My Perspective, in response to each question:
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?
I’ll start with the second question, first. A lie is rarely a good thing – even if you intend to preserve a person’s self esteem, but brutal honesty is no better and is often worse. The key is to be honest, but not brutal.
In response to the other question above, it is unwise and often unkind to offer feedback unless it is requested. So, rather than look at someone’s work and start handing out comments, look at it and offer honest complements, or ask questions requesting more information about something you do feel good about.
If the owner of the layout described by the OP asked me what I think, I’d probably reply with “It looks like you have a lot of fun with your layout.” If he were to press me for suggestions for making it better, I’d point out that there’s a lot of action going on and that a lot of the scenes are things that we see only occasionally (burning building, police stop, etc.); it seems that the most effective layouts are models of the mundane. This guides him to something that he could easily change and it really would make it better.
One of my favorite feedback stories comes from Westcott’s book about John Allen:
Cliff Grandt asked John Allen for feedback on Grandt’s scratch-built brass Heisler. Allen took a photo of it and printed it for Grandt. He reportedly said, “Look at the photo; every time you see something that tells you that this is not a real Heisler, it may be an opportunity to improve it.”
Notice that Allen never listed all the things that could be better; he facilitated a process by which Grandt could find them on his own.
I consider this both helpful and graceful.
I work in Human Resources – and I often have to deal with some pretty touchy stuff. One thing I believe very strongly is that it is critical to maintain a person’s dignity in order to keep a relationship and that it is possible to do so in every case. We owe that much to our fellow hobbyists.
Moving on…Questions for Today:
How does one construct a layout that isn't just a "collection of tricks" ??
My opinion is that we are best off to understand that most of the real world is pretty mundane. We should strive to model the most ordinary of days, with routine stuff going on. Anything that might make the news or the newspaper should not be on our layouts. Keep in mind that a joke is funny the first time you hear it, after that…It can be fun to model a traffic stop, or a burning building, or a funeral, or a bank robbery, or a streaker, but in a year those things will be looking pretty tired.
How does one develop one's "critical eye" and ability to "edit"?
I like John Allen’s approach. With digital cameras it is cheap and easy, and I think it is fun. Take pictures and look at them. They give you a new perspective and that can help you a lot.
To whom does one turn for "the unvarnished truth"?
I think anyone can give us good feedback, after all, we all experience the world. I think the key is to ask the questions. I’ll put it this way when I want feedback: “I’m trying to make this look like a real place, can you see anything that seems not real enough?” I think it gets people thinking about details and invites them to comment. By the way, if you get defensive or argue you will probably shut off their feedback – permanently. If you ask the question, you must accept the answer.How does one learn to accept criticism without taking it personally?It depends on the criticism. If someone comments about my model work, I accept it as their opinion and let it go. If they attack me personally, I’ll reply with something like “I’m not sure that’s really fair.”
What lessons are there to be learned in the layout scenario I've outlined above?
My feeling is that this modeler is doing a lot of what he’s good at (buying stuff and putting it on his layout), and not really expanding his skill base. He may look at his work and say to himself “it’s good enough.” He is entitled to that, but I think the best modelers look at their work and think of ways to make it better. My approach to this hobby is that I’m building my skills as much as I’m building a miniature railroad. Doing the same thing over and over isn’t what I’m here for – doing it better and better is much more my focus. Building dozens of plastic model kit buildings isn’t doing anything for my skills, but assembling a wood and cardboard craftsman kit – that makes me stretch. My sense is that this modeler likes to play with trains, but building his skills is not his real interest.
What tips and scene-composition/layout-composition techniques could you contribute to someone who is just beginning to learn about the concepts?
I’d suggest that they start by measuring their layout in feet and then multiply that by 87 (for HO Scale). That’s how much of the “Real World” they are modeling. Then get out a map of the real world and layout the same area on the map (to the map’s scale). Go to that place and walk around – see how much stuff is really there: how many houses, streets, automobiles, trucks, people, buildings, how much track, etc. See how much stuff goes on in an hour (probably not much).
When I did this exercise, what I found is that my layout is about ¼ mile by 1/15 mile. A half dozen HO scale football fields would cover it. My layout is only about the size of a large city park! Given that, I have a good sense of what belongs there.
