Cliches on layouts

[Pennine MC]

Thing that I don't get that comes up from members is the running figure critique

 

So it is running in place but how is that any different from walking figures or cars on the road that don't move,

 

It's subjective of course, but running is a more exaggerated motion than walking, thus it looks more artificial when frozen. A moving car and a stationary car look much the same in a 'still', in reality the only visible moving part is the wheels, which dont flail about like the arms and legs of a running person

[MarkSG]

Churches in general are a bit of an unjustified cliche, since in reality there aren't that many "traditional" Anglican churches near railways. Churches, at least in small or medium-sized towns (think typical BLT here), predate the railways and are generally at the centre of the oldest part of town. The railways, when they arrived, would have originally been on the edge of town and therefore newer. Over time, the centre of gravity of many market towns shifted towards the station, and away from the church.

 

A more realistic religious building would be a nonconformist chapel, such as a Baptist or Methodist.These were often built in the newer parts of town that grew up around the railway, and there are plenty of real life examples of them close to railway lines or stations. And they, too, have weddings and funerals, and would be a more realistic setting for that kind of cameo scene. They also have the advantage, from a modelling point of view, of being smaller than a typical C of E church and hence easier to fit into the available space without having to make them implausibly untrue to scale.

[newbryford]

 

Perhaps 'it's only a hobby, it's my train set or I'll do what I want" are the ultimate modelling cliches?

 

Nah - all one cliche:

 

'it's only a hobby AND it's my train set AND I'll do what I want"

 

Cheers,

Mick

[Guest jim s-w]

 

I think you and I have have this discussion before Jim (regarding graffiti I believe). I do find that particular aspect of your (outstanding) modelling curious - it seems to be based on what you have personally witnessed...?

 

Not at all Dave. it's what I can find in pictures. In the case of graffitti out of the thousands of pictures I have of new street for the era I couldnt find any, simple as. If loads had a police stop check I would include it but things like that stand out in the real world because they are unusual. Most of us have very uneventful days and that's what's I am creating. The classic cliche is the good old bus on a bridge and I will end up with lots of buses on a big bridge! I ain't going to change it to avoid model railway cliches as that's what was there.

 

Cheers

 

Jim

[Armchair Modeller]

Churches in general are a bit of an unjustified cliche, since in reality there aren't that many "traditional" Anglican churches near railways. Churches, at least in small or medium-sized towns (think typical BLT here), predate the railways and are generally at the centre of the oldest part of town. The railways, when they arrived, would have originally been on the edge of town and therefore newer. Over time, the centre of gravity of many market towns shifted towards the station, and away from the church.

 

A more realistic religious building would be a nonconformist chapel, such as a Baptist or Methodist.These were often built in the newer parts of town that grew up around the railway, and there are plenty of real life examples of them close to railway lines or stations. And they, too, have weddings and funerals, and would be a more realistic setting for that kind of cameo scene. They also have the advantage, from a modelling point of view, of being smaller than a typical C of E church and hence easier to fit into the available space without having to make them implausibly untrue to scale.

 

You are forgetting the Victorian revival, when many new Anglican churches were built in the newly developed urban areas, often close to lines that had already been laid. Also, some stations were built in already developed urban areas, like Liverpool Lime Street or the GC line through the heart of Nottingham. There were churches very close to these.

[bluebottle]

If this appeared on a layout one could think it was an overcooked cliche !

four buses in all, the two (route no.s 23 & 32) on the bridge were stationary, it was a mid circular route staging point. The two to the right are at the terminus of the 52 route, the one to left of the lamp is in mid turn. The location is Woodhouse Station Sheffield C1988. Cheers Phil.

Thing that I don't get that comes up from members is the running figure critique

You could authentically put these things together here. Woodhouse Grammar School used to be just off the picture to the right, and the school cross-country course started off down the station approach. There used to be a large billboard, usually advertising the local cinema, where the bus shelter is in the picture. If modelling the scene c.1960, one could - again authentically - have a large group of runners setting off in front of a poster advertising "The Loneliness of the Long Distance Runner".

[MarkSG]

 

You are forgetting the Victorian revival, when many new Anglican churches were built in the newly developed urban areas, often close to lines that had already been laid. Also, some stations were built in already developed urban areas, like Liverpool Lime Street or the GC line through the heart of Nottingham. There were churches very close to these.

 

I wasn't forgetting it, I was disregarding it in this context because that kind of location is less commonly modelled (and, when it is, is less likely than a typical BLT to include significant amounts of town outside the fence). But, also, such church buildings themselves are very different to the traditional village church. So if you are going to include one, it's very important to get the design right.

