Backdrop questions

[FJ and G]

I'm preparing to do the backdrop painting and have some questions.

1. In the latest MR, advice is given to make the backdrop painting subdued so as not to draw attention away from the trains. However, in the same magazine is a picture of an HO layout, showing a quarry, and in the background are fluffy white clouds and blue sky; definitely not subdued. Why do we need to have rules about the backdrop; why not just let everyone paint what looks best? Subdued looks nice sometimes, but I've also seen backdrops that were not subdued and were stunning.

2. Advice in the same article was to make the horizon as low as possible. However, no explanation was given as to why the horizon should be low. Can someone provide details?

3. I've purchased three types of paints: latex flat, latex glossy, and an assortment of acrylics. Can these paints be mixed and do they go together well?

By way of background, I'm using tempered hardboard, which the dealer said was the same as masonite. I put a coat of drywall primer on the rough side.

Thanks you.

David Vergun

[88gta350]

A few months ago MR had a short article with some backdrop painting tips. It suggested using oil based paints. Buy several different shades of blue and a roller that about 4-6" wide. Roll one strip at the bottom of your darkest blue, make each strip above it a slightly lighter shade until the top strip is a very pale blue, almost white. Because oil based paint take so long to dry, you an take a brush and go back over the strips, blending in the lines so that the shades gradually blend into each other. I hope that wasn't a confusing explanation. The result looked really good I tought. Painting scenes or horizons on a backdrop is an art in itself and would probably come down to what you thought looked best. When I do mine, I'll probably either leave it just blue (and maybe hide the lower portions with backdrop buildings) or paint some hazy moutains in the distance in a few places. IMHO, anything too vibrant and involved detracts from the scene. You only need something to suugest depth when the viewer sees it out of the periphial vision.

[mls1621]

1. It's your layout, paint the backdrop the way you like it.

2. By having the horizon low, it minimizes the amount of terrain you need to add to the backdrop.

3. Rather than glossy latex, use flat finish paint. You seldom see shiney mountains and sky in the distance. The acrylics can be added for detail after the rough outlines are dry.

Just a suggestion for backdrop material. I used a product called polywall. It's a flexible product used to cover drywall in high moisture environments like bathrooms. It's 1/16" thick and has one textured side and one smooth. The really great thing about it is that it can be put in corners with a tight radius and looks great.

Seams where two pieces butt together can be hidden well by using duct tape on the back to join the pieces and invisable tape over the front of the joint then painted.

A 4' X 8' sheet costs about $14 at Home Depot.

[Anonymous]

I read the same article referanced above by Dave M. I think the article said to use light colors low and darken as they get higher. However, if how Dave explained is how the article was written, then I disagree with the article. As you look towards the horizon on a clear day, the blue can disappear into shades of white. The darkest blue is directly overhead.

I have differant opinions than the writer of the latest article, also. If you look at the horizon, it is always at eye level. Even when you are up in an airplane, the horizon is close to eye level if you have an un obstructed view (rare). Also, I have fairly detailed backgrounds, as I enjoyed painting them that way and I think they add to the scene and do not detract. If you have no, or limited artistic capibilities, in all likelyhood you can make obscure or sudued scenes work for you!

It's my opinion that the only true rule in modelrailroading is, there are no rules! You will have many people attempt to tell you there are! Their rules may work for them! However, they may not work for you or me.

[FJ and G]

Thanks all!

I had forgotten to mention one other thing.

The backdrop I'm painting will go behind some 2 ft high mountains. My daughter will paint the mountains so they are a bit higher than the mountains that I made with styrofoam. That way, if there are any shadows, they will fall on the mountains painted on the backdrop, just like real mountains cast shadows on other mountains. I'm arranging my rotating recessed lighting to minimize shadows, but it's hard to completely eliminate them.

There's nothing worse that having a shadow fall on sky! IMO that ruins the realism of the backdrop.

Dave Vergun

[88gta350]

I was going by memory when referencing that article, so I may very well have had it backwards. More than likely, when I build my layout, instead of having a 2' shelf with painted mountains on the backdrop, I'll have a 3' or more shelf with sceniced moubtains up against a simple blue sky backdrop painted with the above refernced technique. For me, I can make a model mountain more realistic than I can a painted one. I won't be able to completely avoid painted mountains though, because my line won't always run at the foot of a mountain.

