jukebox

Context sometimes helps determine if something looks right. I've got a plain disc drying now - it needed two coats of flock - so will brush that off and have a look at it on Sunday. Till then, here's the first green, in place, with some figures for scale. You can just pretend those picks are putters for now... Cheers, Scott

That's just all the fumes from the MEK....

Awwwwwwwwwwwww. Shook off the excess flock this morning... This has worked out so well, it'd be a crying shame not to use it: The photo doesn't do it justice, really. It looks great. Let me see what a plain one looks like. Of course you know whatever one I choose for the layout, I'll wish I had used the other... Cheers Scott

Perhaps a plain cut is better? St Andrews in colour briefly... https://www.shutterstock.com/video/clip-1030473629-1950s-europe-st-andrews-golf-course-fife And a decade before.... with some pretty agricultural looking greens compared to today!: and as far back as 1929! This clip could very well justify your 8mmx8mm cut, Gordon:

Hi Gordon Thanks for the observation: It's an interesting conundrum... I had narrower strips to start with, but they looked wrong to me (having never played golf in my life other than at school sports in High School 35 years ago...). To be honest, I used this image as initial inspiration: Given the flag would be circa 6ft, I'd assumed those strips were around 4-5ft wide... I started with 20mm strips, but went to 30mm in my latest incarnation, as 20mm didn't look right to my uneducated eye; At 1:76, the smaller chequerboards look toylike. I've also noticed another variation where the cutting is not chequerboard, but bands: Again, just one of the funny thing where it doesn't quite look "right" to my eye. Of course the biggest caveat is: what did these look like 1930-1960? Before large commercial mowers were used? I have absolutely no idea, and there's not a lot of photo reference material of golf courses back then... My mind would be swayed immediately, if I saw something definitive. Because I'm manufacturing this off-layout, I have a lot more flexibility - If I get really keen I can make up a second (third?) green, and try them in place. Once I do have once I can live with, my plan will be to glue it down nice and flat, then flock the edge with a slightly larger grain material to hide the join. Regards Scott

I did notice the zoom doesn't seem to work any more, Martin. I used to be able to open up Gilbert's photos to marvellously large sizes - and I specifically left some of my own shots big so others could. But now, it seems when you click the +magnifying glass on the image, it expands very little. Cheers Scott

Opening okay on a new tab on my PC, Gordon.

Nope, didn't get there with the first attempt. This was the palette I used: I painted the base - no need to get too fancy, just wanted to cover the grid, in case it showed through... And cut myself a stencil, with a reminder which squares needed dark, which ones medium, which ones light green: When I tapped away the excess this afternoon, it was obvious the medium was too close to the dark, spoiling the effect. Cover was a little thin in places, too... Never mind - that first layer seemed to be a really good surface to glue when I did the test strip, so I just reapplied a neat layer of PVA. Perversely, I couldn't see the 1st layer shades under the glue, so didn't even try to align the layers. Here is what it looks like with the light and medium flock down: After that, I can put the mask away and just spoon the dark into the remaining diamonds: And now there's nothing to do but wait till morning. Cheers Scott

Cracked it. Took the test sheet and brushed away the turf... to be greeted with this: Lovely, lovely, lovely. It's one of those times where scaling down 1/76 exactly doesn't work - the eye needs to see some texture to believe it's looking at grass. And the very small grains of the "fine turf" work just right (for me, anyway!). I did have a perverse thought that if this didn't work I could try painting over the top of it, leaving a coloured textured surface. Someone else can try that! As Jonathan correctly observed, I'll repaint the plasticard a solid olive, just to provide an under-colour for safety, but am now comfortable if I have to flock in two passes. The one thing I will do differently to the sample sheet is make all three tones from a blend of colours. The photo doesn't really show it well, but the squares that used blended shades have a more realistic feel than those using the native Woodland Scenics tones - I guess because in real life, grass isn't a single shade either. 37C here in Perth today (where it's 8:30am on Thursday), so I'd imagine I will have this done by the time many of you wake up today. Cheers Scott

