What is a Cameo Layout?

[Liam]

When I next exhibit Sheep Lane, I am contemplating showing as I use it at home when the Memsahib is out. It will of course be shown with an appropriate table cloth.

I can pop a few chairs in front, one for me and a couple for the victims .......sorry, visitors to whom I can chunter on to.....

This may seem a stupid question, but is the fiddle yard attached to the scenic section with hinges?

[Robin2]

As I see it the only reason for building a cameo-type layout is to display it. If you are the only person who wants to see it them the optimum height is whatever you want it to be. If however you want to show it to others then you must remember you are showing it to an audience who will range in ages from 3 to 100 and have an eye height of, say 600mm to 1800mm, and for some of those the eye level can't change.

I understand the problem and the solution is not simple. I suspect you agree that layouts generally look much better when viewed at eye level.

 

Maybe we should turn the cameo "box" through 180 degrees so the viewers see the back of it. Then mount a TV screen on the back so it shows the image from a camera on the working side. There could be two TV screens at different heights to accommodate the long and the short. I realize there is a lot of nonsense in this suggestion - but it is not 100% nonsense.

 

...R

[Stubby47]

Or just leave the layout at home and only bring the screens with a live link...

 

Or just show a video of the layout working...

 

Or not have the exhibition and host the videos on Youtube...

 

Or just build a virtual layout and show that...

 

Or just accept that whatever height you build a layout will please some and annoy others.

 

Rule 1?

Edited May 29, 2017 by Stubby47

[rue_d_etropal]

The problem, and it is a big problem, is that this 'cameo' idea is just one view of what a 'cameo' is. I  have been building what in , broader terms is cameo layouts for many years, but I have never, and will never set it at a height which is , only their opinion, the best height for a layout, ie eye level. As to what eye level, and you then have to decide whether to discriminate against those in wheel chairs(and with an increasing average age in the hobby, possibly more common). I know of one exhibition, which banned any layouts that were not set at a height easy for those in wheel chairs!

 

Another point, and that is many of these eye level layouts are 'flat', and I recommend digging out some of the articles that Jack Nelson wrote over 60 years ago. He is best remembered for his 3D dioramas, but his earlier work, was more conventional by today's standards. He recommended that the front should be low, and the back high. His layout (LNWR HO) had mainline track in the front , with a raised town scene, with working trams, at the back. This way the eye flows from the front to the back naturally. his ideas were revolutionary at the time, yet did not get the attention, such a new idea would get now. Most layouts at the time tended to be large and flat, and would these days be considerd rather  like large trainsets.

 

Obviously I won't be entering this competition. I prefer real challenges, rather than made up ones. I hate competitions, but will sometimes submit something if I feel it is a good challenge, especially if I can twist the 'rules' in an interesting way.

This is not to say that I don't have respect for those involved. Layouts such as Pempoul show what can be done,when you take your time. I can never get enough of that layout, and find far too many of the layouts, some would describe as cameo, as just boring, often with nothing happening at all. It is also not uncommon to see some big errors(eg brickwork), and I would rather see those details corrected before praising how good the model is. Far too many just follow what someone else has done, without thinking, and thinking makes a project far more fun and rewarding. If all you are going o have is one train pottering around, then the rest of the layout has to be breathtakingly good. In those cases you can actually get away without any trains moving, but it is not as easy to design or build.

As to what people do at home, I am not bothered, but for exhibitions, the first and most important rule is to remember you are there to entertain the paying public. You either need action, or something superb to look at, preferably both.

[Robin2]

Or just accept that whatever height you build a layout will please some and annoy others.

I think that is a little too simplistic for an exhibition where a wide range of paying customers is expected.

 

Maybe a more practical option for an exhibition is to locate the Cameo at a height that suits shorter people and have video screen showing at the eye level for taller people. If the tall people want to view the real thing rather than the video then they can squat down.

 

...R

Edited May 29, 2017 by Robin2

[Phil Parker]

I think that is a little too simplistic for an exhibition where a wide range of paying customers is expected.

 

...R

 

Short of mounting the model on hydraulic legs so it can move up and down, there is no other option. If you have a solution to the perfect layout hieght argument, I'm sure we'd all like to hear it so the topic can go away.

[Robin2]

Short of mounting the model on hydraulic legs so it can move up and down, there is no other option. If you have a solution to the perfect layout hieght argument, I'm sure we'd all like to hear it so the topic can go away.

I think my edit to Reply #255 overlapped with your Reply.

 

I agree 100%, this is not an easy problem to solve. And perhaps it goes to the heart of Iain Rice's concept of Cameo with a "roof" (for the lights etc) which precludes viewing from above.

 

...R

[New Haven Neil]

It is an unsolvable conundrum.  I can't bend down to view low layouts for more than a few seconds due to a spinal injury when I was young - and due to a different injury recently spent two months in a wheelchair....I can see both worlds very clearly.  We should accept there is NO ANSWER and move on.

