"I Hate Your Layout"Preface:Just to be clear, I don't really "hate" anybody's layout.
But I recently stumbled across one that just made me cringe. And I knew instantly that I'd be writing about it today. Before I do though, I'd like to remind people that the whole point and purpose of my weekly "Philosophy Friday" postings is not to be critical, condescending, crass or unkind, but to merely provoke thought and discussion about various points or issues related to Model Railroading and/or Railroading in-general. But though I have an enormous interest and a constant desire to learn and know more, I am certainly not an expert in either of these subjects and thus my role in these discussions is primarily that of the interlocutor-- though perhaps occasionally the gadfly instead-- and secondarily that of the student, as I learn a great deal from reading your comments and ideas, interjecting a few of my own, whilst shepherding the conversation.I'm saying this upfront today so I can be clear that my goal isn't to "out" someone or belittle their efforts, but rather to bring up some points that I think are interesting, merit lots of discussion, and may possibly assist someone-- certainly myself if no other-- in developing their skills and their "critical eye", and generally improving their overall ability to construct and present pleasing and satisfying scenes and model-works. In the interest of full disclosure, my own skills are likely to be approximately on-par with those I'll be discussing. Perhaps not as much in some areas, or more in others. But I feel, as I am moving forward in my own layout, that I am as much "criticizing" what I believe to be about my own approximate abilities. And indeed, that was the impetus for this posting today-- when I saw the photos of this layout, I saw a ghost image of what my own layout might turn out to be. It was a bit like that scene in "Star Wars" where Yoda sends Luke into the cave to confront his fears. Inside he meets up with Darth Vader who, when defeated, turns out to be himself. Like enters the cave and says "I'm not afraid", and Yoda, in his inimitable way, says "You Will be.... You will be!"So with that, let's dig in.
I HATE YOUR LAYOUT...The other day I was surfing the net, as I often do, looking for pictures of other people's layouts to look at, admire, study, learn from, compare & contrast in my head with other's I've seen and so on. As I was surfing, I stumbled upon one layout that was the very epitome of everything I "hate" about train layouts. It was so egregious it, in my view, was a caricature of what a train layout should be.And to be fair-- really fair-- the owner has done nothing wrong probably, a matter of a difference of opinion at the most really. And besides, its *his* railroad, and if he likes it that way, who am I to be critical of it?** And you should bear that in mind throughout this whole post please. **
Who's layout is it?I'm not going to tell you-- because my intent is not to call anybody out or to try to make them feel bad, nor even really to "judge" this layout versus that one, but merely to point out some things that I feel undercuts the modeler's intent and extremely obvious effort into building what is otherwise a *very nice* layout.So I'm asking you-- even if you know or figure it out-- please do not disclose any names or absolute identifying information that would conclusively identity the layout or its owner. I have no desire to cause anyone any pain. This is a hobby after all, and the ultimate goal is to please ourselves. If we are to talk about these issues at all, it is only because we, ourselves, have an interest in learning about other methods, training our "critical eye" for our own purposes, and improving our own skills so that we can apply them in our own handiworks. And hopefully, put them out there-- just like this guy-- for everyone else to appreciate.So, about the layout...As I write this, I am being literally guided by the posted photos of the layout. The layout itself is constructed in, what appears to be, a generous, though mostly unfinished, basement space-- perhaps 25x35 feet or so if I had to estimate it. It is single-decked, comprised of four or five generously-proportioned "box"-type benches with 2x2" legs for support. It has no fascia-- though its front edges are painted-- or skirting.It is dimly lit by a few overhead fluorescent bulbs. And it is flat. Very flat. Did I mention that it is flat??? Nothing descends below the plywood line that delineates the top of the bench-work. Even the mountains, of which there are quite a few, are all perfectly situated on top of the never-ending expanse of flatness.The layout is well-apportioned however, there are, what appears to be, miles and miles of code 100 HO-scale track running in exact parallel with the edges of the bench-work, interrupted by an occasional curve or turn-back of precisely 90 and 180 degrees respectively.It is populated by a veritable cornucopia of structures-- old man Walthers would be grinning with pride... so would the folks at DPM... and AHM... and Revell... and Life-Like. The buildings are artfully arranged in nice, neat rectangles and carefully aligned to the edge of the layout. As the bench-work makes a 90-degree bend, so do the neighborhoods.There are many inhabitants of this little world, each of whom is dutifully standing on his or her own base, which has thoughtfully been provided to assist them in maintaining their balance. They all drive late-model Matchbox or Hot Wheels cars, though a few of them have some higher-performance models. Probably at least a couple of them are even in HO-scale. And there are some specialty and exotic vehicles to be seen, also some trucks here and there, and a number of military tanks-- presumably guarding against alien invasion...The layout is resplendent in its wide assortment of colors including green, brown and... er, green and umm-- brown. Though to be honest, the modeler did really try to include a range of shades and some occasional colors-- reds and yellows-- here and there, and the roads are black (flat black) and painted in nice, crisp, well-masked straight lines.Most things on the layout are weathered. Locomotives, rolling-stock, structures, cars-- though the effect is reminiscent of an explosion at the brown paint factory. Each of the locos and rolling-stock have been weathered with an airbrush, amongst likely other things, with two vertical brown stripes fore and aft. And then lightly over-sprayed with brown paint to complete the effect.The weathering is complimented by the occasional items-- structures, locos, rolling-stock and whatnot-- that are not weathered, but are instead shiny and new and punch and add newness and plastic shiny goodness to all those areas that would otherwise be droll and drab and.... weathered-looking.The whole thing is artfully showcased by the Walthers lithographed backdrops. The ones with the city landscapes conveniently arranged in a multitude of perspectives so that something on the backdrop is almost positively guaranteed to almost match-up with a view on the layout...Nor does the layout lack for "scenes" and "stories". As near as I can tell, every single cutesy scene ever published anywhere is represented someplace on this layout. As is every scene from every walther's flyer or in the AHM or LifeLike catalog. Everything from the gandy-dancers laying track to the police-car pulling over the speeder, to the burning building surrounded by fire trucks, to the little guy looking surprised in the outhouse with the open door-- you name it, if you've seen it anywhere before, its here. And that also includes every locomotive servicing facility, coal mine, steel mill, bakery, freight house, trackside structure, water tower, sand house, coal chute, enginehouse, train station and passenger walkway-- they're all here.