So, to the challenge at hand.... model a golf green convincingly. Well despite my best efforts to screed the plaster level, I knew that it would not be flat enough, so my cunning plan is to use a sheet of plasticard, and texture the green off-layout. I took a rubbing of the area with a brown paper bag, and cut a disc of thin card to suit: Knowing that the area was going to need a patchwork of colour, I took a rather bright green paint and used it as a base, but also a guide to how I thought the mowed surface might look. I then applied some masking tape to get hard demarcation: After painting one set of stripes in a deep green, I added more tape at right angles, to develop the chequerboard a green might have, and painted some olive stripes: And hated it. My original theory was that a green is mowed and rolled so tight, it has no texture when viewed from a distance, so paint would be the best thing to reproduced this at 1:76 scale. Instead it looked like paint. Even unfinished, I can see it's too neat, and too flat. Okay, then that meant Plan B. Which in the back of my mind, I preferred to begin with. Use Woodland Scenics "Fine Turf" in differing blends to make the chequerboard. Oh, and increase the size of the squares, cos that width I used with the paint looks wrong... I took two shades of green, and blended some to make a third shade - all similar, but hopeful discretely visible as different when I'm done.. So I decided to test that using some card: Now the flaw here is that card is more absorbent than plastic. When it dried, I was left with only 50% coverage: So I have re-applied the glue, and spread a second layer of flock. It's drying now.. Let's see how that looks in a few hours. Cheers Scott

Really enjoying the potential for photographs in some of those scenes, Shaun. Keep up the excellent work! Cheers Scott

A suggestion, Gilbert? Some of your shots might benefit from cropping to a wider format than 4:3. That first one above, for instance, takes on more oomph (at least I think that's the technical term) if you letterbox it: Of course this sort of thing is totally subjective. One mans' meat, another man's poison and all that... Regards Scott edit: I wonder if it may have something to do with the "rule of thirds" coming into play. With the sky and rails cropped, the horizontal "thirds lines" touch the train rather than the sky and rails, and the eye runs along the train to the station... Important disclosure: I don't always believe in that rule.

..and our mail service helpfully announces it's waiting for you when you get home from work, so you can build up a thirst!

Our national airline may have all but stopped flying... but the good news they are still delivering booze to my front door!

The covers were removed, and the surveyors moved in, with coloured chalk to mark the fence lines and features... Cheers Scott

Hi Gilbert - the camera does do a lot of funny things; leaning over the top of the hill, there's a spot on the right hand curve at the top near the junction where I'm a touch worried the toe of the cutting is a bit close to the running line (which is what you may be seeing) - but then I look down the track with a "driver's eye" and it seems to be okay. I'll run a train past to check clearances shortly for my piece of mind. As Jonathan says, adding a lines of cinders/cess material will give the eye a physical break between track and hillside, and any of those areas where the cutting toe is a bit too generous toward the ballast will be camouflaged (I hope); in person, the fresh side actually seems to have slightly more flat "toe" at the base, so not quite symmetrical with the finished side, which bothered me for about 3 seconds, until I realised it's not something I can change, and in the bigger picture, won't be very noticeable (except now I've told you all about it....) *** It's 6:30am here in Perth as I post this - and I just went up and had a peek under the "covers". All looks good with no sign of cracking. Will be 33C here later today. If it makes it through to tonight intact, I should be safe. Cheers Scott

