Since I started installing some masonit panels for backdrops, before I put ones in for the secoond deck, I thought I'd ask the topic question. It's not one continuous panel 2 decks high, each deck has its own strip of backdrop.
What's the concensus here, shoudl the upper and lower deck both have the seams vertically aligned, or should I shift the panels so the seam on one deck is a few feet over from the second deck? I am trying to set the panels so that the seam always is on top of one of my vertical risers that is screwed to the wall, though inevitably there will be places that I need to use a scrap piece of wood as a backer.
Also, there will be places that the upper deck brackdrop won't be right up against the wall - at least, that is my thinking. Perhaps false reasoning. My thinking is that over areas where the lower deck is wider, such as above the main yard, I want to have the upper deck near equal in width so the lighting will work, but I don;t want that much of a reach-in on the upper deck, nor do I want to put that busy of an area on the upper deck, as a complex switching operation on the upper deck right above the main classification yard will just cause peole to get in each other's way. I could eacher snak the backdrop out and make the actual sceniced part narrower, or keep the backdrop along the wall and just fill the space between track closer to the edge and the backdrop with additional scenery.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
My philosophy is to keep it simple, and to make it look good 'enough', especially with backdrops. Personally, I would not see the need, nor go to the trouble, of aligning two decks' scenick backdrop seams. I believe that they might stand out even more for having that artefact of construction.
Nothing inherently wrong with 'snaking' the backdrop out here and there, and probably for the same reason that our better track layers and layout builders know not to have long tangent runs of tracks. They snake as well...or ought to. But, I prefer even expanded expanses of scenery on my layout. I don't lay track willy nilly because I have the room. I try for realism. I keep the trackage to a minimum precisely so that it stands out among all the expanse...the latter of which is time consuming and materials-heavy to accomplish. But, it's worth it. I'll make that larger mountain, or deeper gully. It's lost to me anyway when I'm fixated on the steamer and what trails it.
Why not fill the seam and make it solid? I did that with mine and if I ever move I can break it at the seam and fix it at the new house.
Three seams in this backdrop, bet ya can't find them, go ahead get as close as you like.
Brent
"All of the world's problems are the result of the difference between how we think and how the world works."
Well they are going to be taped and mudded. You can always tell though, if you hit the light just right.
I'm not talking about going out of my way to align them, just that after the first panel was up, it was easy to put the upper deck panel right above that one. But I could shift it over a stud or two.
My thought is that since it is two different decks, broken up by the upper deck benchwork, you would never see it one way or the other.
My vote it to do what is easiest, most practical, and most enhances the appearance. The whole point of a multi-deck layout is to do whatever you can to concentrate the viewer/operator on one deck at a time. So ideally they should not even be aware of different seams on different levels. If someone is noticing both levels that way then they are noticing the obvious unreality of the whole thing.
Frankly at my height the lower deck tends to be hard to view anyway and in particular the backdrop of a lower deck. A shorter person might have the opposite reaction but the common theme is, one deck is preferred for viewing and often operating.
There is something to be said for not having both decks be equally deep unless the space is needed for important layout features. That is, the deck you can actually feel most comfortable viewing should be the deep one. The other one - lower deck in my case -- might be more viewer friendly to me if things are brought forward closer to the edge so I am not forced to crouch down to see deep into the scene (or worse yet, to uncouple a car or try to read reporting marks).
A case can be made that lighting can and should be different between levels as well.
I speak here of the usual double deck layout, not a mushroom design.
Dave Nelson
dknelsonThere is something to be said for not having both decks be equally deep unless the space is needed for important layout features.
You can always put a bulge in the benchwork to accomodate a RH/TT or dock/barge scene. I find those make things a little more interesting as long as you can still move around it okay.
I am not planning on having any ceiling lighting, except for walking aroound and construction. Under the upper deck, I will have LED strings for lighting the lower deck. Above the upper deck, there will be a cap of sorts, underneath of that will be the LED strips for the upper deck lighting. On top it will be used as a shelf for power supplies for the upper deck. Most of the time, I see the room lights being turned ovv when oeprating. So if the upper deck is shallow and the lower deck is wide, there will be unlit areas of the lower deck.
rrinkerWhat's the concensus here, shoudl the upper and lower deck both have the seams vertically aligned, or should I shift the panels so the seam on one deck is a few feet over from the second deck?
It doesn't matter. What I have always done is to do the curved sections first since I don't want seams there. Then fill in the blanks.
rrinkerkeep the backdrop along the wall and just fill the space between track closer to the edge and the backdrop with additional scenery.
This would be my vote. A little extra space without track is always nice - unless you're one of the guys that hates doing scenery.
I have the right to remain silent. By posting here I have given up that right and accept that anything I say can and will be used as evidence to critique me.
rrinker...snak the backdrop...
Cheers, the Simple Bear.
"One difference between pessimists and optimists is that while pessimists are more often right, optimists have far more fun."
I'm Indiana Jones - I hate snakes. Even the word. So snak.
Start on the curves - that's what I did with the first piece on the lower deck. Ends lined up nicely in the middle of a vertical on each side of the corner. One of which was the middle one on the short wall, so the second piece also went around the next corner with no gap in the curved part, but it ended up sticking slightly past the upright on that wall.
Forgot I have one of those oscillating cutters - I could just zip off the little bit that sticks over and make the next joint land on the upright.
Going the other way from the first corner - since my contractor does good work and really made all the wall studs 16" OC, since the first piece stopped in the middle of an upright, the next 8 foot panel along the straight wall ALSO ended in the middle of an upright, no cutting or planning.
I also thought, if I keep the upper deck track near the front, but put the backdrop along the wall, I could do some low relief scenery (since you wouldn't be able to see down behind it, not even 6'7" Kevin) and put some staging back there to represent an unmodeled part of the line. Probably need a camera to monitor it, and I'd have to get a stool to reach over and retrieve anything, but since I always go for bullet-proof track work, I don't see it being a problem. It's accessible, just have to grab the step stool.
rrinkerput some staging back there to represent an unmodeled part of the line.
Staging like this is a great addition to a layout. Having someplace else to go to/arrive from provides a lot of operational interest. Besides, you can never have too much staging.
If it ends up being stub ended, arrange it so the backing move is downgrade to provide a little more reliability. If possible, you also want to back through the straight side of turnouts.
Seriously, Randy, if I was ever to be invited to visit your layout and then proceeded to search for the backdrop joins, I’d expect to be rapidly Uninvited!
Another reason why I so rarely have invited fellow model railroaders to my house.
About the backdrops: Drywall is avilable here in 12 foot lengths. That means I will only have two seems to conceal in my 11 by 22 foot room that are not corners.
One seam will be behind a large vertical tank on a hill, the other will be behind a large brick building.
-Kevin
Living the dream.