Why do people start with 4 x 8's

[SpaceMouse]

A nobler cause would be designing a interesting 4x8 footers that a newbie will enjoy better then the standard "snap track" designs found in most layout books.

That is exactly what I am going for. You have a favorite that is not copyrighted?

[SpaceMouse]

4. Depth of scenery. Some folks are content with scenes only 20 or 24 inches deep. I'm not

I know that I want more scenery than that. 

Sorry, I can't buy it. A four foot island of scenery is not as effective as a 30 inch shelf with a good backdrop. And with the 4 foot depth you sacrafice realism by having multiple tracks running through the scene.

Most really effective 4 x 8's I've seen work hard to eliminate the depth so that they can create the illusion of isolated scenes for their trains to pass through, either through view breaks or backdrops. Just the opposite of what you are describing.

You asked us why we built 4x8 layouts, we tell you, and then you say you don't buy it?

Are you getting your threads mixed up?

It's ok, thread creep is part of forum life, as long as I'm sure you aren't telling me why I built what I did.

It's a photography thing, and it morphs into yet another reason too.

With a shelf layout, shooting a horizontal pic, along the track axis, there's a minimum "zoom" (the opposite of wide angle) you have to use to fill the frame with layout, to keep the illusion alive and avoid showing floor, or fascia.

If you're shooting at any down angle, across the tracks, again, you have to zoom in or crop the photo to get rid of the fascia. The effect is worse if you're shooting at an oblique angle. The narrower a shelf layout is, the more this affects your photography.

The island aspect of a 4x8 brings in the other photography consideration, you get exactly twice as many angles to work with for any given scene. With castors and removable fascia/backdrops along the "back" side of the layout, you get the best of all worlds. Deep shots, from the front or the back, and when you're done shooting, you roll it back against the wall and enjoy your backdrop.

As far as multiple tracks in a single image go, in the specific case we're modelling, it matches the prototype perfectly. The only part of the layout where the "back" side of the loop is visible, not hidden under mountains, is the 5% grade around a U shaped horseshoe bend, our representation of the Muleshoe Bend.

The Silverton railroad is described as encompassing three engineering marvels, the depot inside the wye at Red Mountain, the Corkscrew Gulch turntable, and the Muleshoe Bend. Not far away, on the west side of the ridgeline, there's a near identical feature on the Rio Grande Southern, the Ohpir Loop, built by the same Engineer, for the same reasons, to gain a lot of vertical elevation in a short horizontal span.

I don't know if it fits in your plan for your paper or not, but you might want to consider and ask about the other half of the same equation, "Why do people AVOID layouts that aren't 4x8?" Not all the reasons people build what they build are because they WANT a certain configuration, many times, they decide against certain configurations, for specific reasons. if you're giving the builder credit for knowing enough to choose one layout over another, I think you also have to give him credit enough to decide against options he chooses not to use.

 

:-)

Fair enough. I hadn't considered the photography angle.

[jeffers_mz]

4. Depth of scenery. Some folks are content with scenes only 20 or 24 inches deep. I'm not

I know that I want more scenery than that. 

Sorry, I can't buy it. A four foot island of scenery is not as effective as a 30 inch shelf with a good backdrop. And with the 4 foot depth you sacrafice realism by having multiple tracks running through the scene.

Most really effective 4 x 8's I've seen work hard to eliminate the depth so that they can create the illusion of isolated scenes for their trains to pass through, either through view breaks or backdrops. Just the opposite of what you are describing.

You asked us why we built 4x8 layouts, we tell you, and then you say you don't buy it?

Are you getting your threads mixed up?

It's ok, thread creep is part of forum life, as long as I'm sure you aren't telling me why I built what I did. I'm pretty sure I know what the reasoning was when we started, about 100%, right on the nose.

:-)

It's a photography thing, and it morphs into yet another reason too.

With a shelf layout, shooting a horizontal pic, along the track axis, there's a minimum "zoom" (the opposite of wide angle) you have to use to fill the frame with layout, to keep the illusion alive and avoid showing floor, or fascia.

