How fussy are you?

[Anonymous]

Although I would like to be in the category of perfectionist, my fingers and eyes won't cooperate, so I do "good enough for me" and it keeps me happy. I think the main thing, like many others have said, is to derive pleasure from the hobby. Don't let some of them tell you you have to spend a lot and get the best to be happy. You have to decide at what level keeps YOU happy. Nobody sees my layout except my wife and 2 daughters (because noone is interested) and that suits me. I do this for me, not to impress others. I like that "2 foot rule". I may just use that. Maybe that's why I like the Athearn BB kits-they look fine from a distance, and I can't tell the difference anyway!!

[CNJ831]

I ascribe to the philosophy of "good enough" modeling or the old two foot rule. I try to give the _impression_ of high detail in every scene but cut corners at the same time. If one can give the impression that complexity and great detail is present, that's all that's really needed to fool the viewer. Earl Smallshaw is a master at this.

CNJ831

[darth9x9]

There are rivot counters and there are those who measure the rivots! But I consider myself an 80% modeler.....if it is 80% accurate, it suits me just fine.

[fec153]

only detail i have is debris from ANDREW that i have left on the walkway of a gp-40 that was on my layout during the storm.
phil

[Fergmiester]

I believe I once said "The Two Foot Rule" and no not the ones in my mouth!

If it looked good at two feet I was happy. Funny how things change when you hang this crowd. Over this past year I am slowly approaching "The One Foot Rule" as detail is becoming more important to me and maybe because I need stronger glasses[:I]

If it looks good at a foot, it's good enough for me.

[Anonymous]

I have always been a little different than most people. I do enjoy making a scene as realistic as possible, but at the same time, i do enjoy having the feel that it is a model rather than a real little world. So things like rivets on a model will only be a pet peeve if i built it from scratch. I am more concerned with the level of detail on the items that are scratchbuilt as compared with the detail level of built kits or rtr items. If i scratchbuild a model, i want it to be as close to the prototype as humanly possible. but otherwise, i am okay with the "lower detail level" of the other items on my layout. ........But then again, i am also the type of model railroader who does not like a scenario operating session, i just enjoy the view of a train passing another on the main line.

[on30francisco]

I usually detail locomotives and rolling stock until the look "good enough," however, I plan to add more detail to them in the future when the mood strikes me. I really enjoy superdetailing structures and scenic areas to the Nth degree. I sometimes add interiors to certain buildings and rolling stock. The ease of detailing is the one of the aspects I like about O and larger scales.

[Anonymous]

The more I think about it, the more I realize I worry about detail in stages from Macro to Micro. Get all the major stuff done first, then go back and detail it all, then go back with the fine tooth comb when it's already working right and looking pretty good.

Since I'm such a perfectionist, I do my best to stick with the two foot rule of detail; otherwise, I would spend my whole life putting keys on a 1/87 scale working piano that went inside an house where you couldn't see it..... [#dots]

Warren

[emdgp92]

I have no problem at all with people who like to add every last detail. I subscribe to the "good enough" school of modeling. If something can't be seen, I don't bother with it.

For example, my bus company building doesn't have a rear wall. Since you can't see it, that wall is just a piece of cardboard. In fact, i didn't even bother to *paint* it!

Building interiors are another story. If they have large windows (such as the Walthers White Tower restaurant) then I'll add a little detail, such as a counter, some tables, etc. to make them look "lived in." Smaller windows, such as those in the DPM townhouses just get some paper blinds.

Right now, I'm more concerned with getting things running. Eventually, I'll go back and add the smaller details.

[Anonymous]

i think one big factor concerning detail, would be the level of operation you subject your equipment to. my layout is operated on a regular basis. this means that your rolling stock and engines are subjected to more "hands on" treatment than the average model. i think we all have our favorite individual models that we may put more detail into or add sound to ,for more realism, that is a personal choice. overall the amount detail on rolling stock and scenery depends on the individual.

[willy6]

my wife tells me i spend too much time in detailing like wallpaper on buildings you cant see the interiors........it's part of the hobby

[Anonymous]

I have no consistency whatever, sometimes it's fun to detail something meticulously other times it's fun to download a paper cut out from the internet. Here is a paper house which took a fraction of the time that the interior of the passenger coach took to put together.

