MRJ 262

[John_Hughes]

Certainly not merely a good read, but an edition which I shall find useful for my own modelling - especially the Trevor Potts, Gordon Gravett and Martyn Welch articles. Brilliant, all three of them, and well illustrated too.

 

It seems a shame that the Small Suppliers' Forum has gone missing, and it would have been nice to have a plan for Orford; with a 'scenic area' of 8' by 20" or so it shows just how nice a small 'O' Gauge layout can be. And is it just me, or has the quality of the pictures improved lately? Certainly Orford looks stunning.

 

I confess to a good deal of ambivalence about the Lawrence Boule article on 3D printing. On the one hand it's nice to see the topic given some recognition (even the Continental Modeller has got in on the act, so it's becoming quite mainstream here only about three years after it began to surface in American magazines); but - although it's clearly stated to be the writer's 'personal foray' into 3D printing - I do wonder if it gives too much of an impression that you need to spend megabucks on the dedicated computer, printer and other stuff that the author has acquired before you can make much progress.

 

I'm certainly not alone in knocking up useful parts with nothing more than a bog-standard Windows 10 PC running free design software, and getting Shapeways to print the results for me. That said, Mr. Boule has certainly done some nice work!

[Captain Kernow]

I confess to a good deal of ambivalence about the Lawrence Boule article on 3D printing. On the one hand it's nice to see the topic given some recognition (even the Continental Modeller has got in on the act, so it's becoming quite mainstream here only about three years after it began to surface in American magazines); but - although it's clearly stated to be the writer's 'personal foray' into 3D printing - I do wonder if it gives too much of an impression that you need to spend megabucks on the dedicated computer, printer and other stuff that the author has acquired before you can make much progress.

 

The results were certainly impressive and the potential for time saving, if producing large batches for example, is obvious.

 

I am, however, an old dog, to refer back to the editorial, and I don't feel up to learning new tricks.

[John_Hughes]

The results were certainly impressive and the potential for time saving, if producing large batches for example, is obvious.

 

I am, however, an old dog, to refer back to the editorial, and I don't feel up to learning new tricks.

 

I don't believe a word of that! Jump in, the water's lovely!

[Captain Kernow]

I don't believe a word of that! Jump in, the water's lovely!

Alas, I fear that it is true, John.

 

Computer technology and I have never really got along that well.

[5050]

With many abject apologies to Ray Davies.

So I should think!

 

Plagiarist!

 

Whatever that actually means.....................................

[Hroth]

Actually a Very Useful issue this month!

 

Must admit, all this 3D printery is a bit over my head, but its interesting to see what can be produced in terms of small batches of components.  If you have the hardware and the software skills to do it properly.

[Enterprisingwestern]

So I should think!

 

Plagiarist!

 

Whatever that actually means.....................................

 

Short for guitar player?

 

Mike.

[Poggy1165]

For me the best issue for a while. I love Orford. And the Martyn Welch article is worth the cost of the magazine in itself. Makes me realise why I have a subscription.

[Re6/6]

A great edition again, but a shame that someone felt the need to criticise an aspect of the lovely Midland Railway goods office in the previous issue.

Whilst praising Richard Ellis' goods office as a 'delightful rendition' (which it absolutely is) Mr Bourne goes on to nit pic about slate size and roof pitch. For goodness sake, the letter is an example of the most lamentable kind of rivet counting and some might consider it insulting criticism of an obviously very talented modeller.

 

l would have thought that a 'complimentary' contribution from 'Mrs Trellis' would have been preferable.

Edited April 8, 2018 by Re6/6

[chris p bacon]

It's funny how people perceive things in different ways.

 

As someone who has to know and do various aspects of roofing in the 'day job' I just read it as offering some prototype information rather than a real criticism.  

 

Either way it's a delightful model. 

[NHY 581]

Richard's modelling is bordering on art and to a standard that I anticipate never attaining. Our hobby will always have an element of compromise but generally if it looks right......it is and this is often overlooked.

 

 

I'm sure the critic could produce a wonderful roof of his own given his knowledge of the subject....

 

 

Rob

[Craigw]

Richard's modelling is bordering on art and to a standard that I anticipate never attaining. Our hobby will always have an element of compromise but generally if it looks right......it is and this is often overlooked.

 

 

I'm sure the critic could produce a wonderful roof of his own given his knowledge of the subject....

 

 

Rob

 

If it looks right, that simply means to the person looking at something it seems right. But, if a person has a knowledge or interest in a particular subject they may know it is not correct.

 

Provided they present a criticism in a constructive manner, does it really matter?

 

Surely the best way to learn about something is to be given correct information and do better next time.

 

Regards,

 

Craig W

[sb67]

Dont always buy MRJ but got to say this month is great, Orford looks stunning, although I wish I could see a track plan and both Gordon Gravetts and Martyn Welch's articles are fantastic, well recommended reading :-)

Steve.

[NXEA!]

I bought a copy this morning from WHSmith at Norwich station. Orford is so atmospheric, and those GE 6-wheelers in Stratford Brown are exquisite. I liked the article on improving RTR wagons too. More editions like that please! 

[NHY 581]

If it looks right, that simply means to the person looking at something it seems right. But, if a person has a knowledge or interest in a particular subject they may know it is not correct.

 

Provided they present a criticism in a constructive manner, does it really matter?

 

Surely the best way to learn about something is to be given correct information and do better next time.

 

Regards,

 

Craig W

Perchance I am too easy going but I retain a healthy regard for other peoples efforts. Anyone on here who follow Richards thread will see the lengths he goes to and his enthusiasm for his subject, hence my observation that if it looks right.....

