For me, less is more. I would rather have properly scaled items on the layout and if it means having fewer other things on the layout so be it. Even then I need to make tough decisions like all modelers do.
Another thing that is not for me is having things that end at the edge of the world like bridges and rivers. This is not meant to be a criticism, it is a choice. Things that end at the edge of the world instantly catch my eye and take away from the other details a layout may have to offer. Others may not think twice about it.
Brent
"All of the world's problems are the result of the difference between how we think and how the world works."
I think that is a fair nit to pick. About the door in particular (eliminating floors as Ed says is a time honored form of selective compression so long as the general idea of the structure is communicated, which it is).
What's missing is what I'd call a "landing" and again selective compression would allow one to be small, maybe impossibly or laughably small, but there should be something.
Dave Nelson
Hello, and —
I can relate to what you are saying and the only thing I can offer is that nearly everything designed and used in our model world has been subjected to "selective compression" out of necessity.
Most layout builders have to settle on a degree of reduction and substitution. Anyone who has tried to fit a steel mill or other large industry on an average layout has felt the effects.
Good luck, Ed
Looking through the current issue, in the article on the cutters - being from Philly, that's a fabulous row of houses, though most of Philly has three story row houses, not two.
EXCEPT... the front steps are wrong. Follow me here: you walk up the steps, knock on the door, and someone opens the door.
And it smashes into your shins.
All front steps have a landing at the top, wide enough that you can stand on without being hit by the foor....