[sparkingbolt]

I like what looks good, at the distance it will be veiwed from. The closer items to the edge of the layout get more attention. There are always exceptions. As stated by others, everything should blend with a pleasing consistancy.
One pet peeve, is a detail that is so poorly done compared with its surroundings that it is a distraction. (say a really good scene with a hokey-lump-supposed-to-be -a- vehicle molded all in one color, really kills the effect.) Dan

[tutaenui]

Less fussy than I used to be. Life is to short! Current layout is about 98% scratch built and my practice is if it looks good at 2 ft then its OK. However I am fussy that the level of detail is consistant over the whole of the layout and what detail there is, is that it is to scale and neatly and squarely applied.

<<Brad>>

[eastcoast]

Can't really call it fussy, but PICKY.
I want to make sure that if I were a HO
person, "does it look real" and
"would I want to live there?"
I have spent entire evenings just staring at a blank
area or mock up to get a feel for what I want it to portray
to me and then begin further planning or building.
For the record, I do not count rivets,
I AM A PERFECTIONIST, AND EXTREMELY CRITICAL OF MY OWN WORK.
I manage to have fun when my work is done.

[Anonymous]

i dont get too obsessed with details but i do add some. recently, i switxhed to modeling the SP and got into adding the proper light packages to the nose and rear. now when i add details i try to match them up to photos of the prototype. when i start off on a new model i make sure the brake wheel/lever is in the right place, make sure that it has the correct brake cylander placement (upper or lower) and then add the proper lights and numbers and decals and roof details. things like exact engine door location doesnt really matter to me. but i try to make sure it is close.

then i throw tons of weathering on (like any good SP diesel needs).[:D]

[JLLentner]

I probably qualify as a 'rivet counter' because I like to detail my diesels to match specific units. Currently, I am detailing 5 Atlas C30-7's based on photographs of BNSF units. One of the most enjoyable parts of 'rivet counting' is doing the research. I probably prolong this more than necessary. I started this project as a result of a picture of a ATSF "Kodachrome" C30-7 with a BNSF patch. Prior to that I had no interest in any GE diesel. By the time I finished the research, the project had grown from one to five models.

The first unit is the easiest to complete since it is a phase 1, which the Atlas C30-7 comes the closest to representing. My model is of a green & black BN with a BNSF patch. Two months ago the unit was 'good enough'. Now I have decided to: change the road number, replace the steps with A-Line brass steps, replace the cab with a High Tech Details cab, and rebuild the truck sideframes to more closely match the pictures I have obtained. Then it will be 'good enough'.

Units 2-4 will require a little more work as they are phase 2s. These three require all of the kinds of changes made on the first unit. In addition, they require replacing the rear numberboards and headlights. Since two of them are ex ATSF C30-7s, they require adding the dynamic brake access doors. I plan to use parts from RPP C30-7 shells.

The last unit will be the most difficult as it is a phase 3. It will require all of the kinds of changes of the first four units. The most difficult part will be replacing the electrical cabinet doors under the left side of the cab. I have not worked out how to do this model yet, but it will be the last of the five. This is an ex ATSF "Kodachrome" C30-7 and it has some interesting roof details that are not on any of the first four.

BNSF fan,
Jerry

[Anonymous]

you pose a very interesting question. i believe that every individual has to assess what they desire from the hobby, and measure that against the restraints of time and money. i see it as a personal thing. the answer is different for each one of us.

tom

[leighant]

I like to do SOMETHING inside my buildings (and locomotives and passenger cars and cabooses) to make them look lived in and worked in, but not so much that it is necessary to take off the roof of everything to show off, because we don't take the roof off real locomotives and buildings to look inside. (Unless we are some @#$%&* government busybody agency.)
My peanut butter factory has a few blocks of wood and scrap parts to more or less outline the shapes of a 2000 pound/hour batch peanut butter mill diagram I found in a book on the peanut industry. I know it there and I think it makes me feel right about it. Nothing to brag about.
A few things just inside the window.
I once built an N scale building that would have everything a nit-picker could ask for, I think. 2x4 stud framing, individual board siding and floor, individual cedar shingles on the roof over framed trusses, double-hung windows, meter and fuse box and elextrical conduit, restroom with the lid left off the commode (bowl carved from a crafter's bead) so you could see the ball and float mechanism. And a hand littered/lettered sign on the front that read "United Farm Workers, Nit Pickers Union Hall".
I cheated and put this building near the front edge of the layout so that viewers can guess ALL the buildings are detailed this way. (Only they aren't.)

[Anonymous]

I am not a rivit counter. I follow the Robert Schliecler "Attainable Excellence" philospohy. I add enough detail to make the scene look convincing.

[lupo]

Moddelling with super-detailing can look awfull if it has the wrong colors!
lots of people forget that.

