James,
Welcome to the forum! Getting feedback about how we behave on the forum is similar to us giving Kalmbach feedback on the magazines. Sometimes it''s an eye opener! You seem like a nice, even keeled person. You'll never fit in around here! I hope you enjoy the forum. It's nice to read anonymously, but it's even better if you can participate.
on30francisco wrote: shayfan84325 wrote: One thing that I sense as I read MR is that layouts that more or less closely follow an actual prototype railroad seem to be most favored, and freelance layouts are considered second tier. Is it just me, or do others get that feeling, too?One example is that the Pike-sized Passenger Train contest required entries to have a real prototype. Up to that point, I was going to model the Hooterville Express, of Petticoat Junction fame ('60s TV show). I respect the discipline that it takes to closely follow a prototype railroad, but for me it is more fun to make it up as I go along. Your thoughts?From what I'm reading in Model Railroader, the magazine seems to emphasise modeling prototype railroads. For some people, model railroading today is more like a competative sport or job to be judged and evaluated rather than a relaxing hobby. My hat is off to those who enjoy this but it definitely is not for me. I have always enjoyed freelancing because I can create my own railroad with my logo, towns, rolling stock, etc. To me, following a prototype is more like a demanding job and a job and hobby are two different things. Although Model Railroader's emphasis is on prototype modeling and operation, they're not the only game in town. The most important point is to HAVE FUN!
shayfan84325 wrote: One thing that I sense as I read MR is that layouts that more or less closely follow an actual prototype railroad seem to be most favored, and freelance layouts are considered second tier. Is it just me, or do others get that feeling, too?One example is that the Pike-sized Passenger Train contest required entries to have a real prototype. Up to that point, I was going to model the Hooterville Express, of Petticoat Junction fame ('60s TV show). I respect the discipline that it takes to closely follow a prototype railroad, but for me it is more fun to make it up as I go along. Your thoughts?
One thing that I sense as I read MR is that layouts that more or less closely follow an actual prototype railroad seem to be most favored, and freelance layouts are considered second tier. Is it just me, or do others get that feeling, too?
One example is that the Pike-sized Passenger Train contest required entries to have a real prototype. Up to that point, I was going to model the Hooterville Express, of Petticoat Junction fame ('60s TV show). I respect the discipline that it takes to closely follow a prototype railroad, but for me it is more fun to make it up as I go along. Your thoughts?
From what I'm reading in Model Railroader, the magazine seems to emphasise modeling prototype railroads. For some people, model railroading today is more like a competative sport or job to be judged and evaluated rather than a relaxing hobby. My hat is off to those who enjoy this but it definitely is not for me. I have always enjoyed freelancing because I can create my own railroad with my logo, towns, rolling stock, etc. To me, following a prototype is more like a demanding job and a job and hobby are two different things. Although Model Railroader's emphasis is on prototype modeling and operation, they're not the only game in town. The most important point is to HAVE FUN!
sf/O30:
There are trends in this hobby just like there are trends in clothing. At one time, it seemed like everybody was modeling the Rocky Mountains. At the moment, I think we are in the later days of a trend shown in the work of Allen McClelland, David Barrow, Tony Koester, the RPI club, John Pryke and that guy with the Maumee Route (nee Midland Indiana) whose name slips my mind ATM. Some of these were or are freelancers, and they have their huge differences, but the point is picking some prototype and following it.
My preference is the earlier method where your RR /is/ its own prototype, so to speak, and you come up with your own standards to follow. Some will say that this can result in less realism, but really, I think the PRR would be completely unbelievable in this way, had it not actually existed in real life.
However, I don't hesitate to dig into the prototype, or to plunder the works of such as the RPI club. By doing that, I've discovered a lot more I could do with my little railroad with minimal capital improvement. For instance, I never realized just how neat milk trains were, or that nearly every industry of any size with rail service used to take so many carloads of coal. I'm not restricted by any particular prototype in how I do these things, but knowing about them adds to the fun.