Now, as modelers we generally do some selective compression. If I put every house on my layout on a true to scale ¼ acre lot, they would take up too much space. If I made my sidings and spurs as long as the real thing, I’d run out of space in a hurry. If I tried to model one farm - true to scale – it would not fit (even if I devoted the whole layout to it). So, we reduce the sizes of things, shorten our turn radii, use much more abrupt turnouts that our prototypes, etc. My goal is not to make a “dead-on” model of the world, but to effectively represent it.
How can someone "put it all together" and achieve scenic cohesion?
I think we all benefit from looking at the world around us and thinking in terms of what’s really there; how much space it consumes, what color is it really (most colors are faded from what they once were), we also minimize action scenes (because there really isn’t that much action). The main thing is to focus on the ordinary and leave the extraordinary to the newspapers.
Phil, I'm not a rocket scientist; they are my students.
Also, based upon past issues with vertical grade breaks and the operational problems encountered with grades, that history did spur me to keep my current layout "flat". Between an inadvertant vertical benchwork issue and the pink foam sheets not always being flat and true, I ended up with a 0.4% grade--which isn't bad at all--just enough that trains do slow down a little bit.
So far as scenery is concerned--and some folks being apprehensive about starting, I offer the following comments:
Fight the war on pink (who really wants to look at all that pink on a train layout?) by buying some latex (do not use oil based anything on the insulation foam) paint in an appropriate background color for your region of the country.
Since I'm modeling the southwest, I painted the entire layout (except the white-primered mountains) a desert sand color that exactly matched the sand I'm using. This alone is an instant, large scenic improvement.
On the second coat of latex paint (one will likely not cover the pink completely), start sprinkling in ground foam (or in my case, real sand) while the paint is still wet.
These two steps alone are a good beginning at the scenery. Then you can come back and add additional vegetation once you are further inspired with more time, money, etc.
You do not need to be an artistic genius, though I do recommend downloading photos for inspiration of that favorite region you hope to capture (in my case, the Saguaro Desert near Tucson, and Union Pacific's Echo Canyon Utah).
John
I too suffer from flat track but I am very much ok with it.. I dont have a lot of room to built a good hill and I am not just sticking a small hill on my layout so I have a bridge or overpass, when I do add a bridge I will just cut some out of my table and make a river. And like UP 4-12-2 post, before I laid any track was to paint my table, then added some track and got some ground cover down so I am not staring a bare table, then I got a working layout down so I can drive my trains and have gone back added more scenery and more track and now that I am happy with most of my track I am starting to go back and add some terrain. From photos I have seen there are a lot of folks who have limited their train driving time due to always being in middle of an extensive terrain build that will take years or folks who have nice track work but have no room for terrain or buildings and in both cases I jealous at the time and effort they have put into a layout and at the same time wonder what where they thinking when their layout is bare or will years down the road before it is really working. I have tried to balance it out and so far I am very happy with it no matter what people might think of my layout.
UP 4-12-2Well, 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.
I don't mind lichen trees so much, but I do agree that nowadays that there's more than can be done to dress them up a bit. Some judicious use of glue and ground foam could go a long way.
But each of us probably has something or other that makes us cringe when we see it. And it probably says more about ourselves and our own preconceptions than it does what we're looking at.
UP 4-12-2Regarding the mainline trackwork generally following the benchwork ... So what? I had only limited space, and I had to make the most of it.
Regarding the mainline trackwork generally following the benchwork ... So what? I had only limited space, and I had to make the most of it.
As I mentioned in another response, none of these things by themselves are that big an issue. And each of them can easily be offset and/or justified by some need or requirement or other. None of the items I pointed out were intended to be "absolutes" but only my own reaction to a particular layout I saw that had a lot of the types of issues that I've seen that collectively work to undermine a modeler's efforts. Which is what I wanted to discuss. Not the specific layout, or the modeler, or else in that case I *would* have added pictures.
The layout and the modeler are unimportant. What is important is that these types of layouts do exist and very often-- in my own opinion-- they could be benefitted by a few well-chosen tips or techniques-- a little retrofitting or remedial action-- and they could just simply blossom into incredible Wow!-inspiring presentations.
UP 4-12-2My layout exists for one main purpose: to be able to accommodate large, fast trains that run reliably. Everything else is secondary to that.
Sure, that makes sense and is sensible.
UP 4-12-2 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 certainly agree with that as well. That's one of the things I've been thinking about lately is the complexity of trackwork, how much the track should dominate the scene, etc. And of course the simple answer is that it varies. And it varies from scene to scene, and with different types of scenes, and with different types of layouts and layout "purposes". Also each individual modeler has a different degree of emphasis and focus that they want to bring to bear with respect to track.