[FJ and G]

Here's my view. Get the darned layout built with mountains and terrain, then add trees, then add structures, then continue to keep adding tinier and tinier details. Your layout should never be completely finished. There's always something to improve on.

But minute detailing can be done over the long run.

----------------------------

So to answer your question. No and yes.

Not fussy when putting it up. Fussy in putting in detailing over time.

[CP5415]

I'm not fussy. Not at all. If it looks good, I'll run it (locomotive, rolling stock) or build the structure.
I do plan on adding details to the scenery when I get to that stage.
Cats, dogs, litter on the ground etc...
If it's something I see everyday, I'm going to try & incorporate it somehow.

Gordon

[Anonymous]

I really enjoy detail, but I also go by the two foot rule. I like to be able to sit back and look at my creations and almost believe it's real...from an adequate distance ;) Judging it from too close up would drive me insane :P

Warren

[vsmith]

Well, I like to add as much detail as I can to each loco or car that I'm working on, but that doesn't mean I'm measuring a prototype and replicating every last bolt head on it. I like my stuff to look believable, not super accurate. Otherwise I would probaby get angry and burnout. So I am keeping a certain perspective to my detailing. I'm more worried about screwing up a model with a bad weathering job than with adding too much detail.

[Anonymous]

This would depend on whom you’re talking to. Please don't ask my wife and don't ask the crew. I thought about this one hard because detail does matter to me as much as enjoyment does. In other words if it's not fun why am I doing it! It's the Challenge!! This is one of my hobbies and I do it to relax, dream and have fun and get personal satisfaction, not frustration.

I could say I have the two-foot rule, the three-foot rule and both foot rule. If the detail looks good at two feet I'm happy if it looks bad beyond three feet start over again and if I'm using both feet, I walk away and cool down, it's a hobby!

If you’re looking for detail in side of the buildings you’re too close, so back away from the building and keep your hands where I can see them.

I have been accused of being a perfectionist but time is at a premium and as in every aspect of life, what level is it acceptable? I believe my benchmarks will change as I change and as long as I'm satisfied with my achievements I should be happy. Why take it to the Nth degree when it has no impact or will go unnoticed?

On a final note, I use to make model ships; I worked on one for about six years going to painful ends to make it perfect. I had one appraiser tell me at the level of workmanship I was putting into it, when finished it would be worth several thousand dollars. Well guess where it is now?........


In a box collecting dust. Does this bother me? No, it's better off in the box, then in a thousand pieces.

If I can't make two steps forward for every step back then I'm doing something wrong and it’s time to re think the process.
![:I]

[dharmon]

I usually proceed with a project until I can look at it and say "cool, that looks nice" to my self and be ready for it to go on the rails without a problem. If making something exactly prototype gets into the too hard or too expensive category, I usually strive for the best reasonable representation I can achieve and leave it at that. I do like adding the small details though, just for fun....graffitti, weathering, debris in empty gondolas, little shipping lables on exposed loads....stuff like that. I do try for standardization on the home road equipment...similiar equipment on locos, same class of boxcars, etc.....

[Anonymous]

oh oh!! i used to be the worst i mean if a grab iron was even the little tiniest crooked i would get so worked up and then it was no fun!! so i have learn to relax and it has saved my me and my hobby!! i to am on my first layout and i think it looks good i compare oit to the detail on my clubs layout and its pretty even, so now all i do to my athearn RTR is add M.U. hoses air hoses, and cut bars and im fine so i have learn to relax but still go all out on competition nights for locomotives i pull out my fully prtotypicall U.P. wings and flag version AC44CTE'S i detailed from athearn undec. kits very very nice have won 2 years straight! but yeah big things i pay attention to deatil but have learn to relax on little things.

[Anonymous]

I am currently having an internal debate as how to properly detail the following:

SP SW1200 Gyralight and warning beacon reversed on casting
Strength of the casting won over complete accuracy here. I will still be soldering up some accurate handrails.

SP GP40-2 Left side handrail "bend" between 7th and 8th handrail is too far forward (SP had extended walkway ducts on GP40 and GP40-2 units)
This is an important spotting feature that "must" be modeled and I will count it a "must have" for the several models I am building. This is in addition to the various upgrades necessary for all SP models.

UP DDA40X, Bachmann model has several "challenges
Ordered every step etching/casting known to determine the best to use.
Already milled the frame to lower the deck, matching Kato SD40-2s walkways. This will require a complete revamp of the handrails.

Did I mention that this is being done in Nscale? I was far more retentive in my HO days...