If you're shooting at any down angle, across the tracks, again, you have to zoom in or crop the photo to get rid of the fascia. The effect is worse if you're shooting at an oblique angle. The narrower a shelf layout is, the more this affects your photography.

The island aspect of a 4x8 brings in the other photography consideration, you get exactly twice as many angles to work with for any given scene. With castors and removable fascia/backdrops along the "back" side of the layout, you get the best of all worlds. Deep shots, from the front or the back, and when you're done shooting, you roll it back against the wall and enjoy your backdrop.

As far as multiple tracks in a single image go, in the specific case we're modelling, it matches the prototype perfectly. The only part of the layout where the "back" side of the loop is visible, not hidden under mountains, is the 5% grade around a U shaped horseshoe bend, our representation of the Muleshoe Bend.

The Silverton railroad is described as encompassing three engineering marvels, the depot inside the wye at Red Mountain, the Corkscrew Gulch turntable, and the Muleshoe Bend. Not far away, on the west side of the ridgeline, there's a near identical feature on the Rio Grande Southern, the Ohpir Loop, built by the same Engineer, for the same reasons, to gain a lot of vertical elevation in a short horizontal span.

I don't know if it fits in your plan for your paper or not, but you might want to consider and ask about the other half of the same equation, "Why do people AVOID layouts that aren't 4x8?" Not all the reasons people build what they build are because they WANT a certain configuration, many times, they decide against certain configurations, for specific reasons. if you're giving the builder credit for knowing enough to choose one layout over another, I think you also have to give him credit enough to decide against options he chooses not to use.

 

:-)

 

 

 

[BRAKIE]

Since you are very against the 4x8, I think you'll have a hard time writing a non-negative unbiased article.  I think you should write on what you feel positive about.

Just my

Enjoy

Paul 

I'm not against the 4 x8, rather I'm against blindly assuming the 4 x8 is rite of passage for the newbie. Hopefully, both my biases and my ideas will be evident in the article.  

 

 

A noble cause no doubt but,a fool's errand as the saying goes..

As long as you have MR,RMC,layout "experts",layout books,train set manufacturers pushing the noble 4x8 layout you are bucking the system and one that has worked for decades and will for decades to come as you can see in the replies in this topic.

 

Chip,While I applaud your efforts I am afraid you are fighting a system that will not change after all the idea behind the 4x8 push is to get trains up and running..A newbie can appreciate such information on 4x8s due to their excitement to get a "table set up to run the trains."

Think of this even if you reach one newbie many more will go with the 4x8 layouts found in books,magazines and of course the instructions in the train set..Then of course next year there will be another 4x8 beginners layout in MR.

A nobler cause would be designing a interesting 4x8 footers that a newbie will enjoy better then the standard "snap track" designs found in most layout books.

 

[Texas Zepher]

Since you are very against the 4x8, I think you'll have a hard time writing a non-negative unbiased article.  I think you should write on what you feel positive about.

I'm not against the 4 x8, rather I'm against blindly assuming the 4 x8 is rite of passage for the newbie. Hopefully, both my biases and my ideas will be evident in the article.

One can have a bias and still write objective as long as they recognize that bias and both correct for it and point it out to readers.  It is those who think they aren't bias that (end up writing for the news media - Oh, no no sorry off topic) lead people astray.

I've seen Spacemouse mature in the hobby from a newbie, to a person almost overwhelmed by it, to a learner, through the know-it-all phase, into the prototypical research era, and then the mind expanding theories, concepts, and philosophies of MR, and now I feel he is into making practical of all he has experienced in order to help others.    I find it refreshing that someone can continually change both their mind set and outlook on others in the hobby.  So many people seem to get stuck in one of the phases never considering where they came from and refusing to expand to the next phase (Shakespear's Julius Ceaser Act II?).  Further he has done all this in what, three years?  I see far more maturity than may people I've known/know who have been in the hobby for 3 decades. 

