jasperofzeal dehusman: Its the difference between being an artist and owning a painting. Then by your logic, most of us "model railroaders" are not "model railroaders" since we buy pre-fabricated items, whether they're RTR, kits, track, vehicles, etc..
dehusman: Its the difference between being an artist and owning a painting.
Its the difference between being an artist and owning a painting.
Then by your logic, most of us "model railroaders" are not "model railroaders" since we buy pre-fabricated items, whether they're RTR, kits, track, vehicles, etc..
No that's not my logic at all, you have just taken the point reducto ad absurdum.
The point is not the materials. An artist buys brushes, paint and canvas. The point is CREATIVITY. The point is actually being able to DO it, rather than just acquiring it. Its a matter of SKILL. It is not a black and white thing, an either-or thing, its a continuum. The more components that are purchased RTR the more towards the "collector" side a person is. The more components that the person builds, modifies, customizes, the more towards the "artist" side the person is. Very few people are at either extreme.
I find it ridiculous how some of you think that if anyone had their layouts professionally built is not a real "model railroader". Get real, did all of you build your own house, or your car?
Nope. But then again I'm not claiming to be an architect, a framing carpenter, an electrician, a plumber or an auto worker. For me to buy a house or car and claim to be any of those would be wrong. Because you are framing the arguement in pure black and white terms (which I am not) you are missing the point.
If you go to somebody's house and they offer you a slice of pie that they baked themselves you will have a different feeling towards them (and the pie) than if they offer you a slice of store bought pie. If you tell me that the person served you homemade pie I will feel differently about them than if you just say they served you pie. The difference in the significance between store bought pie and homemade pie is the difference between buying RTR and making it. Both are nice, but one has a different impact than the other. One has a higher personal investment of time and effort than the other. While you may not value personal time and investment, most people do.
Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com
jwhitten (big snip) So from one viewpoint, the question is a fundamental one-- what is the gist of the hobby? Is it running trains? Modeling trains? Talking about trains? Dreaming about trains? All of the above? Some of each? None of the above? John
(big snip) So from one viewpoint, the question is a fundamental one-- what is the gist of the hobby? Is it running trains? Modeling trains? Talking about trains? Dreaming about trains? All of the above? Some of each? None of the above?
(big snip)
So from one viewpoint, the question is a fundamental one-- what is the gist of the hobby? Is it running trains? Modeling trains? Talking about trains? Dreaming about trains? All of the above? Some of each? None of the above?
John
Indeed, John, that IS the fundamental question and to answer it in proper context one must be familiar with what the hobby was about in its first 60 years and how some might say it has evolved over the last decade.
If one consults the hobby press over those first three score years, there can be absolutely no question that ours was basically a craftsman's hobby throughout that entire time. It centered on the hobbyist building a realistic (as much as his talents and available materials would allow) layout, together with the majority of its equipment and accessories, not because they couldn't be bought but rather because this was the craftsman approach to the hobby and what made it worthwhile pursuing.
There have always been people on the fringes who bought all RTR and had layouts built for them, but they were rarely taken very seriously by the hobby press, which always, at least up until the past decade and beyond the ads, centered around do-it-yourself in just about every aspect of model railroading.
Although it probably leads away from the original idea of your question, the following might be useful in enlightening readers here. Traditionally, people's interests in model trains, as an adult hobby, were broken down more-or-less into the following categories (you'll find them and their ilk from time to time listed and talked about in MR editorials of the past):
Model Railroaders - Those talented and industrious individuals who could build virtually whatever they needed to construct a miniature, artistically executed and believable representation of the real world, complete with operating equipment, structures and scenery of their own making (and for the naive here, that did not mean cutting down their own trees for scale lumber, nor smelting metals). They did the "complete package" when building a layout for themselves.
Runners - Those whose primary interest in the hobby was simply running trains, often on layouts largely vacant of scenery. The latter situation wasn't simply a "stage" on the hobbyist's path to building a complete layout; it was more often than not the end product!
Model Makers - These individuals' interest was basically confined to the construction of models. They usually lacked any layout beyond perhaps a test track, or photo diorama, but the stuff they built rivaled (or even surpassed!) the best professional items money could buy. They are still with us today, often as those folks who paint the highly realistic and weathered individual cars, almost always seen on just a small diorama, or even a plain board. Of course, there are also the strictly model makers today, too.
Armchair Hobbyists - The guys whose association with the hobby is limited to reading the magazines, plus planning and dreaming about the layouts they'll never build. They can often know a great deal about what has been published in the magazines, both scale and prototype, but are unwilling or unable to apply that knowledge to actually modeling anything themselves.
Collectors - Depending on their exact outlook, these are the guys who endlessly purchase locomotives, rolling stock and structure kits (like FSM) "for my future layout." They end up with closets filled with models still in the boxes...to be sold off on eBay after they die. Another faction simply collects, without any intention to ever use the stuff.
