Are backscenes essential?

[bbishop]

An associated question could be the hiding or obscuring of the FY - here I like there to be something but do allow it to be peered over. FY and their operation is an important part of the modelling / operation.

Referring to the infamous third photo in post #6 will show that the fiddle yard on Höchstädt is open for public viewing. There is an 8" wide information panel to inform the public and provide some protection for the stock. The engine shed is located to act as a scenic block to stop the Mark 1 eyeball following the train into the fiddle yard.

 

Bill

[allan downes]

Tony Wright, the best model railway photographer ever now retired I believe, used to hang a  smudged cloudy looking bed sheet on a frame as a backdrop for photographing individual models. Therefore, I would imagine something similar could be done by pinning large bedsheets to the cieling or wall.

 

Another possibilty anyway and I have a feeling one best ignored...

 

Cheers.

Allan

[TonyA]

In fairness to Bill, I had better add my gut as well.

 

 

The backscene here was initially Sky Blue matchpot on a ply backing. I then added a photo copied from a book of colour photos of Nürnberg from the 1930s. It was printed onto matt photo paper, cut out at roof level and then glued to the ply. The houses are not actually appropriate for that part of the town but at least people recognise the location.

 

Tony

[Ron Ron Ron]

Personally I don't really subscribe to the idea of "completing" a layout with a backscene or "finishing off" a layout with one.

Others may differ, but I feel a layout should be conceived and designed as a whole and if a backscene is included as part of the scene setting, then the layout should be built with that in mind and/or incorporated during construction

As such, there should be no "adding" of a backscene, unless it is as originally intended and not as some sort of afterthought.

Done well it makes all the difference, whether it's a plain or hazy backdrop, or includes distant views of the topography.

 

However, I'd like to raise a point that hasn't been mentioned so far and which I believe is often overlooked.

I think there needs to be  a distinction drawn between a backscene that is intended to serve as a visual extension of a layout (i.e. an integral part of setting a scene) and something that serves purely as a scenic break or screen, whether decorated or not.

The shortage of appropriate terminology is at fault here IMHO and that's one of the reasons that I personally don't use the term "backscene" very often and sometimes feel uncomfortable with the word. 

 

 

.

[cromptonnut]

An interesting view point RRR and I see where you're coming from.

 

I'm at the point of construction where I am making that decision whether to build with, or without, a "backscene" hence the discussion.

 

I can understand the point of "something" to block off the 12":1ft scale outside of the boards themselves but wonder how many possibilities we overlook for viewing and photography by sticking some 6mm ply on one side...

[Karhedron]

To me, the purpose of the backscene is to enhance the realism of the layout by furthering the illusion that you are looking at a world in miniature rather than a model. A good backscene can do this in the following ways.

 

1. Creating a neutral background to block the view of objects behind the layout.

2. Adding depth by creating the illusion of continuity of scenery.

 

1 is somewhat easier than 2. I model N gauge so here are a couple of examples that are very different but both do an excellent job.

 

Apa Park is a good example of a neutral backscene. Here there is an impression of sky that frames the layout.

 

Vale of Oxbury on the other hand uses a curved backscene to give the impression of the landscape rolling off into the distance.

 

Both are different approaches but do their job very well. For this reason, I think that Ron Ron Ron is right in that the backscene needs to be considered as an integral part of the layout design and not something which is simply stuck on afterwards.

 

A poor (or poorly applied) backscene can spoil the illusion for all manner of reasons such as sharp corners, or wrinkles in the sky. Also a jarring transition between the scenery of the layout and the backscene.

[allan downes]

 I personally don't use the term "backscene" very often and sometimes feel uncomfortable with the word. 

 

 

.

Perhaps 'back extension' might be a better term RRR.

 

A client of mine once employed an artist to paint a backscene. Everytime it was finished, he'd get the artist to emulsion over it and start again with yet another new idea.

 

This went on for months and in the end, cost £25,000 !!!! 

 

I have photo's of it somewhere.

 

Cheers.

Allan

[shortliner]

A partial answer to this question is perhaps best answered by looking at a modular setup - this one is in Germany.  http://bigbluetrains.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=7642&p=138715#p138715  The decision is one that only you can make - but look at the modules and ask yourself "Do these need/ would they be improved by having a back-scene?"

[PGC]

To my mind, the original question is linked to the age old, much vexed and heavily discussed question of layout height.

 

If the layout is set at a low height, such as the Mid Essex MRC layout Blackwells Brewery (see the top two pictures on this link), which is set about 3' 6" high (and No, I don't agree this is a good height, and being 6ft 3ins my back doesn't like operating the layout unless I'm sitting down!), then the spectators are looking down on to the layout and I don't think a backscene (or what ever name you feel comfortable with or prefer calling it) is necessary as the baseboards almost become part of the backscene.