I wonder if these "phases" are as predictable of model railroaders as they are of people going through the phases of the loss of a loved one?  There is an intersting study for someone.  Does anyone need a Masters Degree related to model railroading?

[wm3798]

I agree with Chip completely.  I think he's on the right track to challenge the newbie and the space challenged to look at all the options... including the 4x8... so they can be more informed about the pro's and con's of each.

Information is power. 

I think it's also important to challenge the magazine editors to be more creative when presenting a start up layout, whether it's changing the shape and size or exploring a different scale than what we're used to seeing. 

Geez, some of you guys are making like we're trying to adopt the metric system!

Lee 

[SpaceMouse]

Since you are very against the 4x8, I think you'll have a hard time writing a non-negative unbiased article.  I think you should write on what you feel positive about.

Just my

Enjoy

Paul 

I'm not against the 4 x8, rather I'm against blindly assuming the 4 x8 is rite of passage for the newbie. Hopefully, both my biases and my ideas will be evident in the article.  

 

[IRONROOSTER]

I respect what you contribute to the hobby and forum Mr. Mouse.  I believe you will  write a very usefull article pertaining to first layouts.  I have however read many posts by you in regards to the 4x8.  Most, if not all, have been on why you shouldn't use the good ole' sheet of plywood as is.  That was why I was assuming your intent for this thread. Sorry if I was wrong.

I frequently challenge the assumption that "I only have room for a 4 x 8." But in essence I've cried uncle. Mostly, I think that people are going to do what they are going to do.

In the article I still will challenge people to look at their space critically and creatively before deciding on a 4 x 8. However, since the 4 x 8 seems as though it is here to stay in spite of all the good arguments against it, I will attempt to distill what principles make for a superior design.    

Since you are very against the 4x8, I think you'll have a hard time writing a non-negative unbiased article.  I think you should write on what you feel positive about.

Just my

Enjoy

Paul 

[SpaceMouse]

I respect what you contribute to the hobby and forum Mr. Mouse.  I believe you will  write a very usefull article pertaining to first layouts.  I have however read many posts by you in regards to the 4x8.  Most, if not all, have been on why you shouldn't use the good ole' sheet of plywood as is.  That was why I was assuming your intent for this thread. Sorry if I was wrong.

I frequently challenge the assumption that "I only have room for a 4 x 8." But in essence I've cried uncle. Mostly, I think that people are going to do what they are going to do.

In the article I still will challenge people to look at their space critically and creatively before deciding on a 4 x 8. However, since the 4 x 8 seems as though it is here to stay in spite of all the good arguments against it, I will attempt to distill what principles make for a superior design.    

[secondhandmodeler]

I realize that the purpose of this thread is to get people to consider something other than the 4x8 in HO.

Oh really, I thought that is what it has degenerated into.   I thought the purpose of the thread was to give Spacemouse some observations as to why people often and frequently start with a 4x8 as background material for his article.

For the most part, the replies have been just that, why people chose the 4x8.  I was guessing at the intent of the question.

Edit:  Reading this thread in contexed with the other thread about 4x8 plans,  I may have been mistaken in my assumption.

[secondhandmodeler]

I realize that the purpose of this thread is to get people to consider something other than the 4x8 in HO.  There are better uses of space and materials.  However, I don't think that a newbie is going to jump in with both feet and do an around the walls layout.  With that kind of setup, your room is the 'train room'.  With the 4x8, it's a room with a train set in it.  I realize that it takes up the same amount of space, but psychologically, it doesn't.  As far as being able to cut wood,  it is a little intimidating.  Ripping a piece of plywood without  experience is a little scary.  If you don't have a chop saw, cutting the lengths of supports is less than fun.  There are a lot of things to learn about this hobby.  Learning basic carpentry skills may not be at the top of the newbie's list.  This whole conversation is like telling somebody to start building laser cut, wooden structures instead of plastic.  Sure the results are more satisfying, but it's a little more involved than a DPM kit.

Actually the purpose of this thread is not to get people to consider alternatives, but rather to explore the motivations why a person might choose such a hard medium as a first layout. The ultimate goal of this post is to create a good article on designing a good layout in spite of the limitations of a sheet of plywood.