The Toy Train People - Regarded as those who employed RTR Lionel/Flyer/Marx, regardless of it being O, or HO, along with Plasticville-like scenery on their layouts, plus the Hi-Railers. These folks were not taken seriously by the more accomplished hobbyists, or by the scale hobby press, and the magazines eventually ousted them from being seriously regarded as part of the hobby way back in the 1950's. The "Runners" sometimes got lumped into this group as well.
All these separate groups are with us today, but it has only been over the past dozen years, or so, that these distinctly different groups somehow melded into being considered all "model railroaders" by the current generation of hobbyists. Surely this has a great deal to do with the influx of new middle-aged hobbyists we saw in the 90's and more recently, the folks who were more familiar with the Lionel approach to the hobby, rather than that of the craftsman.
CNJ831
CNJ:All these separate groups are with us today, but it has only been over the past dozen years, or so, that these distinctly different groups somehow melded into being considered all "model railroaders" by the current generation of hobbyists.
---------------------------------------------------
John,Who are we to judge and classify modelers? Today's RTR models are far from the train set RTR that was once common to RTR'ers.Today's RTR models has road specific details etc..Just because one builds a craftsman kit doesn't mean he's a craftsman no more then weathering a car makes anybody a weathering "expert" since there are specialized weathering material available as well as tutorial videos on YouTube..
Those old bias classes of modelers no longer apply since a newbie can turn out a very nice layout by following written instructions that comes on the package or by watching tutorial videos on you tube and those old worn out classes of modelers set forth by those who thought themselves superior years ago should be forgotten .
The day of the true craftsman is over it died years ago along with my Dad's generation of modelers.
After all regardless we are all Model Railroaders in the end..Its amounts to how we choose to arrive there in the pursuit of our hobby enjoyment base on our personal choices....
After all our trains runs by electricity on 2 or 3 rails regardless of the way we chose to model..
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
John: I am a professional Model Railroad Builder. Over the years I have built over two dozen layouts. These might include only bench work, just wiring, finishing a layout started or building a complete layout. I find in most cases the customer was stalled, did not have a specific skill, the facilities or tools, or just did not want his layout to take years to build. All my customers went on to do something to enhance their layout to suit some specific interest. For example one man did not care for the trees installed, though they were fine. He just felt he had to go beyond my work. He even had me come back and do other things on the layout a number of times. Another customer reworked the staging yard to better suit his needs. I did not have any objections to these changes. To me that is an essence of model railroading. I have done the same on my own layout. To me I am an encouragement to the hobby as that person probably would not proceed in the hobby without mine or someone else's help. With the customer's permission I have even left out specific things on the layout so that the customer could personalize his layout, for example people and vehicles.To sum up I have no objection to hired or free layout help as this increases the participation and gains new friends. However, I do like to see credit given.
The Ferroequinologist layoutconcepts@yahoo.com eBay store: Backshop Train & China Store Facebook: Model Trains, Train Sets, Buildings & Layout Concepts
Very nice to have the past post by the professional installer/builder...thanks for that. I take it that you look at yourself largely as a 'facilitator' to the person who would like to have a working layout that meets his standards, and not always just your own. Sure, at some point your values and experience might force you to decline a job, but that would be extremely rare. Usually there is a negotiated settlement, an agreement first in principle with ideas shared, and then you make a proposal and there is finally a shaking of hands or a contract.
But you aid, or facilitate, the realization of what the person needs and can't or simply won't do for himself. And that is really what all suppliers of materials and finished products, from RTR locos to kits of any description, do for all of us...they expect payment for providing us with aids to the realization of our dreams.
I tend to agree with John when he describes true modellers as those who do it pretty much all for themselves. I would think that such a person could also have some RTR items, though, but he claims the title by having accomplished the construction of all the items of a kind at one time or another. Eventually, though, time, changing circumstances, whatever....as Chuck has suggested, impose a changing reality that requires all of us to decide what we can and will do, or what we can't practically do.
We wouldn't say that kids who set up Mattel race car circuits and run their little motorized cars at breakneck speeds around them and up loops and such are modellers, because those toys really are a representation of a kind, just as our RTR trains are, but we don't say they aren't toy race care drivers....that is precisely what they are doing!
We can have a model train set, or a model railroad, but we aren't modelling...we are playing with them. Modelling, per se, is the act of rendering an item in scale. Few of us really go to those lengths these days.
I sure like the fact that there are people like John who can pass on those skills, though, people who know how and have done it.
-Crandell
Selling it or taking it to a show or exhibition and saying you made it, when you didn't ,is where I would draw the line !
Once Upon a time.........
My photobucket:
http://s6.photobucket.com/albums/y250/JohnReid/
I am a man of few words but lots of pics
I quit drinking beer because the download was taking longer than the upload !
