Physicsman

Just keep "nagging" at me, Peter. It's amazing what rubbish I can spew out!!

Yes, Jay - the walling can look DRAMATICALLY different when taken from different angles and under continually varying lighting conditions. I worried a lot about this when painting the DAS on the viaduct. But in the end I went for a "central" grey-coloured wash that meets most conditions. As for the re-walling. Problem is - as you probably already know - that once you come up with an improved technique it renders a lot of previous stuff obsolete. For me, as will be the case in the Peak District, the walling is about the equal most important landscape "characteriser" (what a word, bet it doesn't exist!!) So if I'm not happy with that, I'm bu99ered!! J.

Peter, Rob - again, thanks for the encouragement. Being self-critical is a useful trait, but can be taken too far. I'll be counting rivets next! As for that mould. I think a mixture of WS Burnt Grass and Earth Fine Turf, in PVA, with a dominance of the former might get close to the colour and texture.

Very nice. DCC sound (smoke is of no interest to me) for around £1200.....

If I was a total perfectionist I'd say you were being "too kind". Ideally the front faces of my stones could be a bit "squarer", but it was that very squareness that made me dissatisfied with the previous stuff in the first place. I think the blend of thicknesses and shapes isn't bad, though it may be - to a purist - that my walling isn't Lakeland/Dales, but something else. Whatever, I have to say I'm very happy with the outcome, so no further changes are planned. I DO have an urge to build a section of walling in 7mm scale - in which case I may TRY (as it'll only be a short length) to copy a section of one of the photos, as close to stone-by-stone as I can. It's a bit crazy (what do you expect?), but there's a sense of challenge there that's worth having a go at. But then, of course....."hey, you've got a piece of 7mm walling, Jeff" "oh yes, well I'd better build a 7mm diorama to go with it, then!!" Oh, dear!!!!

Well, plenty of references to stone over the last day or so. I can tell you, I don't count sheep to help me go to sleep......19,000, 19,001, 19,002 (stones on the viaduct). Oh, bu99er - been awake counting all night. Time to get up. The stone thickness is made to a set of pre-determined sizes, set by the plastikard jig I use to make the DAS strips. These thicknesses are nominally 1mm, 2mm and 3mm (3,6 and 9" in 4mm scale). However, I scrape along the strips (with a craft knife) once they are set, so a typical 1mm thick strip might be only 0.5mm in places etc. This gives a very wide variability in stone thickness - more so than in my earlier walling. As for shapes, no pre-set shape in mind. Almost a random "chivvy" with the knife. I can shape, maybe, 5 stones a minute. Sounds fast, but if you're using 400 a day there's no time to really consider a "planned" shape. Real stone walling has a wide variety of rocks in it. I just try to create something that approximates the "feel" of the things. Here's a couple of pics that have influenced my outlook - though I could probably post a hundred images from around the Dales and Lakeland Fells that would show significant variations from these. At the end of the day, if it looks half-decent.... (and remembering that viewing a model wall from even 2 feet away is equivalent to around 50 yards/metres in the real world - so how much detail do we REALLY need?)

I've attached a couple of pics showing the result of around 45 minutes of DAS strip cutting and edging, from earlier today. This little lot - amounting to around 200+ edged stones - lasted about 40 minutes once walling commenced. Then it's a repeat process etc. It's pretty tedious, but very satisfying once the wall is built and coloured. Not the most exciting of pics, but maybe someone will find them of interest/useful!!

It's one of those jobs that, if you gave it a lot of thought, you'd NEVER do. But it IS surprisingly enjoyable. The sad thing is that all the stuff I'm changing (the walling in the backround round the outside won't be touched) was only built between May and October last year. But the new stuff is so much better that anything that's in the foreground just has to be replaced. I could ignore it, but it'd dig at me. The new process also takes twice as long as previously - where the stones were just basic straight-edged, cut off the DAS strips. If the difference in appearance was marginal I'd not have bothered, but now things are well underway I'm pleased I started. That was one of the purposes of the diorama - to test out the new walling and have a go at some tree-making. Thing is, Rob, I'd be the first to admit that you have to be somewhat insane to do this kind of thing. But as you know, attention to detail takes time - and a degree of obsession! Jeff

Here's another angle. Forgive the state of the grass etc - it will need a clean up after the new wall debris is removed.

I've shaped every stone (Stanley knife) - it takes about 60-75 minutes to chip away at the DAS stones to create 300 for an hour's work. Stone courses are also thinner and the walls generally have 9 or 10 layers. The core wall is a scale 4' - 4'6", with 6"-12" copings laid over slightly.

Chris, delighted to see you back on here. As with Rob and Jonathan's excellent layouts I never seem to get round to looking at what other people are doing..... My excuse? Replacing 15,000 stones (about 7 metres) of walling - before the trees, hedges etc etc etc go in!

Evening Jonathan, Rob. There are some dilapidated sections along the wall - this section is around 3 metres, so I've dropped some bits every so often. I'll get plenty of pics when the job is done. There's a LOT going on, but I don't want to post on here until I can present a coherent whole. Haha, as if it'll ever be "finished".... Here's a "close up" - not necessarily sharp as the phone has a habit of focussing on the signal box rather than the wall!

Meant to post this last night - this pic might give an idea of the re-walling that's going on.

