Warley NEC National Show 25th & 26th November 2023

[2ManySpams]

3 minutes ago, scottystitch said:

The wonderful and clever use of an imposing retaining wall, on Wetherbury  Magna, to frame and lead the eye into another well realised layout, this time in 7mm. Terrific stuff. I wish my mind had the ability to visualise this sort of scene in the planning stage. First class modelling:

 

 

Good stuff. Nice to see a 7mm layout that has actually considered scenics. Love Lane is another. Mostly they fall into the "how much track can I ram into the boards". 

[Legend]

1 hour ago, Barry O said:

From memory I think the Warley Show was in Hall 17 (or two halls out there in the bundooks. Its a bit of a trek away from the centre.

 

Can't see me visiting the new "model" show. Pete Watermans big roundy roundy  does nothing for me.

 

Baz

I think there is a danger of over exposure of Pete’s layout and it has tended to dominate things . It’s been in all the mags I think, featured on his TV show and there’s even a bookazine on it .  That said it is a draw into Railway modelling and so it’s got to be good for that reason . 
 

it depends how this new exhibition is marketed . Yes I know it’s already in the Hornby Mag , but if it has wider exposure to the general population it might be good for the hobby in general - both Construction Kit and Railway Modelling , to paraphrase a well known advert to reach parts other Model Railway exhibitions don’t reach !  Let’s face it as enthusiasts we all know about Warley but the general public doesn’t . 
 

looking at the comments it and the pictures , as someone that didn’t visit , it looks like Warley was a big success this year . Congratulations to all the volunteers that put it on .  They don’t have to do it you know . 

Edited December 1, 2023 by Legend

[Dunsignalling]

15 hours ago, Barry Ten said:

 

I think a good, big, general model show will be very welcome and long overdue, so I hope it does well. It's on the same weekend as the Taunton RMweb do, though, which creates at least a partial clash for me.

I won't be missing Taunton, but Saturday might be on if I'm fitter by then. 

 

Something to perhaps replace the much-missed Brighton Modelworld at last?

 

[Dunalastair]

9 hours ago, melmerby said:

A few more pictures from Warley ...

 

 

I have not been to Warley since pre-COVID, and now don't much enjoy crowds, so thankyou to all who braved the busy halls for these photos. I was thinking that I had not seen any photos of pre-1860 layouts, then I saw this. Do we know anything more? The wagons behind look as if they belong to a later period, so is it perhaps depicting an anniversary celebration, or is it older stock on a newer period layout?

[Dunsignalling]

15 hours ago, Redkiterail said:

woodhead route layout is netherwood sidings and stella gill is stella gill

I like the look of the layout in photos 5-8 in the first set. Can you identify it please?

 

Station building probably scratchbuilt but looks like it might have used several Airfix Church kits 😉 and grounded LSWR van body on platform.

 

John

[C126]

29 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

... replace the much-missed Brighton Modelworld ...

 

I was very sorry to read this.  I did not know it had ceased, and have many happy memories of pottering round it each year from the 1970's with my father and uncle.  Second-hand Lima locos for a tenner, and a daft pre-teen desire to collect the entire T.O.P.S. loco list.

 

Thanks @Redkiterail for all those pictures.  Made me realise how much I had missed, and how one should put the effort in if possible to prepare an annotated map before arrival.  Thank you all for a most enjoyable day.

 

[St Enodoc]

20 hours ago, bradfordbuffer said:

3pm on Sunday should know your way around by then!...don't blame Warley staff for number removal at that time ....they probably only just got it finished by closing! Big Hall! And once the unwashed are ushered out all he'll gets unleashed....trying to put boards into transit frames and collecting numbers don't mix....

So if you are the average "unwashed" punter who pops in two hours before closing time you don't deserve to see the stand numbers? Not in my book.

[St Enodoc]

15 hours ago, woodenhead said:

I had to think on my feet with new trig points forming constantly to maintain my bearings.

That's why the big loco is there!

[Hobby]

Is the reading of the plan that difficult? I thought map reading was supposed to be a male strength!