I hesitated to answer, but this is a day and a half late. Enough hesitation.
I would prefer a house designed by an architect and built by a builder. But I would not allow an interior decorate to set foot inside. There are too many things I want to do. Hang train pictures.
I am glad my dad built layouts for me when I was little, and for my brother (and for himself.) By the time I was 11, I wanted to start designing at least the scenery and buildings. Measuring the doors and windows of real buildings and figuring ¼ inch = 1 model foot. Why did my houses look big compared to my Lionel trains?
I have built layouts for people. Mostly kids. Once for an elderly lady who never had trains because girls don’t get trains.
I can’t imagine allowing anyone else to design or build my layout. Maybe if I had $$$, it might make sense to have my track and wiring done by someone who did better than me.
But there are too many things I want to do on a layout-- my own things.
I-- wouldn’t say I dislike- I am unexcited by a generic layout. If someone hired a professional team to build a layout, had no idea what they wanted except a train layout, didn’t want to bother to talk about it or think about, I would probably be unexcited about that layout. I might just say “that’s nice” like one does when a generic poet poetizes generically about flowers and birdies and how nice spring is.
Sometimes I chose things to do just because they are different and non-generic.
So many layouts have a tunnel because a railroad has to have a tunnel. And it looks it. Modeling the Texas coastal plain gives me plenty excuse to avoid tunnels.
I am glad manufacturers build my locos for me. I often want to disassemble them and paint them for my prototype.
So many things I want to do. Especially design and scenery and structures to do my own thing. My dismantled layout included 11 structure kits built more or less as designed but chosen to fit my prototype setting, 3 fairly kitbashed structures, 5 radically kitbashed structures (unrecognizable), and 13 scratchbuilds. My own thing.
I have enjoyed building a few layouts for other people. The elderly lady who always wanted a train got only a small layout that
o more or less represented the area of her hometown
o as it looked when she was a little girl
o at Christmastime.
Not generic.
This set of topics has come up on numerous conversations in which I have participated. Some were about show cars and whether it is appropriate for factory built rods to compete for the same prizes as those built in garages; others were conversations with my father in which he expressed his displeasure at all the ready to fly R/C airplanes that were showing up at the flying field. I've read articles about professionally built model railroads and come to this conclusion:
No matter who builds it, I'll consider the product on its own merits. The factory built rods give us garage guys something to strive for. RTF airplanes and RTR model railroads are made because there is a market for them. None of this commercialism has to alter my pleasure. It is my choice if I allow it to.
My regard for the owner of the purchased works is that they likely have more money than time, skill, and/or talent. I appreciate the analogy to a painting owner as compared to an artist. My own values are that I much prefer a creative process as compared to simply owning something. In fact, after spending years building my street rod, I became bored with it and sold it. One of the great facets of model railroading is that a layout is never really finished, at least for me that is the case. I don't want to own a model railroad; I want to build one. In this way, I feel that the folks who simply buy a layout and I are very different.
There is nothing wrong with the layout buyers. They do nothing to interfere with me, and often their layouts are very well made. I doubt that we'd have much to talk about, but there are plenty of build-your-own folks out there - I don't lack for conversation partners.
I agree that we all should be truthful about our accomplishments - what we build and what we buy. I've yet to find a dishonest owner of a factory built 'rod, RTF or ARF airplane, or professionally built model railroad, so I don't see it as an issue. If there is competition, I feel that it is fine to include professionally made pieces as well as non-professionally made pieces. After all, the awards are for the best model, not for the best model that was built by an amateur. I also feel that it is fine to include professionally made work in magazines - after all, magazine publishers are trying to present interesting material so that we'll buy their publication; if it is interesting, engaging, unusual, or what have you, it is their prerogative to publish it.
One final comment - my experience is that professional builders often make compromises that amateurs don't. After all, if you are making a iving at something, you have to make productivity a priority. We amateurs are not "on the clock" so we have no incentive to cut any corners.
Phil, I'm not a rocket scientist; they are my students.
selector We can have a model train set, or a model railroad, but we aren't modelling...we are playing with them. Modelling, per se, is the act of rendering an item in scale. Few of us really go to those lengths these days. -Crandell
Crandell,
Shame on you. We are all model railroaders, from the guy who lays track on an old door and runs an engine in a loop to the guy who pays a small fortune to have his layout professionally built to all the rest of us who fall somewhere in between who build our own layouts, large and small, and enjoy the hobby.
As for the author of this thread, I don't know what he wants. Back in May, he wrote about a layout that he hated. It was so egregious in his view that it was a caricature of what a train layout should be. He didn't like the layout, he didn't like the landscaping, he didn't like the structures, he didn't like the little people, he didn't like the weathering. Gotta feel sorry for the "model railroader" who built it. Now, he wants to know where is the threshold point on commercially designed layouts or "store-bought" items before the "negative connotation" emerges.
