TEAMYAKIMA Posted February 7, 2022 Author Share Posted February 7, 2022 One of my/our problems in the past has been that several of our special features are never spotted by exhibition visitors. I have always tried to make the subtle so that they remain 'features' rather than 'gimmicks'. The trouble has been that I have made them too subtle - no one notices them! One such feature is the cement mixer which revolves, but because it was plain white nobody noticed it. Not any more! Thanks to Al's talents, that should not be a problem in the future. 5 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TEAMYAKIMA Posted February 7, 2022 Author Share Posted February 7, 2022 You may remember that the original backscene was dark grey - I wanted it to frame the layout - it was 'the void' and it wasn't popular! We then moved to a more dramatic backscene based on a photo we found of a New York cityscape and it was eye-catching but there was something not quite right. Today I am awaiting the arrival of backscene.v3 which takes things a little further as we went back to our original source material and I am excited to see how it's turned out. 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TEAMYAKIMA Posted February 8, 2022 Author Share Posted February 8, 2022 Ok, here is backscene.v3 Not quite there yet, but nearly. One debate/issue between me and Gordon (Gordon is actually doing all the work on the backscene - take a bow, Gordon) is whether the 'slots' between buildings should go all the way to the ground or over just above. You can see three different interpretations in this photo - any thoughts? 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luke_stevens Posted February 8, 2022 Share Posted February 8, 2022 2 hours ago, TEAMYAKIMA said: One debate/issue between me and Gordon is whether the 'slots' between buildings should go all the way to the ground or over just above. You can see three different interpretations in this photo - any thoughts? If the "slot" goes all the way to th ground it means that there is nothing between the building and the horizion; not a tree, not a bush, not a pile of rubbish. I'm sure there would be something! The slot should finish well above ground level where the next building would obscure the sight line. Luke PS Well done Gordon! 1 4 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luke_stevens Posted February 8, 2022 Share Posted February 8, 2022 Is it me or do the "building is silhouette" seem further forward? In the earlier photos they seemed tonally to be "distant". Now the seem to be "too close". I hope it's just a trick of the light as I felt the lighter grey building better matched what was in the photo "inspiration". The edges of the building seem to "sharp" which a building in a backlit in smoggy atmosphere certainly wouldn't be... In both of the below (which are in smog filled industrial China) there is a graduation where the elements further away are of a lighter tone and more fuzzy outline. There are also warmer grey than seem to show in the layout photographs. 3 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TEAMYAKIMA Posted February 8, 2022 Author Share Posted February 8, 2022 46 minutes ago, luke_stevens said: Is it me or do the "building is silhouette" seem further forward? In the earlier photos they seemed tonally to be "distant". Now the seem to be "too close". I hope it's just a trick of the light as I felt the lighter grey building better matched what was in the photo "inspiration". The edges of the building seem to "sharp" which a building in a backlit in smoggy atmosphere certainly wouldn't be... In both of the below (which are in smog filled industrial China) there is a graduation where the elements further away are of a lighter tone and more fuzzy outline. There are also warmer grey than seem to show in the layout photographs. Luke, Thanks for your comments. Gordon does not follow RMweb (or any other forum for that matter) but I have sent him a link to this as you make an interesting point. Regards Paul 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold john new Posted February 9, 2022 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 9, 2022 14 hours ago, TEAMYAKIMA said: Ok, here is backscene.v3 Not quite there yet, but nearly. One debate/issue between me and Gordon (Gordon is actually doing all the work on the backscene - take a bow, Gordon) is whether the 'slots' between buildings should go all the way to the ground or over just above. You can see three different interpretations in this photo - any thoughts? The black does not work, as has been stated by others there needs to be a tonal regression moving back via successively lighter tones towards the fictitious horizon. The black silhouettes behind foreground grey just does not work, the reason you are trying to make the eye think they are back lit but the buildings you can see as your first layer of scenic back drop are front lit! 3 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luke_stevens Posted February 9, 2022 Share Posted February 9, 2022 A little diagram I've knocked out in Word to show what I mean by darkness effecting perceive distance: The darker the colour, the closer to the viewer. The closest shape will also be sharper and need more detail and, as john new said, it flags up the discrepancy in light direction. Luke 2 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Geep7 Posted February 9, 2022 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 9, 2022 I think, and it shows in the photos, that rather than being a shade or grey, the silhouettes maybe should really be a darker greyish shade of the orange background colour. This would give the effect that you're viewing the silhouettes through the smog. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luke_stevens Posted February 9, 2022 Share Posted February 9, 2022 2 hours ago, Geep7 said: I think, and it shows in the photos, that rather than being a shade or grey, the silhouettes maybe should really be a darker greyish shade of the orange background colour. This would give the effect that you're viewing the silhouettes through the smog. I couldn't get Word to do it, but that was what I wanted to do! Yes, the shadow should got from a warm grey to the orange Luke Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luke_stevens Posted February 9, 2022 Share Posted February 9, 2022 2 hours ago, Geep7 said: I think, and it shows in the photos, that rather than being a shade or grey, the silhouettes maybe should really be a darker greyish shade of the orange background colour. This would give the effect that you're viewing the silhouettes through the smog. Towards the lower end, of course (Not sure the orange is quite right, it needs a green-yellow tinge) 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luke_stevens Posted February 9, 2022 Share Posted February 9, 2022 Along a more yellow/orange gradient The further back a building is the lighter it becomes... Luke 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