A lot of people however, are taking things personally. For me, it's not about them. It's about research for an article. That's what writers do.

I respect what you contribute to the hobby and forum Mr. Mouse.  I believe you will  write a very usefull article pertaining to first layouts.  I have however read many posts by you in regards to the 4x8.  Most, if not all, have been on why you shouldn't use the good ole' sheet of plywood as is.  That was why I was assuming your intent for this thread. Sorry if I was wrong.

[Texas Zepher]

I realize that the purpose of this thread is to get people to consider something other than the 4x8 in HO.

Oh really? I thought that is what it has degenerated into.   I thought the purpose of the thread was to give Spacemouse some observations as to why people often and frequently start with a 4x8 as background material for his article.

EDIT: Now Spacemouse you went and made me look stupid by posting the same thing at the same time I did!    Stop It!

[SpaceMouse]

I realize that the purpose of this thread is to get people to consider something other than the 4x8 in HO.  There are better uses of space and materials.  However, I don't think that a newbie is going to jump in with both feet and do an around the walls layout.  With that kind of setup, your room is the 'train room'.  With the 4x8, it's a room with a train set in it.  I realize that it takes up the same amount of space, but psychologically, it doesn't.  As far as being able to cut wood,  it is a little intimidating.  Ripping a piece of plywood without  experience is a little scary.  If you don't have a chop saw, cutting the lengths of supports is less than fun.  There are a lot of things to learn about this hobby.  Learning basic carpentry skills may not be at the top of the newbie's list.  This whole conversation is like telling somebody to start building laser cut, wooden structures instead of plastic.  Sure the results are more satisfying, but it's a little more involved than a DPM kit.

Actually the purpose of this thread is not to get people to consider alternatives, but rather to explore the motivations why a person might choose such a hard medium as a first layout. The ultimate goal of this post is to create a good article on designing a good layout in spite of the limitations of a sheet of plywood.

A lot of people however, are taking things personally. For me, it's not about them. It's about research for an article. That's what writers do.

[shawnee]

Why?  Perhaps they don't have a saw. 

[Vail and Southwestern RR]

I realize that the purpose of this thread is to get people to consider something other than the 4x8 in HO.  There are better uses of space and materials.  However, I don't think that a newbie is going to jump in with both feet and do an around the walls layout.  With that kind of setup, your room is the 'train room'.  With the 4x8, it's a room with a train set in it.  I realize that it takes up the same amount of space, but psychologically, it doesn't.  As far as being able to cut wood,  it is a little intimidating.  Ripping a piece of plywood without  experience is a little scary.  If you don't have a chop saw, cutting the lengths of supports is less than fun.  There are a lot of things to learn about this hobby.  Learning basic carpentry skills may not be at the top of the newbie's list. 

I think this may be getting pretty close to the answer to the original question.  There is  comfort in th 4x8 layout, encouraged by the magazines, the track in a trainset, and the material obviously avaible at the Home Depot. 

Intimidation and fear of the 'unknown' are a big part of this hobby, as very few people have skills in all of the areas that they are going to use.  I bought the paint for my backdrop a year ago, or more.  But I'm scared stiff to do it, so I have kept working in other areas.  The funny part is that I am pretty sure it will come out fine, once I take the plunge!

 

[Vail and Southwestern RR]

One thing for the folks that are getting 'defensive' here to remember... Chip is using inquisition as a way to learn.  When he asks a question, he isn't saying what you are doing or have done is wrong, he's just trying to get to the next level of why.  And then he'll probably ask another question.  He's trying to get beyond the first, and even the second level of anwers.  So, while it feels like he's attacking, I think he's just trying to dig deeper, both to increase his understanding, and to encourage everyone else to take their thinking to a different level.  I hope I'm right about this, otherwise I just put a bunch of words in the SpaceMouse's mouth!  In the time Chip has been on the forum, I have never known him to accept 'because it is' as an answer.  He always goes deeper.