[FJ and G]

Dave M,

I'm experimenting a lot with my mountains, as I have a very narrow shelf layout. I'm trying to find the optimum height and slope and width. My mountain chain extends about 30 feet and is approx 15 inches in depth. I don't want to make then any thinner than that because they then start to look hokey. OTOH, if they are too wide, they take space from the shelf layout. A very critical tradeoff.

Reg. the backdrop, I'm sloping the backs of the mountains and leaving an inch or two of space between the mt & backdrop.

Thx

Dave Vergun

[cwclark]

I would suggest that the mountains be no more than 8" high...I did a backdrop once that had a 3' high mountain and it really overpowered the entire layout...to start with..i use very light blue flat latex paint to paint the sky..it should start dark ( a loaded paint brush) at the top of the backdrop and paint it down until the brush is practically dry and ends up with the horizon having a hint of white in it..it does wonders for depth...clouds should be larger at the top of the backdrop and get smaller as they move towards the horizon...paint few clouds...too many clouds also can take away from the layout.... i like to use cut-out backdrops also...it does wonders for scenery depth..the article in this month's MR is right in my opinion...the suttle backdrop keeps one's focus on the layout and not the nice "picture on the wall" which will grab a persons attention in a heart beat

[FJ and G]

cwclark,

8" high, I'm assuming you mean HO. 15" should be about right max height for O?

When you say "cut-out backdrops" what do you mean? Do you mean that perhaps you find a picture of something you like and cut it out and paste it on the backdrop? If so, how to you conceal/camouflage the edges?

Also, I'm still undecided on your opinion about the sky grabbing attention. I've been to open houses (NMRA) and find that most visitors initially watch the trains, then they start looking at the scenery and details in the layout. Great mountains or great structures, for that matter, could draw your eye just as easily as a striking background. In the real world, trains are just a small part of a given scene. I think that the answer has more to do with your philosophy. As for what works best for me, I'll experiment and find the best balance. Thanks for sharing your ideas!

dav

[88gta350]

QUOTE: Originally posted by FJ and G

Reg. the backdrop, I'm sloping the backs of the mountains and leaving an inch or two of space between the mt & backdrop.

That's the exact technique I am planning to use, but as I haven't started construction yet, I can't give you any help on proper height or angles. I think it comes down to personal taste, prototype modeled, and available space anyways. In my planning phase, I've considered a 12-18" height for my mountains along my backdrop, but as I said, I'm also planning on having something along the lines of a 3' shelf, so I'll have more room for a larger mountain. The back foot or so of that 3' should be all mountain, so I'll have a roughly 12" deep, 12-18" high mountain. This is an HO scale layout.

Of course, this is all subject to change once constructions starts.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by FJ and G

1. In the latest MR, advice is given to make the backdrop painting subdued so as not to draw attention away from the trains. However, in the same magazine is a picture of an HO layout, showing a quarry, and in the background are fluffy white clouds and blue sky; definitely not subdued. Why do we need to have rules about the backdrop; why not just let everyone paint what looks best? Subdued looks nice sometimes, but I've also seen backdrops that were not subdued and were stunning.

I agree. Whatever your artistic eye says to do, go for it.

QUOTE: Advice in the same article was to make the horizon as low as possible. However, no explanation was given as to why the horizon should be low. Can someone provide details?

I think the horizon line is relative to the layout height. If you are looking down, as if you are on a hill, your perspective is at a higher point than if you were in a lower point, like a valley.

QUOTE: I've purchased three types of paints: latex flat, latex glossy, and an assortment of acrylics. Can these paints be mixed and do they go together well?

I'm sure they can, but first try a small test sample to see how well they mix and dry and see how much tinting you need to get what you want. If you mix gloss with flat you'll get a semi-gloss or a satin finish.

QUOTE: By way of background, I'm using tempered hardboard, which the dealer said was the same as masonite. I put a coat of drywall primer on the rough side.

Are you painting on the rough side or smooth side?