UP 4-12-2Regarding 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.
There we go-- now we're getting to the heart of the subject. We've been beating around the bush up to this point-- but now we've fully arrived. Perhaps your friend's layout was a "concept layout". Undertaken simply to see if something or other could be done effectively in miniature.
Whatever the case-- there was at least some aspect of it that grated on you-- the question is what was the aspect, and why were you bothered by it?
It is only by asking ourselves questions about what we see, and how we *feel* about what we see that we are able to compare and contrast what we see with what we *think* we see, or else see in our *mind's eye*, or else what we *want* to see.
It is by asking ourselves critical questions and picking apart the answers-- and comparing them to other things we believe, like, dislike, whatever-- that we learn and grow and are able to articulate in more or less precise terms what we think we need (want) to change, how to change it, and generally-speaking, how to go about it.
UP 4-12-2My layout has to please me
That is definitely the most important criteria-- and it doesn't matter a whit's end what anybody else thinks about it-- including me. Just you. But that doesn't mean that other people can't see it and have an *opinion* about it, even if they never communicate it with you. That's just human nature. We are all critical and judgemental-- its part of our essential character as human beings.
Thanks for your comments!
shayfan84325 My Perspective, in response to each question: 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? I’ll start with the second question, first. A lie is rarely a good thing – even if you intend to preserve a person’s self esteem, but brutal honesty is no better and is often worse. The key is to be honest, but not brutal.
shayfan84325One thing I believe very strongly is that it is critical to maintain a person’s dignity in order to keep a relationship and that it is possible to do so in every case. We owe that much to our fellow hobbyists.
This is precisely my own orientation to dealing with people. As Kant taught us, every person is an end unto himself and each person is worth his dignity. That person's acts may be contemptible, but the person is worthy of dignity. So treat the person with dignity, and condemn the act as is its due.
The forums here and there have email and Private Message services. I use them routinely to offer some perspective to people. I always acknowledge that my message may be an intrusion, and therefore unwelcome, but I chose my words carefully and make an offer of a point of view. I have yet to receive a hostile reply to an email or PM I have initiated with a view to helping someone to see something I suspect they haven't seen. I haven't always had agreement, but have never been rebuked or told to go pound salt.
In that respect, I was being honest and providing a service at the same time. From there it is up to the recipient to determine his or her orientation to it.
It is analogous to having someone offer you medication you can take orally, or something they tell you must be inserted up your back passage. One is much more pleasant than the other, and is more likely to elicit an expression of gratitude and a smile. If your intent is to be heard and understood, never mind the thanks or acknowledgement, then it should be done in a way most likely to achieve that result. Blunt and forceful words are most often going to fail.
Thanks, Phil, for your wise words.
-Crandell
TMarshWow. 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.
Thank you for saying so. And I agree. That's been my goal and desire, to promote healthy discussion and debate, and nothing else.
TMarshI 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.
Indeed, how could it be otherwise-- except perhaps at the movies.
TMarshThis 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.
And of course many times we are told something like that from a supposed "friendly critic" who then proceeds to be a "harsh critic" and/or an "unforgiving critic". Both of which are absolutely devastating to the critical process. It can indeed be difficult to know how to receive criticism well. And I know that sometimes describes me for certain. But even for someone who doesn't typically receive criticism very well, it is often useful for that person to stand there and hear it anyway-- even if there is an immediate visceral reaction to it. Because later, in a quieter time, it may be that the criticism can more easily be heard, understood, digested and imparted for what it was meant-- direct feedback and a third-party view (whether neutral or otherwise) of the situation.
TMarshI think Picasso paints like a third grader
Yeah, me too. And Jackson Pollock had 'em all fooled.
TMarshThe same with Model Railroading. After all each model is just a real life version of a persons vision.
A model is a real-life version of a person's *attempt* at recreating their vision. What they see in their and may be nothing like the reality they are able to create. But I otherwise get and agree with your point.
TMarshSome 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.
And that also has a lot to do with how some people can look and be very tolerant-- or even not "see" the "obvious flaws" that are there (presuming there are some) while others are driven simply batty by the same scene.
I was reading some post somewhere recently in which the poster was complaining that they could overlook almost any modeling faupaux except for signaling errors-- or something along those lines. And it turned out later in the conversation that he had been a Dispatcher or something where signals and CTC operations was an integral aspect of his job and daily life. And after years and years of being exposed to it through his occupation, he had a hard time seeing simplistic attempts at performing signaling on model railroads. In his view it was better to omit them entirely than to do it poorly.
