Interesting to watch:
Note that the idler gons have quite a bit of ballast in them.
Cheers, Ed
railandsailThe problem in that case is that those photos of the GREAT waterfront scene were posted on 2 other model rr forum sites,...and linking to those is a no-no on this site.
As far as I'm aware, the Model Railroader site does not bar links to other sites, but it does not approve of using photos which the poster did not take or does not have permission, from the photo taker, to use.I often add a link to supplementary information related to something I've posted here. I'm not trying to lure anyone away from this site, but it allows me to share more information without having to duplicate it here. If a viewer wishes to see it, he'll click on the link, but no one is required to click on it. Some, I'm sure, are wary of unknown sites, but I'd guess that only a very small minority of viewers here would even bother to click, anyway.
Wayne
Right, provide a link, which takes you to the authors web site and pictures.
I think Tom mentioned that.
Mike.
My You Tube
I get what you guys are saying, but I hope Brian does get beat up too bad over the photo posting, but that being said, we should all give credit where credit is due.
As far as the layout goes, I agree what others have said. I think there becomes a point where you can try to do too much in such a small space. I would try to pick smaller scenes.
I really do get what Brian is trying to do though. Freelancing is hard in my opinion. Much easier to just copy a prototype for me.
Ed
Semi newbie HO scale modeler coming from the O scale world
doctorwayne railandsail The problem in that case is that those photos of the GREAT waterfront scene were posted on 2 other model rr forum sites,...and linking to those is a no-no on this site. As far as I'm aware, the Model Railroader site does not bar links to other sites, ...Wayne
railandsail The problem in that case is that those photos of the GREAT waterfront scene were posted on 2 other model rr forum sites,...and linking to those is a no-no on this site.
As far as I'm aware, the Model Railroader site does not bar links to other sites, ...Wayne
You don't recall the trouble I got into for linking to MRH,...and other model rr forums?? There are a few entire discussions of mine that got deleted due to their having images with addresses from other rr forum sites.
Brian
My Layout Plan
Interesting new Plan Consideration
That was a good video GMPULLMAN
Nice also that they speeded it up,...and good detail shots.
railandsail You don't recall the trouble I got into for linking to MRH,...and other model rr forums?? There are a few entire discussions of mine that got deleted due to their having images with addresses from other rr forum sites.
No, I don't recall that particular incident, but if you included, with the link, images from other sites, without permission, I'm not surprised such action would be taken.It's easy enough to create the link to where the photos are located, which allows any interested party to take a look, without you actually including any of those pictures directly in your post.
Simply right-click on the title or number of the particular thread or post to which you wish to link, then select from the drop-down menu "Copy link location".
In your post here, type a square bracket, followed, without spaces, by url= then "paste" the data copied from the other site, followed by the opposite-facing square bracket. Again, without spaces, type in a word or phrase which will represent the actual link on which interested parties can click, following it with another square bracket, then, without a space /url followed by another opposite-facing square bracket.
If you want to see some more pictures, take a look here, because I don't have permission from the person who posted this to use their photos directly in the Model Railroader Forums
[Above link disabled by moderator]
I admire your enthusiasm for the layout which you're creating, so I hope that this will help to keep you out of trouble here.
I'm surprised that worked, Wayne. A lot of other forumes allow linking into a thread like that, but you are unable to view the images unless you have a login. While I DO have one there, it's been so long since I last logged in that it would have prompted me if it was required.
That said, I guess we should check the fine print - I thought they didn't want people linking to other forums from here - or perhaps that only applies to forums run by a competing publication.
Depending on the browser, posting a link can be even easier - just copy the URL from one tab and paste it in the body of the message has always worked for me. No adding codes, or even using ay of the tools - when I am lazy, even posts from my own web site end up being links because I didn't use the image ocon to post the URL to a picture I wanted to post.
Sharing photos from other sites by just posting the photo, permission or not, is usually frowned upon, whereas posting a link is OK - it's all in how the web traffic goes. If you directly post the picture, you are using that other site as a photo hosting service and just using their bandwidth. When you link it, you are still using their bandwidth, but you are directing the viewer to the other web site, driving up their hit count and allowing the host site to get some credit for accesses.
There have been cases of direct linked photos being replaced with some really nasty and disgusting images in attempts to discourage people from stealing bandwidth like that - that's yet another good reason I can see that our hosts don't want people doing this, permission or not. You don't have control over that image on the other end, and what may be perfectly fine today - might not be tomorrow.
MOST people in the hobby would first try to contact you about using images without permission, but not everyone is reasonable about it. Their first option might well be to replace the image with something nasty, which then ends up with you being permanently banned from here - the times I've seen this done, the images are indeed that digusting that you can bet you'd never be allowed back here again.