I could go on-- for quite a while, in fact-- but I've said enough to make my points. The real crime this layout commits, I eventually decided, is that its visually... boring. I feel like I've seen it all before someplace. And technically, it is a collection of techniques all of which, when viewed independently, are not that bad but when viewed collectively-- inspire me to... um, stifle a yawn. Its boring.There, I've said it. Its B-O-R-I-N-G. Okay, so if I don't like it I don't have to look, right?Of course that's right. But then we wouldn't have anything to talk about. Which we'll get to in a moment.So, aside from that Mrs. Lincoln, how was the Play?Before we go on with our discussion of what's wrong-- let me talk for a minute about what's right...What's right is this guy is engaged-- he's actively building a model railroad-- *his* model railroad, and is *very obviously* paying attention to the model press, discussions of techniques, scene construction, model-building, track-laying-- everything. Heck, for all I know, he may be reading along right now and about to comment unwittingly on his own layout-- the potential irony there is off the scale... I'll bet that despite all the aforementioned stuff, his layout is actually probably a lot of fun to operate and that he (the modeler) himself is probably an enjoyable guy too. His works looks like that of someone who cares and wants to try new stuff, and probably considers himself an "experienced model railroader"-- and in that, I would quickly agree. He's spent a lot of time, money and considerable effort in achieving his result-- the layout I'm discussing it. And that, if nothing else, should place him squarely in the league of "Hallowed Model Railroaders". His skills probably easily outpace my own. I've got a lot of learning and trial-and-error of my own to do before I could ever seriously "look down" on his efforts, even assuming I'd ever want to.Further, judging from where I found the images, its apparent that he's outwardly-engaged and connected with other Model Railroaders and is part of a Model Railroading club, and not only does he work on his own layout, he also works on the club layout (of which there were also pictures) and a number of the other members have also published their layout photos. So he's active, engaged, energetic, bright (intelligent), thoughtful, creative, and connected. All extremely positive adjectives. I would be proud if folks described me with only a small percentage of those adjectives! Whoever he is, I wish him lots of years of happy modeling and many great operating sessions with his buddies-- I wish I could be there with him some day too. I'd like to meet him, and maybe eventually I will. Our discussion here though will stay our little secret. Lessons and Take-AwaysTo say that I learned something from this guy's layout is a dramatic understatement. I learned *a lot* from him. To be sure, I learned stuff that he probably didn't intend, but hey-- sometimes our purpose in life is to be a lesson to others! And I have a philosophical question already, right now before we go any further:Does a true friend look at your work and say it looks great? Or that it stinks and here's why? Which is ultimately the bigger (or better) gift, the lie or the truth?
But I'd like to talk about the other stuff too-- what is "wrong" with his layout. [And remember, we're having this discussion in the spirit of learning and fun-- not to disparage or denigrate anyone or their efforts].
My Questions for Today:How does one construct a layout that isn't just a "collection of tricks" ??How does one develop one's "critical eye" and abilty to "edit"?To whom does one turn for "the unvarnished truth"?How does one learn to accept criticism without taking it personally?What lessons are there to be learned in the layout scenario I've outlined above?What tips and scene-composition / layout-composition techniques could you contribute to someone who is just beginning to learn about the concepts?How can someone "put it all together" and achieve scenic cohesion?
EDIT:
I *love* the comments I've been reading and the direction the discussion is taking so far. Please don't stop that direction. Let's keep on and see where that goes...
But one of the things I was hoping for, was more actual conversation about the "faulted items" (my words-- perhaps poorly chosen) that I used in my illustration.
Not only-- what else do people have "issues" with when they see / encounter it, but also the remedial aspect-- what can be done about it?
What are positive, constructive comments that can be made to assist people who may be reading along and going... "Hey, that's me and that's my layout-- but how do I *fix* it??"
As always, I look forward to your comments and opinions.
And pictures-- POST 'EM if you got 'em!!!
John
A very thought provoking subject, and in my mind very well put, you are not trying to be offensive, but I am sure there will be modellers that will see your comments as such.
In the club I'm in (in Australia), we have many levels of modelling competency, some great, some good, some so-so and some poor, the later two are where this leads.
Several layouts well known to me, are really nothing short of atrocious to some, yet the owners proudly display them at many venues, and the average Joe relates to them and thinks they are fantastic, the modeller with a bit more knowledge and talent - well, they think a bit different, and herein lies the problem - lie or criticise?