 

On the other hand, if you have a layout that's set so the average spectator can look at track level, I would venture that a backscene is definitely necessary, and ideally one that has the same perspective and colour tones as the rest of the layout, otherwise it obviously looks like a badly executed backscene and not a well executed visual extension.

 

I think the best example of a visual extension I've ever seen is in this picture by darren01 of this parish.

 

Phil

[Graham_Muz]

I must admit that is a particular pet hate of mine viewing layouts (at exhibitions) that have no backscene, in my opinion even simple a plain blue or grey painted back board is better that nothing. The last thing I want to see is the clutter behind the layout and the midriffs (being kind) of the operators. A good backscene helps create impression of depth and aids the overall illusion that we are trying to create with a layout, regardless of whether it permanent at home or intended to be  / is exhibited.

I also blogged about this very subject here http://grahammuz.com/2014/04/19/a-view-from-the-line-13-creating-the-impression-of-depth-effective-backscenes/

[allan downes]

A partial answer to this question is perhaps best answered by looking at a modular setup - this one is in Germany.  http://bigbluetrains.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=7642&p=138715#p138715  The decision is one that only you can make - but look at the modules and ask yourself "Do these need/ would they be improved by having a back-scene?"

 

I would say that this was intended as 'pure railway' and nothing else with just a little token scenery dotted about here and there and really no more than a glorified test track but nevertheless done superbly.

 

Cheers.

Allan

[Neil]

I used to have some fairly inflexible views on the subject; backscene a must have, printed ones universally pants, photo ones too detailed for the foreground, painted the only way to go.

 

Recently I've begun to question such a hard line stance. In fact it's all pretty much up for grabs. I've seen a few excellent photo backscenes, but they have had thought and work put into them. I've yet to see a really satisfactory printed scene, though I realise that this may just be a reflection on what's available now, the Peco examples being particularly horrific. Painted is ok if you can do it, but I'm minded to agree with an earlier comment that none is better than poorly done.

 

Several years ago I tried to work out what my ideal layout presentation would look like, the backscene being a significant part of it. Here's what I thought then. I haven't been able to follow this for my big trainset Morfa, but Little Point has put quite a lot of my ideas into practice, in particular a backscene which fits with the layout but which isn't attached to it.

 

 

 

[Kenton]

 

I think there needs to be  a distinction drawn between a backscene that is intended to serve as a visual extension of a layout (i.e. an integral part of setting a scene) and something that serves purely as a scenic break or screen, whether decorated or not.

The shortage of appropriate terminology is at fault here IMHO and that's one of the reasons that I personally don't use the term "backscene" very often and sometimes feel uncomfortable with the word.

 

I think the distinction is already there and pretty clear.

 

A "backscene" usually goes at the erm ... "back" of the layout scene.

 

A "scenic break" goes where the layout "scene" breaks from the "FY"

 

Or have I misunderstood something?

 

OK so some layouts send trains out through the back of the layout and a terminus or layout without no FY has "sidescreens".

[RhBBob]

 I think the distinction is already there and pretty clear.

 

A "backscene" usually goes at the erm ... "back" of the layout scene.

 

A "scenic break" goes where the layout "scene" breaks from the "FY"

 

Or have I misunderstood something?

 

OK so some layouts send trains out through the back of the layout and a terminus or layout without no FY has "sidescreens".

 

Ah, but, then there is bendy MDF which results in a blurring of the lines......no pun intended, but......

[Mikkel]

Interesting discussion.

 

I have sometimes wondered whether it would be possible to do a layout that (a) was viewed at eye-level height, (b ) was very deep (perhaps round) and where (c ) the buildings and stuctures were strategically placed to avoid any direct views fully across the layout. The point of it would be to avoid the backscene and make the layout viewable from all four (or at least three) sides. The design would probably best be done with lots of mock-ups of the structures and buildings, and much patient moving them about to achieve the exact right positions, especially as there would be viewing from several sides.

 

On a related note, I was pondering the other day that we tend to build layouts that look away from the railway environment. Ie we model a station but the backscene almost always shows the town or landscape behind the station. I don't think I have ever seen a backscene that extends the railway environment - eg shows the rest of the station buildings, and/or a yard. (I'd be very interested if anyone knows an example of this, as I'm probably going to be doing something like that on my next layout).

[Ron Ron Ron]

.....even simple a plain blue or grey painted back board is better that nothing. The last thing I want to see is the clutter behind the layout and the midriffs (being kind) of the operators. [/background]

 

A good example of what I was trying to say earlier. That is more a screen, or scenic break than a backscene. Primarily a means of providing an abrupt end to the scene for whatever purpose.

