Latest Issue of CTT

[NYC Fan]

Dennis,

I totally understand. CTT photographed my layout for the January 2000 issue and I know alot of work and thought go into each shot. The quality of the photography is not my issue. My issue is, "How well do the photographs illustrate the subject of the story."

I must question how much of this is attributable simply to the taste of the individual photographer. Like I said above, judging from an accummulation of this photographers work in CTT, he appears to consistantly provide the same type of photos in his layout coverage, close-ups and portraits. He may honestly think they are artsy. There is currently a book on the market that is a collection of photos of Lionel Trains where about 3/4 of each photo is out of focus. Personally, that's not my taste either, but some may consider it artsy.

As a professional, Dennis, how much of this do you think is his personal preferrence and how much do you think is due to the limitations of the situation?

[Anonymous]

If you check out the article entitled "TMCC and DCS on the same layout" in the January 2004 issue of CTT, you'll see a different style of photography by Jim Forbes. The shots are much wider. This layout obviously lent itself to greater vistas.

In the September 2003 issue, check out "The Scenic Route" article. It also has an overall shot.

Based upon his photography in those two layouts, I would think there were limitations in shooting Terry Johnson's layout.

Dennis

[NYC Fan]

Thank you Dennis. I respect your opinion and appreciate your responses.

I hope, whenever possible, the photographers and editors keep in mind what we have discussed in this thread, and do their best to show as much of the layout itself as possible.

[Frank in Steam]

The other possibility is that the editor selected the artsy/portrait/close up photose to 'balance' with the other layout's pictures in the same issue. I cannot believe that there can't be a few medium distance exposures to give us a feel of the layout. Strange that we don't see this issue crop up (pun intended) in the competition's photos.

[Anonymous]

Hi guys,

Thanks for the feedback. Dennis has shot some layouts for us and he is right on the mark. We go into every layout shoot looking for an overall shot. We just couldn't get it done at Terry Johnson's house. If you look at the way his layout snakes around, you'll get a better sense of things.

Lighting can be a problem, and as it is, we can no longer take lights on airplanes reliably (weight restrictions) so if we fly for a photo shoot we have to ship much of the equipment.

Also, we can't always back up far enough to get a big-picture shot. Sometimes we can get away with a wide-angle lens, sometimes not (the lens also accentuates the floor and ceiling).

Ernie Emrich shot his own photos in last January's issue. If you look at his track plan, you note his layout is in -- more or less -- two separate rooms. Not easy for an overall.

Thanks again for the comments (thanks too, Dennis) and we'll keep plugging away at overall shots. By the way, another layout Dennis shot is coming up in one of the fall issues.

Sincerely,
Neil Besougloff
editor

[Anonymous]

I remember one time they did a really small layout(4x6?) and all of the shots were close up making it very intimate. You couldn't tell what size it was from the pictures. Since I am modeling on a small layout, I would like an overview to get an idea of track and building placement.

[3railguy]

Why not hire Boldt or CR Meyer to lift the house off the layout with a crane so you guys can get an overall shot? You'll have natural sunlight too.

One overall shot is nice if doable. I like the up close shots best because they show the details better and sort of suck me in. They give me the feeling I'm a toy figure living in a toy train world.

[FJ and G]

After reading the article about converting PS1 to PS2, I think I'll let the experts do it instead of trying to save $120. The author mentions that Williams can be converted as well. Perhaps a follow-up piece on that and other models to upgrade.

Also, mention was made of using some type of conducting grease or something (don't have the mag w/me right now). What does that do, I wonder? Thought a good soldered joint was good enough conductor.

[FJ and G]

Oh, one other thing that I'm sure Neil B. is aware of. Over on the "other" forum is an extremely long and sometimes humorous and unhumorous thread reg. Neil B's editorial. He's become a maga-star over there.

[BigJim]

"How well do the photographs illustrate the subject of the story."

That's been a real bug-a-boo!

So many times in CTT the text speaks of an interesting scene or idea and then has no picture included!

If you're going to talk the talk, put a picture where your mouth is!!!