And I think that's telling-- he was expressing a very similar sentiment to what my post is about.
TMarshBeauty 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.
Beauty is indeed in the eye of the beer-holder.
TMarshNow, 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.
Precisely.
Social decorum is always a difficult issue fraught with peril-- that's why most people stick to the script and do little to introduce controversy. But at the same time, that also leads people to hold false beliefs, or to not receive the "education" they could benefit from, or be denied an opportunity to hear the truth and grow from it.
It cuts both ways.
TMarshAs 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.
I'm not 100% sure that's actually true. I think many of us would like to believe we can give out honest assessments-- but I think that when put to the test, particularly in a face-to-face / one-on-one situation-- and even more particularly with someone we have affection for, respect for, or some other aspect of esteem for-- we are as likely as not to fall back on the little white lie, or else mumble some really shallow aspect that could be trivially improved, and thus shy away from delivering the real coup de grace-- the truth.
TMarshMy opinions, yours of course will vary.
No, you *must* have the same opinions as me!!! Or else I'll hold my breath and stomp my feet!!!
Thanks for your comments-- they were very insightful and I enjoyed reading them.
John,Since this week's subject is a heady subject I shall make my reply in the morning when I am refresh for whatever its worth..I just returned from a quick trip to Marion and am little tired since I been up since 5:00AM.
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
dehusmanFirst I have to want something else. If I like "tricks" then a layout that is a "collection of tricks" is just what I wanted.
Certainly, no argument from me. If you set out to build what you made-- you're right on target. And even if you didn't and you're happy with it-- bingo, hit the target again.
But just as you have the right to make and be happy (or not) with whatever you made, I (or anyone) has the right to look at it and have our own opinion about it.
dehusmanI 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.
Absolutely right and without question.
One thing that I don't particularly like is "animation" on a layout-- not sure quite why, but it never (or rarely) strikes me as being "done right"-- and perhaps its even impossible for it to be done right-- who knows-- but in my view, when I see it, it detracts from the overall enjoyment and visual appeal that *I* could (would) feel about seeing it. *BUT* if *other* people like it, and/or the owner likes it-- that's the only justification that's required. My opinion hardly matters.
But, I *can* still have an opinion.
dehusmanThe 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.
So what you're saying is that you know (or believe) that if you open the post and read it / see the images that accompany it-- something about the effort is likely to "annoy" your sensibilities...? So you skip opening the post because you don't want to pile on with the "congratulations", "way to go", "looking good" little white lie comments? And so even though you know you have a real opinion you could voice that (might) could help the other person-- you elect instead to stay silent? To not be involved?
Is that really a "friendly" thing to do? Or simply a "not rocking the boat" / "sticking to the social contract" type thing to do?
Which is better, the lie or the truth?
I'm not judging-- simply asking the questions-- attempting to draw out opinion and commentary. That's the point of my Philosophy Friday posts.
dehusmanDon'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-)
And yet you continue to participate.
Interesting.
But your feedback is duly noted.
Seriously though, I don't purposely make my posts any particular length or other. I just start writing until I feel like I've presented the information I want to present, made the points I want to make, and asked the questions I want to ask. Whatever length that turns out to be is what I hit the 'Post' button on.
Feel free to read 'em, or not-- your choice. Feel free to respond, or not-- your choice.
But if you do, and I *hope* you do, I'll be happy to read and consider and probably respond to whatever you have to say.
And I appreciate your comments now, as I always do.
Thanks!
odaveUP 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.
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.
It was never my intent to establish "The Canonical List", but rather to broach the topic of layout "issues" that nobody ever really wants to talk about directly.
selectorFirst, 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."
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."
Noli nothis permittere te terere.
selectorI 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
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!
I can always count on you to offer up the correct point-of-view!
DrilineJust wondering. How long did it take for you type this novel?
With edits, probably about an hour. Maybe a little less. But that also included thinking time and time spent flipping back and forth looking at the pictures.
Drilineand do you have a secretary?
No why, are you volunteering???
Drilinesimulating the drone of that prime mover as I push my wooden brio train
I think you have the right attitude.
If I were the forum administrator, I would have locked or deleted this thread early on with three simple words, "It is offensive".
It doesn't really matter whether the layout remains anonymous, or whether it is fictional, or for that matter, whether it is the author's own layout.