 

Our hobby is experiential so yes, in theory we get better with practice. I get it. But this is is the standard of Richards modelling.....it just seems somewhat churlish to take issue with it. ( I hope Richard excuses the use of his images to illustrate my point)

 

As I say, no doubt our critic applies the same standards to all aspects of his own modelling.....

 

Rob.

[Jol Wilkinson]

Eddie Bourne, "the critic", is a member of the S4 Society South London Area Group. a.k.a "SLAG" who produced the St Merryn layout and wrote a book about it.

 

https://www.scalefour.org/publications/stmerryn 

 

This post is for information only and does not imply any opinion on the correspondence in question. 

[BlackRat]

Everyone has their own 'foibles'.......

 

I've never seen a layout in the flesh, or in a magazine that has correctly positioned, proportioned/dimensioned and appropriate road signs and markings.

 

Still can't all be perfect can we.

 

I just take it for what it is ..... and enjoy the workmanship and skill behind what I am looking at.

Edited April 8, 2018 by BlackRat

[Barry Ten]

I think Mr Bourne's letter is fair enough in context, albeit arguably drifting into the arena of nit-pickery. It does say "Journal" on the front of the magazine, after all, which to me applies that the articles within should be held up to close scrutiny (perhaps more so than in the mainstream magazines) and subjected to reasonable criticism, if there's an aspect of them which is considered worth addressing in a polite and informed manner, which I think is the case here.

 

In other news, another enjoyable issue. In with the general articles, I'm particularly taken with the shots of Clutton which feature, reminding one of what a fantastic layout it is.

[Osgood]

.... and it would have been nice to have a plan for Orford; ....

 

....Orford looks stunning, although I wish I could see a track plan ....

 

 

I agree - a track plan is most useful in placing photos into context and helping to visualise the whole creation.

However in the case of Orford, with only 8ft available for photography, the photos (including one near the back) work like a kind of jigsaw and I found it reasonably easy to work out the track plan.

 

What I find more infuriating is when just occasionally the scale is not mentioned and the photos yield no clues, and one has to deduce it from the odd supplier name or such like - not easy unless you happen to model in that scale!

Edited April 8, 2018 by Osgood

[sb67]

I agree - a track plan is most useful in placing photos into context and helping to visualise the whole creation.

However in the case of Orford, with only 8ft available for photography, the photos (including one near the back) work like a kind of jigsaw and I found it reasonably easy to work out the track plan.

 

What I find more infuriating is when just occasionally the scale is not mentioned and the photos yield no clues, and one has to deduce it from the odd supplier name or such like - not easy unless you happen to model in that scale!

I kind of worked out a track plan but missed the bit that said it was 8ft, that makes the layout look even better! think it looks bigger than that.

Steve.

[NHY 581]

Eddie Bourne, "the critic", is a member of the S4 Society South London Area Group. a.k.a "SLAG" who produced the St Merryn layout and wrote a book about it.

 

https://www.scalefour.org/publications/stmerryn

 

This post is for information only and does not imply any opinion on the correspondence in question.

 

I guess that is where our approaches differ then.... I have seen St. Merryn, spent some time watching it, bought the book, thoroughly enjoyed it and used a few of the techniques myself. But I aim for the overall look, an impression and try to imbue a sense of time and place in my layouts rather than attempting to count every rivet. This is something that Richard ably demonstrates with his modelling and his results reflect an attention to detail that I simply do not have.

 

The St Merryn team have produced a lovely model and it's no wonder that a member of this team feels the need to comment on details that he feels needs addressing......but was it really needed?

 

MRJ showcases top quality modelling and Richards modelling demonstrates this without question and provides inspiration and something to aspire to. To go further, to have one's models in MRJ is surely recognition that you are at the top of the hobby. I am therefore saddened by this achievement being clouded by the comments made after the event, albeit in all honesty, probably well intentioned observations..

 

 

I shall leave this now as I have probably said far too much.

 

 

Rob.

Edited April 8, 2018 by NHY 581

[bgman]

Having just read the letter ( only bought the Journal this afternoon ) I had to refrain from spitting at it purely because I don't want to make a mess of my Journal !

[Captain Kernow]

If it looks right, that simply means to the person looking at something it seems right. But, if a person has a knowledge or interest in a particular subject they may know it is not correct.

 

Provided they present a criticism in a constructive manner, does it really matter?

 

Surely the best way to learn about something is to be given correct information and do better next time.

 

Yes, nothing wrong in what you say, Craig.

 

But,

 

But,

 

 

I think I'd rather be happy than right.

I guess that is where our approaches differ then.... I have seen St. Merryn, spent some time watching it, bought the book, thoroughly enjoyed it and used a few of the techniques myself. 

I also bought that book.

[New Haven Neil]

Spar sells MRJ!???

 

Astonishingly, yes!

 

It's actually the best magazine stockist in Ramsey - not that that is saying too much - and a Post Office.

Edited April 8, 2018 by New Haven Neil

[2ManySpams]

Whilst praising Richard Ellis' goods office as a 'delightful rendition' (which it absolutely is) Mr Bourne goes on to nit pic about slate size and roof pitch. For goodness sake, the letter is an example of the most lamentable kind of rivet counting and some might consider it insulting criticism of an obviously very talented modeller.

 

l would have thought that a 'complimentary' contribution from 'Mrs Trellis' would have been preferable.

I was picked up a while back for have the wrong size (or rather a variety of sizes) of slates on a model I was building. Fortunately I'd copied the prototype's random, non-standard sized roofing slates. Just goes to show it's not always right to slavishly follow the rule book everytime. A good mix of standards/guidance backed up with photos of actual use is preferable IMO.