I don't care who you are, THAT's funny. First he tells us that the hobby is dying and that Model Railroader is no longer publishing articles that are of interest to experienced modelers and now he tells us that Model Railroader's standards are too high and that all we're getting are "fantasy" layouts. Blasts from the past - fantasy layouts from the "Golden Age".John Allen - fantasy layoutetc., etc., etc.There are more and I'll probably think of them later, but right now, I have to clean the coffee spray off my monitor and explain to my wife why I'm having fits of the giggles.Andre
I don't care who you are, THAT's funny. First he tells us that the hobby is dying and that Model Railroader is no longer publishing articles that are of interest to experienced modelers and now he tells us that Model Railroader's standards are too high and that all we're getting are "fantasy" layouts.
Blasts from the past - fantasy layouts from the "Golden Age".
John Allen - fantasy layout
etc., etc., etc.
There are more and I'll probably think of them later, but right now, I have to clean the coffee spray off my monitor and explain to my wife why I'm having fits of the giggles.
Andre
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. 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.
CNJ831
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. Interestingly enough, a number of those might be considered somewhat amateurish today given the vastly improved kits, r-t-r and scenery materials with which we have to work. Both McClanahan's T&RGW and Walsh's WA&I used Tru-Scale milled roadbed with ties milled in place, IIRC. The milled roadbed had ties that were way too uniform.
Since the topic of model railroad photography has been mentioned a few times, I've got to make sure you all know about this website:
http://arailfan.googlepages.com/
It's the creation of Bob Boudreau (one of our fellow forums participants) and it's great! It is full of good advice for taking great pictures of your work. I really urge you to take a look.
GREAT WORK, BOB!
-Phil
Phil, I'm not a rocket scientist; they are my students.
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?
-Crandell
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
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
As far as the issue of not being able to get things published without being in the Model Railroader clique is concerned, there does appear to be some cronyism that I have noticed over the years. However, there is often considerable self-delusion among those that submit something to MR that is rejected. Over the years I have been subjected 4-5 times to a rant from someone (usually in a hobby shop) who is really upset by the rejection of their submission to MR. When I was shown the actual manuscript, photos or ideas, it was all I could do to keep a straight face and be diplomatic. Not all of us are skilled modelers or photograhers and not all of us can write. Having seen some of the modeling featured in some of the lesser (and now gone) magazines, and am glad that MR has high standards.
The other thing I have noticed is that often the newer, skilled modelers and new quality layouts will show up in RMC or LDSIG first, or develop a regional reputation for having a layout worth seeing and then will start showing up in MR, so people do break though and get published in MR. - Nevin
OzarkBelt wrote: just a little comment, but i thought it funny that the title is about this getting locked quickly, and here we areon page seven. kinda funny. on a more serious note, i think this type of thoughtful, cordial discusion and debate a nice change and a standard for other posts
just a little comment, but i thought it funny that the title is about this getting locked quickly, and here we areon page seven. kinda funny.
on a more serious note, i think this type of thoughtful, cordial discusion and debate a nice change and a standard for other posts
I am happy you noticed. You have pointed out the very reason the thread has proliferated....it is focused, respectful in tone, and it is relevant. It doesn't matter who is saying what, it is more focused on what is being bandied about...which is the intent of the forum and Kalmbach.
No need to squelch a good conversation. It would be rude.
Some things are a labor of love, we put everything we are into a work of art and only some of the folks will see the blood sweat and money that goes into what we see as a Master Art work when others will look at it and just see mediocre work.
Art like lay outs is subjectable or in the eyes of the beholder.
As long as you enjoy your creation that is all that matters.
Yes , I'd love to see the average Joes layout, this would give me more incentive to advance to a place that is reachable to me, and I must admit the perfect lay outs with the endless cash flowing into them can intimidate me and make me wonder if I'd ever have a lay out that would stand out amongst all the rest.
My game plan is to build what I know, honor what I'm doing and those who will enjoy it the most are those that I hope will get some inspiration from me and my art form.
Build it from your heart and it will always be remembered, build it for publicity and it will only be judged and out done by some one with more money and talent than we hope to have.
Good luck, now I'm off in search for pics of the average Joes lay outs.
I'm also happy to see that they didn't "Pull this post" that would only make me wonder about freedom of expression at this site, it is refreshing to see that at least one of our rights remains in tact.
If an article submitted to MR is deemed worthy, they will buy it and stash it away for future use. Balancing issues is I imagine a big part of their having lots of material to draw from. Sometimes the purchased articles can sit for a long time in their archives; they held onto one of mine for 13 years! It was bought and paid for so I couldn't submit material on the model to any other prublications, somewhat frustrating if you'd like to see your work in print.