 

[secondhandmodeler]

I realize that the purpose of this thread is to get people to consider something other than the 4x8 in HO.  There are better uses of space and materials.  However, I don't think that a newbie is going to jump in with both feet and do an around the walls layout.  With that kind of setup, your room is the 'train room'.  With the 4x8, it's a room with a train set in it.  I realize that it takes up the same amount of space, but psychologically, it doesn't.  As far as being able to cut wood,  it is a little intimidating.  Ripping a piece of plywood without  experience is a little scary.  If you don't have a chop saw, cutting the lengths of supports is less than fun.  There are a lot of things to learn about this hobby.  Learning basic carpentry skills may not be at the top of the newbie's list.  This whole conversation is like telling somebody to start building laser cut, wooden structures instead of plastic.  Sure the results are more satisfying, but it's a little more involved than a DPM kit.

[Greg H.]

I know that I want more scenery than that. 

Sorry, I can't buy it. A four foot island of scenery is not as effective as a 30 inch shelf with a good backdrop. And with the 4 foot depth you sacrafice realism by having multiple tracks running through the scene.

Most really effective 4 x 8's I've seen work hard to eliminate the depth so that they can create the illusion of isolated scenes for their trains to pass through, either through view breaks or backdrops. Just the opposite of what you are describing.

But isn't the person who is building the layout the one who decides what kind of realism they do or do not want? 

What is wrong with multiple tracks is the first place?   There are plenty of places that have multiple tracks - the Georgetown Loop in CO, actualy loops back over it's self - it is about 2 miles from Georgetown to Silverplume as the crow flies, but the track convers 4-5 miles to climb over 600 ft between the two towns.

You can see the track at the lower left where it goes under it's own bridge.

[SpaceMouse]

It's a labour of both love and learning for Chip.  I think he is a good steward for the hobby who merely wants to ensure that those cruising through here looking for ideas don't fall into a handy nook of thinking only 4X8.  If the 4X8 is what it must be, then that's just peachy....do your best.  But if you had not thought outside those confines or configuration, there is sooooo much more you can do with the same square footage.

Is that what we should take from your message, Chip?

Actually, I am planning an artile on how to design a good 4 x 8. However, since it is such a difficult medium top work with, I will spend a fair amout of time at the beginning helping the reader to assess their needs to determine whether of not a 4 x 8 is the most practical layout for them in terms of space, ability, and growth in the hobby or if they are just going the 4 x 8 route because they think it is what they should do.     

 

[SpaceMouse]

Why is that BS? Without any tools, it's hard to cut plywood by sheer force of will " border="0" width="15" height="15" />

"Most" people I'm not buying, "some" people is very believable, but just because a person has a 4 x8 does not mean he cannot cut a piece of plywood. ;) The benchwork on my 4x8 is cookie cutter, it was much more difficult than sawing up some foam I can assure you.

I guess the "broad brush" approach to 4 x8 modelers bothers me. A lot of people here consider us trainset loop noobs and probably don't have the right to post here. I do not want a basement size layout. I'm interested in details, not miles and miles of ground foam. But the difference is I don't slam the huge layouts, to each his own. I model for myself, and no one else.

So Chip, I'm wondering, how much do you get paid everytime you post a thread containing "4 x 8" 

I don't get paid by the post, I get paid by Microsoft every time the characters "4 x 8" appear in a Internet Explorer program.

While some people may be 4 x 8 snobs, I'm not. AS I said before, there are a lot of good 4 x 8's out there.

But I would ask you if you are doing cookie cutter (which I did on my 4 x 8 as well), why did you choose such a difficult shape to work with? I'm curious because others do as well. I did a 4 x 8, because I had heard that was a starter layout.

But you would think that an experienced modeler such as yourself would expand it out to 4.5 or 5 foot to give yourself some more options.

Just curious.

 

[Greg H.]

But doesn't that mean that even more bench work has to be built than would be needed for a 4x8?

Yes, but so what? Think of it this way. If you were building a house would you make it all one big room to save construction time. 