(I'm not connected with RPI, but I recommend that anybody with an interest in history or railroads subscribe to their site for one month, and assimilate as much as possible in that time. You will be amazed at what's there. Essentially, you'd be buying the right to read the greatest model railroaders' encyclopedia of prototype information ever written, for one month, for a bit less than an issue of GMR. Screaming deal.)
JD: I don't think we're motivated by jealousy, and I do like reading the layout features. I buy MR at the newsstand, and I don't skip too many months. However, I also read a lot of back issues, and often I enjoy them more. Maybe it's because the good ones are what survived, maybe it's because we need another paragon of geekcellence like Linn Westcott to appear.
Been lurking on these forums for ages, and I've finally decided to get active. Being new to the hobby, I'm was at first somewhat amazed at the amount of pessism I've found in these forums (death of the hobby, rising costs, these pages), but find a similar amount of pessism in forums I frequent for film photographers (death of film, rising costs, not enough "average" photographers featured in magazines). Perhaps that is just how we are as a society. What's even more interesting is that for many of you who've posted here, I've drooled over you wonderful layouts in fits of jealousy, and guess what, it wasn't in the pages of MR. It doesn't have to fall in the pages of a mag to for to discover your wonderful layouts!
I've only been subscribing to MR for 6 months. As far as the magazine goes, I've been quite happy to enjoy viewing the quality layouts they feature. It gives me inspiration and something to aspire to. I am not always impressed with the layouts they feature (maybe it's the plan, opertations, etc.) but I respect skills that are far superior to mine. I think they've featured a good mix of scales, sizes of layouts, freelance and prototypical operations from a multitude of modelers of different locations, ages, backgrounds, etc. It's helped generate many ideas for my layout planning, even if the process has been slow. Perhaps I'd like to see a little more content and less advertising, but hey, it keeps the costs down. Plus I think it's stated in the magazine that they more than welcome reader content.
They are entitled to have their standards in place for reader submissions. Quite frankly, I think it's very obvious from the articles what they require. If one has trouble with writing or photography, then why not seek help from others who are adept in those areas instead of giving up on the idea? I'm sure there are any number of people on these who would welcome the chance to critique writings and photos, and provide help. They sure don't hesistate when it comes to layouts And how can one complain about publishing if they've never attempted or done it a few times? Keep trying! Obviously the talented modelers did...they weren't born with the skills to lay and detail a layout.
I guess I'm just suprised at the some of the jealous overtones I find in these pages. MR features some wonderful quality layouts, and certainly wouldn't mind building layouts that matches that said quality. But MR isn't the end all be all to me, and I don't need them or anyone else to validate or justify my reasons for participating in the hobby. That's not my motivation when working on my layout. I'd be content with a just a few hits a year on website, and wife that say's "That's nice, babe" when I try to wow her with a weathered box car Hopefully, as I get more involved in these forums, I'll get help from you fine people and grow as a modeler, even without falling in the pages of MR.
Sorry...just the opinionated rant of a newbie...
shayfan84325 wrote:One thing that I sense as I read MR is that layouts that more or less closely follow an actual prototype railroad seem to be most favored, and freelance layouts are considered second tier. Is it just me, or do others get that feeling, too?One example is that the Pike-sized Passenger Train contest required entries to have a real prototype. Up to that point, I was going to model the Hooterville Express, of Petticoat Junction fame ('60s TV show). I respect the discipline that it takes to closely follow a prototype railroad, but for me it is more fun to make it up as I go along. Your thoughts?
tattooguy67 wrote:...don't you have to subscribe to MRR to gain access to this forum? and even if not i am a subscriber, and also own many of their fine books, so i guess the way i look at it is we are more like roomates or housemates if you like, and when i come on here i see it as more of me coming into the living room of a house we share and hanging out, and as i would want to keep peace in the house i would not hector you on a view you held, but i would also let you know that i did not agree and the reasons why, nicely of course, and while i do really enjoy this forum and have learned alot on here for no fee, i also do not consider this a charity in that they are losing money by providing it, they may not make much, and on some days it may seem more trouble then its worth, but i doubt it would still be here if it cost them....