[97406]

4 minutes ago, Hobby said:

Is the reading of the plan that difficult? I thought map reading was supposed to be a male strength!

 

Like reading the manual……….

[Nile]

1 hour ago, Dunalastair said:

 

I have not been to Warley since pre-COVID, and now don't much enjoy crowds, so thankyou to all who braved the busy halls for these photos. I was thinking that I had not seen any photos of pre-1860 layouts, then I saw this. Do we know anything more? The wagons behind look as if they belong to a later period, so is it perhaps depicting an anniversary celebration, or is it older stock on a newer period layout?

 

 

[Redkiterail]

1 hour ago, Dunsignalling said:

I like the look of the layout in photos 5-8 in the first set. Can you identify it please?

 

Station building probably scratchbuilt but looks like it might have used several Airfix Church kits 😉 and grounded LSWR van body on platform.

 

John

Hewisbridge

[Chris M]

1 hour ago, St Enodoc said:

So if you are the average "unwashed" punter who pops in two hours before closing time you don't deserve to see the stand numbers? Not in my book.

The premature removal of stand numbers was not good for the "washed" either. A number of club people were trying to find their way to various layouts to sort out a few things on Sunday afternoon but suddenly finding a layout was taking a lot longer than it should due to the removal of stand numbers. The Warley club chairman agrees that signs were taken down too early. In fact the Warley club chairman was one of those visiting stands on Sunday afternoon without a plan of the hall because he could navigate from stand numbers. Suddenly he found there was no clue as to which stand was which and he was not happy, no not happy at all.  

[Pacific231G]

15 hours ago, AY Mod said:

 

Although a layout would be considered to be your intellectual property an image taken of it is the copyright of the photographer.

Taking a photograph of a copyrighted work is slightly complicated. This is what the UK gov, says

(https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/copyright-notice-digital-images-photographs-and-the-internet/copyright-notice-digital-images-photographs-and-the-internet)

"If someone takes a photo, copyright can exist in that photo. If someone takes a photo of a work protected by copyright, and the work forms an essential part of the image, using that photo on the web is likely to be an infringement of copyright."

However

"You do not need permission to photograph buildings, sculptures and similar works on public display in public spaces. The photographs you take are afforded full copyright protection. This means you, as the photographer, are able to commercially use your work."

I assume that a model railway would be a "similar work" but, not being a lawyer, have no idea whether a model railway exhibition would count as a  public space. 

As far as possible, I try to ask the owner (or operator) of an exhibition layout if they're happy for me to photograph it and I've never been asked not to. In reality, I'd assume that, like me, anyone exhibiting a layout would expect it to be photographed and for photos to be shared. I wouldn't be happy if they were commercially exploited unless as reportage, or if they were used in a detrimental way such as a caption saying "this is the sort of rubbish layout that appears in too many exhibitions these days."  

 

As Andy says, there are two sets of IP, that of the layout builder in their artistic work and that of the photographer in their image of it. So for example, I couldn't use a photograph that someone had taken of my layout without their permission. 

[ruggedpeak]

1 hour ago, Chris M said:

The premature removal of stand numbers was not good for the "washed" either. A number of club people were trying to find their way to various layouts to sort out a few things on Sunday afternoon but suddenly finding a layout was taking a lot longer than it should due to the removal of stand numbers. The Warley club chairman agrees that signs were taken down too early. In fact the Warley club chairman was one of those visiting stands on Sunday afternoon without a plan of the hall because he could navigate from stand numbers. Suddenly he found there was no clue as to which stand was which and he was not happy, no not happy at all.  

Exclusive footage of the Warley Show team preparing to rescue lost stragglers in the hall at 5.15pm Sunday

 

[WIMorrison]

As a photographer I know the 'rules' applicable to photography and I often have to quote them to people trying to stop me taking a picture of their building, monument, view, etc. The key is that I cannot be stopped taking the image provided I am standing in a public space, and it is that definition of a public space that it critical. I have even had recourse to asking the police to assist me with unruly security people who are not conversant with the law.