If I were new to the hobby or contemplating joining this forum and this was the first thread that I read, I would turn and run.
It would be one thing to generally discuss things about layouts that you don't like, but it is quite another to describe in detail the layout in question and everything that is wrong with it.
This is the reason why most modelers don't join clubs or have that much interaction with other modelers, the fear of being ridiculed either to one's face or behind one's back.
The justification for participating in the criticism of this layout is that we can all learn. I don't see how or in what way except to congratulate ourselves that we have not posted photos of our own layouts.
John, nothing personal, I don't think you intended to be mean spirited. It was just a poorly chosen method of critique, in my opinion, that will offend and intimidate many readers who won't respond. It comes off very smug, whether intended or not.
Rich
Alton Junction
richhotrainIf I were the forum administrator, I would have locked or deleted this thread early on with three simple words, "It is offensive".
Thank you for your feedback.
richhotrainIt doesn't really matter whether the layout remains anonymous, or whether it is fictional, or for that matter, whether it is the author's own layout. If I were new to the hobby or contemplating joining this forum and this was the first thread that I read, I would turn and run.
Really ?
You don't think you might stay a bit and see how the discussion turns out? Already some folks have offered up some really, really interesting comments and suggestions for how to "see" and construct scenes.
richhotrainIt would be one thing to generally discuss things about layouts that you don't like, but it is quite another to describe in detail the layout in question and everything that is wrong with it.
Hmmm-- but isn't that exactly what they do in the beginner's forums whenever someone talks about a track plan or other-- whether its one the OP posted about, or else someone else offered up, or even one from a book someplace? In fact, I have read quite a few posts where the layouts have been described in exquisite detail-- often by the actual modeler themselves-- and then opened up for opinions... and criticisms
If you never ask questions, if you never look to see what can be improved upon-- how can you ever learn to discern what is good or not good. If you never critique, or accept criticism, how can you learn to use your "critical eye" ??
I'm not rebuking you or trying to talk down your comments-- I take them at face value and assume you mean what you say-- but I ask you-- how else does one learn than by asking questions and considering critically?
In fact, you only have my word for it that the layout in question actually exists at all. So from your perspective, aside from the fact that you *believe* it to exist-- it *is* discussing things about layouts in general.
richhotrainJohn, nothing personal, I don't think you intended to be mean spirited. It was just a poorly chosen method of critique, in my opinion, that will offend and intimidate many readers who won't respond. It comes off very smug, whether intended or not.
And I accept your comments and criticism in the spirit in which it is intended, but ask you to reconsider, meaning to re-consider you stance and see if you don't come to a new conclusion. If you don't, that's okay, I understand. Not everybody is going to agree with me-- or with you. That's just a factor in life. And I can agree to disagree if you can. But if you don't mind, at least for a minute, give it another thought and re-consider your opinion.
And... if I were *really* smug, I'd point out that the moderator has already joined in the discussion...
(But I say that in jest, and nothing else)
richhotrain If I were the forum administrator, I would have locked or deleted this thread early on with three simple words, "It is offensive"...
Rich, I think that is taking it too far and too seriously. This is a hobby, not life-or-death. Though I have to admit, I don't necessarily like the title of the topic.
richhotrain...This is the reason why most modelers don't join clubs or have that much interaction with other modelers, the fear of being ridiculed either to one's face or behind one's back....
I really can't say whether this is true or not - never really thought about it - but I will say that I HOPE not. I hope everyone in any hobby is doing it for their personal enjoyment and doing it exactly the way they want to, other opinions be d****ed. Perhaps some younger (as in teenage) modelers might be so inclined, but adults?
richhotrainThe justification for participating in the criticism of this layout is that we can all learn...
The thing I noticed about this thread is that there has been very little actual criticism of the layout itself. In my case, that's because I don't really like commenting on things I only know second-hand, and I haven't seen the layout. Whatever the reason, a great many of the comments seem to be about criticism, and our general treatment of each other, than about the layout described at the beginning. I like a discussion of 2-8-0s and kitbashing as much as anyone - it's why I signed on here - but i also like discussions about human nature, because unlike scale, era, setting of our layouts, that's the one thing we all have in common. That said, your mileage may vary.
Sean
HO Scale CSX Modeler
Let me preface this by saying that we can probably all agree that some layouts have "it" and others simply don't. I'm very visually oriented, and I really like a layout that's well thought out and well rendered. All of the features that you described in the original post are things that absolutely drive me up the wall, too.