...don't you have to subscribe to MRR to gain access to this forum? and even if not i am a subscriber, and also own many of their fine books, so i guess the way i look at it is we are more like roomates or housemates if you like, and when i come on here i see it as more of me coming into the living room of a house we share and hanging out, and as i would want to keep peace in the house i would not hector you on a view you held, but i would also let you know that i did not agree and the reasons why, nicely of course, and while i do really enjoy this forum and have learned alot on here for no fee, i also do not consider this a charity in that they are losing money by providing it, they may not make much, and on some days it may seem more trouble then its worth, but i doubt it would still be here if it cost them....
Thanks for your thoughtful reply, tattooguy. I agree with you...this is meant to be a place where we are equals in terms of our right to be here. What is not equal is how well each of us writes, and even our intellects and knowledge bases vary. Sometimes generally mean-spirited, but bright and articulate, posters can make the place miserable for the rest of us. It is my contention that they ought to know better. If they know so much, why can't they understand the rules...or remember them?
This place would suck, frankly, if we couldn't find something to disagree about. If we all liked Athearn Genesis, and no other product, where would we be? It also sucks when entire conversations are co-oped by loud-mouthed schnooks, to use the term of the Chicken Hawk in the Bugs Bunny cartoons.
By the way, I quoted you above at the start of a statement that indicates you are mistaken in understanding. You do not have to be a subscriber to the magazine to post here...you must only register with your required particulars and then you are free to use the place once you receive the confirmatory email from them. I subscribe to none of the Kalmbach magazines (30 of them), and I am a moderator on their trains.com forum....go figure!
-Crandell
on30francisco wrote: Unfortunately, many activities that started out as hobbies, where the main focus was to unwind and have fun, have turned into competetive pasttimes in which many participants take more seriously than their job. Hiking and biking are good examples. At one time these were pleasurable pasttimes in which to enjoy nature, get out of the house, ang get some exercise. Today, at least in the SF Bay Area, these are extremely competative with some "official" gear costing thousands of dollars. Some people wouldn't be caught dead without their "official" gear. I suppose model railroading is like that for some people who feel they have to measure up to a certain standard in order to be "official". There's nothing wrong for wanting to better your modeling skills but when this starts to become more of a stressful chore rather than an enjoyable pasttime, it ceases to be a hobby and turns into a chore. I'm sure there are many superb layouts out there from some members on this forum and elsewhere that can outdo some of the "official" masters, but will never get published because the hobbyists attitude toward model railroading is enjoyment rather than trying to be numero uno.
Unfortunately, many activities that started out as hobbies, where the main focus was to unwind and have fun, have turned into competetive pasttimes in which many participants take more seriously than their job. Hiking and biking are good examples. At one time these were pleasurable pasttimes in which to enjoy nature, get out of the house, ang get some exercise. Today, at least in the SF Bay Area, these are extremely competative with some "official" gear costing thousands of dollars. Some people wouldn't be caught dead without their "official" gear. I suppose model railroading is like that for some people who feel they have to measure up to a certain standard in order to be "official". There's nothing wrong for wanting to better your modeling skills but when this starts to become more of a stressful chore rather than an enjoyable pasttime, it ceases to be a hobby and turns into a chore. I'm sure there are many superb layouts out there from some members on this forum and elsewhere that can outdo some of the "official" masters, but will never get published because the hobbyists attitude toward model railroading is enjoyment rather than trying to be numero uno.
Well said! I've heard them referred to as "gearheads." As a cyclist on a 35-year old bike I wonder about whether they are having fun.
At work I'm evaluated and measured all the time, part of what I get from my hobby is a break from that. One of my pals commented that john Allen had a great approach to the hobby and his attitude was "I like it; I run it." No competition at all, just fun.
Here's to freelancers and guy's who put dynosaurs on their layouts and call them switch engines (like John Allen's #13).
Come to think of it, do you suppose it mattered to John Allen if he was featured or not? I like to think it was all for pleasure, never for fame.