richard i Posted February 9, 2022 Share Posted February 9, 2022 Why not just use a photo backscene made out of the images shown earlier? richard 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brightspark Posted February 9, 2022 Share Posted February 9, 2022 I don't know if it was suggested earlier, but I suggest that you avoid using black. It is a very strong colour and just sucks out the light. Being a strong colour it also draws the eye to it. My O level art teacher removed the black paint from our art boxes and told us to go an look at the real colour. "There is no such colour as black" she said. She was correct, if you look closely and you see the other colours. So do I have black in my art box? I sure do, but rarely use it raw and I am always aware that it kills the light. Also look at the lighter colours. They are not just at the sun. They reflect up and around objects and through that smoke. Andy 2 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luke_stevens Posted February 9, 2022 Share Posted February 9, 2022 2 hours ago, richard i said: Why not just use a photo backscene made out of the images shown earlier? richard Hi Richard, The primary inspirational phot is actually New York! The two I posted are not of sufficient image quality to be expanded, but I'm sure it is something Paul will think about. Luke Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luke_stevens Posted February 9, 2022 Share Posted February 9, 2022 A better explanation of building regression. The blocks on the left have no specific order where as the blocks on the right give a regression. The colours are the Word colour "families": same primary colour but lightened / darkened as appropriate. The blocks are in the Orange family, the back ground is in the Gold family. 1 1 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TEAMYAKIMA Posted February 10, 2022 Author Share Posted February 10, 2022 I have made Gordon aware of these posts and no doubt he will consider the comments carefully. I have found the comments useful and thought provoking. There is just one thing I would say though, the current colour is not black per se, it's more slate grey - not a huge difference I know, but not black. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TEAMYAKIMA Posted February 10, 2022 Author Share Posted February 10, 2022 I have just spoken to Gordon and he feels that these are good ideas, but that time is too short for Glasgow - Gordon visits me once a week and we have several other issues to address in his two scheduled visits before we leave for Scotland. We hope to incorporate these ideas in time for Aly Paly in April. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luke_stevens Posted February 10, 2022 Share Posted February 10, 2022 I'm sure Gordon is right; it would be too much of a rush for Glasgow. Give the ideas time to sink in! Luke Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
richard i Posted February 10, 2022 Share Posted February 10, 2022 22 hours ago, luke_stevens said: Hi Richard, The primary inspirational phot is actually New York! The two I posted are not of sufficient image quality to be expanded, but I'm sure it is something Paul will think about. Luke Use it and see if anyone notices. richard Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveNCB7754 Posted February 11, 2022 Share Posted February 11, 2022 (edited) Totally agree with all that has been said so far, as regards the tonality issue - so fading to a lighter hue to imply distance is the way to go. Returning to your original question, regarding how this should appear in the gaps between buildings. Definitely prefer the one on the left (so, small gaps that do not reach the ground), but I think you are always going to have a problem depicting the scene behind your main buildings, so long as you effectively have the horizon at ground level. With no visual horizon at a naturally higher level (say, about a third of the way up and with the ground depicted also rising up to that notional horizon), those blocked-in distant 'buildings' behind the actual ones, are always going to give the impression that the land behind your buildings is effectively falling away - especially if those painted outlines are always lower than the 3D buildings at the front. Easy to criticise I know, not so easy to remedy - such has always been the issue with model railway backscenes. Edited February 11, 2022 by steveNCB7754 2 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold adb968008 Posted February 11, 2022 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 11, 2022 i loved seeing this layout at Tolworth. A quick look through my photos found these street scenes from 20+ years ago, I hope theres some inspiration. 4 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TEAMYAKIMA Posted February 11, 2022 Author Share Posted February 11, 2022 3 hours ago, adb968008 said: i loved seeing this layout at Tolworth. A quick look through my photos found these street scenes from 20+ years ago, I hope theres some inspiration. Thank you for that comment. Hopefully you might come to Aly Paly in March when it will be even better. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium St Enodoc Posted February 11, 2022 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 11, 2022 6 hours ago, steveNCB7754 said: Totally agree with all that has been said so far, as regards the tonality issue - so fading to a lighter hue to imply distance is the way to go. Returning to your original question, regarding how this should appear in the gaps between buildings. Definitely prefer the one on the left (so, small gaps that do not reach the ground), but I think you are always going to have a problem depicting the scene behind your main buildings, so long as you effectively have the horizon at ground level. With no visual horizon at a naturally higher level (say, about a third of the way up and with the ground depicted also rising up to that notional horizon), those blocked-in distant 'buildings' behind the actual ones, are always going to give the impression that the land behind your buildings is effectively falling away - especially if those painted outlines are always lower than the 3D buildings at the front. Easy to criticise I know, not so easy to remedy - such has always been the issue with model railway backscenes. That makes sense. I think that with backscenes you have to make a choice. Either an extension of the scene, in other words buildings, trees, clouds and so on, in which case you face the challenges Steve mentions (not least horizons - there's one well-known layout where the sea level on the backscene is probably 50m higher than the land on the layout). The second choice is to regard the backscene as a frame, with no attempt to include any suggestion of what lies beyond the edge of the 3D area. The third option, of course, is not to bother. How many times is the "backscene" at an exhibition the operators' bellies, coffee mugs, and the like? 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luke_stevens Posted February 11, 2022 Share Posted February 11, 2022 43 minutes ago, St Enodoc said: The third option, of course, is not to bother. How many times is the "backscene" at an exhibition the operators' bellies, coffee mugs, and the like? That would NOT be acceptable to Paul!!! 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now