That being said, there are probably a lot of layouts that look great in photos, but run like crap, and many that look simple and beginner-ish that run like a Swiss watch.
For me, it's not enough to have bullet-proof operating track. If that were the case, I'd have Kato Unitrak. But I want it to look as realistic as possible, so I use Atlas code 55. As such, my challenge is to lay it carefully, and make it work smoothly, so I take the time to do that.
Anyhow, let me answer your questions...Rather than re-hash your original list of peeves, I'm going to show some images that I think represent the best of the best, and we'll just let the worst be what it is.
How does one construct a layout that isn't just a "collection of tricks" ??Every layout is a collection of tricks. But as you say, it has to be more than that to really work. There has to be at least an attempt to represent something that is recognizable to the viewer. The biggest (and best) trick to pull is to create an eye-popping and immediately recognizable scene that greets the visitor as he or she enters the room. I've enjoyed visiting several layouts that do this extremely well.
Rob Carey's Tennessee Pass layout does this extremely well, as does Rick Ernest's Columbia Gorge:
How does one develop one's "critical eye" and abilty to "edit"?
This can be achieved only one way. To learn by DOING. You can't sit in an armchair and read about weathering, or track planning, or scratch building. You have to do it. You have to do it badly, then learn from your mistakes. That process hones your skills, so you get better at each step of the process. You also have to pay attention to the world that's around you. If you do, then you won't accept a bridge without proper abutments. You won't accept a road that curves that has no guard rail. You won't accept a Conrail diesel with no cab signal box on the engineer's side.To whom does one turn for "the unvarnished truth"?
I get my truth in economy size bags on the various forums I participate in. There's one in particular that has adopted the phrase "Better Modeling Through Peer Pressure". This doesn't mean that we rip each other to shreds, but it does mean that if there's a badly puttied joint under the paint on your kitbashed locomotive, it will be pointed out as a flaw. It means that if you have a 60' auto parts car in a consist of outside braced wood boxcars, there will be a flag thrown. I like hearing the truth, because it helps me do a better job of sticking to MY mission, which is to build a model representing a particular railroad in a particular time and space. Knowing that my work will be constructively critiqued, and even scrutinized on some points, makes me pay more attention to the details that cement that time and place issue in the viewer's mind. This is not a bad thing.How does one learn to accept criticism without taking it personally?Everyone takes criticism personally. If you don't, then you are not a human being. The difference comes in how you accept that criticism. When I take a remark personally, that means I'm going to internalize it, and it's going to be rolling around in the back of my mind as I either fix the problem, or face a similar project down the road. It also helps me challenge myself to move my modeling to the next level, and to reject the idea that I can't improve my skills beyond where they are today. This flies in the face of the guys that hide behind "Rule #1" and who deny themselves the pleasure of reaching a little deeper into themselves to try something new. (That being said, it's important to note that there are probably more Rule 1 guys who have actually built something than there are guys with lofty goals who have actually attaineed them...)
What lessons are there to be learned in the layout scenario I've outlined above?The main thing would be that there are guys out there who just don't see beyond the basics of composing a model train layout. There are also guys that really want to do better work, but who feel intimidated by the "stars" of the hobby, who make it look so easy. I've found that the best policy is to find something positive to say, even if it's just "Boy, that's a nice piece of plywood you started with there", then offer suggestions that might help them turn the corner to get to the next step in their modeling experience. I try, not always successfully, to avoid sounding condescending or overbearing. I also try ALWAYS to back up my suggestion with a photo of MY work, to demonstrate to the poster that I've "been there, done that" and my experience and suggestions are legitimate and have merit. Way too frequently we get lofty answers about things that clearly display that the adviser has no idea what he's talking about.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?
First, he has to decide that it's important to him to do so. Just look at any Ntrak collaboration. Often there are blocks of modules that are designed to create a continuous and coherent theme, but just as often there's an animated carnival right next to a chemical dump. But to answer your question, if the modeler wants to "put it all together" there has to be some level of consistency in the execution. The level of detail should be appropriate to the scene, yes, but it should also share some of the values of the entire layout.
In the end everything is a choice, and some people choose to lock themselves in, and others choose to try for something more than what they can do today.