Again - not that I think anyone involved thus far would go that far, but the point is - you can't know because you don't control the source material. If it's a link, it's a choice to click it, plus if you have filters in place to prevent the viewing of inappropriate content, they have a chance to block the link when you click on it.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
rrinker That said, I guess we should check the fine print - I thought they didn't want people linking to other forums from here - or perhaps that only applies to forums run by a competing publication.
That is correct, Randy. In the OP's case the URLs of the photos are from a photo-hosting site (Imgbb) and only display the photos when clicked and nothing else. Providing direct links to those photos are not a problem because it's not associated with/linked to a specific forum.
Wayne's link, however, would NOT be acceptable because it does take the viewer to another forum. So sorry, Wayne, I'm going to have to disable that link example from your post.
Tom
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
tstage That is correct, Randy. In the OP's case the URLs of the photos are from a photo-hosting site (Imgbb) and only display the photos when clicked and nothing else. Providing direct links to those photos are not a problem because it's not associated with/linked to a specific forum.
Also, don't use Imgbb to host image libraries you link to from elsewhere, content for your website, advertising, avatars, or anything else that turns us into your content delivery network.
Earlier in this thread, the OP indicated that he was posting the photos from two other MR forum websites. So, apparently, the link to imgbb would violate its terms of service and, in the process, indirectly post (link) private photos without the owner's knowledge or consent.
It just seems to me that we, as forum members, need to be respectful of our own forum's rules as well as copyright protection due the author of proprietary text and images. If you don't have permission to post a photo, don't post a photo. If you cannot link to a photo outside of a 3rd party server, then don't link to the 3rd party server. In this instance, linking to the 3rd party server merely circumvents the need to obtain the author's permission.
Rich
Alton Junction
railandsail New Solution I believe I have arrived at a good solution to my problem with this area,...ELIMINATE the pier terminal bldg,...while leaving my track plan basically as it was with the bldg there. I finally went back to that original carfloat plan I had. I picked up the pier terminal bldg and sat if off to the side,...ELIMINATED. Now I have a nice clear run to the carpfloat that I could place some other structures along side that approach track, or just leave it open.
New Solution
I believe I have arrived at a good solution to my problem with this area,...ELIMINATE the pier terminal bldg,...while leaving my track plan basically as it was with the bldg there.
I finally went back to that original carfloat plan I had. I picked up the pier terminal bldg and sat if off to the side,...ELIMINATED. Now I have a nice clear run to the carpfloat that I could place some other structures along side that approach track, or just leave it open.
I have begun to look for other building(s) I might put in that port scene, particularly along that track leading to the carfloat. One that I think would work particulary well would be Walthers 'water street freight terminal',...along side the carfloat approach track and between the dockside crane approach track. (to the left of those 2 freight cars)
I have one problem with that idea, in that I have also chosen that structure as my brick factory building. I don't think it would be too great to have two identical structures on the same layout,...particularly on the same deck level?
Can someone suggest how one of these kits could be kitbashed to look that much different than the other?.....any examples, images, etc ??
The brick plant near me is just a single story structure, more sprawled out. So perhaps for the brick plant you could build it as a larger single story building (just have to construct some extra roof), and possible keep the freight dock as as detached structure (maybe make it bigger too, more like a warehouse)
I'm not sure it looks very 'nautical' but then again a lot of the warehouses and piers along Delaware Ave in Philadelphia looked particularly nautical.
Generally, with brick manufactures and distributors, everything is stored outside. Product would only be inside long enough to cure, than out it goes, to the yard. The only warehouse that might be involved is the storage of bagged material, and other contractor supply items and tools.
You could do a backdrop of a brick yard, like other modelers do with container facilities.
Maybe you can use part of the warehouse addition from your brick plant, and add it to your dock warehouse, and reconfigure the brick manufacture, as Randy suggest.
If your going to model the railroad part of a brick plant/distrubution facility, you probably wouldn't see the main entrance to the office part. Turn it away from rail scene.
Painting the two buildings ( brick planr and dock warehouse) in different colors would also help.
With kit bashing, anything is possible. I'm sure you'll make it fit.
tstage rrinker That said, I guess we should check the fine print - I thought they didn't want people linking to other forums from here - or perhaps that only applies to forums run by a competing publication. That is correct, Randy. In the OP's case the URLs of the photos are from a photo-hosting site (Imgbb) and only display the photos when clicked and nothing else. Providing direct links to those photos are not a problem because it's not associated with/linked to a specific forum. Wayne's link, however, would NOT be acceptable because it does take the viewer to another forum. So sorry, Wayne, I'm going to have to disable that link example from your post. Tom
rrinker
Well, this subject always gets to me. Of all of the forums, websites, and blogs that are out there, I don't see the problem with being able to link from one to another.
OOOOPS! I'm way off topic.