[Anonymous]

I haven't received my CTT yet. It seems that us here in Canada get it a few days later than the American subscribers. I would like to make some more comments, though, about what people have mentioned conerning JLC and toy train advertising.

Lionel is by far not the only toy train company that focused on how much better their trains were than their competitors. In fact, all of them probably have done it at one time or another. In the train page of an early-1900's Eaton's (a Canadian department store with a mail-order catalog, like Sears) catalog, all the trains are Ives, all of which are clockwork. There is quite a lengthy writeup that goes on about why Ives trains are the best and comparing them to German-made toy trains. It claims that Ives trains ran much longer and were of far better quality than "larger, more expensive German-made train sets." The truth is that at that time, many of the trains made by German companies like Bing and Marklin were of a much higher quality than Ives was.

And who can forget American Flyer's postwar marketing campaign claiming that AF trains were "authentic scale models with real two-rail track", not old-fashioned three-rail track. In an AF catalog of mine, there's a picture comparing an AF Alco PA A-B set with some fictitious set of short toy-like diesels representing what other manufacturers were making.

I'm not criticizing or defending any particular toy train company here, but more or less am pointing out that all of them have at some point been guilty of advertising like this. The train manufacturers are in the business to make money and naturally want to do better than their competitors. Advertising like this is nothing new, just turn on your TV and you'll see plenty of commercials that compare their products with those of competing companies. That's basically the point of advertising, though, trying to make your products look like the best. It certainly may not be ethical at times, but it's what is done.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by FJ and G

Oh, one other thing that I'm sure Neil B. is aware of. Over on the "other" forum is an extremely long and sometimes humorous and unhumorous thread reg. Neil B's editorial. He's become a maga-star over there.

OGR Melvin deletes threads he considers "negative" yet he allows that one to continue.
Looks like a double standard to me.

[cnw1995]

Turning this back to the subject, I really like the latest issue - the article on Littletown is certainly interesting - I hadn't heard of it. I love the scenicking ideas and the looks inside at the wiring of pw Lionel locos. The layouts are interesting. I wish I could see a video of that rocket hidden inside the moutain.

[Anonymous]

Doug:

Yeah, that would be cool! Even if the rocket does hit the ceiling & bounce off!

Tony

[nitroboy]

Just got my copy, I LOVE the layout building tips!!! I guess because I am building my layout now and can use all the tips I can get.

Great magazine, keep up the good work.

[Dr. John]

I thoroughly enjoy CTT ! Not every article or issue rings my bell, but it is an overall high quality magazine that provides me with a great deal of information, inspiration and entertainment. Between subscribing and hunting down back issues I probably have 95% of all of the CTTs published. I will continue to subscribe and look forward to the October issue! Keep up the good work, Neil and Co.

[Anonymous]

This is my first post on ANY forum!!!
I'm Terry Johnson and was reading posts about my layout relative to photographing the entire layout. I think Jim Forbes has taken the best photos I've seen in any mag., and I was very happy to have drawn him for my shoot. Having said that, I was quite disappointed with my layout's coverage. The scenery looked stark and dull. And you're all correct- there were no overall shots which took in the scope and character of the layout. I feel I have a knock out layout, mainly because of the special effects, but it looked pretty boring to me in print. I'll blame myself for not having scenery that photographs well.
I have about 48 feet of Backdrop Warehouse backdrops, of which only a snippet was shown in the background. My layout room is immaculate and I had nothing sitting around to detract from wide angle photos. I am not, however, a photgrapher and would not pretend to know how to shoot a layout.
My layout was shot 3 1/2 years before it was published. You are looking back in time. I now have 2 UP turbines, a Challenger and a DD40X that would have said UP alot better than a GN F3 set.
As far as my TM video is concerned, that was a smaller layout in a different home.
Don't get me wrong; I'm honored to have my layout in CTT and think the world of Roger Carp and Jim forbes. Thanks guys![:D]

[Anonymous]

Terry,

I loved the Video of your layout on TM videos. I was not aware that this house was different. It must be spectacular. I agree with what has been said that we all like to see the "big picture" especially when it is a layout of your size.