As has been noted, preparing articles for submission to magazines can be a fair amount of work. If you're working on a model, then you have to be set up and prepared to take in progress photos as well as ones of the finished model. Writing an article takes a fair amount of time - assembling your references, setting up a proper sequence, etc. My word processor keeps track of time a document is open; one article I completed showed over 600 minutes - 10 hours. Now I wasn't typing all this time, but was working at the computer most of this time.
Photography has become a lot simpler with digital cameras, with instant feedback. I was always crossing my fingers when I used to shoot color slides, especially on out of town layouts. I didn't know how my photos turned out until I got back home and had them developed. Never really had any problems, but it was always a concern. Dioramas set up for photography were usually left set up until the slides could be checked to see if I got what I wanted. Normal shots weren't a problem, it was the ones with special effects such as smoke from engines, falling snow, etc. The photo setups often took a fair amount of work, but I didn't mind as photography was my other main hobby and trying to get the special shots I had envisioned was fun for me. But I can see how it could be a problem for anyone not comfortable taking photos.
It was fun anway!
Bob Boudreau
CANADA
Visit my model railroad photography website: http://sites.google.com/site/railphotog/
As for publication delays, I wonder how much of that depends on the subject matter. If, for example, MR gets a lot of articles on detailing F units or DCC programming, these might sit for a long time before use. OTOH, a long multipart article about something extraordinarily arcane like scratchbuilding a brass gondola car in N with working brakes and individually carved grains of scale coal might wait a long time for the time to be right. I am willing to bet my prized Tyco "Snack Pack" boxcar* that a short, interesting article with good photographs on something a lot of people could get into would see quick use.
I'm pretty sure you're right.
I think I read once that MR makes an effort to include a balance of material for N, HO, and O scale modelers. I imagine that most of the submissions to MR are from HO scale modelers, and the topic of the submission is in HO scale. Assuming that they receive more HO submissions than the other scales, it makes sense that the wait for publication would be longer and those submissions would receive greater scrutiny.
Regarding photographs, the published standards for Trackside Photos are fairly high (digital pictures must be at least 5 megapixel). I think this is because the printing processes cause a certain amount of degradation of the image, so the better the original the better it looks in print.
I think we all appreciate the crisp and high-quality appearance of MR, and we can understand them making a conscious effort to include the three most popular scales with some level of equality. Based on all of this, it seems that much of what it takes to see your work in print is to do good model work that would be of interest to a lot of readers; write it up very well, and provide very good pictures.
I've considered writing articles and submitting them for publication, but I know that to have any real hope of success (in getting them published) I'd have to get a better camera and set up a visually clean work-space, create some darn good drawings, and write/rewrite until I've got it right. As much as I'd love to see my work in print, I'm a builder - not a writer - and all of that seems like work, not fun. I've already got a job; I don't need my hobby to start resembling my vocation. One thing I like about the Forums is that the standards are simpler, so I can share my best work and ideas without having to do all the extra stuff that it takes to appear in MR.
I'm grateful for the modeler/authors and modeler/photographers among us. They provide us some great reading material and photos, and give us the resulting inspiration/information to do better and better work. I'm also grateful to the Forums contributors, this is like sitting down for coffee with a bunch of model railroaders - it's a lot of fun and a great way to share information, methods, and ideas.
dknelson wrote:...On the other end of the spectrum, for good how-to articles and layout visits that don't seem to be re-hashing the same set of modelers repeatedly, don't ignore the new and improved Scale Rails magazine that you get when you join the NMRA. Every issue features scale drawings of at least one structure, and often a locomotive as well. It is several steps improved from the NMRA Bulletin of years past. Dave Nelson
On the other end of the spectrum, for good how-to articles and layout visits that don't seem to be re-hashing the same set of modelers repeatedly, don't ignore the new and improved Scale Rails magazine that you get when you join the NMRA. Every issue features scale drawings of at least one structure, and often a locomotive as well. It is several steps improved from the NMRA Bulletin of years past.
Dave Nelson
That may be true for the recent past Bulletins, but the Bulletin of the 70's and 80's when Whit Towers was editor, I think, are still its best years.
Andies Candy 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 Well stated and from my experience submitting stuff it appears to be true. MR has an elite circle of contributors and to get into that circle you will have to get to know someone already in the circle well. Its just like a club where you can only enter if you have a family or friend that is currently a member of it.
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
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.
Well stated and from my experience submitting stuff it appears to be true. MR has an elite circle of contributors and to get into that circle you will have to get to know someone already in the circle well. Its just like a club where you can only enter if you have a family or friend that is currently a member of it.