Their house, their rules, but I agree, it seems kind of silly. I can see not wanting people to link to competitors, but another forum that is NOT associated with or sponsored by a competing publication?
rrinker Their house, their rules, but I agree, it seems kind of silly. I can see not wanting people to link to competitors, but another forum that is NOT associated with or sponsored by a competing publication? --Randy
While I agree with Randy, we have more lawyers than the rest of the world and that complicates the situation. I just received the terms of service from Flickr (aka SmugMug)
The Services and all images, software, platforms, tools, graphics, data, text, code, the Marks (as defined below) and other content and materials available on the Services (excluding User Content) and the selection and arrangement thereof (collectively, the “Flickr Materials”) are the property of SmugMug or its third party licensors and are protected by United States and international intellectual property laws.
On that basis, I see Tom's point. Shakespeare had lawyers pegged years ago in Henry VI. No moderation for me, you will have to google lawyers and Shakespeare to further you classical education.
Henry
COB Potomac & Northern
Shenandoah Valley
MOST of the copyright law was put in place to help protect the 'creators' from misuse/profit by COMMERICAL interest, either big commercial interest or individuals hoping to exploit the situations.
I truly don't think that it should be over-lawyered for individual hobbyist discussing things on public forms. And I don't believe that many copyright owners wish to enforce their rights on such usage.Do you really think the forums would be a interesting place without photos? Can you imagine that all of those images in the past that came from photobucket, google images, etc as being outlawed?
There use to be a formal method to copyright material,...it involved informing a government office, and I think it was paying a very small fee of one dollar or so, then PLACING a copyright symbol on the material,....too bad they did away with this placing of the copyright symbol, as it definitely indicated that the creator wanted recognition or remuneration.
If the author or creator was NOT concerned about this they did not bother to copyright it, nor patent it.....Put it out for public consumption, comment, development, etc ( a number of years ago I was 'inventing' a number of things in the boating industry, including a rather unique sailing rig plan. I DID NOT seek any patents, nor copyrights as I always felt it would be open for further development as time went along. At one point I did copyright a few of the drawings, only so I might get recognition for at least that contribution. But otherwise I hoped it would gain wider distribution)If you take a close look at Mr Goldstien's site and statements you can see he is looking for recognition for his work and contributions to the subject matter. That is why I specifically listed his website link when I posted some pictures that were located there, and that is why I SPECIFICALLY SOUGHT OUT HIS PERMISSION to post that material on a hobby forum. If you re-read his reply to me (below), you will see that he has no problem with my using it in the forum discussions,...he only ask that I give him recognition when I use it on my final layout plan.
Hi Brian,That permission label is to keep image pirates from reusing images unattributed on the internet and in Facebook Groups. They right click the image and post it in the group with "no other information" "photographer / owner unknown" (if that much) when the info, photog and owner are under each image. More often than not, they just grab the image and post in a dozen different groups at the same time.As for model builders and other research; I have no qualms about the website being used referenced. In your application, yes you may use what ever images you find necessary. When the time comes to discuss / display your layout, just give a kindly mention that my website was used for reference. Sincerely Yours, Philip M. Goldstein
Sincerely Yours,
Philip M. Goldstein
Potential Operations on the Peninsula
Here is how I would imagine some of the operations would happen on that peninsula.
The mainline train would enter on either of those 2 tracks that meet at the double slip. The mainline loco might uncouple right there, and proceed to get back over to the roundhouse area or the freight yard by way of that escape route provided by the tail track at the end of the container yard and the runaround track.
Or it might go ahead and pull the train thru the container yard, but uncouple and leave non-container car(s) there at the double-slip. It still can use the tail track to escape and go home.
The switcher then comes in to pull groups of container cars into the 2 tracks for unloading. As they are unloaded, that switcher (or a second one) can pull singles or pairs of those unloaded container cars over to a waiting area (the freight yard perhaps). Then come back to repeat the operation over and over, ...pulling new container cars into unloading, then over to the freight yard waiting area.
Another switcher working the right side of the peninsula would grab off non-container cars up at the double-slip and move them onto one of 3 waiting tracks for selection to be delivered to the 1) big dockside crane out at the end of the peninsula, 2) the carfloat, 3) several other warehouses in that port area, 4) allied rail rebuilders, 5) another industry possibly located on that narrow right hand shelf, or 6) maybe even the brick factory or waterfront scene down in the far corner on that right hand deck.
(that little switcher working that side of the peninsula might be given its own little 'home' in one of the arches of the via-duct)
That little switcher might be a steam type like the infamous 'docksiders', or it might be a swarm of trackmobile types. Those multiple little switchers might lie in wait on that one siding next to allied rail rebuilders.
One of the 'port warehouses' I am considering is utilizing either the Walthers Waterstreet Freight Terminal kit, or the P2K 'Moore & Co' structure located approx here,..
Brian,
Since you're basically posting the same photos in two different threads with similar discussion matter, let's close this one so you can concentrate your efforts on one thread instead of two.