My Questions for Today:How does one construct a layout that isn't just a "collection of tricks" ?? This can be seen on many layouts, even the so called best of them, it's basically reinventing the wheel, but it is possible to go overboard and hence realism and believability suffer.How does one develop one's "critical eye" and abilty to "edit"? Many have that ability, the difficulty is in conveying the observations to the recipient without losing their confidence, friendship etc, hence for the most part, we lie!To whom does one turn for "the unvarnished truth"? It's an unfortunate situation, that human nature seldom likes to hear the truth if their is any negativity attached, the honest person will be judged in a different manner, and in the eye of the judged recipient, they will be seen as wrong!How does one learn to accept criticism without taking it personally? I'm not sure if anyone is really, honestly capable of accepting criticism without rebuttal, there will always be a reason, primarily, in this hobby, its my layout, I'll do it my way!What lessons are there to be learned in the layout scenario I've outlined above? A lot of the time, the expert modellers have never actually achieved anything, it's easier to criticise than be criticised!What tips and scene-composition / layout-composition techniques could you contribute to someone who is just beginning to learn about the concepts? I feel the person has to realise right from the start that there are an abundance of approaches to this hobby, everyone will visualise the world differently and model it as they believe it should be.How can someone "put it all together" and achieve scenic cohesion? I really believe that very few modellers can really achieve the total package, otherwise, we wouldn't be having this conversation would we?
You will only ever achieve out of this hobby what "you" want, and that will rely on your desire to improve your modelling and how much effort you are willng to put in to learn, listen to constructive advice (note I did not say criticism) and put it into practice, this is after all, a HOBBY, and some people are content to just hover at a set level and be comfortable, view deficiencies as you see them, as a learning avenue to better your own modelling.
Yours in model railroading
Ted (Teditor) Freeman
From the Land Down Under.
Teditor
My most critical eye is my own, in many ways. My yardstick, through the 6 years or so that I've been back in the hobby, has been our own Weekend Photo Fun. What I used to think was "pretty good" has slipped to "barely acceptable," as I've gained a greater appreciation for really high-quality modeling.
How many psychiatrists does it take to change a light bulb? Only one, but the light bulb has to want to change. And, so it is with becoming a better modeler. It takes study, effort and time, plus the understanding that you won't always get it right the first time, and occasionally you'll just never get it right.
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.
TeditorA very thought provoking subject, and in my mind very well put, you are not trying to be offensive, but I am sure there will be modellers that will see your comments as such.
Thank you!
And agreed, I have put a lot of thought into it over the course of the week, how to delve into this topic in a respectful, non-confrontational, discussion-provoking manner.
For me-- just me-- one of the things that nearly always "gets me" is when I spot the old Revell (or AHM-- whatever it is) "Lumberyard" or "Train Depot" structures. There are others as well, but those two in particular. And I have one of each on my own layout-- so there's some aspect of irony there too At some point I will remove them. But for now they're busy filling space that would otherwise be empty. And when your entire landmass is PINK, that's an important consideration!
TeditorHow can someone "put it all together" and achieve scenic cohesion? I really believe that very few modellers can really achieve the total package, otherwise, we wouldn't be having this conversation would we?
That might be true-- I don't know-- but suffice it to say at the least they have to have a desire to improve, or else we wouldn't be having this discussion.
Thank you very much for your comments, I appreciate them!
MisterBeasleyMy most critical eye is my own, in many ways. My yardstick, through the 6 years or so that I've been back in the hobby, has been our own Weekend Photo Fun. What I used to think was "pretty good" has slipped to "barely acceptable," as I've gained a greater appreciation for really high-quality modeling. How many psychiatrists does it take to change a light bulb? Only one, but the light bulb has to want to change. And, so it is with becoming a better modeler. It takes study, effort and time, plus the understanding that you won't always get it right the first time, and occasionally you'll just never get it right.
A very astute observation, thanks very much for your comments!
Sean
HO Scale CSX Modeler
PASMITHAlthough it is not necessary to enjoy the hobby, one must decide what is important to you and to have or want to have a preconceived vision of what your ideal is. This is difficult because outside influences and personnel preferences change over time. If one does not have a vision, it may be hard to directly address these questions because there is no frame of reference and a snap judgement is not of much help.
True, agreed.
PASMITHOnce you have a vision that diverges from the work you are viewing you can pretty much make a comparison to your own work and make adjustments accordingly.
This is the tricky part. How do you (A) ever discover that a divergence exists ? And (B) what can you do about it ? And (C) what can you use as a "yard-stick" to measure your performance / improvement ?
Especially since so much of it is subjective anyway.
I suppose one could always put out surveys and solicit (supposedly) unbiased opinions from others. Of one could compare his/her work to that of others. But then again, that presupposes the modeler has the ability to "step back" from their work, "step out of the picture"-- so to speak-- and look objectively upon his/her work and use their "critical eye" to assess and understand what's "right" and "wrong" about their scene and composition-- and *then* to figure out some type of remedial project plan to correct / improve the deficits-- and particularly without overly interfering with whatever positive aspects exist.
I know that I often have that problem-- the first part in particular, being able to step back and look at something I've done or created less subjectively (more objectively) and try to see the faults and weaknesses along with the strengths and positive elements. As a modeler, your scenes tend to be highly "personal" and criticism of them, even criticism originating internally, often tends to be down-played or ignored. Which is a shame, because often the "critical" aspect is directed at just a tiny portion of the overall whole and could probably be addressed without overly interfering with the positive aspects.