AC:
Actually, you and CNJ are saying two completely different things.
CNJ is saying that the MR staff has set their standards so high that few can meet them.
You are saying that MR just favors certain people regardless of standards.
I have to say that there may be something in what Mr. 831 says here, particularly in the area of photography. Lou Sassi is an excellent model-railroad photographer (although as I have said before, I wish he'd vary his style more). A less experienced shutterbug or sensorbug would have to get up pretty early in the morning to come up with something that wouldn't look a little rough next to one of his photos. Of course, his photos also look really nice, so I wouldn't really want to see standards brought down. I suppose we will all have to get up earlier.
Photography has always been somewhat of a stumbling block for would-be contributors, I think. Many of the people we remember most from bygone days just happen to be the model railroaders who were also good photographers: John Allen, for instance.
*It's the 60-footer and doesn't have trucks, sorry.
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.
Terry Walsh - fantasy layout
Bill McClanahan - fantasy layout
Wally Moore - fantasy layout
Carl (?) Appel - fantasy layout
Whit Towers - fantasy layout
Cliff Robinson - well, you get the picture
"He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot Visit my blog! http://becomingawarriorpoet.blogspot.com
CNJ831 wrote: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.CNJ831
I believe that the company photographer has probably been sent out to photograph layouts that were intended to be a full major article, but may have been pulled for something else. So at least they use the photo in Trackside Pictures to give us a flavor of the layout even if we don't get a full article. I know of a number of people where they came out and never published the article on the layout.
Rick
Rule 1: This is my railroad.
Rule 2: I make the rules.
Rule 3: Illuminating discussion of prototype history, equipment and operating practices is always welcome, but in the event of visitor-perceived anacronisms, detail descrepancies or operating errors, consult RULE 1!
Car Craft magazine has had a section of the magazine that is dedicated to readers rides for a long time. I myself have just picked up my first subscription to MR in 20 years. I want to see a mix of stuff, I want to see the museum pieces for new ideas, and the average layouts for "Corner Cuttin Money Savin Idee-ers".
I am the first to admit that my layout when completed will be no museum piece. I am trying to complete a basement layout for $5000.00 or less, with DCC. It looks like I might be able to accomplish this goal. But it will by no means be a showpiece, but with a little care and a lot of effort it can look nice.
Will my layout grace the pages of MR? Probably not.
So what. Its about bonding with my son that is the most important, and he and I are interested in Model RR together.
fifedog wrote: Folks,gather 'round. I've read all your posts, and I gotta tell ya, what you seek already exists: CLASSIC TOY TRAINS. Heck, we've already given you Neil B to set things right."Come on in boys; the water's fine."
Folks,gather 'round. I've read all your posts, and I gotta tell ya, what you seek already exists: CLASSIC TOY TRAINS. Heck, we've already given you Neil B to set things right.
"Come on in boys; the water's fine."
lol
Actually some of the postings on this thread actually seem to be yearning for a return of Kalmbach's old magazine, Model Trains -- which probably only a handful of us grizzled veterans remember. It featured scale and tinplate but the projects were at a do-able level for more people, the layouts tended to be small apartment sized. It also featured some wonderful "railroad you could model" articles about prototypes. Linn Westcott wrote that the magazine was discontinued not because it wasn't selling but because the target audience needed so many questions answered at the same time that the conclusion was that only books on a topic, such as wiring or scenery or building a layout on a 4x8 that could grow, really met the need.
I didn't mean that showcasing layouts of average quality was one of the good ideas. The publication should always rise to the top with the cream.
There are, however, a lot of really good ideas in terms of things that could be included in their layout spreads, such as how the layout fits in the room, more "how to" information from the model builders, etc.
Model Railroader isn't the place to show pictures of a piece of plywood tetering on a saw horse with a circle of Unitrak on it.