Phil, I'm not a rocket scientist; they are my students.
shayfan84325 wrote:I really don't think there is any sort of inner circle membership requirement, or minimum layout size to get into MR. Over the past couple of years I've seen a couple of fairly small layouts featured (A UP layout that was set up as a sequence of dioramas, and another one that is always lit as if it were nighttime). The things that appeared to get them into the magazine were that they were well done, looked good, and were a little unique (something new to read about).My question is do we really need to appear in MR to be validated as model railroaders? For me, that sort of thing is for certain professions (like college professors), but this is a hobby. We do it for fun, right? For folks who want to share ideas, methods, pictures, etc. I really think MR provides a place, right here in the forums. Want to look at "regular" modelers' work? Just look around the forums.I once built a layout with the specific goal to see it in MR, I got all the way to having professional photos taken and then I asked myself how I'll deal with it if I'm rejected, and what I'll do if it is accepted. I didn't have an answer for either question.Then I asked does it matter?I never made my submission (I still have the pictures). Since then, I keep things in perspective: If I'm satisfied with my project, it's good; if I'm not satisfied, I keep trying.One last thing - I did publish an article in a professional journal. I submitted it, got paid, 4 years went by, a friend called to say he just read my article, I was thrilled (briefly). When I read it I found out what editorial license really is: slasher is a word that comes to mind. All in all, it wasn't all that rewarding and most of my work ended up "on the cutting room floor." My point: Getting published ain't all that great.Here's where I'm at: Let's build our layouts for fun, and accept MR for what it is. Those folks do all they can to keep their readership up, but they know they can't please everyone all the time - and they don't have space to feature all the great model railroading work that goes on in millions of private homes. If I were king of the magazine I'd change a few things, but I'm not king of the magazine. Somehow I doubt that I could do a better job than they do - after all, they've been at it for well over 75 years.Regarding Trackside Photos: They just published the requirements for a photo to be considered - take your best shot!Regarding the half-basketball tip: I agree, that was a little lame, but if you happen to have a ball with a hole - well, there you go!
I really don't think there is any sort of inner circle membership requirement, or minimum layout size to get into MR. Over the past couple of years I've seen a couple of fairly small layouts featured (A UP layout that was set up as a sequence of dioramas, and another one that is always lit as if it were nighttime). The things that appeared to get them into the magazine were that they were well done, looked good, and were a little unique (something new to read about).
My question is do we really need to appear in MR to be validated as model railroaders? For me, that sort of thing is for certain professions (like college professors), but this is a hobby. We do it for fun, right? For folks who want to share ideas, methods, pictures, etc. I really think MR provides a place, right here in the forums. Want to look at "regular" modelers' work? Just look around the forums.
I once built a layout with the specific goal to see it in MR, I got all the way to having professional photos taken and then I asked myself how I'll deal with it if I'm rejected, and what I'll do if it is accepted. I didn't have an answer for either question.
Then I asked does it matter?
I never made my submission (I still have the pictures). Since then, I keep things in perspective: If I'm satisfied with my project, it's good; if I'm not satisfied, I keep trying.
One last thing - I did publish an article in a professional journal. I submitted it, got paid, 4 years went by, a friend called to say he just read my article, I was thrilled (briefly). When I read it I found out what editorial license really is: slasher is a word that comes to mind. All in all, it wasn't all that rewarding and most of my work ended up "on the cutting room floor." My point: Getting published ain't all that great.
Here's where I'm at: Let's build our layouts for fun, and accept MR for what it is. Those folks do all they can to keep their readership up, but they know they can't please everyone all the time - and they don't have space to feature all the great model railroading work that goes on in millions of private homes. If I were king of the magazine I'd change a few things, but I'm not king of the magazine. Somehow I doubt that I could do a better job than they do - after all, they've been at it for well over 75 years.
Regarding Trackside Photos: They just published the requirements for a photo to be considered - take your best shot!
Regarding the half-basketball tip: I agree, that was a little lame, but if you happen to have a ball with a hole - well, there you go!