It is a definite conundrum.
One specific thing that I do, in my own works-- whether modeling, carpentry, home remodeling-- whatever, is to take copious pictures of the scene and the work-piece (or work-space.. object in question) from many different angles, both in and out of the scene if possible, so as to see *it* rather than my internal "image" of it. The camera doesn't lie, it faithfully (for the most part) records what it sees-- and that's what you see when you look at the final recorded images. It can be a very useful technique for studying and gaining insight into whatever it is you're working on-- and critically assessing your work, or your work-piece / work-space to determine what needs doing and how to go about resolving it.
Thank you very much for your comments, they are much appreciated!
I have avoided posting on these threads so far, but...... Always ignore anything that comes before the word "but".
As Superintendent of an NMRA Division I get the chance to visit many layouts. I always tell folks that I always learn something when I visit layouts. Sometimes I find some technique which would work great on my layout, and other times I see things that aren't anything I would want to do........... Usually, a little of both.
I can honestly say my own ability as a modeler has improved greatly in the last several years! I look at scenes I did just 2 or 3 years ago and think, "What was I thinking..."! The growth in my my own skills come from being able to see others model railroads both on line, and in person. I have also been challenged to become a better modeler through the NMRA Achievement Program which set some high standards. I know what I was doing 4 or 5 years ago would not be close to getting the Scenery Certificate which I earned a few months back.
A big part of MRRing for me is the journey, much more than the outcome.
If I see something I don't like??? All depends on my purpose for being at the persons layout, whether we are alone, and whether the person is looking for "suggestions". I can almost always find something about the layout I like. I sometimes ask how the person did the scene and why. It can then lead to a "honest" evaluation of the work and offer suggestions for improvement. I try to read the persons comfort level and interest in hearing comments from me.
I am always surprised (and pleased) when someone says they love my work on the layout and ask me how I got to the point I am at.... I don't consider myself thee expert in any area of Model Railroading. Recently two gentlemen (one a MMR) were very taken with the lighting system I use on my layout and wanted to know exactly what I did, where they can get the same bulbs, and how much they cost. I later got a great email from one of them reiterating that they liked my work and thanking me for my information. Those things tend to make one feel very good........
73
Ray Seneca Lake, Ontario, and Western R.R. (S.L.O.&W.) in HO
We'll get there sooner or later!
Colorado_Mac i see model railroads as works of art, not only in looks but in operation. Like any art (painting, writing, architecture, music), most humans can master the basic tools.
I completely agree with that. And from past discussions, I think there is a fairly large contingent of folks here who likewise agree. And even among those who disagree-- many of those do so only on a technicality, a parsing of what the word "art" or "artist" means and not a specific dispute that the work itself is creative and generally "original".
Colorado_MacOften we can copy very well. But an "artist" - even a mediocre one - is the person who can use those tools to produce something that is more than a collection of parts.
I think that is well-said, and a point that should not be lost from the discussion. What makes some people more technically-oriented while others are more artistically inclined? That may be a facet of simple human nature and personality-- that which makes one person unique and different from another, and yet there are still similarities to varying degrees amongst all of us.
Colorado_MacWhat tips and scene-composition / layout-composition techniques could you contribute to someone who is just beginning to learn about the concepts? Open your eyes. Look at the world everyday, hopefully in a different way, and REMEMBER what you see. Think about it. You may drive the same route every day, twice a day on your commute. But then you ride in the passenger seat, with someone else driving, and suddenly you will see things you never noticed before, and see things you have seen before in a different way. If we, as model railroaders, use our eyes and our memories to catalog the real world, rather than watch our Blackberry screens or our feet, t will be much easier to recreate it in miniature. All that said, there are many people who will never be able to create art. This is why we admire so greatly those who can.
Very true, but its often harder to "See" than we realize. And more than that, we often don't "see" what we think we see. How many of us actually take time out of our busy days to stop and *look* at something? Not just glance at it and think "I should go back sometime and look at that more closely"-- but to actually, literally *stop* and SEE what is there?
I think its difficult, especially when we're driving along in our cars to notice stuff. Partly perhaps because we're whizzing along so fast. Maybe because we're focused on the road and other drivers. Maybe because we're preoccupied with other concerns of the day. Whatever the case, whatever the reason-- how many of us look around us to "see" what is there? Study the wonderful colors and textures and interplays between shadows and light? To "see" the shapes and how they combine and merge and interweave and overlap to give us the things around us we pass by and take for granted every day?
How many of us are *able* to "see" if we even tried?
1. Well, I too have read many modeling articles over the years, and there are indeed certain things that make me cringe. Among them are lichen "trees". My pet peeve is reading about some "name" layout and seeing way too many lichen "trees" in the photos. Could people at least shell out a little cash for some nicer "foreground" trees or other vegetation? I mean--some folks have hundreds of engines--perhaps a few nice trees wouldn't break the budget, right?
2. Regarding the mainline trackwork generally following the benchwork (and that being visually "undesirable"): some of us have to be careful with our basement R/W acquisition. Some of us have to leave part of the basement open for other things. Also--when there's a derailment, one needs to be able to physically reach the derailed rolling stock without needing a specialty over-layout creeper, right?