[Guest jim s-w]

 

Id say the huge majority of great layouts I have ever seen are sprung from the creator's imagination...

 

Each to their own I suppose. I can count on 1 hand freelance layouts that look utterly convincing to me and those have been researched like a real location anyway. I suppose it depends on a - if you understand the real world we are trying to portray or b - care! (there is no requirement to do either)

 

I guess you are a huge fan of photoshopping models (male and female type) for magazines too as that makes them better? I used to do illustration and finishing for a living so I am fully aware of the ideology of making thing look nice. I guess my hobby goes against that and lets face it, no amount of sugar coating will ever make 1980's new street look nice!

 

If all layouts were idealised it would be dull, if all were ultra realistic that would be just as dull!

 

Cheers

 

Jim

Edited October 29, 2011 by jim s-w

[2ManySpams]

We'll be taking Treneglos to Spalding show in a couple of weeks....I'm just wondering which bridge I should put our bus on?

[Poggy1165]

To my mind the greatest cliche of all is a through station where the main lines curve sharply in the same direction at the platform ends. Unfortunately, most of us don't live in castles and stately homes, so this cliche is entirely understandable.

[2ManySpams]

Cunning....

[Mallard60022]

To my mind the greatest cliche of all is a through station where the main lines curve sharply in the same direction at the platform ends.

Sounds like this could be the Peterborough North before realignment cliche.

P

[Guest jim s-w]

No there are models based on a prototype (prototype, reality, real place - its all the same) which you dont like. Then there are layouts based on a made up scenario which dont appeal to me - thats fine, they dont have to.

 

You said that you like the artistry and editing things for a better effect, the same way we photoshop models for magazines. No difference, both create an idealised image that is slightly detached from the real thing.

 

I know its always a train set, and based on your comments and liking for things to be slightly sweetened I can guarentee that my train set will leave you colder than a penguins fridge but thats OK too.

 

Cheers

 

Jim

[BlackRat]

Sometimes with Jims, you feel you can almost smell the dog sh*t and diesel, in the same way on other layouts, you can just breathe the atmosphere.

 

OK, thats not for everyone, and we all do our own thing.

 

Pendon, Hursley, Catcott, Pipers Mead, The P4 depot based on Laira (4got the name!!), Petherick, Ditchling, and loads more, all freelance but..............reeking of atmosphere!

 

And thats it, we all do our own thing, and hopefully we all bring a little something to the table.

Edited October 31, 2011 by BlackRat

[Guest jim s-w]

I admit that you,Jim are an artisan but that doesnt make you better than a guy who just plays trains on a bit of 6 x 4 chipboard

 

I never claimed it did, I have often said theres nothing special about what I do and anyone can do it. I learned to do it, anyone can!

 

My day job is using my imagination, My hobby is different!

 

I didnt think you were arguing to be honest, dont sweat it

 

Cheers

 

Jim

Edited October 31, 2011 by jim s-w

[Guest jim s-w]

i dont sweat it when i win

 

jsut 'cos its is P4 don't make it even a lil tiny bit better......

 

Take 2 layouts, the same except for one is 00 and one is p4 and the p4 one would obviously be better. No amount of p.c, middle of the road gibberish is going to change that fact. You can even measure the 'better' with a ruler.

 

Whether it is more worthy is a different matter (and not a point you are making)

 

It's simple, look at the vehicles here, http://www.finescalerr.com/smf/index.php?topic=1574.30 they are infinately better than anything I produce, no amount of Rose tinted ideaology is going to change that fact.

 

My layout will be the best I can do, it won't be the best layout, far from it!

 

Cheers

 

Jim

Edited November 1, 2011 by jim s-w

[Guest jim s-w]

Sorry mickey, made that point a page ago. Let's get back on topic shall we?

 

Cheers

 

Jim

[Mod3]

Handbags outside please gentlemen

[Guest jim s-w]

It just leaves me cold, You are obviously a very talented chap, so why spend the best part of yout life making a model of somewhere that has no soul?

When I pass through NS i close my eyes and hope its over asap.....

 

you would be far better off putting your talents to somewhere "nice" your words not mine...how about a full scaled to size model of Liskeard?

 

A good question

 

Most people do (hope its over I mean)! I could say its because there arent enough big p4 layouts, there arent enough OLE layouts, there aren't enough city based layouts and its convieniently local for research purposes, which would be true but the real reason is thats where I went as a Kid, Nothing loftier than that I am afraid.