Lee
Route of the Alpha Jets www.wmrywesternlines.net
maandg wrote: Supreme Line wrote: luvadj wrote: It matters on who you are to get in the mag and how money is invested in the layout to make the magazine..... Basically all the contributors are rich! ........So the move you need to make before trying to get published in the mag is locate someone like TONY KOESTER, befriend him a little bit kiss his butt I couldn't disagree more. Speaking as someone who has been published in both MR and GMR, I think it would be appropriate to share my first hand experiences. My entry into MR stemmed from a submission to the small layout contest they hosted in 2001. My layout at that time was in a spare bedroom and fit the 100 square foot maximum size requirement. I spent several weeks working on the manuscript and took my own slide photos. It was fun, but a LOT of work. Unfortunately, my submission did not place in the contest, but it was purchased for future publication. That "future" was four years later, but in April 2005 I had a life-long dream realized by seeing my work appear in MR. As a complete unknown, I had no connections to Kalmbach publishing, Tony Koester, or any other hobby notable. My layout was not a billboard for any company or manufacturer. Nor did it occupy the Super Dome. Yet somehow it managed to sneak under the radar of the "elitists" at MR.Soon after, I began my current dream layout. Motivated by the first article, I decided from it's inception that the new layout would be built to a publishable degree of quality...period. Living in an area where model railroaders are few and far between, I saw the hobby media as a means to share the layout with others. True, I build it for my own personal enjoyment, but I derive equal gratification by sharing it, as shown through the labors of my website. This second layout was published in GMR 2007; however this time, I was contacted by the magazine. It seems that Andy Sperandeo had visited my website and liked what he saw. I was, and still am, an unknown name in the hobby...but somehow managed to crack that "bastion of wealthy socialites" up in Waukesha. I guess they lowered themselves temporarily to pity the Hoi Polloi.My point is this. MR has something known as standards. It is their right and, IMHO, obligation to the readership. I by no means am putting myself on a pedestal. I don't profess to have a great model railroad, as the name of GMR suggests. However, I do believe that anything worth doing is worth doing to the best of one's abilities and talents. This holds true not only for the layout itself, but also the manuscript writing and the photography. If what I put before MR's readers is mediocre, then it doesn't say much for me. I have never bought into this notion that exquisite layouts scare away newcomers. They certainly didn't scare me away. To the contrary, they motivated and inspired me. My message would be "if I can do it, anybody can!"
Supreme Line wrote: luvadj wrote: It matters on who you are to get in the mag and how money is invested in the layout to make the magazine..... Basically all the contributors are rich! ........So the move you need to make before trying to get published in the mag is locate someone like TONY KOESTER, befriend him a little bit kiss his butt
luvadj wrote:
It matters on who you are to get in the mag and how money is invested in the layout to make the magazine..... Basically all the contributors are rich! ........So the move you need to make before trying to get published in the mag is locate someone like TONY KOESTER, befriend him a little bit kiss his butt
I couldn't disagree more. Speaking as someone who has been published in both MR and GMR, I think it would be appropriate to share my first hand experiences.
My entry into MR stemmed from a submission to the small layout contest they hosted in 2001. My layout at that time was in a spare bedroom and fit the 100 square foot maximum size requirement. I spent several weeks working on the manuscript and took my own slide photos. It was fun, but a LOT of work. Unfortunately, my submission did not place in the contest, but it was purchased for future publication. That "future" was four years later, but in April 2005 I had a life-long dream realized by seeing my work appear in MR. As a complete unknown, I had no connections to Kalmbach publishing, Tony Koester, or any other hobby notable. My layout was not a billboard for any company or manufacturer. Nor did it occupy the Super Dome. Yet somehow it managed to sneak under the radar of the "elitists" at MR.
Soon after, I began my current dream layout. Motivated by the first article, I decided from it's inception that the new layout would be built to a publishable degree of quality...period. Living in an area where model railroaders are few and far between, I saw the hobby media as a means to share the layout with others. True, I build it for my own personal enjoyment, but I derive equal gratification by sharing it, as shown through the labors of my website. This second layout was published in GMR 2007; however this time, I was contacted by the magazine. It seems that Andy Sperandeo had visited my website and liked what he saw. I was, and still am, an unknown name in the hobby...but somehow managed to crack that "bastion of wealthy socialites" up in Waukesha. I guess they lowered themselves temporarily to pity the Hoi Polloi.
My point is this. MR has something known as standards. It is their right and, IMHO, obligation to the readership. I by no means am putting myself on a pedestal. I don't profess to have a great model railroad, as the name of GMR suggests. However, I do believe that anything worth doing is worth doing to the best of one's abilities and talents. This holds true not only for the layout itself, but also the manuscript writing and the photography. If what I put before MR's readers is mediocre, then it doesn't say much for me. I have never bought into this notion that exquisite layouts scare away newcomers. They certainly didn't scare me away. To the contrary, they motivated and inspired me. My message would be "if I can do it, anybody can!"
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.
I'm glad Cliff Powers chimed in also.
I see one common thread among layouts in MR. They're the good looking ones! They look great, and that's why they're in there. Cliff's first layout was awesome. (I'm a bit of a layout article junkie - scanning my favorites into my computer before recycling the magazine in the recycling bin). Both of Cliff's layouts are great.