Depending on skill and objectives of the builder, "Yes" it can and might be built as one big room initaly, then later on it would be later broken up into individual rooms or added on to later.   I have seen several homes that were built that way ( my grandparents lived in one ) - further, many office buildings and stores are intentualy built that way.

You can't live in fear of building the layout. Every step along the way forces you to do something you've never done before. Every step you gamble that what you are doing will not mess up what you have done before. Eventually, you might get to the point of mastery. But I suspect, even the masters like CNJ push themselves to try even harder projects. 

I doubt that it is fear in many cases, but, lack of skill and materials - and to some extent even time.

A 4x8 table top, layout can be put together in less time, money ( materials & tools ), and skill, than a 5x12 around the wall of the same area.

Do I have room for a 5x8 table top?   Yes.   The dinning room table is for all practical purposes unused.

Do I have room for a 3x12 around the wall of the same area?  No - I would have to move a full 80 gal aquarium ( and there are only a few places that that aquarium can saftely sit due to it's weight ), or a lrg upright piano ( again a weight issue ), or the TV center, or any number of other things.

Benchwork, although it is the first step, is one of the easier and quickest steps. If you want it to go really fast, rent a chop saw.

So we end up back at the avalability of materials and tools / or the money to obtain them.   If it's not avalable ( for any number of reasions ) then they have to settle for what is readily avalable - like a 4x8 sheet of plywood.   Some people don't mind buying / renting tools if they don't already have them, while others just have to make do, and don't mind having a 4x8 for a year or two, as inadaquate as other may think it is.

Who am I to say that a 3x7 is a bad choice for someone, if that is how they want to run their trains?   Yet there are people out there that get enjoyment  from even a 2x6 based on switching ops.   It may be a bad choice for me, but it is not a bad choice for them.

[selector]

It's a labour of both love and learning for Chip.  I think he is a good steward for the hobby who merely wants to ensure that those cruising through here looking for ideas don't fall into a handy nook of thinking only 4X8.  If the 4X8 is what it must be, then that's just peachy....do your best.  But if you had not thought outside those confines or configuration, there is sooooo much more you can do with the same square footage.

Is that what we should take from your message, Chip?

[Anonymous]

Why is that BS? Without any tools, it's hard to cut plywood by sheer force of will " border="0" width="15" height="15" />

"Most" people I'm not buying, "some" people is very believable, but just because a person has a 4 x8 does not mean he cannot cut a piece of plywood. ;) The benchwork on my 4x8 is cookie cutter, it was much more difficult than sawing up some foam I can assure you.

I guess the "broad brush" approach to 4 x8 modelers bothers me. A lot of people here consider us trainset loop noobs and probably don't have the right to post here. I do not want a basement size layout. I'm interested in details, not miles and miles of ground foam. But the difference is I don't slam the huge layouts, to each his own. I model for myself, and no one else.

So Chip, I'm wondering, how much do you get paid everytime you post a thread containing "4 x 8" 

 

[SpaceMouse]

If you were building a house would you make it all one big room to save construction time. 

Every step you gamble that what you are doing will not mess up what you have done before.

Benchwork, although it is the first step, is one of the easier and quickest steps. If you want it to go really fast, rent a chop saw.

One BIG room? Instead of a half dozen postage stamp sized cubby holes? Hmmm, let me think that one over... *grin*

And I'm not willing to LOSE the gamble. That would just cause me to toss it all in the fireplace right now. I've been beaten enough by life and the ones running it, I want some relaxation time, not more aggravation and strife.

As for backdrops, I am NO Rembrandt to paint lifelike scenes on the wall. And my printer only does 8 1/2 X 11 which means tape all over or glue with the associated wrinkles in the paper.

I'm NOT knocking the around the room layouts, If I could afford to have a crew come in and add a room to the house and then build the layout for me, that would be great. I'm just not up to more disappointments in life when the 4 X 8 is down and dirty, quick and easy for me to get up and running. I may even eventually go the custom room type shelf or other style layout, but to cut my teeth and have some small enjoyment, and practice the skills necessary to tackle the large stuff, I'm going to get my feet wet on a 4 X 8.