All of this negativity does not promote the hobby in my view. C'mon fellas, we are all model railroaders. Yes we are!
Rich
Alton Junction
One of the interesting things about the hobby is how historically the vast majority of model railroaders have always preferred RTR. The history of the hobby is a history of developing RTR.
When reasonable quality track became available most stopped hand laying.
Athearn and Roundhouse (and others) developed simple kits and became the large producers. Later they went RTR and are still large.
Screwdriver locomotive kits largely replaced craftsman/scratchbuilt and in turn have been replaced by RTR.
Simple plastic structure kits were developed and now RTR structures are available and appear to be selling well.
Benchwork components and kits are available, just screw them together.
And so layout kits and layout modules are available.
RTR layouts are available.
What this says is that model railroading is and has always been about a transportation system in miniature. Just as railroaders don't build their locomotives, rolling stock, stations, track, etc. so now do model railroaders not have to do that either.
Which is not to say you can't. There is and has always been those who enjoy the model building. And this will continue into the future. And of course many build to save money. It's just no longer necessary to be a model railroader.
Enjoy
Paul
IRONROOSTER Simple plastic structure kits were developed and now RTR structures are available and appear to be selling well. Benchwork components and kits are available, just screw them together. And so layout kits and layout modules are available. RTR layouts are available. What this says is that model railroading is and has always been about a transportation system in miniature. Just as railroaders don't build their locomotives, rolling stock, stations, track, etc. so now do model railroaders not have to do that either. Which is not to say you can't. There is and has always been those who enjoy the model building. And this will continue into the future. And of course many build to save money. It's just no longer necessary to be a model railroader.
Paul, Larry, Rich, et al., our society employs nomenclature to identify and define things. It is absolutely necessary to do so if one is to understand what a person, company, or entity is involved in. Whether, or not, one personally wishes to agree with the situation does not factor into things. Simply owning a model railroad, or basic train set, does not somehow automatically make one a model railroader, any more than someone who buys a stamp at the local P.O. to send a letter across town can rightfully call himself as a philatelist. A distinct term, or name, is used to clearly identify what is being done by the individual(s) involved.
For better than half a century the term model railroad hobbyist, or model railroader, has unequivocally meant one who builds examples of a railroad in realistic miniature. The other terms that I pointed earlier are long recognized and were largely accepted definitions of some distinctly different pursuits, or hobbies, involving miniature trains in some fashion. Their practitioners are not the same as model railroaders. Even our host acknowledges this fact by separating the different types of hobbies involving miniature trains through their different publications and in the division of specific areas on this website.
Folks, the term "model" in model railroader is employed with the intent to clearly indicate that the practitioner is personally responsible for having built much, if not all, of his layout and equipment. Disregard that fact and the use of the term "model railroader" becomes a sham. If one wishes to employ a term, such as "miniature train enthusiast", as an umbrella term to encompass the many sorts of interest in scale and toy trains, that's fine, but "model railroader" should not mistakenly be used in place of it.
I think a couple of posters have hit the nail on the head. A commercially designed and produced layout is only an issue if one attempts to pass the work off as one's own. This is intellectual dishonesty of the worst kind.
Someone who purchases a prefab layout would be a "Runner", by CNJ's definitions above, but interestingly, those definitions leave no room for someone who puts RTR equipment and model kits on his layout. I guess those folks aren't "real" model railroaders, huh? Maybe another category, say, "Scum of the Earth" would be appropriate there.
Connecticut Valley Railroad A Branch of the New York, New Haven, and Hartford
"If you think you can do a thing or think you can't do a thing, you're right." -- Henry Ford
CTValleyRR Someone who purchases a prefab layout would be a "Runner", by CNJ's definitions above, but interestingly, those definitions leave no room for someone who puts RTR equipment and model kits on his layout. I guess those folks aren't "real" model railroaders, huh? Maybe another category, say, "Scum of the Earth" would be appropriate there.
"Folks, the term "model" in model railroader is employed with the intent to clearly indicate that the practitioner is personally responsible for having built much, if not all, of his layout and equipment."
CT, next time how about reading what's posted first, before spouting nonsense? We all have some RTR stuff on our layouts. It's when hobbyists increasingly employ not only RTR locomotives, but large selections of RTR rollingstock, plastic RTR roadbed/sectional track, RTR buildings and so on, that they progressively step over the line from being a model railroader to becoming just a variation of the toy train group's approach. Try to keep in mind that the hobby is about creativity and craftmanship, not about simply ownership.
And...the categories of hobbyists I cited earlier are not simply based on my opinion. They have appearred in the pages of MR with the editorial staff having been the source and a reflection of how hobbyists in general regarded the various approaches in the past.