My layout design was based upon the knowledge that I needed to accommodate some larger locomotives, and I wanted a separation between the edge of the layout and the track so that derailed equipment remains on the layout. It ended up working out that my mainline does indeed follow the edge of the benchwork--especially along the large return loops at each end of the (twice folded dogbone) layout.
So what? I had only limited space, and I had to make the most of it.
3. My layout exists for one main purpose: to be able to accommodate large, fast trains that run reliably. Everything else is secondary to that. I like scenery, and am hoping that my scenery, as items are added, will provide interest that is missing from my simple track plan. However, sometimes less trackwork is indeed more visually. I'm still trying to figure out how to add all the scenes I'd like to add to my layout--there just isn't room for everything--yet the trackwork itself is minimal but complete (3-#6 turnouts on the mainline, with 3 other #6 turnouts located on sidings).
4. Regarding the need for a layout to be "interesting". Many of the layouts I see in MR just don't do anything for me. I have a friend, an excellent photographer and award winning modeler of his particular railroad. His layout was featured in MR, and also made the front cover a few years ago. It was extremely well done--but also boring as all get-out. A true, prototypically accurate point-to-point branchline railroad set in a desolate location of the west, with no provisions for continuous running, and a train could traverse the entire mainline in less than a minute (unless doing the branchline 5 mph crawl). Excepting one or two scenes, I really didn't like my friend's layout. My son liked it for all of 5 minutes.
My layout has to please me, and will most certainly never please MR's editorial staff. They have different goals and desires of what they want to see in a layout than me, though I would avoid the "spaghetti bowl" trackplans at all cost. That's actually about the only thing I might agree with them on!
Colorado_MacWow. Obviously I have a lot to learn about the artistry of replying to these posts in a way they can be easily read! I'll work on that!
Heh, no sweat-- if they waded through all my verbiage, yours is a piece of cake.
Wow. What a subject. But a very common subject which I think you approached very well and hope it is treated the same. So far these discussions have been surprisingly civil.
I will attempt to give my views of a few of the items and emphasize they are just my opinions.
I feel the most problems we have are with the human ego and a bit of non-understanding of others. We have a tendency to look at something through our eyes and our eyes alone. We must first understand that each one of us has a different outlook, desire and view for the end result. We must first approach a persons work with the "I like squash, you don't" attitude. Just because you do or do not like it doesn't make it bad, you just prefer something different. Keeping this in mind should keep the critique un hurtful and actually much more helpful because it softens the gut reaction to defend. One must also have the same attitude when receiving comments. If one understands that everyone likes something different and it is just an opinion you can take or dismiss, then the act of defense can be calmed. This requires, however, the "I'm right and you're wrong" attitude to not be involved. So many times that is conveyed to the modeler that the person who makes such comments is not only telling you what he prefers, but that it is actually the only way it should be done.
I think Picasso paints like a third grader, others think it is art. Does that mean I think these people are wrong? No. Just different opinions of what one likes. The same with Model Railroading. After all each model is just a real life version of a persons vision. Some love hills and mining or logging. Some like flatland and long intermodels. Diesel, steam, switching, roundy rounds. Each has their own idea of what they want and each of us has to understand that just because we want 100% prototypical, someone else may want just a train or something in between. Some are more into the modeling of scenery, some are more into the modeling of trains. Some are more interested in the operation and just have on the layout a fixture to represent what the train is to do. Any of it wrong? No. Any of those not what I want or like? Yes.
If we keep in mind that a person doesn't have the same vision that another necessarily does then I think things can be much more civil and therefore more productive. Do you don't walk up to a person and they introduce their wife to you, do you say, "gee, she's horrible" and then start picking her apart as to what you would pick in a wife? I'd hope not. That may not seem the best comparison, but the concept is the same. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and what someone wants out of a relationship isn't always what another wants. Keep this in mind when viewing a layout.
Now, does that mean I'm saying don't say anything unless asked and then sugar coat it with fantastic, wonderful, glorious? No. Not at all. Just keep in mind when making comments that what you see as a result isn't necessarily what the modeler has in mind. And likewise when you receive a comment that suggests something different than what you did, or need to do, that the person is just offering their opinion the same as suggesting a color for you next car. You can do what you want. It is your railroad. But, always keep an open mind when someone offers a suggestion because they may just have an idea you like or don't see until they point it out. It's all in the delivery.
Someone shows a picture of a weathered boxcar. You see you don't care for it for some reason. You have several ways to approach. You can:
not make a comment at all. This doesn't really help the person at all, especially if you see something you can help them with. Again it's personal to an extent
Make a general statement such as "looks good" or "getting better". This again could give a false impression the modeler is doing well and doesn't help. Though adding a "getting better" doesn't hurt.
Make a smoothed over "I like this, but that could be better by doing this" Probably the, arguably, best approach. You are telling the modeler what he has done well, to let him know what technic works,(and pat on the back) and you are telling him what he can do to improve.
You can just make a "I think it needs this" or "try doing it this way" " or even " well it kinda looks like someone painted it on. Try this" This, IMHO, is not mean just giving someone your opinion and why you feel that way. Maybe they can see the same when someone tells them. The commenter is not rude, but the modeler must also understand that it is just his opinion and if you disagree, then you disagree. Also, not everyone wants to sit and write a 5 minute critique on a project and they shouldn't be expected to. They just point out what they see needs improvement. Nothing wrong with that.