[Fergmiester]

QUOTE: Originally posted by 88gta350

A few months ago MR had a short article with some backdrop painting tips. It suggested using oil based paints. Buy several different shades of blue and a roller that about 4-6" wide. Roll one strip at the bottom of your darkest blue, make each strip above it a slightly lighter shade until the top strip is a very pale blue, almost white. Because oil based paint take so long to dry, you an take a brush and go back over the strips, blending in the lines so that the shades gradually blend into each other. I hope that wasn't a confusing explanation. The result looked really good I tought. Painting scenes or horizons on a backdrop is an art in itself and would probably come down to what you thought looked best. When I do mine, I'll probably either leave it just blue (and maybe hide the lower portions with backdrop buildings) or paint some hazy moutains in the distance in a few places. IMHO, anything too vibrant and involved detracts from the scene. You only need something to suugest depth when the viewer sees it out of the periphial vision.

If this is the article by Tony Koester then it's what I followed and as far as I'm concerned it's not to hard and if you feel intimidated then don't be. I used latex not oil and I am quite satisfied with the results. I also used large small holed sponges to do the blending.

[FJ and G]

Dave M,

My shelf is approx 2.5-3 ft wide as well. Aren't these compromises frustrating?!

When we are discussing "mountains" we're really talking about very tiny hills, as a true mountain would be more than a dozen feet high vis-a-vis, the trains. More of an "artistic mountain."

Ideally, our mountains would be wide but that takes away our other space. Very frustrating! That's why, IMO, a backdrop w/mountains gives us this sense of distance and height that we can't capture in the models.

Incidentally, I'm modeling the Pinon/Juniper belt of central N.M., and will model the trees atop the mountains in a smaller scale than those in the foreground.

Also, the trees in the painting will even be smaller.


dave vergun

[FJ and G]

gsetter,

painting on the rough side. Thx for tips.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by FJ and G

gsetter, painting on the rough side. Thx for tips.

People generally paint the smooth side, but I think I see what you're doing. With the rough side you'll have more of a texture finish like on canvas. That may eliminate light reflections off the backdrop. Have you done a small sample to see how it works?
I read a tip in one of my scenery books, recommending to fold or curve the back edge of the scenery to blend into the backdrop. I haven't got that far on my layout yet.

[FJ and G]

Gary,

The rough texture has a better bite to hold the primer. The primer makes it smooth enough for me.

At this point in time, I've downloaded images of Abo Canyon NM as well as photos of cloud formations. I'm putting this together with a sketch of what I want and am giving the entire portfolio to my artistically talented 17-year-old daughter tonight, to draw. It will likely take a bit of time, as there are three 4X8 sheets to paint. The extent of my painting was to coat the primer on and draw a pencil line where the mountains will be as well as to collect the pictures of Abo Canyon from Trains mag as well as some excellent website.

Curiously enough, I've never been to Abo, but I've driven thru NM & love the stark beauty.

Thanks again, all.

Dave V

[cwclark]

Dave,
Yes to HO...and the cut-out backdrops?..I use the walthers backdrops and very carefully cut the sky portion away from the picture with an exacto knife...I do this since trying to match the blue sky color of the painted backdrop to the blue sky color of the walther's backdrop picture is impossible...this way..there are no seams or lines to cover...I glue the cut out backdrop in place with tacky glue....it's unconventional... but it works really well...and if you want big mountains and clouds and all...well hey!..it's a free country!...do whatever you want!...that is what makes this hobby so fun!..a persons own originality and creativity!.....Chuck

[FJ and G]

Sorry to reply so many times, but I just thought of something else. I'm using forced perspective with the trees, as I mentioned, using O scale in foreground and S to HO in background (progressively). On the painting the trees will be pretty small. I've noticed that several modelers use this technique; for example, Paul Dolkos models in HO but has some N items in his background. I'm also going to try to give an enhanced sense of vastness by strategically placing bits of mirrors around in various places.

I'll be experimenting to see which type of weed is similar enough to Juniper/Pinon to make it convincing. These trees, btw, are not very tall in the prototype, which is good because they will not overwhelm the scene.

Interestingly, I've noticed another group of modelers who do not use forced perspective and model everything in O (or whatever scale they are in), even near the back of the layout. Neither approach, IMO, is the "correct one." It has more to do with the modeler's ability to convey a sense of realism.

