Looks like the archive pics are now gone. Can someone post some Bragdon Geodesic Foam rock work pics? I'm especially interested in seeing the granite but anything would be great.
I'll be attending Joel's clinic in Sacramento at the National and would like to see if it's something I can get into. So far I'm still leaning towards hydrocal.
I've got my carboard lattice work and plaster clothed mountains alreay covered so the geodesic method is too hot to allow heat re-forming later.
I'm not sure it 'll be as advantageous to use if I can't bend it to my will or not. Anyway would like to see if it's as realistic looking as people say.
Thanks.
Raised on the Erie Lackawanna Mainline- Supt. of the Black River Transfer & Terminal R.R.
Dear Capt. Grimek
I don't have any pictures to share because I haven't tried this method yet. Actually, I don't even have a layout yet.
But big-time O-scaler Eric Siegel has a tutorial for this method on YouTube, and his tunnels and rock look perfect.
I plan to use this method on my son's layout--if I don't chicken out and try one of the prefab models.
--Jaddie
This is an under-construction shot of the Moose Bay inlet:
Later on, it looked like this:
Since I've got both hydrocal and geodesic foam rocks on my layout, I can compare them directly. Simply put, the Bragdon Foam knocks the socks off the hydrocal for detail level. I've tried hydrocal castings with a Bragdon mold, and they don't pick up the fine grain as well.
I have another section of my layout where I'll be using the foam, once I get the scenery base finalized. Hopefully, some time this summer.
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.
Thanks Jaddie! Those videos were a great help getting familiar with the process.
Mr. B. Thanks for yet again helping me out with pics and info. I just last night saw an old archived post from you and it seems like you've only been at this for about 5-6 yrs.? Your work is really really nice.
I have a couple of questions (as always). Is the detail difference between the Geo. foam and hydrocal super noticeable or super dramatic or just a bit nicer?
JUST RE-READ your comments after writing back and realized that "knock your socks off" pretty much says it all...
I MAY have to stick with hydrocal or dental plaster because my cardboard latticework is all plaster clothed already and Joel Bragdon said that there would be too much heat involved with heat forming/bending the foam scenery to my contours later. How hot does it all get? (I've already questioned Joel to death and I'll be attending his clinic at the National in Sacramento so figured I'd discuss this with him further then.)
I've considered ripping it all out but have decided not to. It just came out too nicely. The Geo. method appeals because I already have most of the contours I'd like to end up with bent into my lattice work. Using dry plaster castings and breaking them up is going to be a challenge to approach the look I have so far with the plaster cloth.
My other question is: Are all of the liquid products (and curing products) truly odor free? Many products are advertised as such but aren't-really. I'm very chemically/scent sensitive (migraine headaches). Again I can determine this at the clinic but would like to know ahead of time. (Sometimes I even have to leave a clinic due to this). Paul Scoles uses "scent free" hair spray for tree making in clinics and it (to me) was anything but so hence the question.
Are there plaster AND Geo. rocks in your pics? Can you point out which are which for me?
Many thanks!
Jim
I have a large (roughly 10x10 inch) Bragdon mold that I used for my rocks. As you can see, my rock faces are only aobut 4 inches high. I did all of the work on my workbench (my wife's workbench, actually, since it's bigger) and then cut and fitted them to the surface. I re-heated the castings with a hair dryer, and it softened them sufficiently to curve them around the foam castings I'd done already.
I didn't have any problems with odor or chemical irritation of any kind. I did this in the summer with the windows open, which is generally a good idea for anything like this, but it was the basement and not as well ventilated as one would ideally like. Still, no problems.
These pictures are all foam rocks.
Bragdon Molds in white art plaster:
Don Z.
Research; it's not just for geeks.
Thanks Mr. B. (that's what I thought but wasn't sure...) I appreciate the scent issues account of your experiences. My room has no windows but I can use fans to blow stuff out.
Don. Those are gorgeous! Do you recall which mold numbers you used? What type of rock are these?
I've been seriously considering #122 which is a granite (Bragdon doesn't always say in the catalog pics).
I assume yours are a sandstone judging by your layout pics? These almost look like granite if they were gray so was wondering...
Thanks also for your great PMs!
"Don. Those are gorgeous! Do you recall which mold numbers you used? What type of rock are these?"
Jim, those two molds are #85 and 87. Sorry for the delay in responding.
Thanks Don for your mold #s. They sure are nice! Fractured granite I guess...
I"m still considering rubber rocks as I've just discovered that the Olympic Mt. Range in WA State is sandstone and not granite as I'd assumed. The N. Cascade range is granite and basalt. So... (argh!) more decisions to make.
here is what i have gotten done
http://cs.trains.com/TRCCS/media/p/2108761.aspx
jeff m
Jeff, (I think I may have responded via a Pm)... Thanks for posting these. It's good to be able to see the material's edge/back a bit and get a sense of it. The translucent quality is cool too. Beautiful work so far!
a friend came over today and shot a video you can see more of what a train looks like going threw it
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCNI_q3WAaA&feature=email