Are you a realism nut?

[Anonymous]

The Question is: Does everything have to be realistic on your layout? Do you have to be realistic, or do you want to have fun?

[lupo]

can't we have both?
I want my loco's to look realistic, but not to the point of counting rivets
i want scenery to be realistic but can also fun to build:
( http://www.trains.com/community/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=10424)
So as long it is FUN to model realistic I go for realism.

I collect UP locomotives wich ran late '50 early '60's, I check the UP roster of accuracy of the road# involved quit realistic,
but feel free to let an 1961 delivered diesel along a 4884, and that is not realistic I think.

[Anonymous]

OK, I forgot to put that. I'd say both.

[Anonymous]

If you are referring to realism as representing life as it is, or was, then yes I am a realism nut.[:D]
I may not model a particular scene, or a particular day to 100% accuracy, but I do model to a degree that visitors find the scenery very believable.
Dinosaurs, UFO's, 50 ft tall cartoon characters walking down the street, working missle silos loaded with "live" Estes rockets, Ice skaters in June,
S scale automobiles on HO layouts, among other things I have seen on layouts, have NO place on mine.[V]
Just because a layout looks realistic doesnt mean it can't be fun.[:D] Switching cars, making up and running trains and scale railfanning can all be fun![:D][:D]

[lupo]

[#ditto]kbfcsme,
I agree on scale, all things must be the same scale, look realistic an believable,
but:
About scale combinations: I once saw an big LGB scale (G?) layout with an HO trainset for large scale garden railway the LGB size figures could ride, situated
in an Railway themepark setting where they also had a Z scale layout featuring as a HO-ish layout [%-)][%-)] It looked allright ( as a LGB layout can look)

[Anonymous]

I'm not a fanatic when it comes to realism, definately not a Rivet Counter, However I would like it to be believable and realistic. Nothing clunky, out of proportion or tacky!

I would like to be able to have a layout that could be featured in MR.

When I build Musquodoboit people from there won't recognize it as such as it will be a generic small town that you would probably find anywhere on the eastern seaboard. There will be a couple of nuances that will make it Nova Scotian. Sorry if this is a disapointment to anyone BUT! If I get to detailed it will take me away from other things in my life. Later however I will probably replace those structures that don't appeal to me with those more typical to the area.

I'm not waiting 25 years to have a finished layout!!!!

[Anonymous]

no i wanna have fun but i do like some relizum but i can live with a few out of scale things

[IRONROOSTER]

I like what I do to be correct in size, but with allowance allowed where needed for operation. I don't need great amounts of detail, but again what detail there is, should be in scale. It also should be sufficient to present a reasonable appearance.
Enjoy
Paul

[AntonioFP45]

Would like the railroad and scenery to be believable, whether viewed by a non railfan or a fellow modeler. I'm not an extreme "purist" or rivet counter. While I'm modeling the U.S east coast in the late 60s, one will see Rio Grande, and Santa Fe units here and there.

Tony Koester on the Model Railroader magazine does a great job of realistic modeling and I've used his column as a guide. While he is on the "extreme realism" end, his insights and comments serve as a great guide for making any model railroad believeable. HIs column in new or old MRR issues, is definetly worth reading.

[Anonymous]

I want to enjoy the my trains (fun, fun, fun!) more than anything, though realism doesn't hurt. Even if I have only tracks in place and trains to run on them, I'm happy.[:D]

[Big_Boy_4005]

What a refreshing idea Mark, and the responses have been fun to read.

Being in 3 rail O gives me a one strike count before I step up to the plate. I have to take both, but over the years I have actually tightened up my style. My new layout will be much more realistic, and use much less silly stuff than I have in the past.

[Anonymous]

Interesting question. I have a varied view on realism, for example, I will happily run under-scale-length passenger cars, but equally I like to fit them with interior details. My viewpoint on realism is one of "if it looks right, it's ok". As you can guess, I'm not a "rivet counter", but I do try to make the models I operate look as convincing as possible.

[Anonymous]

When talking about realism if you mean running a model train layout with dispatchers and timetables etc, then my answer is no. I certainly like everything on my layout to be scale but there are exceptions. For example, I have an N-scale tugboat in my harbor acting as a pilot boat to the larger ships. Mostly, I like my hobby to be fun.

[Mikeygaw]

the scenery i kinda like to be realistic, but it's not the main thing for me. As for running the trains realistically, it kinda depends on the mood i'm in.