I see where people are coming from this. In my opinion, if you have a layout professionally built for you, why should you be the one who's getting it published? I believe the builder of the layout should have the article be published under their name.
On the idea of having a professional layout builder being commissioned to build a layout, that is up to you. But I think that it is much more entertaining to build your own layout. Watching your first train run all the way around your layout, it's much more entertaining than have some guy come to you and say, "Here, it's done, now where's my check?" Of course not putting that term literally. There are some great professional layout builders out there, don't get me wrong, but if I had the money, I would go with building my own layout, I find it much more entertaining.
Just a teenager's
CNJ831,I will more then likely get a hide tanning but,here goes.
John,I am no longer sure what this hobby is or what its becoming.Seems to me there are more and more saying if your not modeling my way then you're not a real model railroader..Of course 99% of the time this is said behind the safety of a computer screen..To this I say BS in Santa Fe boxcar lettering.
Again one is no more of a craftsman because he/she builds a FSM kit then a prototypical operator is a real railroader...One can have a supped up layout and thinks he superior to all because of his modeling skills.My reply is so? No big thing.
As you know years ago we had to scratchbuild or kitbash if we wanted a correct locomotive or car .Today we no longer need to do that thanks to road specific locomotives and some cars we can buy.
As I mention the true craftsman died with my Dad's generation of modelers as did many things.
One can puff out his chest and say this engine is 110% correct because I did this or that..That is all well and good of course but,a question that pops into my mind is you model in 95..Why does that 25 year old locomotive look new?
If one wants to play that "correct modeling game" then he/she should model the locomotive the way it looked in the year they model if they don't they are no more then-what was that subclass? Ah yes, a "dabbler"..
So,after all the smoke and mirror subclasses of modelers it still hold true..We are all model railroad dabblers in one form or the other..
richhotrain selector: We can have a model train set, or a model railroad, but we aren't modelling...we are playing with them. Modelling, per se, is the act of rendering an item in scale. Few of us really go to those lengths these days. -Crandell Crandell, Shame on you. We are all model railroaders, from the guy who lays track on an old door and runs an engine in a loop to the guy who pays a small fortune to have his layout professionally built to all the rest of us who fall somewhere in between who build our own layouts, large and small, and enjoy the hobby. As for the author of this thread, I don't know what he wants. Back in May, he wrote about a layout that he hated. It was so egregious in his view that it was a caricature of what a train layout should be. He didn't like the layout, he didn't like the landscaping, he didn't like the structures, he didn't like the little people, he didn't like the weathering. Gotta feel sorry for the "model railroader" who built it. Now, he wants to know where is the threshold point on commercially designed layouts or "store-bought" items before the "negative connotation" emerges. All of this negativity does not promote the hobby in my view. C'mon fellas, we are all model railroaders. Yes we are! Rich
selector: We can have a model train set, or a model railroad, but we aren't modelling...we are playing with them. Modelling, per se, is the act of rendering an item in scale. Few of us really go to those lengths these days. -Crandell
Wow, you sure are reading a lot more into this than I had in mind. My original goal of this thread was to simply to discuss how people felt about engaging in professional commercial model railroading services, whether getting assistance developing a trackplan, or building benchwork, to the outright purchase of an entire layout. I even went so far as to put in bright red, bold print that I didn't want to start a 'who is/ who isn't a model railroader' thread, though as far as I'm concerned you're welcome to state that too if its your opinion, but that wasn't the point of my thread.
In reading Crandell's answer, he was talking about people who *model* something, not whether or not they are a "Model Railroader". In fact, I don't think anybody here has said people are not "Model Railroaders" even if they buy a layout (maybe somebody did and I missed it). But what people *have* said in a number of threads, is that there is a difference between a "Model Railroader" and a "Railroad Modeler".
The first is someone who self-identifies themselves with the hobby in some manner. Whether they talk about it, dream about it, read all the magazines, build or buy a layout, or join a club and operate on the club layout. I'm pretty sure that most of the folks here would mostly agree that anybody who *thinks* they are a "Model Railroader" and wants to be in the hobby, *is* a Model Railroader. (Maybe I'm wrong, but that seems to me to be the gist from most of the respondents.)
On the other hand, a number of folks-- including Crandell-- have said that they believe there is another facet, or "category" if you'd rather, of people who are "Railroad Modelers", who actively engage in the actual design and construction Railroad-related models, whether its building locomotives and rolling stock, or constructing buildings and structures, or putting together benchwork and laying track so as to construct a complete railroad *model*. The difference being the element of creativity and participation, and the actual work-effort required, regardless of the outcome, in building / constructing the models and/or layout.