The last and the one that causes so much grief, is the " that looks like crud. Why don't you read some books. Looks like a fifth grader had a fit with a paint brush. You using crayons?" type answer. Those comments serve no purpose other than to insult the modeler. Not assist him with his work. They are usually, but not always, made by folks who rarely show their work if they even have any, and/or generally reach out for the dictionary for the literal definition of the word "critique" and argue it's what you should expect if you post a picture.
Does all this mean the commenter needs to be wishy washy and walk on eggs? No. The modeler needs to, when posting a picture, be prepared for some to have less than positive comments on his work. That is going to happen. But the commenter need not be insulting. That serves absolutely no purpose.
As for who to turn to for honest assessments. I think most all will give honest assessments. It's how they are given and taken that is the key.
As for the layout appearance question. Like I said To each their own, but asking questions is a start. Also one of my realizations is, on my layout, I can't have everything I want, for that very reason. One must step back and say, "you know, I can't fit that in there because, well, it just doesn't work." Probably the hardest thing to do.
My opinions, yours of course will vary.
Todd
Central Illinoyz
In order to keep my position as Master and Supreme Ruler of the House, I don't argue with my wife.
I'm a small town boy. A product of two people from even smaller towns. I don’t talk on topic….. I just talk.
howmus73
I see we're dealing with a real Ham here...
howmusI have avoided posting on these threads so far, but...... Always ignore anything that comes before the word "but".
Welcome aboard!
I'm sorry that you haven't participated before-- I love reading comments, good or bad, and the more the merrier! My goal is to stir up discussion-- to get people thinking about stuff they don't normally think about. I am glad you are joining us now.
howmusAs Superintendent of an NMRA Division I get the chance to visit many layouts. I always tell folks that I always learn something when I visit layouts. Sometimes I find some technique which would work great on my layout, and other times I see things that aren't anything I would want to do........... Usually, a little of both.
That sounds like fun. For me, I do kind of the same thing, but I do it virtually, surfing the pictures people post of their layouts and projects. And I'm like you-- I learn a lot by watching and/or reading whatever documentation or commentary that people post along with their pictures. There's a lot of stuff to find out there and every week I find new stuff to think about and admire. It is amazing the wealth of diversity with respect to knowledge, skillsets and focus that's out there. It is a veritable buffet to be certain!
howmusA big part of MRRing for me is the journey, much more than the outcome.
Yes, as I become more immersed back into the hobby, I am finding that out for myself as well. I originally jumped back in with both feet and an open wallet determined to have everything set up and done by the "end of the week" (figuratively speaking). And since then I have become more tempered and thougtful / reflective of what I'm doing and hoping to accomplish-- and I've given myself permission to "get it done when it gets done", which as far as I'm concerned is probably the best gift a modeler can give himself.
howmusI later got a great email from one of them reiterating that they liked my work and thanking me for my information. Those things tend to make one feel very good........
Yes, that's a very good point, even though you weren't making it directly (I don't think)-- its always good to tell people (give them feedback) about the good stuff too. Criticism really can cover both elements-- its just feedback, the answer to "How'd I do?" If you like something, say so. At least people are more susceptible to doing that.
Just to toss in a word of encouragement here:
I *love* the comments I'm reading and the direction the discussion is taking so far. Please don't stop that direction. Let's keep on and see where that goes...
Thanks again for everybody's comments!!! You folks are terrific and I love reading every one.
"my goal isn't to "out" someone or belittle their efforts," but it is rude to publish a sanctimonious uninvited derogatory critique of someone's work.
Dave
Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow
OK, John
Another item I'll take a little issue with: Flat layouts.
I opted for relatively simple benchwork and simple pink insulation foam in lieu of a plywood table top.
Construction was much simpler (my father, a great carpenter also provided the benchwork--it was his last significantly large project for me as his age is beginning to hinder his work).
Obviously, with just the single 2" foam layer, I chose not to weaken it much by cutting into it. Instead, there are hills and rock formations that go up, and I did cut one dry wash into the foam, to give some lower than trackwork relief.
Some will look at my layout and see that it's mainly flat--yet much of it is Mojave desert or Saguaro Desert--which both have large expanses of relatively constant (smooth) grade, though they are not "flat" at all. There also is a rock formation reminiscent of Union Pacific's Castle Rock, and an area intended to evoke the Echo Canyon, Utah, vicinity...and a winter mountain scene.
If someone opts to save a little on their construction challenges, I don't necessarily think it's wrong to have a "mostly flat" layout.
My 2c.
jwhitten How does one construct a layout that isn't just a "collection of tricks" ??
How does one construct a layout that isn't just a "collection of tricks" ??
First I have to want something else. If I like "tricks" then a layout that is a "collection of tricks" is just what I wanted. I visited a layout on a layout tour many years ago that was a "bowl of spaghetti" design with all sorts of "cute" scenes scattered about it. It isn't the layout I would build, but many of those "cute" scenes had ties to his friends and family. Like a friend of mine from any years ago who had a layout made with Tru-scale track and Life-Like scenic paper mountains. He recieved unending ribbing from other modelers, but he had tremendous fun with the layout. The perfect layout is the one that meets your needs.
How does one develop one's "critical eye" and abilty to "edit"?
Practice, practice, practice. Research, research, research. Time, time, time.
