RMweb Gold Stubby47 Posted August 12, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted August 12, 2012 That's a picture from ground level, imagine if you were looking down at this station, from a plane flying somewhere over the right hand bank - how tall would the trees look, and would shorter trees still look correct ? Edit: Which is probably the point in the first post. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Prism Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 http://www.talismancoins.com/catalog/Brusio_Railway_Spiral_Loop_Bridge_with_Train_1.jpg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Hale Posted August 12, 2012 Author Share Posted August 12, 2012 Not sure what the other images on this discussion are attempting to prove. Whilst trees are all shapes and sizes, in this image of Seaton Junction, some trees (left upper) dominate the skyline, others seem to be much smaller. Plus ça change? Tim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rugd1022 Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 Tim, I'd suggest the images are simply trying to illustrate that real trees often dwarf the railway... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jim s-w Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 We need a picture of a underscale model tree now so that we can give feedback on if it looks right or not (i think that was the point of the OP) Cheers Jim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Barry Ten Posted August 12, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted August 12, 2012 I use HO trees on my N scale layout and I've got at least one 7mm tree (ie marketed as such) on my 00 layout. I think you have to adopt a suck it and see approach, try it in situ, give it a bit of time then decide whether it works or not. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Revolution Ben Posted August 12, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted August 12, 2012 Hello all, Interesting thread, thanks to the OP for starting it. One of the reasons I enjoyed Michael Portillo's recent series was the lingering aerial shots that were a feature of each programme. I must admit, I am a little disappointed with the look of some of the trees on the club layout I have been spending time working on over the last year - they don't look "dense" enough even though I experimented with numerous different construction methods. I'll probably revisit them in the next few weeks, and may investigate the use of some of those techniques used by US modellers as others have mentioned. cheers Ben A. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Prism Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 http://s0.geograph.org.uk/geophotos/02/79/44/2794481_34c6068e.jpg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Captain Kernow Posted August 15, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted August 15, 2012 I think it would work, particularly if the whole layout is 'enclosed' as per Ian Rice, so the whole layout becomes a 'theatrical presentation'. What you dont see, ie the tree top, is constructed in your imagination. Works for me! Interesting idea, but I think it would only work if the layout is enclosed, as Jim and Neil suggest. If you have no pelmet to delineate the viewing height of the layout, and thus hide the lopped-off top of your tree, the whole effect would seem bizarre to me and slightly unsettling. You could use the same argument about tall buildings, such as tower blocks. I have not problem with selective compression, because it would be the overall impression that you are going for, rather than modelling an individual tree to scale. If you achieve the same satisfactory overall effect by modelling everything to precise scale, as per Jim's argument, then that's fine too, of course. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marc smith Posted August 15, 2012 Share Posted August 15, 2012 I think it would work, particularly if the whole layout is 'enclosed' as per Ian Rice, so the whole layout becomes a 'theatrical presentation'. What you dont see, ie the tree top, is constructed in your imagination. Works for me! Sounds a good idea to me too, and could work really well... Then your mind makes the trees as tall as it wants.... One should always bear in mind that real trees do vary hugely in height so is there such a thing as "correct" height? and I don't think I've ever heard anyone at a show asking "how old are your trees supposed to be?" Another issue is the proportion of the trees to everything else in the model - backscene included If we saw a fully grown tree against a backscene where the top of the backscene is clearly visible, and perhaps a similar height - the tree could look overscale.... ... or the backscene too short... The perception of pylon, building and tree height can also be affected by the overall proportions of the layout On a short visible section, say between 2 tall view-blockers, a tall structure or tree can look oversized For those who have bought a job-lot of what they now may be thinking, are under-sized trees, don't forget the effective modelling technique of "forced perspective" Using "undersized" structures, trees and figures can work well, in convincing the viewer that the scene has greater depth.... There's a nice chapter regarding forced perspective in Gordon Gravetts' excellent book on 7mm modelling (part 1) and some photos & illustrations to demonstrate this - using scale 7mm buildings in the foreground, and buildings becoming 6mm and then 5mm scale towards the rear.... Whew - a much larger comment than I had anticipated! scale 8mm / ft surely Cheers Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Stubby47 Posted August 15, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted August 15, 2012 Forced perspective - now there's an idea... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marc smith Posted August 15, 2012 Share Posted August 15, 2012 Forced perspective - now there's an idea... I think I saw someone's excellent diorama, employing the technique, at a recent rmweb members day, .....and perhaps I was remiss in not mentioning that Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Captain Kernow Posted August 15, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted August 15, 2012 I think I saw someone's excellent diorama, employing the technique, at a recent rmweb members day, .....and perhaps I was remiss in not mentioning that It was probably Stu Hilton's (Stubby) diorama at Taunton? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Barry Ten Posted August 16, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted August 16, 2012 and I don't think I've ever heard anyone at a show asking "how old are your trees supposed to be?" Cheers The one time someone does ask you that question, you need to be ready to snap your tree in two and show them the intricately modelled growth rings: "and there's the particularly cold winter of 1756..." etc Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marc smith Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 The one time someone does ask you that question, you need to be ready to snap your tree in two and show them the intricately modelled growth rings: "and there's the particularly cold winter of 1756..." etc No Barry, That cold winter was in 1755.... .... tsk, tsk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Colin_McLeod Posted August 17, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted August 17, 2012 Miss Prism's pictures tell it as it is, especially the first one. Imagine trying to see that train from 100 feet away. The trees would block your view. Often things are much larger that we reailse. Its not just trees. I have seen layouts with houses and other buildings made to full 4mm to the foot scale, and they can look really over size, especially if they are in the background. While underscale, I use a lot of HO building kits on my layout and they look right (to my eyes anyway). A normal 6'6" high x 2'6" wide door scales out in 4mm at 26mm x 10mm. Thats bigger than a lot of "model" doors. Doorways to a public building such as a station or a town hall would be much bigger and look way overscale even though they may be dimensionally accurate. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Barry Ten Posted August 17, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted August 17, 2012 No Barry, That cold winter was in 1755.... .... tsk, tsk Typical bloody ring counter! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.