ballast sizes?

[trainspotters]

I am working on a small n gauge layout, and beginning the scenery. I have seen woodland scenics ballast, and wonder which size would be best. The medium seems a bit large visually, but the small seems too tiny for this scale. Is there a guide, or is it all personal preference. Perhaps you can reply with your experience, I am eager to get the track finished now that the landscaping is nearly over.

[selector]

Basically, it all comes down to what you can be happy with (and maybe rationally defending if you ever get into that type of a discussion over your choice). What you say, goes.

Why do you balk at the proper sized stuff for your scale? Because it is so tiny? So's your train, remember. Anyway, do what makes you the most pleased with your presentation, is what most others would tell you here. Wise words, I think.

-Crandell

[trainboyH16-44]

In HO, I use medium, so I would reccomend fine, but that's just my opinion. A good thing to do would be to take a small piece of wood, and ballast 2 sections of track, side by side, one with medium, and one with fine, using the same techniqes that you will use on your railway, and see wich one you like better.
Trainboy

[orsonroy]

I use fine for both HO and N. IN HO, fine is just about the right size, but in N is a bit oversized. The best N scale ballasting job I ever did in N was an experiment using carpet tape (which I will NOT repeat!). The tape only bonded the WS dust, leaving the only truly scale appearing N scale ballasting job I've ever seen.

But impressions are usually more important to most modellers than scale fidelity. I'd stick with WS fine; it'll look "right", even if it's not.

[trainspotters]

Thanks to all, it sure is great to be able to "talk" to you all. BTW: I did two sections as recommended, and the fine is probably the best looking. I also stopped at some crossings and ballast size is pretty close to that. I know what I pick will make no difference to most people that see my layout, but I still would like it to be as close to "real" in appearance. It seem like if one thing slips, and then another, you end up more with a toy train than a model scene.
Again, thanks to all
Don

[dwRavenstar]

Heya Don,

I have an opinion and insight only from working in N-scale on earlier pikes and HO in my current efforts.
It's all a matter of perspective. A six foot person standing at the edge of a layout with benchwork 48 inches from the floor is looking from a perspective of roughly 175 feet above an HO scene and 320 feet above an N-scale. Imagine laying a rock the size of your fist on a parking lot and looking from the 20th floor to see it in HO scale, the 40th floor in N-scale. Maybe to get your bearings for your chosen N-scale you might be better off using a pile of rocks, just so you can find them on that parking lot. [:D]

I used the fine blend on my past layouts, figuring the overall appearance was about the same as what I could see from the crag of rocks I used to sit on when looking down in the valley at the passing trains. Satisfy yourself and everything will be fine (no pun intended).

Remember, you can see the scene in your own mind and you're making it happen. When it looks right to you it's right. [^] Welcome to the forum and good luck with your efforts.

Dave Wyland (dwRavenstar)