Lee
Route of the Alpha Jets www.wmrywesternlines.net
Yep, you publish photos of your layout, or open it up to visitors (or post opinions on these and other forums) at the risk of rejection and criticism, just like artists and performers do every day. If the criticism is fair and honest the discussion should not be locked in my opinion. And yet .. there are a host of unknowns here. The flat layout with the cliche backdrops and structures might have an astounding signal system with computer interface that is not evident in a photo. It might have CTC or a working ATS system. The wiring may be a wonder of organization and clarity. It might be someone's first layout, or was set up in a hurry for Christmas, or ....
Given the layouts I have visited where the backdrop consists of unpainted cinder block I'd go a little easy on using the Walthers backdrops. As to flatness, well -- sometimes that's the prototype! Me, I tend to cringe more at mountains and hills that look wildly improbable. I always fixate on the water problems in the basements of the scale houses snuggled up to hills ....
I guess my final observation is that after going on lots of layout tours over the years, it is a pretty awful layout where I don't see something of interest or value. There have been some.
Dave Nelson
First of all, although the title may be a bit strong (for effect, no doubt), I see nothing wrong with these kinds of discussions, and certainly nothing to lock the thread about.
That said, I would be willing to bet that some of us may have come upon layouts that didn't live up to our own personal standards. Likewise, we have seen layouts that were much better than ours. If I am invited to comment on the former, I do so in a way that is constructive, perhaps offering to provide some tips or even my own labors. In the case of the latter, I look at them for inspiration in hopes of moving my own talents up a notch.
We always need to bear in mind that everyone brings different skill sets and interests to the table in this--and every other--hobby. Money and available time are big considerations, as well. I try hard to recreate a certain reality in a specific time setting, based on my travels and experiences. Others may have a picture in their mind that every layout needs to have a tunnel in one corner, a 90-degree crossing, the man in the outhouse or whatever.
I see no conflict between my vision of what I want in a layout and theirs. Neither is better or worse. But again, if the guy (or gal) who has what might be judged as somehow "inferior" asks for help, I am always there to assist with whatever advice I can offer.
John Timm
dknelsonI guess my final observation is that after going on lots of layout tours over the years, it is a pretty awful layout where I don't see something of interest or value.
Nicely put, Dave. I share your view here. People hope for affirmation, and some can always be given. The respectful and honest critic also offers suggestions for change. It is up to the recipient to do what he/she will with it, including how they react to it emotionally.
Nobody would post an image with the request, "Please tell me this is awful." Anyone with half a brain will know that there is a need for improvement...the key is to say it respectfully and to offer encouragement by pointing out what you think the person has done well...even if it is just a good start.
desertdogI would be willing to bet that some of us may have come upon layouts that didn't live up to our own personal standards. Likewise, we have seen layouts that were much better than ours
True dat. And, thinking back, I can't recall any layout I have ever seen - whether I "liked" it overall, or not - that didn't have at least one thing done better than I have done it, or inspired me in one way or another.
I'm surprised with the length of some of the posts on the subject. Some very good stuff but what I see is the original post was a shotgun insult to probably 90 percent of those here even if they don't realize it. I think I can say that the vast majority of those here have one or more items covered. A person with a flat layout on pink unfinished foam is probably as close to being accurate as many of the perfect looking layouts. Take a walk down some tracks any time. In most areas it's flat, boring, trashed and has various items strewed about. I remember as a kid having a 4x8 with a"Flat" oval and having just as much fun with it as I do today. There is nothing wrong with constructive criticism of a particular picture or idea posted, Hell that's how I wound up correcting a recent backdrop I made. What I don't agree with is the I hate someone's screwed up layout followed by list that has at least one thing on most readers layouts. I believe that all it does is discourage people from posting pics of their work.
Springfield PA
jwhitten But, I *can* still have an opinion.
dehusman So what you're saying is that you know (or believe) that if you open the post and read it / see the images that accompany it-- something about the effort is likely to "annoy" your sensibilities...? So you skip opening the post because you don't want to pile on with the "congratulations", "way to go", "looking good" little white lie comments? And so even though you know you have a real opinion you could voice that (might) could help the other person-- you elect instead to stay silent? To not be involved?
dehusmanDon'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 dissertations, 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-) And yet you continue to participate.
dehusmanDon'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 dissertations, 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-)
Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com
jwhittenodaveThis one is a non-issue with me too. In my mind, it is the benchwork that needs to follow the track plan. It was never my intent to establish "The Canonical List", but rather to broach the topic of layout "issues" that nobody ever really wants to talk about directly.
odaveThis one is a non-issue with me too. In my mind, it is the benchwork that needs to follow the track plan.