Sunday night in Perth, as COVID-19 starts to bite Down Under. The buttercream/plaster I used to fill the cracking appears to have behaved itself as it cured; I did add PVA to it, but no colour - there didn't seem to be a point, knowing it would be skinned: I went ahead and skinned it... using the last of my third bag of Hydrocal midway. I'd bought another bag mid-week, so had to stop and decant it into 5L buckets. That's 90Kg of the stuff I've hauled upstairs now. It went on smoothly as planned (pun intended!). Trowelled into place 3-5mm thick, and then brush finished down the contours, which will be hidden by the ground cover anyway... I'll have to wait till Tuesday to see if that cracks. But it should be okay - though of course after I'd finished, I did wonder if I should have given the buttercream a week to totally dry in case it starts to open up.... Live dangerously, eh? The extra skin isn't a bad thing - it gives the scenery a bit of extra thickness and rigidity. It was good to be able to lie on the hill and work the spatula around the deep inside of the cutting. One day in the future, when I have shuffled off this mortal coil, my children and grandchildren will swear and curse as they try and break this lot up to get it out the room and back downstairs I'm sure. The slag heap is an interesting idea... but this side of the layout has a much more sylvan palette, so it would have needed to be on the opposite side near the MPD. There will be plenty of grot around there, I'm sure... Cheers Scott

I think you underestimate just how loved and revered the work of Gerry Anderson was, Tony. There are generations of children around the globe who grew up watching those TV episodes on television, and were/are/will always be passionate about them. To you they may just be puppets, but to many of us (myself included) the work of Gerry Anderson in the 1960's/1970's is iconic. Yes, it is a shame that the old names were retired as a result, but it's great to see more late 20th Century icons and institutions being chosen to name locomotives (and aircraft of some airlines fleets, for that matter). And in the case of these in particular, given their roles, a nod to the TV Show Thunderbirds is about as appropriate a set of names as you're ever likely to see. Regards Scott

Imagine the dog's breakfast Thompson would have made of that....

Beat the room temperature butter with a hand mixer, the paddle attachment of a stand mixer, or a wooden spoon until smooth and fluffy. Gradually beat in icing sugar until fully incorporated. Beat in vanilla extract. Pour in milk and beat for an additional 3-4 minutes. Apply to the cutting with flexible knife or spatula... Work into abnormal contours to provide a level base for a new skinning layer... Cover with a damp cloth and leave overnight to harden... Bon Appétit! Scott

Hi Rob; As I said to Gordon, it's not a big deal - and this is the last "large" area I am skinning - there's others I have to terra-form, but much less area to cover, and none with the slope that side has. I have done so many other areas on the layout, and never had the cracking I had (twice!) in this particular region. The only thing I can think is different is the base material - I'm using old business shirts, instead of old sheets as my base. They may just take less plaster and so stay more flexible, then deform when the plaster outer skin goes on top. As I said, no use expending energy worrying - it can be solved easily, and is not a hurdle that is sapping my enthusiasm. The carrot is the fun part that comes next... Cheers Scott

Thanks Gordon - yes, the scale of the cutting it is going to make it very photogentic - and there are a few angles to photograph from that will open up nicely once I scenic the bare hillside and top. Regarding the plaster, I was very careful with my batching this time - small batches, lots of PVA, and a fair bit of paint, before adding water mixing, then adding plaster - and making the batch not too sloppy, knowing that more water = more evaporation. Maybe I should have made the mixes wetter? But it doesn't really matter why it did it now - it's happened. And I know that skinning it with a second lean layer should go okay from my repair work at the top. It's a touch frustrating, but it's not slowing me down. I have to do some test work with flocks off-layout to see about reproducing a golf green surface, so there's some playtime involved there while the plaster dries... Rob - I do already add PVA; it goes in when I tint it with paint, before I add water. Probably 10% PVA? 5% paint. 85% water.

Because I am Down Under... Of course the areas of plaster I didn't expect to crack, did: Whilst the green, up to 15mm thick solid plaster that might have shrunk and cracked, didn't: Curiously, there was an area of the cutting in those batches I did last week that didn't crack anywhere near as much... Never mind. The work for my weekend ahead is now clear; a second skinning awaits. The good news is that top surface is well hardened, has no cracks, and is very lean-able. Also I stocked up on some static grasses and flocks... more on that anon. Onward! Cheers Scott

Sorry, they're not poplars - the branches are quite short and perpendicular, and the single central trunk almost cylindrical almost to the top. (I've already modeled poplars on Stockrington - was looking for something different...)

Indeed. That's why a) These stood out and b) Why I have no idea what they are!