[Martin4]

I like to have realistic models but not at any price. I realized that I don't need every one of my cars to be superdetailed because you can't tell the difference when they are rolling. Only a fair amount of cars need to be detailed, just to be parked where those who care can appreciate them. Weathering every one to various levels is enough to create a consistent look. Locomotives draw a little more attention so I put a little more detail on each of them -again to various levels- trying to keep inside a reasonable budget.

Martin
Québec City

[Hawks05]

both. i think i'll like to have my rolling stock realistic looking but thats about it. i just want to have fun in this great hobby and be able to relieve stress.

[Anonymous]

Your poll reads like a political poll which wants to support one candidate. Do I want realism or do I want fun? Yes. The implication is that realism is no fun or that fun leaves out realism, neither statement is true. I didn't vote.

[ShaunCN]

I like some realism but also want to have fun. what would be the point to model railroading if it wasn't fun.

[tomwatkins]

Both. I want my locomotives to be close enough to accurate to be recognizable as Southern and L&N locomotives. I want my rolling stock to reflect what was used in the late forties to early fifties. My towns and scenery will look like western North Carolina in the Spring. It is and will continue to be fun, whether I'm detailing a locomotive, building structures or scenery, or just running trains. If I stop having fun it's time to look at what I'm doing or how I'm doing it and make some adjustments fast.
Have Fun,
Tom Watkins

[CP5415]

I model for the fun of it.
I want a certain degree of realism but I don't count rivets. I don't have time for that.

Gordon

[Big_Boy_4005]

QUOTE: Originally posted by rsn48

Your poll reads like a political poll which wants to support one candidate. Do I want realism or do I want fun? Yes. The implication is that realism is no fun or that fun leaves out realism, neither statement is true. I didn't vote.

Please keep in mind that the pollster is 12 years old, beside some people view challenges as fun. And going for total realism is certainly challenging.[;)]

[bcammack]

I just want to convey the sense of a real railroad, not recreate it in miniature. Firstly, my eyes are too bad to either implement or see minutae. Secondly, I'm a perfectionist and it is flat impossible to for me recreate in miniature to my satisfaction.

My only recourse is to convey a sense of reality to the degree that satifies myself and the average non-railfan/railroader/modeler who sees these things occasionally.

Regards,
Brett C. Cammack
League City, TX

[Anonymous]

I like realism, but I'm not too much of a nut.

[PistolPete]

Enjoyment (fun) is the driving force behind my model railroading. Hopefully it looks good also, but that is secondary. Their is no way that my layout will ever look like The Franklin & South Manchester or any other layout featured in MR, but I enjoy the hobby as much as the builders of those layouts do. [:)]

[AggroJones]

Yes. I am very much for realism on my layout. Everything is highly detailed and weathered properly, but on this western layout, you might see a N&W Y3 cruise by. All the trains I run are not from the location I model. Otherwise, I go as real as I can.

[orsonroy]

What's with the anti-prototype bias of this question? How come the question isn't "Are you a fantasyland nut?"

[ClinchValleySD40]

Realism to the point that it is believable and feels right. Beyond that (rivet counting) - no.

[vsmith]

Well I'm doing indoor large scale, (I'm calling it 1:20.3) which is very big and I want extreme realism, like coffee pot steaming on top of the loco's backhead realism, like piles of scale beer cans piled up behind the planned saloon. but I also want to have fun with it like surprise views when you look into a building or some humorous touches on the layout.

But I'm not a rivet counter, I have a mix of scales on my layout due to the bizzare mix offered in large scale, some 1:20.3 and 1:22.5 locos and buildings, some 1:24 rolling stock cars, and some 1:18 autos, (large scale is a mess) so I cant be fussy about "exact to scaleness", that I dont worry about. Its more important that things "look right".

I dont know how long it will take to do this level of detailing or if it is even up to my skills but I love the trying. I guess the secret is not to try and ru***o completetion.

[Anonymous]

I voted both. While I endeavour to make the overall scene realistic, I do take creative liberties. Right now, one of my many projects is a model of Amtrak's now discontinued "San Diegan." The locomotives and cars will be accurate models of the originals. But the fare paying passengers will be little green men from Planet Purple.

[liquidcross]

I'd say a bit of both. I'm not modeling a specific railroad or era, but I don't want my layout to seem too "toylike."