Are you a realism nut?

[Hawks05]

both. i think i'll like to have my rolling stock realistic looking but thats about it. i just want to have fun in this great hobby and be able to relieve stress.

[Martin4]

I like to have realistic models but not at any price. I realized that I don't need every one of my cars to be superdetailed because you can't tell the difference when they are rolling. Only a fair amount of cars need to be detailed, just to be parked where those who care can appreciate them. Weathering every one to various levels is enough to create a consistent look. Locomotives draw a little more attention so I put a little more detail on each of them -again to various levels- trying to keep inside a reasonable budget.

Martin
Québec City

[Mikeygaw]

the scenery i kinda like to be realistic, but it's not the main thing for me. As for running the trains realistically, it kinda depends on the mood i'm in.

[Anonymous]

When talking about realism if you mean running a model train layout with dispatchers and timetables etc, then my answer is no. I certainly like everything on my layout to be scale but there are exceptions. For example, I have an N-scale tugboat in my harbor acting as a pilot boat to the larger ships. Mostly, I like my hobby to be fun.

[Anonymous]

Interesting question. I have a varied view on realism, for example, I will happily run under-scale-length passenger cars, but equally I like to fit them with interior details. My viewpoint on realism is one of "if it looks right, it's ok". As you can guess, I'm not a "rivet counter", but I do try to make the models I operate look as convincing as possible.

[Big_Boy_4005]

What a refreshing idea Mark, and the responses have been fun to read.

Being in 3 rail O gives me a one strike count before I step up to the plate. I have to take both, but over the years I have actually tightened up my style. My new layout will be much more realistic, and use much less silly stuff than I have in the past.

[Anonymous]

I want to enjoy the my trains (fun, fun, fun!) more than anything, though realism doesn't hurt. Even if I have only tracks in place and trains to run on them, I'm happy.[:D]

[AntonioFP45]

Would like the railroad and scenery to be believable, whether viewed by a non railfan or a fellow modeler. I'm not an extreme "purist" or rivet counter. While I'm modeling the U.S east coast in the late 60s, one will see Rio Grande, and Santa Fe units here and there.

Tony Koester on the Model Railroader magazine does a great job of realistic modeling and I've used his column as a guide. While he is on the "extreme realism" end, his insights and comments serve as a great guide for making any model railroad believeable. HIs column in new or old MRR issues, is definetly worth reading.

[IRONROOSTER]

I like what I do to be correct in size, but with allowance allowed where needed for operation. I don't need great amounts of detail, but again what detail there is, should be in scale. It also should be sufficient to present a reasonable appearance.
Enjoy
Paul

[Anonymous]

no i wanna have fun but i do like some relizum but i can live with a few out of scale things

[Anonymous]

I'm not a fanatic when it comes to realism, definately not a Rivet Counter, However I would like it to be believable and realistic. Nothing clunky, out of proportion or tacky!

I would like to be able to have a layout that could be featured in MR.

When I build Musquodoboit people from there won't recognize it as such as it will be a generic small town that you would probably find anywhere on the eastern seaboard. There will be a couple of nuances that will make it Nova Scotian. Sorry if this is a disapointment to anyone BUT! If I get to detailed it will take me away from other things in my life. Later however I will probably replace those structures that don't appeal to me with those more typical to the area.

I'm not waiting 25 years to have a finished layout!!!!

[lupo]

[#ditto]kbfcsme,
I agree on scale, all things must be the same scale, look realistic an believable,
but:
About scale combinations: I once saw an big LGB scale (G?) layout with an HO trainset for large scale garden railway the LGB size figures could ride, situated
in an Railway themepark setting where they also had a Z scale layout featuring as a HO-ish layout [%-)][%-)] It looked allright ( as a LGB layout can look)

[Anonymous]

If you are referring to realism as representing life as it is, or was, then yes I am a realism nut.[:D]
I may not model a particular scene, or a particular day to 100% accuracy, but I do model to a degree that visitors find the scenery very believable.
Dinosaurs, UFO's, 50 ft tall cartoon characters walking down the street, working missle silos loaded with "live" Estes rockets, Ice skaters in June,
S scale automobiles on HO layouts, among other things I have seen on layouts, have NO place on mine.[V]
Just because a layout looks realistic doesnt mean it can't be fun.[:D] Switching cars, making up and running trains and scale railfanning can all be fun![:D][:D]

[Anonymous]

OK, I forgot to put that. I'd say both.

[lupo]

can't we have both?
I want my loco's to look realistic, but not to the point of counting rivets
i want scenery to be realistic but can also fun to build:
( http://www.trains.com/community/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=10424)
So as long it is FUN to model realistic I go for realism.

I collect UP locomotives wich ran late '50 early '60's, I check the UP roster of accuracy of the road# involved quit realistic,
but feel free to let an 1961 delivered diesel along a 4884, and that is not realistic I think.

[Anonymous]

The Question is: Does everything have to be realistic on your layout? Do you have to be realistic, or do you want to have fun?