 

Many buildings are set back from the road, and they will often have marks on the pavement indicating where the footprint of the building actually extends to. These marks may be brass dots, they may be what appears to be a draining line, or sometimes they are even painted. Outside that line is a public space, inside belongs to the property owner and as such you must have their permission to photograph within the curtilage of their property.  

 

It is also the case that if you have to pay to enter somewhere the it is not public property and as such you will need to owners permission to take photographs and they would be within their rights to say that the images you take are their copyright. However, fortunately many places choose not to take up their rights and waive such requirements. In the case of the NEC it is private, though they seem to allow photography, though it is dependent upon the exhibition management to state whether photography is allowed, most will allow photographs, but not all do and it is always polite to ask permission from the owner of the exhibit if photography is permitted. Again, most will say yes because they are exhibiting and are happy to see them images taken - when someone asks me I always ask who the images are being taken for, when it is personal I have no objection, when it is commercial e.g. newspaper, magazine, etc. I always ask for their contact details and when I see them in print I ask for payment (though most make payment before hand)

 

The simple rule is, if in doubt ask permission, you will find that it is almost always provided and it is better to have permission than have an argument later.

[MarkSG]

2 minutes ago, Pacific231G said:

Taking a photograph of a copyrighted work is slightly complicated. This is what the UK gov, says

(https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/copyright-notice-digital-images-photographs-and-the-internet/copyright-notice-digital-images-photographs-and-the-internet)

"If someone takes a photo, copyright can exist in that photo. If someone takes a photo of a work protected by copyright, and the work forms an essential part of the image, using that photo on the web is likely to be an infringement of copyright."

However

"You do not need permission to photograph buildings, sculptures and similar works on public display in public spaces. The photographs you take are afforded full copyright protection. This means you, as the photographer, are able to commercially use your work."

I assume that a model railway would be a "similar work" but, not being a lawyer, have no idea whether a model railway exhibition would count as a  public space. 

 

To respond in reverse order, yes, a model railway exhibition is a "public space" as it's a place to which the public have access, either by right, permission or contract (in this case, the contract being the purchase of a ticket). 

 

As far as photographs of models are concerned, the key point here is that a 2D photo of a 3D object is not a copy of that object, because to be a copy it would also need to retain the essential elements of the item being copied, one of which is that the original is 3D. A copy of a 2D image will also be a 2D image, and a copy of a 3D object will also be a 3D object. So, given that a photo of a model is not a copy of the model, it cannot therefore infringe any copyright in the model (emphasis deliberate, because that is precisely what the word means - the right to make a copy). In which case, copyright of the photo will belong to the photographer.

 

If the photos are used as a means to create a copy of the object being photographed, then that resulting copy may well infringe some rights in the original. But that's a separate issue, and doesn't have any bearing on copyright in the photos themselves.

 

The situation where it can get a bit complicated is when taking a photo of a 2D image or design. In that case, the photo can be a copy of the image being photographed, and therefore can be an infringement. The question of whether it is an infringement depends, broadly, on whether the image or design being photographed is merely an incidental inclusion in the photograph, or whether it is, as the guidance says, an "essential" part of the photograph. 

 

To give an illustration of that, most model railways have a backscene. The backscene is a 2D image, and is usually subject to copyright. So if you saw a layout, and thought "wow, that's a really great backscene, I'd like to use that myself" and took a photo specifically of the backscene so that you could print it out when you got home, then that would be an infringement. Because the backcene is an essential part of your photograph - it's the reason why you are taking it. But if you thought "wow, that's a great layout, I'd like some photos of it", and took some photos that just happened to include the backscene, then that's not an infringement. Because the backscene alone isn't the reason why you took the photos (even if the backscene is part of what makes it a great layout), and therefore the inclusion in your photos is, in law, merely incidental.

[AY Mod]

6 minutes ago, WIMorrison said:

As a photographer I know the 'rules'

 

6 minutes ago, WIMorrison said:

when I see them in print I ask for payment (though most make payment before hand)

 

OK; so where's this rule?

