Spanky
O and S for most us is toy trains, not HO where the hobbiest people call sidings a turnout, because. They think a switch is to turn on a lightf
I find Roger Carp a priceless source of information and could use more words.
If I misread anyone, let me know and I will change the chart.
..........Wayne..........
I believe that the balance between visuals and text is pretty darn good as is. Roger personalizes each story and helps give the reader a sense of how the layout owner came to design and run his/her pike in the way he/she did .
Keep up the good work, Roger!
I have been a subscriber since day one. Roger Carp and Bob Keller are the very best at getting information to us. keep up the great articles!
In regard to beginners layouts...
I can recall a time when there was a policy of publishing track plans for what was termed a medium sized layout and one day out of a mixture of curiosity and boredom took out a calculator to determine the projected cost of one. Of course any plan does not include power via transformers or command control or raw materials. The cost was astronomical in relation to biting off a large amount of cash at the onset. Smaller expandable layouts seem more pragmatic to me, as you can do this in small bites and expand it over time.
To me a large layout does not equate to bigger is better, and these days doing more with less is ( again) a more pragmatic option not only from what space is available but from a cash basis for most.
For my moneys worth, most layouts are loops with yards and what I would prefer is more variety..say point to point types, a trolley or interurban based type, or a industrial road confined to a single industry, etc just to break up the endless coverage of gargantuan layouts.
Nothing is more fairly distributed than common sense: no one thinks he needs more of it than he already has.
For the past 15 years, I have been complaining that their are not enough photos of the larger layouts. But when it comes to building a beginners layout by the CTT staff, there are about 15. Enough already..........
I would like to see photos in the layout articles that attempt to show more of the overall layout, not just the up close vignettes.
I know this can be difficult due to cramped spaces and inadequate lighting, but layout photos give a better overall picture of the theme of the layout than just a few close up photos.
I like the layout plan view drawings. That must take someone a few hours at least to draw. Photos would just enhance the experience.
Frankly while I can appreciate the individual artistry of every layout regardless of style, after a half century of being in the hobby they are fairly similar to one another in several aspects but if a layout is unique, then more images are justified. Perhaps additional images could be added on line as a subscriber extra.
Without Rodger's review ( much like a book or movie review) I would glance at an image and move on. I think we live in a largely post literate universe where reading is considered unnecessary and I think Rodger's material is what makes many of the layouts more interesting versus one dimensional images.. Layout images are a dime a dozen but Rodger's knowledge of his subject is unique.
Further, I think being an editor putting together images and text as a balance is more difficult than it seems to be. I saw the preview of the next issue and it was largely Lionel ( again)...I would vote for more variety versus throwing Rodger under the bus for the sake of a photograph.
I've always liked the way Roger writes. His words make me feel like I've visited the layout myself. There's a lot more than lumber, track and foam rubber that go into making a layout. Every one of them is a work of art from the sublimely impressionistic to the photograph-esque hyper-realistic. It often was at the end of a lifetime of learning and living that the great renaissance masters created their greatest works. And without life experience no human can truly excel. Also, knowing where someone's inspirations came from can help us find similar ideas from our own experiences. It's all a means to improving.
Becky
Trains, trains, wonderful trains. The more you get, the more you toot!
I am the monster in your head...And I thought you'd learn by now, It seems you haven't yet.I am the venom in your skin --- Breaking Benjamin
another vote for Roger
Dave
It's a TOY, A child's PLAYTHING!!! (Woody from Toy Story)
To my knowledge, Lionel never used radii, it was either O-31 or O-72 curves back in the "day." Even if anyone ever did use "radii" on occassion, continuing to use a misnomer is not a good practice and only serves to add confusion to new people in the hobby.
Paul Kallus If nothing else, please learn the difference between radii and diameter when describing curves. For example, in the last CTT issue, and many others before, you use the term O-72 radii. This implies the track diameter is 144 inches (12 feet), which would be a very wide curve.
If nothing else, please learn the difference between radii and diameter when describing curves. For example, in the last CTT issue, and many others before, you use the term O-72 radii. This implies the track diameter is 144 inches (12 feet), which would be a very wide curve.
Actually using the term radius instead of diameter to describe track curves originated with Lionel, not Roger, and continues to this day for Lionel O-scale track. It is just part of the nostalgia of Lionel.
Earl
I have to vote for Roger also. I have been a fan of his from way back. I grew up in the sixties and seventies, so I am naturally curoius about that time in Lionel's history as well as the boom years of the fifties. He has an extensive knowledge of that time period.
Roger: if you're reading, this is nothing against you personally. You seem to be a generally nice guy who has a thorough knowledge of toy train history.
The core of what I am trying to say is that a layout description and builder's story can be accomplished without superfluous wording and without both acronymistic analogistic paragraphs. I am not at a point where I am going to stop subscribing to CTT because of lack of photos and your long-winded writing style, but I would like to read layout articles that get to the point and don't take up the majority of the article.
Regards,
Paul
I really like Roger's articles. Layout pictures are readily available almost anywhere on the internet. Just look at the Sunday Photo Fun threads on the CTT forum or the Weekend Photo Fun threads on the OGR forum. But Roger brings life to the photos by his in-depth historical knowledge,
Earl Staley
Sorry Paul but I have to disagree. I get a lot of benefit out of the descriptions of how the builders created the different layouts. I would find it helpful if each article perhaps focussed on one area of layout building in depth to help others recreate it (even say a text box with step by step instructions for one aspect of the layout).
I also appreciate the portion of the write up that tells the story of the builder. I think it is a deserving tribute to the people who spend so much time to create these amazing layouts and inspire all of us. Getting to know a bit about others who share our love of toy trains is a great part of the hobby.
As much as I enjoy pictures of layouts, I would quickly lose interest if there were no stories accompanying them. There are plenty of pictures and video for free on the internet, I subscribe to the magazine expecting the stories to go with them. Just my opinion.
Jay in Ottawa
I agree with SJ. As someone who has only been in this hobby for a few years now and never constructed a permanent layout, the information Roger provides based upon his interviews is greatly helpful. It is great to read how others have constructed their layouts (no matter the size) and learn what worked for them. I regularly see something in one of the photos that I find interesting and plan to incorporate on a layout someday so I'm happy to read how the owner did it.
Joe
I too skim the feature articles. I have read so many I did this and then I did that I no longer find them interesting. However Rogers ramblings probably do help the newer members of our hobby.
"IT's GOOD TO BE THE KING",by Mel Brooks
Charter Member- Tardis Train Crew (TTC) - Detroit3railers- Detroit Historical society Glancy Modular trains- Charter member BTTS
I'd like to see more photographs of the visited layouts as well, but remember, the man IS paid to write.
Roger's been with CTT since the beginning, so he must be doing something write, uh, right.
100% agree. Roger's stories are far too wordy with prose that in reality does nothing for the presentation.
"A picture is worth a thousand words."
I believe that to be a true statement. I enjoy CTT's featured layouts - excellent variety of various types of layouts, but Roger Carp's long narration seems to take up the majority of the article. I suggest more of a balance between words and pictures, but in no case, should words take up more space on any given page than the featured layout. I find myself skimming or skipping over many of Roger's paragraphs. Nothing against Roger's writing style, but the layout pictures seem to be in short supply in just about every issue.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.
Get the Classic Toy Trains newsletter delivered to your inbox twice a month