There have been many beautiful small layouts in MR. (How about Lance Minheim's small shelf layout in GMR 2007?). Don't believe it, check out his website: www.lancemindheim.com
As for the "I don't have DCC" argument: Hopefully Eric Brooman will finally install DCC one day so that his Utah Belt could actually make it into Model Railroader! (Sorry, I couldn't resist).
The layouts in the magazine are there because they're great layouts. Not just because they're great in size or expense, but because they're just great.
Another beautiful layout is the HO Scale 4.5ft long by 1ft wide "Maine Central's Rockland North Yard" in the June 1999 issue. It's gorgous, and tiny!
In fact, I'll go out on a limb and say many of the smaller layouts are more attractive in many ways because the creators didn't have to spend an arm and a leg on them (or a lifetime creating them).
Looking for time/moneysaving tips? Lance Mindheim mentions how he didn't use any turnout mechanisms, kept the wiring extremely simple, made benchwork out of doors for goodness sake. There was ONE locomotive shown in the article. ONE! The layout is in the magazine because it's a work of art.
How about the 2ft x 12ft N scale Kingsbury Branch, featured in Jan 1997, and on the Cover in May, 1998? Beautiful.
I wouldn't want to buy a magazine full of mediocre layouts. Keep the great ones coming!
I'd have to agree that there have been some outstanding ideas for showcasing average layouts in the last couple of days...I hope that someone from MR is taking notes I never thought that my ranting would turn into such a lively and thought provoking thread...
Reading the last two pages I guess I should apologize for the thread title. It was not meant to be a "rickroll" or subversive in any way....I really thought that the post would be deleted seeing as it was a rant on MR's format.
To see that we can air our opinions on this subject is very refreshing indeed.
Bob Berger, C.O.O. N-ovation & Northwestern R.R. My patio layout....SEE IT HERE
There's no place like ~/ ;)
Cliff,
Thanks for piping up. It's easy to fall into the trap of thinking you have to know somebody who knows somebody. By the way, I thought your article in GMR was outstanding. The atmosphere you created with your layout was enough to make the back of my neck sweat, and give a taste for a tall glass of lemonade... I could almost smell the peat moss.
I'd like to agree with the poster who hoped that the MR editors take a look at this thread. I've seen more good ideas here in a couple days than I've seen in the rest of the time I've been a member here. There's really a good thougtful discussion going on, which I hope sets the tone for the rest of this forum.
I've got half a manuscript and a bunch of notes I intend to string together into a submission, but I still need to get a bag of Round Tuits... I hope this inpires me to get off my duff.
I agree with shayfan.
More clubs and local groups would be great!
Cliff, my compliments to you. Nicely and comprehensively stated, and I hope you convince even one of the readers who would prefer to think otherwise.
Personally I like the big, expensive layouts.
I like to spend time gazing at every section of them and then use my limited talents to try to reproduce 1 or 2 small sections that jumped out at me.
Kurt_Laughlin wrote:??? Whaddaya mean "average people", and what does that have to do with anything anyway? I wouldn't care if the RR was built by a rich guy, a poor guy, a housecat, or a potted cactus if the modeling was good. KL
??? Whaddaya mean "average people", and what does that have to do with anything anyway? I wouldn't care if the RR was built by a rich guy, a poor guy, a housecat, or a potted cactus if the modeling was good.
KL
a potted cactus could not do a worse job on the retaining wall I just completed.
As for being rich, I'm a teacher. 'Nuff said.
Cliff Powers
www.magnoliaroute.com
NevinW wrote:I really have to disagree. I don't subscribe to MR to see small, mediocre average layouts. Every once in a while someone makes this complaint but if they really thought about it, the usual first-timer 4x8 would look pretty embarrassing and not be something anyone would be really interested in. Personally my only complaint about the layout features is that I would like to see a few photos showing how the layout fits into its environment and room. I want to see the state-of the-art layouts myself. - Nevin
I agree with your disagreement 100%!
Craig
DMW
Ok, gotta reply to this one. I purchase MR all the time for the information contained in the magazine, and enjoy the layouts that it features. It would be great if the magazine 's editors were to read this post and take some notes though. There are a lot of good point which they could follow up on.
Personally, the great layouts that it features inspire me to continue with my efforts but as mentioned it can also act as a deterent for a newcomer. So it would be interesting to see the pictures from the masters previous layouts. Layouts from previous efforts that were not such stellar layouts as an editorial attachment to the main feature. Let us not forget that everybody has to start somewhere. Also smaller layouts that the average person might build should also be featured as long as they compare to the high quality of the larger layouts which are currently offered by MR. This might encourage more individuals to build a layout themselves.
Just my worth.
Frank
"If you need a helping hand, you'll find one at the end of your arm."