Workshop tip this month
Using half a basketball for easy clean up etc etc? What a waste of space, Im sorry. It was not a great tip that many will even consider to utilize. I will not cut a basketball for that purpose, nope. You may, but not me.
Trackside photos should read; Trackside photos of previous Model Railroader contributors
Dave Vollmer wrote: CNJ831 wrote: I think that Cliff inadvertently brings up a couple of points that, in fact, reflect on some of the counterpoints that have been posed here.How often, even in this thread, do we hear,"They can't publish stuff that isn't submitted." Then you see that the outsiders who do get published typically wait 4-7 years for their articles to see the light of day (ask our friend Bob B. about that)! Do you honestly think that reflects a lack of outside submissions? At the same time, those authors favored by MR are published on a regular basis about every couple of months. As a former magazine writer myself, I can tell you that either these guys are spending all their time writing, or their submissions are consistantly going to the head of the line. Trackside Photos has become even worse. Whereas this was once the outlet for "every-man" to get his best efforts published, the majority of photos displayed every month currently are coming from the same individual...who happens to be the company's paid photog.Likewise, I'd have to say that Cliff is being more than a bit modest in claiming his layout is not something special and he offers it up as an example that anyone can get published. From what I've seen of it, his current layout is likely in the top 100 layouts across the country and at a level far, far beyond the capabilities 99.9% of the hobbyists on this forum.My overall impressioin is that MR has pretty much backed itself into a corner with its extremely high standards, today largely offering the readership fantasy-layout tours and no longer showcasing the hobby as what it really is, or can ever hope to be, for hobbyists. It would seem that MR can no longer normally accept submissions from outside its circle of elite modelers without feeling it is lowering its standards below the extremes it has set. Perhaps this situation is fine from the viewpoint of the armchair folks but for those who actually struggle to model, I'd say that it's a rather unfortunate state of affairs. Now don't get me wrong, I certainly wouldn't want to see the magazine filled with layouts that look like some kid from the 1950's Lionel pike. But it would be nice to see a much wider diversity that encompasses a broader range of layouts that didn't necessarily take an army of helpers, or $100,000 , to create.CNJ831 CNJ,You gotta stop this! That's twice today I've agreed with you 100%!I've had some folks suggest I do up an article for MR on my layout, the angle being that it's small, portable, and yet prototype-specific. My wife thinks that since the layout is designed for my active-duty military lifestyle (constant moves with no gaurantee of a large space for a layout at the next assignment, etc.) would strike a chord with our more mobile younger generation.Two things prevent me from even trying to submit to MR:1. The photography standards are so complex, I feel like I'd either have to pay a professional or take up photography as a second hobby (not happening, since I just took up home-brewing as a new hobby!).2. I don't want to wait 5 years to see if MR will publish it.Current plans are to submit to one of the N scale mags.
CNJ831 wrote: I think that Cliff inadvertently brings up a couple of points that, in fact, reflect on some of the counterpoints that have been posed here.How often, even in this thread, do we hear,"They can't publish stuff that isn't submitted." Then you see that the outsiders who do get published typically wait 4-7 years for their articles to see the light of day (ask our friend Bob B. about that)! Do you honestly think that reflects a lack of outside submissions? At the same time, those authors favored by MR are published on a regular basis about every couple of months. As a former magazine writer myself, I can tell you that either these guys are spending all their time writing, or their submissions are consistantly going to the head of the line. Trackside Photos has become even worse. Whereas this was once the outlet for "every-man" to get his best efforts published, the majority of photos displayed every month currently are coming from the same individual...who happens to be the company's paid photog.Likewise, I'd have to say that Cliff is being more than a bit modest in claiming his layout is not something special and he offers it up as an example that anyone can get published. From what I've seen of it, his current layout is likely in the top 100 layouts across the country and at a level far, far beyond the capabilities 99.9% of the hobbyists on this forum.My overall impressioin is that MR has pretty much backed itself into a corner with its extremely high standards, today largely offering the readership fantasy-layout tours and no longer showcasing the hobby as what it really is, or can ever hope to be, for hobbyists. It would seem that MR can no longer normally accept submissions from outside its circle of elite modelers without feeling it is lowering its standards below the extremes it has set. Perhaps this situation is fine from the viewpoint of the armchair folks but for those who actually struggle to model, I'd say that it's a rather unfortunate state of affairs. Now don't get me wrong, I certainly wouldn't want to see the magazine filled with layouts that look like some kid from the 1950's Lionel pike. But it would be nice to see a much wider diversity that encompasses a broader range of layouts that didn't necessarily take an army of helpers, or $100,000 , to create.CNJ831
I think that Cliff inadvertently brings up a couple of points that, in fact, reflect on some of the counterpoints that have been posed here.