[Barry Ten]

Short of mounting the model on hydraulic legs so it can move up and down, there is no other option. If you have a solution to the perfect layout hieght argument, I'm sure we'd all like to hear it so the topic can go away.

 

I agree, Phil.

 

As long as there's a range of layouts on display, at varying heights, can anyone be too upset?

 

There were some references to Railex; while I wasn't there, I have seen Pempoul on several occasions and it's set quite low compared to the typical "cameo" (not that it's small enough to count as one, of course). At the recent exhibition in Lille there was no trouble with children getting a good view of the model, in fact it seemed to be going down well with family groups.

 

I had to stoop down to get this shot:

 

[New Haven Neil]

Then again - looking at the scissors legs idea above, maybe a slow motion version using a power driven lead screw so the layout rises and falls over a few minutes......

[Barry Ten]

Flippin' Nora, do we have to keep going around the block on this one?

 

The Cameo Competition isn't threatening anyone's personal modelling liberties. Exhibitions aren't suddenly going to be filled with identikit cameo layouts set at the prescribed height - any more than

they are now.

 

I bet a large proportion of layouts won't actually be finished. That's the way it is with these challenges. Life gets in the way, enthusiasms shift, and projects get put on the backburner. Been there,

done that. There were a large number of starters for the Rmweb 6 foot challenge but only a small number made it to the finishing line.

 

If the competition doesn't float your boat, there's a simple solution - crack on with some modelling!

[davknigh]

I think that is a little too simplistic for an exhibition where a wide range of paying customers is expected.

 

Maybe a more practical option for an exhibition is to locate the Cameo at a height that suits shorter people and have video screen showing at the eye level for taller people. If the tall people want to view the real thing rather than the video then they can squat down.

 

...R

And what about the owner of the layout who is 6' tall and has to operate it all day long??

 

Cheers,

 

David

[bgman]

And what about the owner of the layout who is 6' tall and has to operate it all day long??

Cheers,

David

Local model railway group caught outside the exhibition hall in an attempt to help fellow 6' tall member with his layout....

 

[Robin2]

And what about the owner of the layout who is 6' tall and has to operate it all day long??

 

Yes. yet another element of the equation.

 

Maybe a long flex or wireless control?

 

Or a chair?

 

...R

[ruggedpeak]

And what about the owner of the layout who is 6' tall and has to operate it all day long??

At 6 foot 4 I propose we start the 'Full Sized Cameo Layout Builders Association of Great Britain' so we can set some proper standards on height and other critical matters. Shall we say a full 6 foot is the minimum height for members?

 

I'm working on my micro layout on the lounge floor at the moment, which is doing my back no good at all!

 

Having not spent very long thinking about the issue of height, and reflecting on museum displays, these tend to be lower and deeper than your average cameo layout. You can stand facing the glass at a museum and still see the contents even if a horde of small children have their noses pressed against the glass. Well I can, so it seems to work for tall and short alike.

 

The lack of depth plus (from experience) the proscenium totally messes up and constricts the field of view into such cameos. I guess there is a danger of becoming all arty farty and designing something that is outstanding but only if viewed from a precise viewpoint. That, as has been evidenced, can be exclusionary. Note Hornby's display layout - compact, securely mounted at a low level and redaily visible to be both kids and adults. Different concept as a roundy roundy with no fiddle yard but where cameo's are a possible entry point for new blood into the hobby there may be an opportunity, and why does it have to have the view blocked off on 3 sides and possbily from above?

 

Or perhaps a small loop based layout visible from all sides is a different concept from a cameo?

Edited May 29, 2017 by ruggedpeak

[New Haven Neil]

And what about the owner of the layout who is 6' tall and has to operate it all day long??

 

Cheers,

 

David

 

Which is amply demonstrated in the book by the Simon Fosbury operating Tregarrick photo.

[Phil Parker]

Yes. yet another element of the equation.

 

Maybe a long flex or wireless control?

 

Or a chair?

 

...R

 

I hate operating sitting down, I like to be stood up to talk face to face with the public sho are generally standing up on the other side of the layout. They also prefer not to have a hellicopter view of a model.

 

There is NO perfect solution unless we all float around in chairs like the passenger from the film Wall-E

 

[Robin2]

I like to be stood up to talk

Standing.  "Stood" is a disgrace to your profession

 

...R

[BG John]

Local model railway group caught outside the exhibition hall in an attempt to help fellow 6' tall member with his layout....

 

image.jpeg

Hire them out to short visitors, with extra long ones for kids. Wheelchairs with a lifting seat could be hired to those who can't use stilts.

 

Yes. yet another element of the equation.

 

Maybe a long flex or wireless control?

 

Or a chair?

 

...R

I'm currently working on my first wireless control panel, but it's not much use if you're too tall to see the layout! Automation is a better solution, so the owner can spend the day in the pub! That way the layout can be at any height, and the owner won't hear the complaints.

