The hobby- as to the Architecture of nature {scenery}

[galaxy]

What "architecture" of "nature" did you use for your surroundings?  What did you choose? Why?

 

Here again, we may have several "philosophy patterns":

1} what the 1:1 segment you may model actually have encountered for 1:1 realism.

2} what your area's architecture of scenery around you displays, both "city" and "country"

3} what the area you want to model should look like, but you have never been there

4} what you imagine for scenery as though you were building some "fantasy Land" {ie: Hogwarts or Hobbits: "middle earth"}

5} architecture of just "what will fit"

6} The architecture of  "what you see fit" to include

7} or did you just "throw a wad of goop or plaster at the layout to 'see what sticks' and not worry about it"

I am sure there are far more reasons, but I have included what I think may be the "main architecture of scenery" examples. You may share if you have a different philosphy!

 

I, for example, live in NY at the foothills of the Adirondacks and the Poconos, in the "Susquehanna valley" type of area. So I like to choose the "architecture" of what I see around me. Some rolling  hills, mountains in teh distance,  and lots of "green space" and small towns/cities.

 

My style would embrace both #s 2 and 5! Since My layout is only 3.5' x 5.1', I had only one "hill tunnel" in the NE corner, and included trees and a small "sawmill" activity on  the sides/top of it to "mimic some of that" around here. {the sawmill was NOT a "logging" event on the MRR, however}. I can only fit in what will fit, plus I like to model what is around me, and since my "protolanced" prototype runs somewhat through the area, I can get away with a little of what will fit, while yet still being somewhat "prototypical". IF I were to model the southwest, however, then I'd have to go by some pics of the areas, and my own interpretations, having never been there before.

 

So: what "Architecture of nature" did you choose?

What say you?

[BRAKIE]

galaxy

So: what "Architecture of nature" did you choose? What say you?

 

My ISL scenery is all man made except for the  wild grass and weeds Mother  Nature planted..

Man made scenery is a must since the scenery is industrial buildings a street with the normal things like dumpsters,fences,weeds and wild grass..A short skinny scrub tree may look at home too.

[mlehman]

galaxy

1} what the 1:1 segment you may model actually have encountered for 1:1 realism.

G,

I'll take a big helping of #1 and a small side order of #5 ("what will fit"). Since I model mountain RRs in Colorado, having the scenery dominate the trains is important. In fact, I purposely avoided a true double-deck arrangement, because it would've limited the height of my mountains even more in my low-ceilinged basement. Yes, I did double up in spots, but in ways that helped preserve the way the mountains loom over the trains and, in a few cases, over the operator's head.

I was alos fortunate enough to be able to travel and experience the same locations today as where my prototypes ran around Durango and Silverton.

A few examples...looking up to see how close to the celing the mountains rise.

If not too busy, the multiple levels of track enhance the effect.

Throw in an airplane to emphasize the dizzying heights the view sees the layout as reaching.

If you look just to the left of the big, shiny mill building, sort of where the galre is just above the tiny miner's houses, you'll see an enlarged photo I took of the actual area being modeled, so you can see how well it matches the area around Animas Forks by the way it seamlessly blends into the 3D scenery.

[HObbyguy]

Architecture of nature... sounds like a very philosophical open-discussion topic.  I am working on my 2nd layout and paying a lot of attention to it this time.

My plan this time is a freelance based on coal country around West Va and the surrounding area, with a blend of C&O and B&O structures and rolling stock.  So the landscape is a blend of rolling mountains/hills and small meadows, with nothing truly flat.  And I am targeting late summer, very early autumn.

One thing that always strikes me when visiting the Appalachians during summer is how green everything is.  Also although there are a lot of cuts for roads and rails that expose the underlying rock, there are very few natural rock faces that are not all-but hidden by plants and foliage.  So I am using a lot of foam and carving it to get the rolling effect and to make it easy to "plant" trees.  And using a ton of ground foam, static grass, and super trees to keep everything very green.  Plaster is used only to create the cuts and occasional exposed rock and a lot of that is getting covered over by bushes.