How often, even in this thread, do we hear,"They can't publish stuff that isn't submitted." Then you see that the outsiders who do get published typically wait 4-7 years for their articles to see the light of day (ask our friend Bob B. about that)! Do you honestly think that reflects a lack of outside submissions? At the same time, those authors favored by MR are published on a regular basis about every couple of months. As a former magazine writer myself, I can tell you that either these guys are spending all their time writing, or their submissions are consistantly going to the head of the line. Trackside Photos has become even worse. Whereas this was once the outlet for "every-man" to get his best efforts published, the majority of photos displayed every month currently are coming from the same individual...who happens to be the company's paid photog.
Likewise, I'd have to say that Cliff is being more than a bit modest in claiming his layout is not something special and he offers it up as an example that anyone can get published. From what I've seen of it, his current layout is likely in the top 100 layouts across the country and at a level far, far beyond the capabilities 99.9% of the hobbyists on this forum.
My overall impressioin is that MR has pretty much backed itself into a corner with its extremely high standards, today largely offering the readership fantasy-layout tours and no longer showcasing the hobby as what it really is, or can ever hope to be, for hobbyists. It would seem that MR can no longer normally accept submissions from outside its circle of elite modelers without feeling it is lowering its standards below the extremes it has set. Perhaps this situation is fine from the viewpoint of the armchair folks but for those who actually struggle to model, I'd say that it's a rather unfortunate state of affairs.
Now don't get me wrong, I certainly wouldn't want to see the magazine filled with layouts that look like some kid from the 1950's Lionel pike. But it would be nice to see a much wider diversity that encompasses a broader range of layouts that didn't necessarily take an army of helpers, or $100,000 , to create.
CNJ831
CNJ,
You gotta stop this! That's twice today I've agreed with you 100%!
I've had some folks suggest I do up an article for MR on my layout, the angle being that it's small, portable, and yet prototype-specific. My wife thinks that since the layout is designed for my active-duty military lifestyle (constant moves with no gaurantee of a large space for a layout at the next assignment, etc.) would strike a chord with our more mobile younger generation.
Two things prevent me from even trying to submit to MR:
1. The photography standards are so complex, I feel like I'd either have to pay a professional or take up photography as a second hobby (not happening, since I just took up home-brewing as a new hobby!).
2. I don't want to wait 5 years to see if MR will publish it.
Current plans are to submit to one of the N scale mags.
yes he made real good points I agree, BUT 5 years just is not a long time man. I mean where could anyone be in 5 years? Yes you may have moved and started a whole new layout, had a kid or two, bought another house, changed careers, earned a few gray hairs and have more aching bones but its not a long time.
Modeling the Rio Grande Southern First District circa 1938-1946 in HOn3.
selector wrote: I don't want to side-track the thread, but just a point, because it keeps popping up - freedom of speech is not guaranteed...not in my house, and not in yours. If you offend me, I'll demand you leave, and you will leave. It's the same here....Kalmbach sets its own rules, and can compel each of us to comply. It's the price we pay for enjoying what is meant to be friendship here as their guests.I believe the rules are generous, and our hosts are quite tolerant in their enforcement. They are also, to give them credit, relatively bright people who would not be fooled by a topic titled as this one is.Now, could we put this much behind us for once and enjoy what's left of the thread?-Crandell
I don't want to side-track the thread, but just a point, because it keeps popping up - freedom of speech is not guaranteed...not in my house, and not in yours. If you offend me, I'll demand you leave, and you will leave. It's the same here....Kalmbach sets its own rules, and can compel each of us to comply. It's the price we pay for enjoying what is meant to be friendship here as their guests.