Incidentally, my backdrop will not curve as the layout will run along a 52-ft section of basement wall; thusly, I don't have to worry about curving the backdrop.

dav

[cwclark]

since you mention trees my favorite technique is to use the flower pods from creytpe myrtle tree (spelling?..ahh..the tree with the pink flower blooms) ...removing the pods that didn't bloom and glueing some woodland scenic dark and /or medium green ground foam to the complex branch structure of the pod makes really good looking oak trees...

[Big_Boy_4005]

Hi Dave, so this is where you've been hiding today. I missed you over on CTT, so I've been hanging out over on Trains Magazine. By the way, the acrylics do mix OK with the latex, at least in small amounts. Try to stay away from the glossy stuff. Oh, how did the inspection go??[swg]

[FJ and G]

Hi Elliot,

CTT is a nice forum to visit regularly but for questions of this nature, I find MR forum gives a bit more in the way of responses. I'll visit you on Kalmbach's Trains magazines as soon as I can get some work completed at work (imagine that, actually working at work!). I nearly passed the inspection. The only thing that failed on the final inspection was lack of an access panel to the motor in my tub; a job that I can finish in 2 minutes.

BTW, the housing inspector from the county was made aware of my train layout in progress, blocking the window, I found that there are 3 avid model railroaders in the housing inspection team.

Cheers.

Dave V.

[FJ and G]

Oh, one more thought (you can probably tell by now that l I really get stoked with model trains).

Recall the remarks that trains are actors on a stage. I forget who said that (Ellison?), but one can view the backdrops as props; and as such, play very important supporting roles.

Thx for your thoughts and ideas, everyone.

Dave V

[Big_Boy_4005]

I know about tub motor access, I had to build one too. I've even had to use it.[;)]

I agree this is the place to come for questions like this, I wish we could teach the other CTT guys to not be afraid, and come over here to see what they are missing.

Gee, maybe you should start a train club with the inspectors. I guess the other option would be to become an inspector too, given all that you've been through on this project.[swg]

[FJ and G]

Elliot,

MR forum has the opposite problem that CTT doesn't. So many responses that unless you read several pages of MR a day, you miss some. On CTT, it's like slothful.

BTW, reg. the water pump for water flowing thru my layout gorge to simulate a flash flood in the desert, I did some reading and was advised NOT to purchase a sump pump or submersible pump from Lowe's or Home Depot, as these are not made to be run continually for many months and years. In fact, they usually burn out after a couple of months.

A dedicated, more costly garden pump is the solution for the train layout.

dav

[FJ and G]

Oh, forgot one more thing. At the far end of the layout wall, I'm going to try to angle a mirror to sort of double the distance of the layout and its backdrop. It will need to be angled a bit inward toward the wall. I'll be using a glass cutter to cut the mirror to the desired size.

dav

[Big_Boy_4005]

Thanks for the updates on 3 more topics. I saw the thing about the center rail on CTT too. I need to get motivated, and drag my butt away from this computer. I have that huge mess downstairs.

Post 1399 [;)]

[wp8thsub]

QUOTE: Originally posted by FJ and G
Advice in the same article was to make the horizon as low as possible. However, no explanation was given as to why the horizon should be low. Can someone provide details?

A major problem with high (viewer eye level) horizons is that they really mess up track level views and photographs of the trains. Reducing the amount of backdrop scenery above mean layout level reduces the disjointed perspective that inevitably results from viewing from oblique side angles. For an example of what I mean, take a look at photos of David Barrow's old CM&SF or my original Weber Valley RR (Dec., 1984 MR), which featured high horizons. Many of the shots showed roads and other backdrop items that looked odd when viewed from the side at track level, harming the illusion of the backdrop being an extension of the 3-D scene. Barrow's later switching layout series in MR showed a near track level horizon, which photographed much better. Where possible, I now try to make the horizon indistinct to avoid distracting perspective issues, which is easier in mountainous areas where a flat horizon line isn't visible on the prototype.

QUOTE: By way of background, I'm using tempered hardboard, which the dealer said was the same as masonite. I put a coat of drywall primer on the rough side.

I use the smooth side. Once a coat of primer and a color coat or two are rolled on there's a lot of texture to work with, almost like painting on canvas.