My plan is a double dogbone in a 13x14 area, so pretty tight.  And given the "natural" terrain I am finding it hard to find logical spots for structures without the challenge of building them into a hill.

I like to vision individual "scenes".  Since it is freelance the scenes do not have to be true to reality, but just built in a way to fit into the theme.  The only scene mostly completed so far is focused on a wood trestle.  Its been a long time since there was an operating wood trestle in the region but nobody but die-hard railfans would question it.

I am using photos extensively when planning my scenes.  The goal is not to produce a replica but for inspiration on capturing the essence of the terrain and the way that man-made structures fit in.  Example here with the grassy bank, stained concrete supporting the bridge and stand-out fall foliage on the tree.  I still need to add more trees and bushes to finish dressing it out, but another challenge is how to add all the greenery without hiding the trains!

[Burlington Northern #24]

definitely two, while my stuff is still a WIP. There will be green like the western side of washington and there will be various yellow, orange, and brown shades like eastern washington. 

At the moment though I'm going to start with a yard and branch my way out in east and west directions. Since the Rosemary sub will be between Vancouver and Spokane. Eventually I will get to doing Portland and the "A" line to seaside. 

 

Here's Wishram facing east 

[tomikawaTT]

Main course of #1, with sides of #5 and #6.

As I have mentioned a few (hundred?) times, I'm modeling a very specific geographical area at a very specific time.  However, I retain the right to selectively compress or omit some space-eaters that don't enhance the mood I'm trying to project.  I've also added some things from other areas that positively impact the result I'm working toward.  Thus, two coal mines from Kyushu, a concrete spandrel arch bridge on a curve from the wilds of Western Tokyo and an entire mountain from Taiwan have places in my master scheme.

Of course, how closely the final result will resemble my mental picture (and 50-year-old B&W photos) remains to be seen...

Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)

[Southgate]

I'm modeling a fictitious added on industrial area to the Coos Bay harbor where I grew up. A great deal of the land there was man-made, in that they filled in the marshlands with material from surrounding hills. Pretty handy for modeling, since it is mostly flat land at the RR elevation, then abruptly (in some places) jutting up to some rather steep banks, or into hills varying from rolling to steep and high. Easy to work with and make fit, still within reasonable, believable scenery fo my area.

I was just over there a few weeks ago and took extensive pictures of all aspects of construction in the area. That includes the fill, excavation,ground undilations, building construction, streets, docks, trees, plants, grasses...everything I could get.  I can't wait to get started on scenery. I even brought home a bag of yellow earth from what I call "crumbly clay bank", a characteristic feature of the area.

[jecorbett]

One of the things I like about being a freelancer is I don't need to try to replicate anything. That is true of both the hardscape and the landscape. If it looks good to me, that's all that matters. Rural scenery from eastern Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessee to the Atlantic Ocean is pretty generic. Whether we are talking about rolling hills or the Appalachian mountains, one location looks a lot like many others. For example, the movie Last of the Mohicans which was set in upstate New York was actually filmed in North Carolina and if it wasn't for the credits, I doubt anyone would have known that, One tree covered hill looks pretty much like another tree covered hill.

[MisterBeasley]

I model from memory.  I try to replicate the things that stand out in my memories, sometimes decades old, of things I've seen.  Having grown up on Long Island, New York, but grown old in New England, my idea of a stream looks like this:

From my occasional rides on the New York Subway, the thing I thought it most important to get right 50 years later was the tile walls:

[twhite]

Sierra Nevada mountains of Northern California, specifically what is known as the "Northern Mines" area that largely parallels State Route 49 from Nevada City to Sierraville.  From high foothills--3,000 feet in elevation to Alpine and timberline at over 6,000 feet (the Northern Sierra are not as high as the Southern portion of the range, where peaks soar into the 13,000 and 14,000 feet elevation).  Scars from 19th-century hydraulic mining that cut through topsoil and down trough vividly colored clay undersoil to expose geographical structuring that one might mistake for Utah.  Sudden basaltic upthrusts through ridgetops called the Sierra Buttes.  Mixed evergreen and decidous trees in lower elevations, some decidous (eastern maple for instance) not native to the area but originally brought by settlers from New England in the 1850's.  Pine, fir and cedar in the higher elevations, with Ponderosa dominating in the highest reaches.  Granite cliffs.  Steep canyon walls.  Inhospitable--but possible--country for railroad building. 

