Glorious Steam - Diorama 1

[Neilgue]

Hi Jeff. When I first saw what you were up to with this project I wondered if you might regret not regret doing it before you started Gill Head. I saw further back in the comments that you might replace some of the more prominent walling. That's one of the problems with raising your game! The new walling looks amazing and the trees are looking very good. They certainly add another dimension to the landscape.

 

As far as backscenes go, have you considered using a solid blue or pure white one? Then you can combine your model photography with photographic backgrounds from  the area. Just a thought.

 

You will be pleased to hear that I have finally started something. I got myself a 3D resin printer and I have been learning to use it while reacquainting myself with 3d solid modeling using Fusion360. I found a full set of engineering drawings of a 1923 RCH 12T wagon online and I am planning to design a running version. But first I have been making an exact virtual model. So far I have completed most of the underframe with just the drawgear and brake gear to go. It is probably too fine to print out at 4 mm scale, but I am going to try tomorrow. I have already done the wheels at 4mm and 7mm which both turned out well.

 

Many hours of work so far. Every component and every rivet modeled. Who would have thought that being obsessive could be so rewarding...

 

If you will indulge me, here are a few pics.

[Physicsman]

Hi Neil.

 

Very pleased you've managed to get started with your project, given the time constraints you've been working under over the last year. You have clearly found a project that you really enjoy so any feelings of tedium with the minutiae of the task probably don't exist. And I agree, being "obsessive" is very rewarding.

 

The term "obsessive" is a bit of a put-down. You aspire to produce a high quality product and that's to be applauded. Good for you. Better than being complacent and settling for mediocrity. There are some modellers on this Forum who could do with a dose of your attitude. Some layouts, built by very experienced modellers, are a load of crap because they continue to do the same thing, year after year. Ok, it's their project, but what's the point? I think your 3D skills will lead you into areas you haven't yet considered - fun guaranteed for years!

 

As for my walling. Yes, some will be changed, but only a couple of metres worth. I've just cleared out storage space for the next layout (HGS), due late March/April.

 

Can I suggest you start a thread? Put it in the S&C section if you like and don't feel obliged to continually update it. Again, quality counts, not countless posts with continuous repeats and no substance. Go for it!

 

Jeff.

Edited February 9, 2022 by Physicsman

[Dragonboy]

21 hours ago, Physicsman said:

 

That's an interesting point and a valid suggestion. A project for a time when I return to the diorama, I think. I like your idea, but I think it'd require at least 3 half trees at that end and, for the moment, I want to be doing something different....

 

.... So this afternoon I'm going to be rearranging my storage under the boards as it's a real mess under there. Not modelling, but looking forward to it!

Oooooh yes. You can’t beat a bit of a sort out and reorganisation.

 

I did much the same the other day with my work bench and paint and tool storage so everything is more easily accessible when working. So far I’ve not failed to put my hand right on what I need, but can’t help wondering what’s gone missing that I’ve not realised I’ve lost. 
 

Brian

Edited February 10, 2022 by Dragonboy

[Physicsman]

I'll be taking a large batch of different pics of the diorama tomorrow, but here are three from earlier this evening with a few yellow flowering plants added.

 

 

 

[peach james]

#@$@#$ Scotch Broom.  Why, oh WHY !  did Captain Grant have to like the @#$@#$ stuff ?

https://www.coastalisc.com/scotch-broom/

(All the Scotch Broom in BC can be traced by DNA to 3 plants...)

[Physicsman]

11 minutes ago, peach james said:

#@$@#$ Scotch Broom.  Why, oh WHY !  did Captain Grant have to like the @#$@#$ stuff ?

https://www.coastalisc.com/scotch-broom/

(All the Scotch Broom in BC can be traced by DNA to 3 plants...)

 

Trust you to dig that out!

 

I had a few broom plants in my first garden. It used to be fun as the seed pods exploded in summer. But a bit short-lived, so I have no more.

 

A nice feature, with gorse, in 4mm, or one of the many low flowering yellow plants. And they add something in amongst the many shades of green!

[Physicsman]

A few pics, if anyone is passing this way....

 

 

 

 

 

[Neilgue]

Hi Jeff, I was just passing by…

The “plank” is certainly going to be perfect for photography.  To me, those few pics show that the traditional back scene is going to severely limit the number of viewpoints that don’t include the world outside the plank itself. I think you should have a look at a photographic backdrop which can be had on eBay very cheaply. A blue background will blend into your existing back scene and would enable further photographic trickery if so desired. 