The nuance I have been interested in exploring in this post however, is (a) how people feel in general about "buying" a commercial layout, and (b) if they have an issue with the former, how does it break down in its components-- which element or elements do people have the most issue with, or if no one particular element-- at what stage is the "tipping point" that it goes from being recognized as a "work of art" (my words) constructed by the modeler, to a "commercial item" (whether art-worthy or not) *purchased* by the modeler?
Back in May I wrote an article about a layout I actually liked-- and I said so right up front. YOU are just skipping over the parts that aren't convenient for your slant of the post. But it is true that I felt the layout had many of the "cliche" elements that people often discuss. AND, just for the record, I'm NOT the first one-- and probably far from the last one-- to write a post, or an article, such as that one. While I do not consider myself one of the "greats", nearly all of them have written a piece like that over the years-- from John Armstrong to Tony Koester and a whole lot of 'em in between. And some of them were far less gracious in their comments than I was. If you don't believe me, go research the articles and see for yourself.
In fact, I had been *hoping* for my post to be viewed in a humorous fashion, but it wasn't interpreted that way by some-- apparently yourself included. I don't know why-- whether they are insecure in their modeling or layouts, or what. But I did apologize in the event that I offended anybody. If I did, it wasn't intentional-- and I had hoped to have a nice nuanced discussion about the various "cliches" that many people invariably include-- perhaps unintentionally-- on their layouts. But to say I "hated" the layout is just wrong. It was just a title designed to get attention for the post. In retrospect, I agree it was probably too emotionally-charged and I should have used a softer title.
By the way, the word "cliche" isn't a specifically bad word, it merely means something that is done so often it becomes predictable or "pedantic". Here is a definition from the web: "A cliché or cliche (pronounced klē-ˈshā) is a saying, expression, idea, or element of an artistic work which has been overused to the point of losing its original meaning or effect, rendering it a stereotype, especially when at some earlier time it was considered meaningful or novel."
CTValleyRR I think a couple of posters have hit the nail on the head. A commercially designed and produced layout is only an issue if one attempts to pass the work off as one's own. This is intellectual dishonesty of the worst kind. Someone who purchases a prefab layout would be a "Runner", by CNJ's definitions above, but interestingly, those definitions leave no room for someone who puts RTR equipment and model kits on his layout. I guess those folks aren't "real" model railroaders, huh? Maybe another category, say, "Scum of the Earth" would be appropriate there.
So let me ask a question-- and this is not by way of disagreement, but merely to discover the level / degree of effort required before disclosures are mandatory...
If you get track planning assistance, does it seem "mandatory" that it should be disclosed? If its "commercial" (contracted / store-bought)? What about help from a friend over beer? Or taken from a plan in a book? Or modified from a plan in a book? etc.
What about the construction of benchwork? Is it necessary to disclose that you bought "siever's benchwork" (for example)?
What about the wiring and mechanical parts-- I'd wager that practically everybody buys their own wire and electrical switches. Probably a large number buy switch motors as opposed to rigging-up their own (not necessarily implying they wound their own motors). But these items aren't generally disclosed-- *unless* they were constructed by the modeler. So apparently its okay to buy this stuff and nobody cares. But if you buy other stuff-- and enough of it-- you reach a point where people have a different opinion.
CTValleyRR Maybe another category, say, "Scum of the Earth" would be appropriate there.
Maybe another category, say, "Scum of the Earth" would be appropriate there.
Let's not go there-- let's keep it civil.
This has been (in my opinion) a very interesting discussion so far. Let's not spoil it.
Well...
How about a little mind exercise: say you are given/purchase/steal a FSM kit....doesn't matter which one.
You erect it, and gosh if you don't do a bang up job of it. You send a photo of it sitting on your kitchen table to Model Railroader and they decline to publish. Are we all in agreement? It isn't model railroading.
Hmm, sez you. Okay, you sez, I'll put it on a small square of thin ply and scenic it up a bit with some greenery and a fence.....yeah and an old clunker in the driveway. Send it in. Model Railroader declines to publish. We all nod in agreement....it ain't model railroading.
Sheesh, you sez. Okay, I'll put 12" of right of way complete with a ballasted length of code rails and ties running just outside the back yard fence. Model railroad accepts the photo and publishes it. Do we agree it has become a model of a railroad? Did it matter if the rails and ties were really lightly ballasted EZ-Track, hand-laid, or Code 70 from Micro-Engineering...the weathered stuff?
Or, would we expect MR to decline once more, suggest some improvements, and offer to take another look? What would they be? Would you have to maybe power the short length of rails? Would that suffice? No train, but the rails can run one? Or should you also place a doodlebug on that short length of powered rails and have it creeping along when you take the photo? Would that pass the threshold test? Should the "railroad modeler" have actually built the Doodlebug from scratch, or would the Division Point variety (modified to have DCC and sound by you, of course) be acceptable to pass that same threshold test?