The High Country around Sierra Buttes

High foothills and old hydraulic mining scars

Yuba Pass from Wagon Wheel Gap--timber country

 

Tom

[galaxy]

Some great Pics, Tom!

Lets see what others think about the "architecture of scenery"...

[CSX_road_slug]

Scenery is what I consider my Achillies Heel of the hobby.  I only did one small 4'x2' area on my previous layout, and I wasn't very pleased with the results.  

Like Mike L., I want to accurately portray my modeled area but lack the space to do it justice.  Since I am modeling a branch of the B&O running into Cleveland OH, I don't anticipate any high cliffs or tunnels; but I will need to have as many tree- and grass-covered, low rolling hills as I can squeeze in.  I've got an electrostatic grass applicator sitting in an unopened box, ready for use when the time comes.

One thing I really wanted to model but lack the space for, is the Strongsville Viaduct.  There are just too many parallel spurs and passing sidings in the section of the layout where I originally planned to put it.  And I can't eliminate the lineside industries associated with those spurs, they're what keep things interesting for my guest operators.  Maybe if I upgrade my layout to a double-decker I'll get the necessary real estate...?

[glutrain]

Number 2, heavily leavened with a blend of 5 and 6. My Cascade Valley Railroad is set in the upper end of a mythical valley in the Cascade Mountains of the Pacific Northwest. Its scenic base is a thoroughly compressed mixture of many familiar elements to create that "Gee I must have seen that somewhere" feeling. The railroad runs on trackage that might have been abandoned by the GN and UP. Operation therefore are what might be seen on a shortline/bridgeline/interchange line run on a shoestring.

[Anonymous]

Interesting topic, to which I´d like to add my worth.

Most of our layouts start with a track plan and a vague idea of what type of setting we would like to see. The scenery is than somehow fitted in between the tracks, and, with a good deal of luck, the layout ends up looking good. But we all know a number of spots, which we are not really happy with. Either we try to disguise those spots, or we sometimes completely red them. I know of a number of cases, where the layout was completely dismantled and redone.

When I design my layouts, I usually start with a fairly firm idea of the landscape I´d like to have and then "squeeze" the tracks into that setting. It is a bit of a tedious job and requires a lot of "imageneering", but the outcome is rewarding. It works, however, with small layouts, I have not tried it with a room or basement filling empire. I imagine this to be quite a task.

[MisterBeasley]

I've got an electrostatic grass applicator sitting in an unopened box, ready for use when the time comes.

I started using one last year, and I love the results.  It's not hard at all to get really nice results.  I model in HO, and I like 4mm and 6mm grass from Silflor.  The Woodland Scenics stuff is all 2 mm.  It looks OK, but it's more "fuzzy" than that "amber waves of grain" look most of us want.

[CSX_road_slug]

Thanks for the tip MrB, I'll definitely go with the Silflor since most grass in industrial areas isn't very 'manicured.'  The longer the better!

[Heartland Division CB&Q]

Galaxy: Good idea for thread. 

I think every model railroad is #5, what ever will fit. In my case, I try simulating operations on the old Burlington Route (CB&Q) in 1962. The CB&Q operated throughout the Midwest, and also in some western states. To do that, my layout has a mix of country, urban, and industrial scenes. 

There is a little of #2 in my layout, but that's after backdating to to the 1960's when I lived in Illinois next to the CB&Q.