[Neilgue]

This is my one. It extends to 3.5 m. I cant remember how much it cost, but it was dirt cheap. It's far from professional standard, but then I'm not a professional.

 

Cheers, Neil

[Physicsman]

1 hour ago, Neilgue said:

Hi Jeff, I was just passing by…

The “plank” is certainly going to be perfect for photography.  To me, those few pics show that the traditional back scene is going to severely limit the number of viewpoints that don’t include the world outside the plank itself. I think you should have a look at a photographic backdrop which can be had on eBay very cheaply. A blue background will blend into your existing back scene and would enable further photographic trickery if so desired. 

 

Yes, Neil, I can see where you are coming from. Despite numerous manoeuvres, including contortions worthy of an Olympic gymnast (!!), it was pretty difficult to obscure a lot of the extraneous Bunker background. 

 

The diorama will soon be going into a temporary hibernation to allow space for the Hell Ghyll Sidings project, but a backdrop - as suggested - will be ideal. Especially when the northern hemisphere spring/summer arrives with improved (ha ha) weather and lighting - so I can set the diorama up outside.

 

Jeff

[John Besley]

Better still take the diorama up into the fells and have a photo shoot there where you won't need a man-made backscene 

[Physicsman]

4 hours ago, John Besley said:

Better still take the diorama up into the fells and have a photo shoot there where you won't need a man-made backscene 

 

Very true, John.

 

I might get a few funny looks as I unload the diorama at my chosen site, but the background would be authentic!

[John Besley]

41 minutes ago, Physicsman said:

 

Very true, John.

 

I might get a few funny looks as I unload the diorama at my chosen site, but the background would be authentic!

 

Don't worry about that tell em' it's a trial for a film shoot ... that I'll leave them guessing

[Dragonboy]

There was a video clip in one of the BRM virtual exhibitions of Ladmanlow Sidings which was taken up into the Peak District on which it was based and videod and it looked incredible 

[lambiedg]

Not popped in for some time Jeff, busy getting ready for the SEC at the end of the month and making slow progress on my own plank.

 

I really like the trees! I sickened myself making trees for the club’s last layout which has loads made from different materials.

 

Was it deliberate to “borrow the landscape” as gardeners have it in the last photo you posted yesterday?

If so, it works brilliantly.

 

 

[Physicsman]

10 hours ago, Dragonboy said:

There was a video clip in one of the BRM virtual exhibitions of Ladmanlow Sidings which was taken up into the Peak District on which it was based and videod and it looked incredible 

 

Yes, Al did a great job with that background. I can't think I'll ever go to that kind of "trouble", but there speaks the man who is now nearly 1000 stones into replacing a wall section on Gill Head that I only built last October.

 

So madness can strike where you least expect it!

 

[Physicsman]

6 hours ago, lambiedg said:

Not popped in for some time Jeff, busy getting ready for the SEC at the end of the month and making slow progress on my own plank.

 

I really like the trees! I sickened myself making trees for the club’s last layout which has loads made from different materials.

 

Was it deliberate to “borrow the landscape” as gardeners have it in the last photo you posted yesterday?

If so, it works brilliantly.

 

 

 

Good luck with the exhibition. I'm sure you'll enjoy it after a couple of years without exhibits taking place.

 

As for the trees. I thought it'd be a tedious task, but it's turned out to be a very enjoyable one. I'm making 2 more at the moment, again of no particular type. However, I don't think it'll be long before I have a go at a "small" Oak (by Oak standards) - about 40 foot to scale - for use near the station on Gill Head.

 

It WAS deliberate to use the viaduct as a background. However, even with all the lighting in the Bunker (there must be about 6000 lumens worth) and running at 3200ISO, I couldn't get a full depth of field AND there's a bit of intrusive fascia present. I'll sort out a tripod and reduce my shutter speed so the f-number can go up....

 

 

[lambiedg]

 

Glasgow 2020 was just about the last major exhibition before Lockdown 1.

The video gives an idea of the number of trees we made. Not as many as there should be.

Be aware there are things in the video not suitable for those of a nervous disposition!

[Physicsman]

David, thanks for posting that video on here.

 

Great to see the kind of things you and the club get up to - and nice to see a bit of "tree madness" to match the nutty stuff that I've been doing. I have to say that, in the correct context (the S&C is a bit sparser in places), trees DO make the layout.

 

And good to see the well-dressed gent doing the co-commentary!

[lambiedg]

I hesitated to, temporarily, hijack your thread but the treemendous madness was worth it.