[Graham_Muz]

13 hours ago, woodenhead said:

@melmerby Saw it and walked on by - they've got me too many times in the past with their wares - still regretting not pre-ordering a steam railmotor, but it simply would sit in the box for a couple of years or more.

 

You still can order one, our production allows for plenty of stock not just meeting pre-orders...

[MarkSG]

8 minutes ago, WIMorrison said:

It is also the case that if you have to pay to enter somewhere the it is not public property and as such you will need to owners permission to take photographs and they would be within their rights to say that the images you take are their copyright.

 

That's not quite true. Or, at least, in some very very restricted circumstances it can be true, but in practically none that apply in a place like the NEC. It's almost impossible to create a contractual term which obliges someone to assign copyright, other than in cases where it's explicitly framed as a "work for hire" - that is, where the photographer is being paid specifically to take the photos, or is taking them in the course of their employment. Buying a ticket to a model railway exhibition doesn't fall into those categories, and nor does walking off the street into company's yard.

 

What is possible, and in some cases common, is a contractual clause which simply prohibits photography. In which case, if you ignore the prohibition and take photos anyway, then you are in breach of your contract permitting you to enter, and thus you become a trespasser and can be evicted from the premises. That doesn't affect your ownership of any photos you do manage to take before they throw you out, though! It's also possible to have a clause prohibiting commercial photography without a permit, and if you break that clause and sell your photos anyway then the venue operator will be entitled to sue you for damages (typically, the cost of the permit). But, again, that doesn't affect your ownership of the photos, it merely restricts your ability to exploit them.  The latter (no commercial photography without a permit) is very common in sporting venues, because charging the media for access is a big source of revenue.

[Dunalastair]

2 hours ago, Nile said:

 

 

 

Ah, thankyou, stock rather than layout, for now. But still very nice. And thankyou also for the Coventry L&B reference - reminds me of when I was researching for my small scale diorama of Edge Hill in its early days. 

Edited December 1, 2023 by Dunalastair

[woodenhead]

16 minutes ago, Graham_Muz said:

 

You still can order one, our production allows for plenty of stock not just meeting pre-orders...

I want one, I just can't justify it to myself when it would be unused.  The same applies to a 44xx, a B-set, an autocoach and a Pannier.

 

The heart says yes, the head says hold on there bald eagle.

[Clive Mortimore]

I went last Saturday. I had a great time chatting to people, viewing the layouts I wanted to see, and seeing the new products that interested me. There appeared to be many fine model railways outside my normal sphere of interest sadly I didn't have time to view.

 

Prepaid my parking, saved some money and got a token for a free pudding at lunch time. I ate a very tasty burger for lunch and had a delicious bit of cake for my afters.

 

Only bought one loco, a Bachmann Type 3 at a sale price. I had a Accurascale Type 3 delivered just before Warley. My first impression and the major difference between the two new releases, the

Bachmann box fits on my shelf.

 

Didn't take any photos.

 

I joined the LNER society after visiting many of the manufacturers stands and introducing myself as the new (acting) Chair of Diesel and Electric Modellers United.

 

Best layout at the show in my view was Portsea. 3mm, Southern Region green EMUs, friendly operators and most important to me nearly everything has had to be modelled. 

 

A good day out.

[melmerby]

4 hours ago, Dunalastair said:

 

I have not been to Warley since pre-COVID, and now don't much enjoy crowds, so thankyou to all who braved the busy halls for these photos. I was thinking that I had not seen any photos of pre-1860 layouts, then I saw this. Do we know anything more? The wagons behind look as if they belong to a later period, so is it perhaps depicting an anniversary celebration, or is it older stock on a newer period layout?

It was a diorama of the early days of the London & Birmingham railway.

It was at the side of the regular exhibiting large roundy roundy live steam layout and the wagons in the background were running on that.

The L&B stock are all 3D prints with working mechanisms in the locos.

[Phatbob]

2 hours ago, AY Mod said:

 

 

OK; so where's this rule?

These rules? 😊

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/contents
 

Can anybody honestly claim to remember all this lot? 😉

Edited December 1, 2023 by Phatbob
Omission.