goldngreen

I like the use of chalk. I will have to remember that.

8 hours ago, 5&9Models said:

That is a very neat solution. I’m just beginning to think about point control on my own layout and I’m rather inspired by this, thank you for sharing and explaining.

If you give it a go, I hope it works out for you. 

Great images. Merry Christmas. 

The mound is looking good now. Good progress everywhere especially the good shed. Initial progress on the river suggests it will be very convincing. 

It looks brilliant. In addition to all the above I also love the colour on the brick and the care taken to get convincing mortar courses; the way it is bedded in to the really effective ground, and, despite the fact that it is made out of repeating sections, I can see no joins. Thanks for posting.

Sorry I missed this question. I am using something akin to wire in tube. I will do a posting on it.

Looking good. I wait to hear the later bit on the gear train - I hope you have a solution.

Do you use a magnifying aid or just very good eyesight?

The track looks really good. I hope it goes well.

I think the unusual subject and the multiple levels are really effective.

Amazing. I could almost believe that the lathe, stove and kettle were real.

Looking good. I hope it goes well.

I hope it goes well. Please keep posting the progress.

That is quite a challenge you are taking on. I will be interested to follow the progress.

Thanks for the feedback and for reminding me that my old copy of Photoshop is Elements, not Express.

1 hour ago, Mikkel said:

In principle I use Paintshop Pro, which I began using ages ago when it wasn't owned by Corel. It works OK for me as I am used to it, but some would probably call it a bit clunky.

 

I increasingly wonder how much we actually need though. I use Google Photos for storing images, and the web version has some simple editing features. Most of the time that's enough. The only "advanced" features I find I need is to blank out a cluttered background, and occasionally Zerene Stacker for image stacking. 

I must admit I had forgotten about Paintshop Pro.  I used to use it. I will have to check to see where it has got to. I was not aware of Zerene Stacker. I will take a look at that.

I prefer largely card buildings in N gauge since I do not believe that I am capable of getting as a good a brick effect, at the small scale, as I can using a good printed sheet.  The signal box is an exception! Since my approach to making model buildings is to design them like a kit on the computer first and then print them off, I find I need quite a lot of the features in something like the Gimp. For example I would have layers called Walls, Windows, Roof etc. Each one of those layers would have sub-layers for individual facets of the Walls, Windows etc. I also like the advanced auto-selection features and the ability to soften the edge of selections. The colour, contrast and brightness transformations are useful. I also use photographs of real walls/roofs for some brick and tile effects for which I use the Gimp for squaring up.

On 02/12/2020 at 08:02, Mikkel said:

Thanks for that, very useful! That black and white set goes directly on my christmas wishlist 

 

Ah, the Gimp. I would so prefer to use it as a matter of principle -  but must admit I struggle with it. The interface doesn't seem very intuitive to me. Perhaps it's just because I have become used to other programmes.

I found The Gimp to have quite a learning curve. I still sometimes have to refer back to references and get online help when I come back to it after a break. I use it because it gives me pretty much the power of a full copy of Photoshop which I believe is currently £238 per year. It even includes features like nested layers which I use a lot in designing buildings for printing. The redeeming factors of The Gimp for me are:

1. It is very powerful
2. It is free
3. You can become very fast with it if you use the keyboard shortcuts for which there is a Quick Reference
4. The fact that it is free means there is lots of support. In particular it is easy to find short how-to videos on YouTube for almost anything you might want to do with it

I also occasionally use Paint.Net and just fall back to Paint for simple cropping and resizing. I rarely use my old copy of Photoshop Elements now as I find it as difficult to use as the Gimp and less powerful. 

What do you use?

I hope Santa is good to you with the pastels! 

They look brilliant. I am learning a lot from your weathering posts. I will have to get the airbrush out again and do some more. 

The living room looks good like that. Are you going to be pressing for keeping things that way? 

17 hours ago, Paul Robertson said:

Thanks to your excellent link I have now worked out that in fact I'm running my lighting via a hybrid series / parallel circuit! Who knew?! certainly not me when I was stumbling about in the metaphorical and physical dark! I guess that's why model railways are set at 12V and 1 amps so the electronically challenged can't kill themselves when experimenting with the dark science of layout electronics for the first time (Although I had the rather neat experience of using my body to complete a circuit when holding either end of the wires in my fingers with the transformer still on, a very weak light came through the LEDs. I was just grateful it wasn't 240V and 13 amps!)

Pleased to hear that it helped. 

15 minutes ago, Paul Robertson said:

If a knew what that meant I could tell you! To me if I wire something up and it works I regard that as a victory! Seriously though, I think I had been wiring up in series hence the ever diminishing returns of light where as now I believe parallel as there is direct power and return to the transformer for a maximum of 3 leds. Is that right? You wouldn't believe my father was an electrical engineer. He'll be shaking his head when he reads this!!

 

I am not an expert but guessed that, if you were finding that the brightness diminished as you added more, it was probably in series. I have not wired up LEDs before, only traditional bulbs. That prompted me to look on the internet to see what was said about LEDs specifically. I found this which might be useful: https://www.ledsupply.com/blog/wiring-leds-correctly-series-parallel-circuits-explained/. Having said that, the lighting looks great in your later pictures so I think you have a good solution.

Are you wiring the LEDs in series or in parallel?

I am sure you are right. As you can probably tell from the previous post, I have never been happy with the doors. I think I might scratch build some replacements. It would also help if they fitted better.

Thanks. I am trying to get that look across the layout as I always find the layouts with subdued colours to be my favourites at shows. In this case I used Scalescenes Red Brick for the walls but I dulled it down just a little before printing using The Gimp. I have put more information on the build on the next posting.

In the first photo I think it looks good. I can believe the forced perspective and therefore believe that the motte is bigger than it really is but more distant. I also like the winding path - it left me in no doubt about what I was meant to be seeing. Perhaps you can enhance the illusion further by de-saturating the colours progressively up the motte when you come to do the scenic work.

The other viewing angles reveal the reality but this is as expected since they are not the angles from which the forced perspective is expected to work. I am not sure what you can do about that. Even if you model less of the motte and push more of it to back-scene, you will still not get the correct impression from these other angles since back-scenes only work properly when viewed face on. The best forced perspective models I have seen control the viewing angle very precisely to a specific point through a proscenium arch. That is not really an option with this layout. Nearly all of us are forced in to difficult compromises due to space

On a more general point, I think your buildings and track look really good.

The concrete looks really good