Or, would MR and we onlookers require that an actual loop of track be rendered, if not all in the image incorporating the FSM structure and yard, so that the Doodlebug could complete a circuit?
Just asking.
John,
let me try to give a simple answer.
No one really pays attention, who had helped you with your layout, if we are just talking about help. If you publish "your" work, it is a matter of courtesy and friendship to give credit to the work done by your friends. If we are talking enlisting commercial support", it is a different question - there it could have legal implications not to give credit.
So we will end up seeing a long list at the end of each MR feature:
selector Well... How about a little mind exercise:
How about a little mind exercise:
Another exercise might be-- suppose you buy a book of track plans by John Armstrong. A whole shopping cart full of FSM kits. A slew of Central Valley tie strips and turnout kits and rails to go with it. Siever's benchwork to fill the whole basement. Enough Woodland Scenics supplies to scenic a small country. Photo-realistic backdrops from All Scale backdrops. BLI and Proto2K locomotives and Exactrail rolling stock. NCE or Digitrax DCC controllers--- and you take all that stuff and combine it into a layout...
Is it *yours* or is it *commercial* ???
Sir Madog John, let me try to give a simple answer. No one really pays attention, who had helped you with your layout, if we are just talking about help. If you publish "your" work, it is a matter of courtesy and friendship to give credit to the work done by your friends. If we are talking enlisting commercial support", it is a different question - there it could have legal implications not to give credit. So we will end up seeing a long list at the end of each MR feature: Track plan by: Benchwork by: Track by: Scenery artist: Locos by: Rolling stock by Structures by: Figures by: Vehicles by: Power supply by: etc. etc.
Okay, but count me out when they start talking about "Grips" and "Best Boys" and who supplied the hairdressing and wardrobe...
This topic comes up now and then and we see the same kind of posts.
The name of the magazine and forums are Model Railroader. To read some posts you would think that there should only be a dozen members.
In my opinion the definition of a true model railroader should be:
A person who is someone between middle age and elder who looks back in life and sees that he/she hasn't accomplished much they are proud of, so they identify with a hobby to make themselves important. They play with toy trains and can build any part of them from scratch. They even cast their own metal wheels for use on theit cho choo's and never buy anything but scratch to create their kingdom. The trains that a true model railroader runs on DC or DCC systems that they designed and built, making their own silicone chips from sand and mining their own metals for making wiring and rails.
One thing that I find absolutely funny is how offended they become when someone takes store bought materials and RTR assemblies and create a world that looks just as good as thiers.
All this aside I truely feel sorry for those who really think they can look down at anyone else in the hobby. Life would probably feel a lot better if those would accept people who simply have the same basic interest as the equals they are and even get to know some of them.
In the end we're all the same and our toys will be pawned off like everything else to the highest bidders.
O
Springfield PA
John W. said:
"...there is a difference between a "Model Railroader" and a "Railroad Modeler..."
I have made this very statement, words arranged exactly the same way, several times in the past three or four years. If you purchase every single item, or only some, and create something that passes for a scale railroad, you are the former. You arrange parts to create something greater than their sum, and you have a railroad of some sort...modeled or in scale. However, if you take pains to faithfully render a true scaled version of a section of a real railroad, then you are a railroad modeler...that is what you set out to create, and there it is. I still think that some of the items could be purchased, donated, modified, or scratched from raw materials. I wouldn't make the insulated 22 gauge feeder wires, for example, nor the joiners, and I would probably not in this lifetime get around to creating a NYC Hudson in HO from materials and some commercial parts. But if I worked hard to create a scaled version of the Podunk & Western's right of way between mile posts 12 and 13, and ran scale trains down that length, I would say I was definitely a railroad modeler.
By the way for those true modelers, here's the definition of a railroader.
http://www.wordnik.com/words/railroader
A person engaged in the management or operation of a railroad or railroads; one employed in or about the running of railroad-trains or the general business of a railroad
That being the case to make a model railroader you would simply add the word model before railroad in the definition. It doesn't mention building the scenery or trains or anything else on the railroad.
John (OP),
Too bad that despite your plea, your thread became a who is/isn't a model railroader thread. Getting a straight answer is going to be difficult when egos, labels, and fragile confidence are present. It's too bad that these attitudes that some exhibit are what keeps new people from this hobby. So what if someone doesn't have the talent to build a layout or super-detail an engine or car, they still like trains and that should be enough to let them enjoy the hobby as they see fit. Labels, even if it's the norm in everyday society, don't do anything but categorize people to make the "higher ups" feel better about themselves. if I were to apply the so called accepted labels of this hobby to myself, I would be a "model maker" and "armchair modeler". Truth is that I am a model railroader because of my love for trains and the models (fancy word for toy) of such.