Yes, call it "Instant Gratification" or say I have "No Commitment" all you like. Just because I don't attempt to swim the English Channel on my first day in the water, doesn't mean I don't like to swim.

Scoot

Scoot,

There are circumstance where a 4 x 8 is perfect for an individual. I've talked with you enough to know that you should enjoy what you can.

 

[Printer]

If you were building a house would you make it all one big room to save construction time. 

Every step you gamble that what you are doing will not mess up what you have done before.

Benchwork, although it is the first step, is one of the easier and quickest steps. If you want it to go really fast, rent a chop saw.

One BIG room? Instead of a half dozen postage stamp sized cubby holes? Hmmm, let me think that one over... *grin*

And I'm not willing to LOSE the gamble. That would just cause me to toss it all in the fireplace right now. I've been beaten enough by life and the ones running it, I want some relaxation time, not more aggravation and strife.

As for backdrops, I am NO Rembrandt to paint lifelike scenes on the wall. And my printer only does 8 1/2 X 11 which means tape all over or glue with the associated wrinkles in the paper.

I'm NOT knocking the around the room layouts, If I could afford to have a crew come in and add a room to the house and then build the layout for me, that would be great. I'm just not up to more disappointments in life when the 4 X 8 is down and dirty, quick and easy for me to get up and running. I may even eventually go the custom room type shelf or other style layout, but to cut my teeth and have some small enjoyment, and practice the skills necessary to tackle the large stuff, I'm going to get my feet wet on a 4 X 8.

Yes, call it "Instant Gratification" or say I have "No Commitment" all you like. Just because I don't attempt to swim the English Channel on my first day in the water, doesn't mean I don't like to swim.

Scoot

[Vail and Southwestern RR]

Hmm, I've got plenty of the first two, I need to get hopping!

 

[wm3798]

A steady diet of Atlas Code 55 Rail, DZ123 decoders, and lots and lots of coal hoppers...  That's what I feed mine!

Lee 

[Vail and Southwestern RR]

Yes, the 'Why do most people start in HO?' question!  Opening the 'door' to N scale changes a lot!

As far as the elephant, give it peanuts?

 

EXACTLY!

I think the best example of HO Myopia was when the last "room size layout" contest was conducted by our esteemed hosts, it was restricted to HO scale designs.  For me, and legions of other oppressed N scalers, that was like repealing the First Amendment.

The best project layouts Ive seen were the N Scale Arkansas and Missouri, the N Scale BN layout, and the N scale Applachian Central.  David Popp's Naugatuck Valley is also very nicely done in a limited footprint.

Lee 

I have an N scale elephant in my garage.  What should I be feeding it?

 

[wm3798]

Look at the format for building modular benchwork... Legs, wing nuts, levelling screws...  A cordless screw gun, some 2x2's... it really can go up in a hurry.

As for depth of scenery, the key there isn't the size, it's what you do with it...

David Barrow's Cat Mountain is built on a series of 2' deep tables.  Multiple examples exist of backdrops blending seamlessly into a foreground shelf (Pelle Soeberg's work comes to mind).

Likewise, I've seen large table top layouts that have a big blob mountain at one end that looks like a pile of laundry.  It doesn't always matter how big the scenery is, if it looks like crap, it looks like crap.

And it's not an issue of whether or not you have the skills.  Skills can (and should) be developed through practice and observation.

Lee 

[SpaceMouse]

4. Depth of scenery. Some folks are content with scenes only 20 or 24 inches deep. I'm not

I know that I want more scenery than that. 

Sorry, I can't buy it. A four foot island of scenery is not as effective as a 30 inch shelf with a good backdrop. And with the 4 foot depth you sacrafice realism by having multiple tracks running through the scene.

Most really effective 4 x 8's I've seen work hard to eliminate the depth so that they can create the illusion of isolated scenes for their trains to pass through, either through view breaks or backdrops. Just the opposite of what you are describing.