 

Cheers

 

Jim

[Guest jim s-w]

 

I don't agree with you there jim, the P4 layout may have track and wheel standards that are more accurate, (NB not better), but how the whole layout is built, scenery,coloring, buildings, stock, runs etc etc all play the part in the 'whole', Your New Street project undoubtedly meets the 'ideal', the whole layout has a homogenous feel to it in overall quality from the track to the stock to the buildings etc etc, When I've seen it run it runs well. However, there are some P4/S4 layouts I've seen on the show circuit that most certainly are not 'better' than some other 4mm (OO/EM), because some elements fail to meet the standards set by some 'coarser' gauge layouts.

 

I Agree with you PMP. There are plenty of fabulous 00 layouts and some dire P4 ones. My point was that if all things were equal one would be undeniably just that little bit better. It could be anything though. Take 2 layouts Identical except one has out of the box stock and the other has the same stock but nicely weathered. Again one would be undeniably a little bit better than the other.

 

As I said - It would be up to each individual to decide it it actually mattered but in both cases you could never claim they were equal.

 

Cheers

 

Jim

[Oldddudders]

Having used New Street on a number of occasions over the years, en route meetings at Stanier House, Quayside Tower, Mailbox etc, as well as being an interchange point on other journeys, I take Mickey's point about it being a bit drab. Ok, so a lot drab.

 

But a chap (or chapess) is entitled to choose a prototype that suits them, much as they might choose a tipple or a (not my thing) football team, and the modelling quality - or not - will still show through, as it certainly does for JS-W.

[BlackRat]

Take 2 layouts, the same except for one is 00 and one is p4 and the p4 one would obviously be better.

 

In a single un pc word

 

Bolloc*s!

 

take two men, I am a 6'2" 14 stone ex Marine, another is 5' 5" overweight and balding with myopia.

 

Take another two, one with a high degree, the other with NVQ's.

 

Or one that runs marathons at olympic events in world class times, the other raises a few bob for charity and does the London in 5 hours.

 

Which one is better?

 

NEITHER, we are just different!

 

And its the difference that makes the world go round.

Edited November 1, 2011 by BlackRat

[Guest jim s-w]

 

In a single un pc word

 

Bolloc*s!

 

 

You are spot on there! That was the single un-pc word in your post!

 

Put is another way - I'm up against Usain Bolt at the start of a 200 meter track. Am I equal to him? Of course I am not! Only some PC zealot would try to think I am. Its somewhat insulting to him to imply that the years of training and toil he has put in to be the best at what he does isnt worth Jack!

 

The differences are important yes but as I keep repeating, in a hypothetical situation where there are no differences but one, then one will clearly be better.

 

After all how many discussions exist on RM web about which version of a particular model is better? Triang did a 37 so do Bachmann. The entire reason we have decent drives, high level of detail is down to people wanting something better. I fail to see how anyone can reasonably argue that all things are the same. It just makes no sense at all.

 

Cheers

 

Jim

Edited November 1, 2011 by jim s-w

[BlackRat]

No one is implying anything about equality are they?

 

The point is he can run faster? So what that, doesn't make him better than you does it? He's just quicker aint he?

]

That doesn't mean you cant run against him or stop you having a go?

 

So its OO or P4, then P4 is automatically better? Why? Because 1 has nearer to scale rail gauge ratio?

 

Me and you are different, but neither is better surely?

 

Or perhaps you think you are because you model in P4?

 

I dont know, I'd like to think not, ......... but certainly thats whats coming over in your posts, that if you dont model in P4 (or any other combo such as scale 7) or are working towards that, then somehow your path isnt as enlightened as others?

 

I can see by the number of posts you have made that model railways are an important part of your life, as it is to many of us.

 

But we must remember to some its just a hobby after all.

 

The differences are important yes but as I keep repeating, in a hypothetical situation where there are no differences but one, then one will clearly be better.

 

And at the end of the day thats all it is isn't it.

 

Hypothetical.

Edited November 1, 2011 by BlackRat

[Guest jim s-w]

 

So its OO or P4, then P4 is automatically better? Why? Because 1 has nearer to scale rail gauge ratio?

 

 

In terms of track, yes. No point trying to hide it. Its not an exclusive club though - as you said, anyone can learn to do it if they choose to.

 

Me and you are different, but neither is better surely?

 

True, but we arnt equal either. You probably do a whole load of things I cant.

 

Or perhaps you think you are because you model in P4?

 

 

Certainly Not. All I can say with certainty is If I had built my layout in 00 it would be worse than it is now. I would imagine If Catcott Burtle was built in P4 it would be a little bit more brilliant than it is now. Thats all I am saying.

 

 

Cheers

 

Jim

Edited November 1, 2011 by jim s-w