I believe the rules are generous, and our hosts are quite tolerant in their enforcement. They are also, to give them credit, relatively bright people who would not be fooled by a topic titled as this one is.
Now, could we put this much behind us for once and enjoy what's left of the thread?
dknelson wrote: For those who enjoy seeing all sorts of layouts including incomplete ones, small ones, and some that are not perhaps as finished as might warrant an article in the model railroading press, I hope you are NMRA members and attend divisional meets as well as regional and, when possible, national conventions. Layout tours in person are a real opportunity to learn.Dave Nelson
For those who enjoy seeing all sorts of layouts including incomplete ones, small ones, and some that are not perhaps as finished as might warrant an article in the model railroading press, I hope you are NMRA members and attend divisional meets as well as regional and, when possible, national conventions. Layout tours in person are a real opportunity to learn.
Dave Nelson
Hear! Hear! I plan on rejoining the NMRA in next 2-3 months for that very reason plus,to renew old friendships with folks that live in other areas.
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
Poor Andre. I was pointing out that the level of modeling and the physical magnitude of virtually all the layouts pictured in the layout tours lately are so far beyond the abilities of such as yourself and probably 99% of the readership, that MR is largely selling a magazine of fantasy, rather than of practicality.
That's twice today that I have sprayed my monitor with a caffeinated beverage. This time it was Pepsi.
You must mean layouts like Rod Stewart's or Bruce Chubb's or Chuck Hitchcock's to name a few recent ones. So what? Doesn't mean that we peasants and other assorted riff-raff can't enjoy reading about them. I remember that when I first saw the 2 parter about Bruce Chubb's new layout, my first reaction was a mix of "wow" and "why"? The more I read, the more it became "why?". I mean no disrespect to Bruce Chubb, but my overall impression was one that can be summed up in the word "overkill". Well done overkill, perhaps, but overkill nonetheless.
As for abilities, if you mean skill, well, skills are learned, not inherent. If you mean financial means, you're probably right but, as far as I'm concerned, irrelevant. Even if I could afford a club sized layout in my basement (if I had a basement), I have no desire for something of that magnitude. Actually, my favorite recent layout was the Indiana & Northern (I think it was called that, I don't have my copy of GMR 2008 handy). Not ALL the layouts shown in the last year in MR, GMR, MRP are mega layouts. There've been a number of smaller ones, including Lance Mindheim's little gem of a switching layout. Even the Troy branch of the WSOR, although large, is not a mega layout. It's certainly a doable one for many, even if it would have to be "downsized" to fit a smaller space.
Certainly not that the layouts are fantasy. For future reference, let me advise you that when the meanings aren't clear to a poster, the intelligent approach is to ask what the author actually meant, instead of the classic approach of the ignorant in vainly attempting to poke fun at things they don't understand.
Physician, heal thyself. When I referred to "classic" mega layouts as fantasies, I was referring to the fact that those of us great unwashed (not to mention those poor benighted young whippersnappers unschooled in the way of the classic Jedi model railroader) could only fantasize about having such layouts.
I knew exactly what you meant. Did you know what I meant?
Andre
concretelackey wrote: Here would be my official suggestion to the editors....1-since Kalmbach owns/operates this forum they should have a representative voice from the editorial staff pop in on threads like this to explain the hows and whys of the current magazine format to us (not that they really are obligated to do so but just to answer some questions AND) to show they are really listening.2-Establish a clearly stated "outline" of what they expect for submittals to consider for publication. Do they require 20 to 30 photos, a 3000 word essay on how they current layout came to life, or would a decently drawn CAD plan with 5 snapshots and 100 words be enough? Doing this would give all of us a level playing feild to get started. I am extremely impressed with the fact that this thread has remained as civil as it has been.