TONY
"If we never take the time, how can we ever have the time." - Merovingian (Matrix Reloaded)
So, which one is "better?" Is it the operations-uber-alles guy who builds a Plywood Pacific, forsaking even roadbed, or the same guy who pays someone else to build a beautiful layout for him to operate?
We all have our skills, and our limitations. Some have lots of time, others lots of money, most don't have enough of either. Some years ago, we had a spirited discussion here about Sam Posey's book, Playing with Trains. Sam is a former Nascar driver and sports analyst, so he's one of those guys with the financial resources to have a fine layout built. He worked with a professional modeler, and did a lot of the work himself, and ended up with a layout he was proud of in far less time than it would have taken to build it himself. Sam also has Parkinson's Disease, which limits his physical ability to model, so that's yet another consideration.
I've come to realize that I'm a Builder. I enjoy casting stone walls with Hydrocal. I enjoy making my own latex molds for casting cobblestones. So, am I any less the model railroader because I don't do op sessions or run my trains on schedules?
If you really want to know if a guy is a model railroader, ask his wife.
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.
MisterBeasley If you really want to know if a guy is a model railroader, ask his wife.
That´s about the best answer to this issue I´ve ever read!
Definitions of words change constantly. Oh by the way there is a mouse on the desk by my right arm as I type this. Model Railroading has gone from carving out blocks of wood to computer controlled replica's of the real thing.
At this point in time more than ever definitions are in flux. Should we strike up a committee to come up with new words or just tune up the definitions of the words we already use, or both?
The points made in this thread and the definitions of what or who is what at this point in time, cannot be much more than opinions, or so it seems. Let's offer up our opinions and let's respect those of others.
The glass is half full. Let's have a drink. It's Sunday morning and I'm off to the church of Train Room.
Brent
"All of the world's problems are the result of the difference between how we think and how the world works."
A few thoughts - directed at both sides:
CNJ831 - Like it or not, definitions of words and phrases evolve and change with time - we don't speak the same language of the King James Bible.
To the ready to run, "kumbaya" crowd, you are just as responsable for the "divisions" as the die hard, craftsman types. How? By holding views like "Why build that when you can just buy XYZ123".
What this is really all about is:
Interests - We are all interested in trains, but deep down that interest is very different for many of us. Both extremes on this issue have a hard time understanding the other side.
Goals - We all have different personal goals, or a chosen lack of them, in our pursuit of this hobby. and actually the young RTR crowd has a harder time understanding the goals of the "model builder" than what the model builders have understanding the RTR crowd - based on what I have seen, and as I have experianced on this forum regarding my own modeling choices and methods.
Abilities - Some of us have mechanical, electrical, construction or artistic skills which we enjoy appling to this hobby - out of neccessity those of past generations HAD to have or develope these skills - not so much so today.
Resources - Time and money or time vs money? This hobby has always required both, but now the importance of money is at the fore front - hence this discussion.
I belong to a round robin group and have helped a number of other modelers with their layouts. I have designed track plans, built benchwork, designed and installed control systems, and more - always donating my time - but usually being compensated for materials/products/supplies I bring to the project.
I, on the other hand, do not desire the help of others on my own layout. I desire that it be my own work. I have no problem using any level of commercial products, RTR (although they seldom stay completely "stock"), kits of every skill level, and scratch build items when the need/desire strikes me. But I have no desire to ask friends for help or hire proffessionals to come into my home and build the layout. Those are my choices.
I have no problem with others who make different choices, but I know from experiance, 40 years of it in this hobby and a number of years working in hobby shops, that I am unlikely to have much in common with someone who buys a turn key, or nearly turn key layout from a pro - I suspect I could be that pro or at least work for one if I chose to.
And again, as in my first post, I am only offended when such layouts are "passed off" as the owners work. Beyond that I am largely indifferent.
I have also built hot rods and restored old cars in my lifetime, and in that hobby too I find I have nothing in common with those who simply "buy" a fast car or a perfectly restored old car.
I design and build houses for a living, I seldon have much in common with my clients - they buy houses, I build houses.
Model trains is a vast hobby, "Model Railroading" is undefined at this point as the hobby and the culture are in flux, but to be sure it is a large and diverse hobby and it is unrealistic to expect that those within it who have one set of goals, interests, ablities, resources to be in touch with those whos goals, interests, ablities and resources are at the oposite ends of the available ranges.
Examples:
Some love sound - some hate it.
Some love building kits - some hate it
Some love brass - some don't see the value/point
Some are prototype focused - some not so much so
Some freelance or "protolance" - some don't see the point
Some are only about the trains - some are into the whole "minature world" thing
Some love prototype operation - some don't care one bit about it
Some love trains of the past - some only care about what they see today
How can all these views come together? They can't really, at least not for more than ten minutes of small talk - then the boredom or offense sets in. Birds of a feather will ALLWAYS flock together - it is human nature.
Sheldon