Well, you did say this:
jwhittenBut 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.
The point dknelson made above about anyone putting their layout "out there" should be ready for critiques is a good one. I was pretty nervous about putting my track plan up here, but I got some great advice on what worked and what didn't, and my plan became better because of it. I am grateful that some folks talked about my issues directly.
shayfan84325One of my favorite feedback stories comes from Westcott’s book about John Allen: Cliff Grandt asked John Allen for feedback on Grandt’s scratch-built brass Heisler. Allen took a photo of it and printed it for Grandt. He reportedly said, “Look at the photo; every time you see something that tells you that this is not a real Heisler, it may be an opportunity to improve it.” Notice that Allen never listed all the things that could be better; he facilitated a process by which Grandt could find them on his own. I consider this both helpful and graceful.
Phil-- your name must be short for "Philosopher".
I really loved your response, you offer sage advice!
Wow, what a discussion. And alot of it pertains to me, but I was never scared to post pics of my layout plan. I received all the constructive criticism and applied that to improvements on my plan.
I am always very appreciative at all the help I have received, and I always let everyone know that too. And I think it encourages more people to join in my help discussions.
Without all this, my layout would be... well...horrible.
And as a newbie, I agree that along with the critisism should come encouragement also. For example, I don't know if anyone remembers my "Rail Yard issue", it was a pretty big discussion. But in the end, I now have a great working yard that is easily accessible. That's just one example of many that I have come here asking for help and suggestions, and I'm sure it's not the last.
In any case, it's all about model trains and having fun!!!!!
Michael
CEO- Mile-HI-RailroadPrototype: D&RGW Moffat Line 1989
UP 4-12-2Fight the war on pink (who really wants to look at all that pink on a train layout?) by buying some latex (do not use oil based anything on the insulation foam) paint in an appropriate background color for your region of the country. Since I'm modeling the southwest, I painted the entire layout (except the white-primered mountains) a desert sand color that exactly matched the sand I'm using. This alone is an instant, large scenic improvement. On the second coat of latex paint (one will likely not cover the pink completely), start sprinkling in ground foam (or in my case, real sand) while the paint is still wet.
In my case I plan on using spline roadbed construction and plywood forms for the yards and town locations. I haven't yet decided whether I will use hardshell construction or foam-based construction-- perhaps a bit of both.
Eric97123 I have tried to balance it out and so far I am very happy with it no matter what people might think of my layout.
That is precisely the goal!
shayfan84325Cliff Grandt asked John Allen for feedback on Grandt’s scratch-built brass Heisler. Allen took a photo of it and printed it for Grandt. He reportedly said, “Look at the photo; every time you see something that tells you that this is not a real Heisler, it may be an opportunity to improve it.”
greg - Philadelphia & Reading / Reading
BRAKIEJohn,Since this week's subject is a heady subject I shall make my reply in the morning when I am refresh for whatever its worth..I just returned from a quick trip to Marion and am little tired since I been up since 5:00AM.
Brakie,
Thanks for stopping in! I look forward to your comments when you're ready.
HamltnblueWhat I don't agree with is the I hate someone's screwed up layout followed by list that has at least one thing on most readers layouts. I believe that all it does is discourage people from posting pics of their work.
Perhaps while you were still reeling over the title, you missed this part:
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!"
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!"
Beyond that, if you still feel the same, I accept your criticism, and will add it is not and was not my intent to disparage anybody's layout, but to point out items / issues that can work to undermine an otherwise valiant effort.
I also said this, which you also seem to have overlooked:
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. **
And this:
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.
You seem to have skipped past all of that to only concentrate on "the list", which I specifically included to get all of us thinking about developing our "critical eye" with the purpose of *improving* our modeling. The idea being to put some stuff out there to stimulate the conversation and *not* to denigrate anybody specifically-- that is why I have gone to great lengths not to identify the layout or the modeler. So what difference does it make if I am describing a real or fictional, or perhaps even my own layout in my description?
However, if you want to blow past all that and ignore 2/3's of my post so you can take one small part way out of context-- then okay, that's fine. I'll accept your criticism. I knew as I was writing this post that there were going to be some people who wouldn't see this as a positive and constructive effort.
Thank you for your comments though. I appreciate them. And if you come back and post more, I'll happily address those as well. My goal is to get you-- and anybody else who reads my posts-- thinking. And if that's what you want to think about and discuss, that's your prerogative, and I respect that.