Rob, totally agree re. the school day. His book is very inspirational, and although few of us would achieve his standard, the photos and text encourage trying to do that. And WANTING to do that. I'm very happy with my trees, but they were first attempts, so with a bit of effort.... I left the coniferous book, for now. I'm just curious as to the contents of the third one - grass, weeds, landscape etc. We know how good the Gravett's are, and it's a pleasure to have the books for education. Always great when such talented people are so humble and prepared to share their techniques. The books aren't cheap, but worth every penny. And btw, I fancy having a go at a Hawthorn - splendid pic towards the back of the book.

Rob, I've just bought a copy of this. Superb book, full of expertise and practical inspiration. I've ordered a copy of his Landscaping book to see what ideas I can glean from there.

I thought it was about time I posted a short update on here. With the diorama project effectively completed, the focus has returned to Gill Head over the past week or so. I've rebuilt around 2 metres of wall in that time. When the present section (about 3m in total) is done and painted, I'll post some pics. Then it's a case of building more trees for GH, before more walling.... Re-walling, that is. And Hell Ghyll approacheth! J.

Completely agree with Al. Great bit of work, especially effective around the base of the trees. Jeff

Just to update my intentions on the backscene issue. I'm currently doing a bit of re-walling work on Gill Head (!!), but at some stage in the next week I'll paint a neutral grey-blue (more grey than blue) onto the reverse of the boards that are currently there. You can then give me your opinion. Aside from the insanity on Gill Head, I've been reviewing the baseboard plans for Hell Ghyll Sidings. The materials for the L-table and ply base will probably be bought at the end of March. So that gives me another 4-5 weeks to do crazy things - pics at some stage - to confirm my insanity. Peter, David, Jay, Simon, Jonathan, Brian - thank you for taking the time to give your viewpoints on here. Jeff.

Just a quick response as I'm about to eat my tea.... I really like photo backscenes and there are plenty available. But after a year or so they wrinkle up and look awful. Hence the reason for removal of the one in the Bunker about 2 months ago. I'm going to paint a neutral grey-blue onto the reverse of the existing boards and see how that looks. J.

Peter, thanks for the important part of that comment re. the modelling. That's what has taken me 4 weeks, including learning new walling and tree-making skills. It seems I've made some progress, so I appreciate your comment. Now to the interesting part. I TOTALLY agree with you about the painted background. I don't especially like it, either. There are some modellers on here who would react very negatively to what you've said - and "invoke Rule 1" to defend what they've done to the death. To me that is a "load of crap attitude". It's simply an excuse to try to defend inadequate modelling or a total lack of effort on their part. Some pretty well known RMwebbers do this, frequently, as a matter of course. Your comment needs respect and looking at.... So, first point - why is the background there? I'd rather it wasn't as it "cramps" the feeling I wanted to create on the diorama. BUT, there's extraneous things behind and around the diorama, so it was a way to isolate what I've built from those. I am no artist, and I'd definitely prefer to do without the diorama even if I could create Bob Ross-standard backgrounds. Let's turn it round. You don't like the background. Alternative(s)? The background serves (some kind of) a purpose for photography - the eye is able to filter out "rubbish" in the surroundings when looking at the scene. Neil, above, has provided really good comments - photo background screen / neutral boards for photography. Agree entirely. But, playing devil's advocate - what would YOU prefer/suggest? I suspect it'd be NO background at all - and that's my preference, too. This diorama is a test-piece, and it's never going on show. If it was, I'd simply have the 2 boards and no background. For photographs, I'll take remedial action as per Neil's comments etc. Maybe part of me is "stirring the pot" because I really appreciate honest, critical comments rather than the sycophancy that's prevalent on a number of threads I could name. NO, I'm not going off on a Jeff rant!! The photographic aspects have been discussed further up the page. I'd welcome other comments about that backscene - NOT regarding the quality of artwork (which is sh1t), but whether it's necessary/serves a purpose at all in its SCENIC context. Would people have preferred a blank grey/blue/white background (colour irrelevant, just the neutrality of a "nothing" backing is what matters)? As I've said many, many times - if you can't take advice/listen to other opinions, what are you doing posting on an open Forum like this? Peter, THANKS very much for your post. Always good to get your take on things. Jeff.

I was tempted to give you a "Funny" Like, but I'm afraid the humour was quite bad enough to warrant it! David, never a case of hijacking - this thread is open to discussions involving all aspects of good modelling.....shame that interloper by the name of Physicsman keeps posting his stuff on here. I must have words with Andy York about this!

David, thanks for posting that video on here. Great to see the kind of things you and the club get up to - and nice to see a bit of "tree madness" to match the nutty stuff that I've been doing. I have to say that, in the correct context (the S&C is a bit sparser in places), trees DO make the layout. And good to see the well-dressed gent doing the co-commentary!

Good luck with the exhibition. I'm sure you'll enjoy it after a couple of years without exhibits taking place. As for the trees. I thought it'd be a tedious task, but it's turned out to be a very enjoyable one. I'm making 2 more at the moment, again of no particular type. However, I don't think it'll be long before I have a go at a "small" Oak (by Oak standards) - about 40 foot to scale - for use near the station on Gill Head. It WAS deliberate to use the viaduct as a background. However, even with all the lighting in the Bunker (there must be about 6000 lumens worth) and running at 3200ISO, I couldn't get a full depth of field AND there's a bit of intrusive fascia present. I'll sort out a tripod and reduce my shutter speed so the f-number can go up....

Yes, Al did a great job with that background. I can't think I'll ever go to that kind of "trouble", but there speaks the man who is now nearly 1000 stones into replacing a wall section on Gill Head that I only built last October. So madness can strike where you least expect it!

Very true, John. I might get a few funny looks as I unload the diorama at my chosen site, but the background would be authentic!