To whom does one turn for "the unvarnished truth"?
History, the prototype and one's own mind. If you want an outside opinion you have to ask for it.
How does one learn to accept criticism without taking it personally?
Well first you actually have to recieve it. The current philosophy on this and many other forums is that you never say anything "bad" about anybody's efforts unless they ask for feedback. As a result most efforts get a slathering of "Good Job!", "Looks great!" posts. I rarely open threads that even look like those type of "see what I've done", because I can't stand all the sugar coated feedback on something that very poorly executed. It does nothing to help them improve. See your question on the "unvarnished truth".
What lessons are there to be learned in the layout scenario I've outlined above?
Don't know, didn't read it, your "questions" have gotten soooo long and wordy my eyes glaze over. I just cut to the chase. I "hate" long winded discertations, if the proposition is longer than maybe 2 paragraphs, unless its truly compelling reading, I'm skipping it. You asked about how to take criticism, there ya' go. 8-)
What tips and scene-composition / layout-composition techniques could you contribute to someone who is just beginning to learn about the concepts?
Study, study, study. Practice, practice, practice. Research, research, research. Time, time, time. Look at model pictures and plans with a critical eye. Look at prototype pictures witha critical eye. Skip the 3/4 wedgie roster shots and concentrate on the aerial photos and overhead facilities shots or panoramas. Spend and entire day photgraphing at your favorite spot BUT don't take a single picture of a train. Take pictures of everything else. Turn around and look away from the tracks. Stop just asking questions on a forum and do some real research.
How can someone "put it all together" and achieve scenic cohesion?
Study the prototype. Study art. Study photo composition.
Study, study, study. Practice, practice, practice. Research, research, research. Time, time, time.
Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com
UP 4-12-2Regarding the mainline trackwork generally following the benchwork
This one is a non-issue with me too. In my mind, it is the benchwork that needs to follow the track plan.
I agree that having tracks run at angles to the viewer does help create more depth in a scene, and I've planned for that in a couple of my scenes. But sometimes, to get a scene to deliver the functionality it needs to deliver, or to maximize aisle space, or other similar considerations, the tracks are better off running parallel to the edge. I don't think I'd compromise on things like that just to satisfy a "nothing must be parallel" notion.
IMHO, of course
First, a quote attributed to Terence: Nullum sit jam dictum quod non dictum sit prius.
He is saying, "Nothing is said which has not been said previously."
With the plethora of images and choices proferred on this and other fora, and with the intensely personal and emotional investments of all kinds of resources, sometimes at the cost of relationships or one's health, it is bound to happen that much of what each of us sees is going to fall short in our appreciation somehow.
There are so many variables in circumstance in the application of the various methods, materials, and skills needed for this hobby that it mirrors the way its practitioners look at cars or houses; some we like, some we hate.
I have always felt that there is plenty of room to accommodate all ways and means in this hobby, even to the extent of pink polka-dotted SD90MAC's running on 6% grades. If it brings a smile, it has served its purpose.
Oh, and I can't stand the lichen tree thing... Yeeesh!
-Crandell
jwhitten"I Hate Your Layout"
Just wondering. How long did it take for you type this novel? and do you have a secretary?
The only problem I've had with my layout is the saliva that drips from my mouth now and then on the track when I'm simulating the drone of that prime mover as I push my wooden brio train set around and around.
Phoebe Vet"my goal isn't to "out" someone or belittle their efforts," but it is rude to publish a sanctimonious uninvited derogatory critique of someone's work.
How do you know I'm not looking at the pictures of my own layout??
Thanks for your comments.
jwhitten Very true, but its often harder to "See" than we realize. And more than that, we often don't "see" what we think we see. How many of us actually take time out of our busy days to stop and *look* at something? Not just glance at it and think "I should go back sometime and look at that more closely"-- but to actually, literally *stop* and SEE what is there?
My railroad modeling has made me better at "seeing." I do notice things I'd never looked at before, most commonly the details of roadside marshes, or the tops of buildings seen from elevated highways.
But, I don't model what I see, but rather what I remember. That's true both for that stand of cattails in the loop of the highway interchange, or the subway walls of my now-distant childhood. There are certain things about a scene which stick in my mind, while others are less important. So, when I model them, I really try to get those key elements right. I suppose, then, that the success of my modeled scenes depends as much on the viewer's memory as on mine. If their memory of subway stations is all about the hundreds of people waiting to board the train at rush hour, then my near-empty stations will not fit in as well with their vision, and they won't "get" what I'm doing with my models.
jwhittenPhoebe Vet"my goal isn't to "out" someone or belittle their efforts," but it is rude to publish a sanctimonious uninvited derogatory critique of someone's work. How do you know I'm not looking at the pictures of my own layout?? Thanks for your comments. John
Well, there are too types of people. Those who are their own harshest critic, and those who can see no wrong in what they do. However, this has no correlation on how they'll respond to criticism from others.
UP 4-12-2 Another item I'll take a little issue with: Flat layouts. I opted for relatively simple benchwork and simple pink insulation foam in lieu of a plywood table top.
My layout is flat too. Like you, I also built very simple benchwork and am presently using pink insulation foam in lieu of a plywood table top.
As you can see, I wasn't kidding about the state of my own layout. Though mostly at the moment it is due to everything in my basement being in transition so I haven't really "begun" more than just this attempt to get the benchwork up, some pink foam on top, and some track pinned-down so my kids and I can play with the trains until the basement work gets completed.