Here would be my official suggestion to the editors....
1-since Kalmbach owns/operates this forum they should have a representative voice from the editorial staff pop in on threads like this to explain the hows and whys of the current magazine format to us (not that they really are obligated to do so but just to answer some questions AND) to show they are really listening.
2-Establish a clearly stated "outline" of what they expect for submittals to consider for publication. Do they require 20 to 30 photos, a 3000 word essay on how they current layout came to life, or would a decently drawn CAD plan with 5 snapshots and 100 words be enough? Doing this would give all of us a level playing feild to get started.
I am extremely impressed with the fact that this thread has remained as civil as it has been.
Terry
Terry in NW Wisconsin
Queenbogey715 is my Youtube channel
Okay, gotcha...thanks for clearing that up for me.
selector wrote: IRONROOSTER wrote: My presence or absence in your house is not a freedom of speech issue. In my house my freedom of speech is guaranteed.EnjoyPaulSo...are you agreeing with me, Paul, or disagreeing? I am not following...sorry.-Crandell
IRONROOSTER wrote: My presence or absence in your house is not a freedom of speech issue. In my house my freedom of speech is guaranteed.EnjoyPaul
My presence or absence in your house is not a freedom of speech issue. In my house my freedom of speech is guaranteed.
Enjoy
Paul
So...are you agreeing with me, Paul, or disagreeing? I am not following...sorry.
Mostly what I am saying is that this isn't really a freedom of speech issue. In the case of houses the implied right of privacy is superior.
I find this thread interesting, and will chime in my . You may react as you wish.
One thing I find very useful for me in various MR articles is - especially in the 'fantasy' ones (e.g., Rod Stewart's, and he had help with that, as those who read the article carefully know already) - is the ones of whatever size, which have in a very good or excellent manner portrayed the scene (for lack of a better phrase). The article and photos need not be something I can achieve all of it (and I may not want to recreate that layout), but it just needs to inspire me or to give me a detail or two in setting the scene, that I hadn't thought of which could be transferred to my layout (small, freestanding shelf/sectional type - I live in a one-bedroom apartment, and currently my layout sits in part of the living room). Though I wouldn't give the 'layout design elements' book five stars, I think the concept is useful. I don't need to duplicate every detail; I want instead to create the mood, the ambience that lets the layout viewer (or me) to fill in whatever details we remember from some time when we watched a railroad. So, in a way it's helping create the fantasy, but without having to buy every big-ticket item in Walthers' (or other) catalog to do that.
Okay, I'll step down from the now. To each his/her own...
Jim in Cape Girardeau
andrechapelon wrote: andre c: I'm pretty sure CNJ is referring to layouts we'd dream about owning, rather than freelanced or fictional-world model railroads, although a lot of what you listed could also qualify as that. The G&D was and is that, for sure.I brought those layouts up because they represented the "state of the art" at the time. They were what the rest of us either aspired to or thought we should aspire to.
andre c: I'm pretty sure CNJ is referring to layouts we'd dream about owning, rather than freelanced or fictional-world model railroads, although a lot of what you listed could also qualify as that. The G&D was and is that, for sure.
I brought those layouts up because they represented the "state of the art" at the time. They were what the rest of us either aspired to or thought we should aspire to.
ac:
Okay, right. That's true...the G&D was certainly the greatest dream railroad to a lot of people, and it still is up there. Fair enough.
What is nice about the G&D is that if you go way back and read old issues, you can follow Allen's dream as it grew up...but then, Allen was a gifted photographer who could take very little and make it look amazing. We've all seen the picture of a boxcar being unloaded in the background, with overhanging tree branches in front? Then there is this scene:
http://www.gdlines.com/GD_Galleries/Structures/slides/awesome.html
It's really simple in detail, but what an atmosphere. It's still rare that a scene has the kind of reality that Allen could create - often I see a picture and it looks like a perfect model, but I don't get the feeling that I could reach out, open the door, and walk right in.
Is it just me, or has the positive nature of this thread degenerated a little?
-Phil