[Physicsman]

1 hour ago, lambiedg said:

I hesitated to, temporarily, hijack your thread but the treemendous madness was worth it.

 

I was tempted to give you a "Funny" Like, but I'm afraid the humour was quite bad enough to warrant it!

 

David, never a case of hijacking - this thread is open to discussions involving all aspects of good modelling.....shame that interloper by the name of Physicsman keeps posting his stuff on here.

 

I must have words with Andy York about this!

[Peter Kazmierczak]

Superb (real) modelling, Jeff, but the painted background doesn't really do it for me.

[Physicsman]

2 hours ago, Peter Kazmierczak said:

Superb (real) modelling, Jeff, but the painted background doesn't really do it for me.

 

Peter, thanks for the important part of that comment re. the modelling. That's what has taken me 4 weeks, including learning new walling and tree-making skills. It seems I've made some progress, so I appreciate your comment.

 

2 hours ago, Peter Kazmierczak said:

Superb (real) modelling, Jeff, but the painted background doesn't really do it for me.

 

Now to the interesting part.

 

I TOTALLY agree with you about the painted background. I don't especially like it, either.

 

There are some modellers on here who would react very negatively to what you've said - and "invoke Rule 1" to defend what they've done to the death. To me that is a "load of crap attitude". It's simply an excuse to try to defend inadequate modelling or a total lack of effort on their part. Some pretty well known RMwebbers do this, frequently, as a matter of course.

 

Your comment needs respect and looking at....

 

So, first point - why is the background there? I'd rather it wasn't as it "cramps" the feeling I wanted to create on the diorama. BUT, there's extraneous things behind and around the diorama, so it was a way to isolate what I've built from those.

 

I am no artist, and I'd definitely prefer to do without the diorama even if I could create Bob Ross-standard backgrounds.

 

Let's turn it round. You don't like the background. Alternative(s)?

 

The background serves (some kind of) a purpose for photography - the eye is able to filter out "rubbish" in the surroundings when looking at the scene. Neil, above, has provided really good comments - photo background screen / neutral boards for photography. Agree entirely. But, playing devil's advocate - what would YOU prefer/suggest? I suspect it'd be NO background at all - and that's my preference, too.

 

This diorama is a test-piece, and it's never going on show. If it was, I'd simply have the 2 boards and no background.

 

For photographs, I'll take remedial action as per Neil's comments etc.

 

Maybe part of me is "stirring the pot" because I really appreciate honest, critical comments rather than the sycophancy that's prevalent on a number of threads I could name. NO, I'm not going off on a Jeff rant!!

 

The photographic aspects have been discussed further up the page. I'd welcome other comments about that backscene - NOT regarding the quality of artwork (which is sh1t), but whether it's necessary/serves a purpose at all in its SCENIC context. Would people have preferred a blank grey/blue/white background (colour irrelevant, just the neutrality of a "nothing" backing is what matters)?

 

As I've said many, many times - if you can't take advice/listen to other opinions, what are you doing posting on an open Forum like this?

 

Peter, THANKS very much for your post. Always good to get your take on things.

 

Jeff.

 

 

Edited February 15, 2022 by Physicsman

[Rowsley17D]

For me, it's better to have some background than no background. As you say, to filter out some of the extraneous clutter and to stop the eye from roaming off-scene as it were. Perhaps a plain background of light greys. The sky here the the moment is the sort of thing I have in mind!

 

 

Excuse the "vapour" trail, it's the reflection off the uv filter over the glass.

Edited February 15, 2022 by Rowsley17D

[Peter Kazmierczak]

I've been having a ponder...

I agree that something is needed to showcase Jeff's reasonable/fair/not bad/so-so/excellent/brilliant/superb modelling (delete as applicable). A model is a bit like a painting or a stage set. When I visit the National Gallery I find the heavily gilded picture frames off-putting, but doubtless others love them and there is the historic perspective to consider I suppose, as whether the frame and painting are linked. Anyway, I digress.

I went through a stage of having a plain backscene for, as Rowsley indicates above, it's better to have something than the flock wallpaper and ducks on the wall like Hilda Ogden's "muriel". So the first photo illustrates this - a hardboard background just painted a very pale blue.
 

But there's also a more recent trend to photo models with a real-life background. The second photo illustrates this approach; taken outside in our then garden some 35 years ago.

Having seen advances in enlarging photos of real life scenes to provide a backdrop on a number of layouts, I'm rather minded to think this might be the way forward.

Dunno; don't think there's one answer to all this.