I have posted other pictures of my "layout" on this site before-- search for "South Penn RR Updates", or "The Littlest Engineer" for additional photos. I quickly admit that what I've got to show right now isn't all that much and certainly not all that great. BUT, my sons (well, mostly son #1) and I have a lot of fun switching cars in the yard and doing pickups and setouts at the "industries".
And I know from my previous modeling efforts, that my skills are still pretty much in the "beginner" phase. Although I'm not bad at the carpentry and mechanical work, and have years of experience with electronics, computer programming and automation.
And I know what (little) amount of artistic talent I possess. I am actually scared that I won't ever be able to achieve what I see in my mind's eye. But that won't stop me from trying.
So if you or anybody else, wants to take shots at my own paltry modeling efforts and abilities-- please do, I invite you to do so. And I will do my best to take them head-on, bravely, and on-the-chin, so to speak.
As I said at the outset, I am *not* holding myself as a "Great Arbiter of Model Railroading", but rather asking questions-- including "tough" ones, in the hopes of stimulating discussion and conversation that I (if nobody else) can learn something from. And if other people can learn something too-- so much the better-- that would make me very happy indeed to know that.
I absolutely *love* talking to you all-- picking your brains and listening to your comments and opinions. You all are the ones that are filled with amazing talents that I want to know more about. But if there's ever anything anybody wants to know that I have some knowledge about, I'm always happy to chip in with what I know.
jwhittenWhat tips and scene-composition / layout-composition techniques could you contribute to someone who is just beginning to learn about the concepts?How can someone "put it all together" and achieve scenic cohesion?
Just to address the above. I think it is important to put some time and effort into studying things that influence a scene, that may not be directly railroad related. The lay of the land and how roads and towns are laid out; the age of the buildings in the central business district, relative to the suburbs, relative to the new industrial park, etc. are important aspects of making a scene realistic. Towns in the Eastern US tend to have older CBD and follow rivers and streams, or mountain slopes. Towns in the prairie tend to have newer structures laid out 90 degrees to each other. Even older CBD's evolve, with high traffic areas like street corners, having a brand new convenience store/gas station built next to a 100 year old structure. 100 year old structures that were built before air conditioning, have had their abundant windows bricked in, perhaps with different color brick, etc. etc. Scenery items such as rock and hill formations and river banks should be studied as well.
The example you gave sounds like the modeler maybe focused too much on the trains, and placed buildings, track, people and cars, etc. on the layout without as much consideration to understanding geography or town planning or town evolution.
Studying those aspects may even be more time consuming than studying things that are directly railroad related; however, it is probably not the reason the modeler got into MRR in the first place. We we should probably all spend more time understanding how nonrailroad related events/items affect railroads.
- Douglas
UP 4-12-2 Another item I'll take a little issue with: Flat layouts.
I want to respond to you a second way also...
None of the things that I mentioned, by themselves, would seriously deter my "appreciation" of the layout-- heck, even *all* of the things wouldn't do that really. I can even (sort-of) enjoy a train running around in a simple loop of track (for a few minutes).
But the layout I saw had so many issues-- it really spoke to me, (A) personally and individually about my own skills and abilities, and the possible future of my own layout-- but also (B) pointed out a lot of things that I think other people struggle with-- whether they know it or admit it or not.
It is extremely obvious and apparent that the modeler who's layout I've been talking about is interested and engaged in building his layout and doing the best that he can. And from that perspective I have *absolutely nothing* to say on the subject-- Kudo's to him, its great and fabulous and I'd love to run trains with him on it some day.
But from an *abstract* perspective-- which is exactly what I've given out-- there is a lot that can be said about it. And discussed. And points made. Comparisons of techniques made. Tips given-- all sorts of things that the people here could HELP each other with, including me and you, in understanding our own efforts, abilities and limitations, and scene composition, figuring out how to "blend" it all together. Making something cohesive-- figuring out which techniques *really* work, and which work to drag down the others.
Its a hard topic-- because nobody wants to put down a fellow modeler's efforts-- not me, and probably not anyone.
So how can we talk about it unless someone grabs it by the horns and starts talking about it??
UP 4-12-2My pet peeve is reading about some "name" layout and seeing way too many lichen "trees" in the photos.
When I was a teenager and I had a flat layout, changes in elevation were accomplished with Life-Like trestles and Atlas graduated bridge-pier sets. The grades were too steep, both because I didn't really have enough space to get the trains up high enough to get over other trains, and because these trestles and piers had to be close enough together to support the sections of Atlas snap-track without sagging too much when trains went over them. But, I read one wise suggestion which has stuck with me ever since: Keep your track level, and have the scenery go up and down around it to simulate elevation changes.
I did that, pretty much, for my present layout. The main line is completely flat, although I have a few sidings and the whole turntable area that are slightly higher or lower, to add visual interest. On the other hand, the terrain does rise and fall somewhat, which allows the trains to cross bridges and go through cuts. By "hiding" some of the track behind mountains and buildings, the short main line seems longer.
Right now, Phase 2 of my layout is completely flat. Also, most of the track is parallel to the benchwork. It's a narrow section, only 2 1/2 feet, so the track can't really go very far in any other direction. I have one section which is so far undesigned, and it may well feature a mountain, or at least a hill, for the trains going to and from staging to slip behind.