design and build a layout that actually gets finished. Rice's own home layout, Cade's Green, as outlined in MRJ250 is such a creature although it has grown beyond the size limit and is not likely to leave home. The Cameo part goes with the presentation and operation of something that would be equally at home at an exhibition or in a layout room. Far too many home layouts are, as a sadly departed club member once said of his own work, "in the ninth year of a five year plan".

 

cheers,

 

David

[Robin2]

The combination of a believable scene to the most demanding standard that the individual is capable of in minimum space

I think I know what the words in bold mean but what exactly might they imply for the competition?

 

If someone had a really believable scene but the judges discovered that that he was capable of better would he be disqualified? And, anyway, how would you define "better" - perhaps he should have used a Malcolm Mitchell model rather than an updated Bachmann one?

 

...R

[Robin2]

Working on the basis of a picture is worth a word or two,

Looks fabulous. Thank goodness existing models are excluded from the competition

 

...R

[MartinWales]

I think I know what the words in bold mean but what exactly might they imply for the competition?

 

If someone had a really believable scene but the judges discovered that that he was capable of better would he be disqualified? And, anyway, how would you define "better" - perhaps he should have used a Malcolm Mitchell model rather than an updated Bachmann one?

 

...R

Interesting point. I think I needs to be looked at as a whole, but also as a challenge to the individual to possibly try or work in a new scale/gauge combination, not necessarily finescale but one that the competitor may not have previously worked with.  

[Captain Kernow]

If someone had a really believable scene but the judges discovered that that he was capable of better would he be disqualified? And, anyway, how would you define "better" - perhaps he should have used a Malcolm Mitchell model rather than an updated Bachmann one?

I can't believe that the judging process would be other than to compare the quality and believability of what is actually in front of them (or on their computer screens, perhaps).

 

You would surely only 'lose points' if the next layouts Mitchell 45XX looked more convincing than your Bachmann one (and it's quite possible for a well-weathered RTR loco to look better than a badly made kit).

[Neil]

I can't believe that the judging process would be other than to compare the quality and believability of what is actually in front of them (or on their computer screens, perhaps).

 

You would surely only 'lose points' if the next layouts Mitchell 45XX looked more convincing than your Bachmann one (and it's quite possible for a well-weathered RTR loco to look better than a badly made kit).

 

Quite; I've often thought that the secret of creating a believable model isn't what you put in but in the editing out of the stuff that shouts model regardless of how many hair shirts were worn out in its production.

[Stubby47]

The more I think about this, the more tempted I am to enter.

 

The deadline, 2019, means I have time to really improve my skills in certain areas, and I should not need to rush things.

The concept, a small contained layout, fits with my modular approach to building layouts - I might even attempt a through line instead of a terminus.

Operational, that could mean anything, but probably needs signals.

As it seems RTR stock & Peco track will be accepted (though may rate less points than handbuilt), that will suit my larger aims. 

 

I'm struggling to find reason not to have a go (other than space to store it & SWMBO's comments such as "not another bl**dy trainset").

 

Now, what quirky subject can I use....

[pete_mcfarlane]

Sounds like one of those avante garde theatres with the audience sat all round the stage and being invited to participate.

I went to such a performance last year, of 'Oedipus Rex'. We were warned by the Front of House that 'You can sit at the side of the stage, but you may get some fake blood on you....'

 

Actually it was really good. 

 

As for the competition, surely having a year and a bit to build a small layout means that you can learn how to build your own track if you wanted/needed to? 

[Neil]

......

 

Now, what quirky subject can I use....

 

Maybe I can help you with this.

[Jub45565]

Looks fabulous. Thank goodness existing models are excluded from the competition

 

...R

Agreed, but you raise an interesting point...

 

Do entries have to be done completely from scratch, or can it be used as a goal fpr current projects which fit, or can be made to, the bill?

 

My current project almost has the track completed, & has a goal of September 2018. I think it fits the criteria, but if the aim is to get new projects off the ground (& would be perfectly valid, I already have the targets I need really) then I know I wont have time to fit in a second one concurrently...

[Robin2]

Agreed, but you raise an interesting point...

 

Do entries have to be done completely from scratch,

I don't know. My comment was intended as a complimentary joke.

 

 

Quite; I've often thought that the secret of creating a believable model isn't what you put in but in the editing out of the stuff that shouts model regardless of how many hair shirts were worn out in its production.

In support of that I came across this today when re-reading Iain Rice's "Layout Design" book (p128)

creating a convincing and pleasing model railway is often more about creating an effective illusion than it is about achieving a slavishly-exact rendition of reality

 

Sounds good to me.

 

And it certainly does not seem to require hand-made track.

 

...R

[Captain Kernow]

I see that a new sub-forum for the cameo layout competition has appeared - http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/forum/328-creating-cameo-layouts-the-challenge/

Edited April 21, 2017 by Captain Kernow