On the other hand, as you say....... 

 

...A good backscene helps create impression of depth and aids the overall illusion that we are trying to create with a layout, regardless of whether it permanent at home or intended to be  / is exhibited.

 

i.e. Primarily a device, conceived as a visual extension to the layout, even if it does also provide the secondary function of screening.

 

 

.

 

.

[Neil]

....I don't think I have ever seen a backscene that extends the railway environment - eg shows the rest of the station buildings, and/or a yard. (I'd be very interested if anyone knows an example of this, as I'm probably going to be doing something like that on my next layout).

 

I can think of an example shown in Model Railroader where an extra siding with a couple of tank wagons was added to a yard by depicting it on the backscene. It was difficult to tell whether it worked from the photo in the magazine as it would be naturally taken from a viewpoint where the perspective looked ok.

 

Just come to mind of a UK example, Brian Taylor's model of Lynton where the goods shed is painted onto the backscene at the left hand side.

[allan downes]

 

 

.... I don't think I have ever seen a backscene that extends the railway environment - eg shows the rest of the station buildings, and/or a yard. (I'd be very interested if anyone knows an example of this, as I'm probably going to be doing something like that on my next layout).

 

What a brilliant idea !.

 

This just goes to show what forums are all about, other peoples ideas that no one has thought of before and Mikkel has just led the way - why, we could even include Carnforth or Swindon in the box room stuck to the wall !

 

Cheers.

Allan

[Griffin Road]

I tried a matt black backscene on my layout last time out at Ayr mre . I had the idea of using it like a stage backscene . It mades your eye concentrate on the layout and not what was behind it . Funnily very few people noticed it but did comment on the layout . I have a pelmet across the front ( with lighting in white and blue for day and twilight lighting ) . It forces you to look down into the layout rather than into and across the layout .

 

Don't know if this helps but just my experiment .

 

Mike b

[coachmann]

I I don't think I have ever seen a backscene that extends the railway environment - eg shows the rest of the station buildings, and/or a yard. (I'd be very interested if anyone knows an example of this, as I'm probably going to be doing something like that on my next layout).

I seem to recall I have seen this featuring a Freightliner yard and overhead container crane.....Maybe an Andy Y layout?

[shortliner]

I tried a matt black backscene on my layout last time out at Ayr mre . I had the idea of using it like a stage backscene . It mades your eye concentrate on the layout and not what was behind it . Funnily very few people noticed it but did comment on the layout . I have a pelmet across the front ( with lighting in white and blue for day and twilight lighting ) . It forces you to look down into the layout rather than into and across the layout .

 

Don't know if this helps but just my experiment .

 

Mike b

 

There was a NG layout ( that features on Carls Scrapbook site - the name escapes me!) that used this method very successfully - Bright halogens facing downwards more or less spotlighting the layout and all the operators behind in black. together with all the surroundings - it worked exceedingly well

[Waverley West]

My own view is that, as well as adding depth, a backscene should be a completely integral and natural part of a layout, making the scene a complete "photograph". The colouring needs to be similar to the colours used in the layout too. I'm not a fan of painted scenes generally, although I have seen some very impressive ones. I don't subscribe to the view that a backscene should not distract the viewer from the layout or use faded colours. As I say, I think it should just be an "extension" of the layout.

 

Here are some photos which I hope show what I'm getting at. In some of the photos, the backscene is not very prominent at all, but I still think it adds a lot of depth and realism (and without lots of extra modelling too!).

 

 

 

 

 

And now for one without the backscene in place...

 

 

Whether a backscene is essential is a personal choice of course, but I'd say it can add so much more to a layout.

 

 

 

[PhilJ W]

If I fit a backscene I like to disguise the transition from horizontal to verticle wherever I can by using a fence or building. One thing I have also tried is a 'below the horizon' effect with the ground falling away to give the impression of there being something out of sight between the layout and the backscene. Black Country Blues is a good example of what I mean.

EDIT thanks to Waverley West for illustrating what I meant.

[The Ghost of IKB]

Backscenes essential?  Pah!

 

Only track, trains and a controller are essential, everything else is the unnecessary decadence of the bourgeoisie designed to divert you from the true marxist glory of running a railway for the utopian benefit of downtrodden workers of 2mm, 4mm or 7mm worlds!!

 

Also all passenger carrying stock must be third class and all wagons must be open!

toy trains of the world unite, you have nothing to lose but your boxes!

[cromptonnut]

toy trains of the world unite, you have nothing to lose but your boxes!

 

... and your sanity, by the sound of it.