 

It looks as though I won't be entering the competition, as I think I'm delaying my plans for starting the two potential entries. I'm planning something quicker, and non Cameoish instead. So that solves my height problem!

[Phil Parker]

Standing.  "Stood" is a disgrace to your profession

 

...R

 

Grammar rules are interesting, as the vehemence with which some people chose to police them. Recently, I was in the audience for a very enjoyable talk at the Stratford Literary Festival by David Crystal, British linguist, academic and author, entitled “Making Sense: The Glamorous Story of English Grammar”.

 

He managed to kill a number of sacred cows during the evening by tracing the rules back to their root. Goodies such as “Can you start a sentence with a preposition” for instance, owe their origins to a group of teachers deciding they were bad and banning pupils from starting sentences with “And”. Of course, as he pointed out, these same teachers were encouraging pupils to read Shakespeare, specifically Hamlet, which includes the line “And then it started like a guilty thing”.

 

As for the Oxford comma, another significant rule you'll be familiar with, the story is hilarious and exasperating. For the record, I side with Cambridge.

 

The start of the talk laid down a simple message. Language is for communication. If you can understand what is being communicated then it's worked.

 

Stood isn't as elegant as standing I'll admit, and were I writing for the page rather than making a quick point I'd have changed it, but you knew what I was trying to convey, even if you were so keen to hurl an insult that you (possibly deliberately) ignore the point I was making, that there is no perfect answer to the question, “What is the best height for a layout.”. On that basis it works OK, especially in a conversational forum such as RMweb which I take part in in my free time.

 

Now, how is your layout progressing?

[NHY 581]

Grammar rules are interesting, as the vehemence with which some people chose to police them. Recently, I was in the audience for a very enjoyable talk at the Stratford Literary Festival by David Crystal, British linguist, academic and author, entitled “Making Sense: The Glamorous Story of English Grammar”.

 

He managed to kill a number of sacred cows during the evening by tracing the rules back to their root. Goodies such as “Can you start a sentence with a preposition” for instance, owe their origins to a group of teachers deciding they were bad and banning pupils from starting sentences with “And”. Of course, as he pointed out, these same teachers were encouraging pupils to read Shakespeare, specifically Hamlet, which includes the line “And then it started like a guilty thing”.

 

As for the Oxford comma, another significant rule you'll be familiar with, the story is hilarious and exasperating. For the record, I side with Cambridge.

 

The start of the talk laid down a simple message. Language is for communication. If you can understand what is being communicated then it's worked.

 

Stood isn't as elegant as standing I'll admit, and were I writing for the page rather than making a quick point I'd have changed it, but you knew what I was trying to convey, even if you were so keen to hurl an insult that you (possibly deliberately) ignore the point I was making, that there is no perfect answer to the question, “What is the best height for a layout.”. On that basis it works OK, especially in a conversational forum such as RMweb which I take part in in my free time.

 

Now, how is your layout progressing?

 

In future Phil, to avoid adverse comment regarding stood, standing etc, I would suggest the following;

 

" I like to be erect when talking"

 

There can be no miss understanding about that.....

 

 

Rob

[davknigh]

In future Phil, to avoid adverse comment regarding stood, standing etc, I would suggest the following;

" I like to be erect when talking"

There can be no miss understanding about that.....

Rob

Erm, perhaps vertical might be ever so slightly less subject to misinterpretation??, or not....

 

Cheers,

 

David

[Porcy Mane]

In future Phil, to avoid adverse comment regarding stood, standing etc, I would suggest the following;

 

" I like to be erect when talking"

 

There can be no miss understanding about that.....

 

Excellent suggestion from an upstanding member of the forum.

 

P

Edited May 29, 2017 by Porcy Mane

[Robin2]

 

 

 but you knew what I was trying to convey, even if you were so keen to hurl an insult that you (possibly deliberately) ignore the point I was making, that there is no perfect answer to the question,

 

I deliberately included a smiley in the hope that you would not take my comment seriously.

 

I do agree that there is no perfect answer.

 

But a great deal of money is spent (for example on low-floor kneeling buses) to make life easier for the minority of people who have disabilities; are obliged to use wheelchairs or who are in charge of small children. It seems singularly perverse if the attitude of the model railway fraternity is to say F*** Off to those people. We can do what we want in our homes or our clubs. But at a public exhibition the "ordinary" public should be accommodated even if at some inconvenience to the exhibitors

 

...R

Edited May 29, 2017 by Robin2

[MarcD]

I'm struggling with the dimensions. Iain Rice's books are all based on 4mm either EM or P4, Nothing wrong with that but if your a 7mm working out dimensions of what counts as a Cameo layout. We have a Fenland style layout that is 22ft long with it fiddle yards does this count once I have finished its lighting rig. its not high as we wanted kids to be able to view it without having to climb on a box.

 Marc