All Hail John Allen!

[icmr]

QUOTE: Originally posted by CNJ831

QUOTE: Originally posted by roadrat

I must disagree about Sellios his work may be cluttered and have a depression era look to it but it is still fantastic on all levels, that being said to each his own this is a hobby not a job.

bill

During the Great Depression major New England cities looked nothing like the F&SM. Nor did the American Southwest ever look like any of Furlow's layouts. Great modelers? Yes, absolutely! But should one really be revered for building a Disney-like layout?

And, yes, everyone has the right to model as they please. But the observer should never be so naive as to take absolute fantasy for reality...as so many do today in the cases of the three modelers (see the discussion of Allen, Sellios, Furlow, and 1940's film noir's influence on the hobby a year or so ago here).

CNJ831

Whats wrong with Disney-like layouts? I mean that Disneyland is a BIG layout. Walt told the people that built Disney land that he wanted the park built around the trains not the trains around the park.

As to the discussion about John Allen I have not seen much of his layout but I have read many articles and really enjoy them. I have gotten a lot of information from him.



Victor

Happy Railroading.[swg][swg]

[MidlandPacific]

Chip,

If you like that, there's a fellow who periodically writes for the "Narrow Gauge & Shortline Gazette" named Alexander Zelkin. Does some great logging scenes - you might want to check it out.

[BRAKIE]

QUOTE: Originally posted by SpaceMouse

Probably one body of work that influenced me, or should I say inspired me, was the work of Paul Templar.



He has his own distinct style that is often imitated. But although his work is excellent, an artist in anyone's book, I don't place him with Furlow or Selios or Allen. Clearly, he has little in common with Koester. He does have a following, perhaps greater than Furlow or even Koester. But I wonder 20 years from now, what his contribution will be to layout art. I also wonder how much that will be determined by MR.

Chip,Good question..Paul does museum quality work that can be rival by few and he's more then willing to share how he got there.I believe he has had articles printed in some magazine.[:D]

[hminky]

Paul has modeling tutorials on his website

http://www.all-model-railroading.co.uk/amr/index.htm

One of the original pioneers of presenting info on the internet. The internet permits people to have web articles without the cronism of the printed press. The printed press tends to print articles from "contributers" they know.

His site is a must see

Just a thought
Harold

[grandeman]

OK, let's lighten up some of the tense responses here.

20 years from now, ya'll will be talking about how much Grande Man furthered the hobby thru the use of Atlas bridges. [:D] Oh yeah, and since we've been challenged to post pics of our work...




Seriously though, I do like Paul Templar's work, even though I'm not a huge logging RR follower. He's quite a photographer as well.

[hminky]

QUOTE: Originally posted by grande man

20 years from now, ya'll will be talking about how much Grande Man furthered the hobby thru the use of Atlas bridges.

I can see the thread now. "Too many Grande Man Atlas bridges?"

Just a thought
Harold

[grandeman]

QUOTE: Originally posted by hminky

I can see the thread now. "Too many Grande Man Atlas bridges?"

Just a thought
Harold

Yep. [;)]

[twhite]

I think what we've all forgotten is that John Allen came along in the 1950's, when HO scale model railroading was just beginning to emerge from the dark ages. His eye for detail (and frankly, his sense of humor) was a real eye-opener for modelers during that time (like myself). Looking back from our perspective, perhaps he overstated some things, but he also let us know what COULD be done. And his articles on realistic operations were relatively new for that time.
Historically speaking, John Allen's impact on the hobby was something akin to daVinci arriving on the scene right after the caveman learned how to mix various types of clay to make paint.
The hobby didn't arrive fully formed, remember. There had to be pioneers. Allen was a pioneer, and as such, his impact on the hobby was considerable. Say what you like about his approach, but I'm willing to bet the bank that most of us at some point or another on our own model railroads have incorporated at least SOME of his ideas or techniques, consciously or unconsciously. I know that I have.
Tom [:D]

[grandeman]

Hey! I just got my 4th star! Should I expect a check in the mail? [:D]


ETA- I agree with you completely, Tom. Allen was a pioneer and we're all further ahead because of his work.

[SpaceMouse]

QUOTE: Originally posted by grande man

Hey! I just got my 4th star! Should I expect a check in the mail? [:D]

Yep, check that mailbox and if it isn't there. Call and email your post office. Gotta keep those guys on their toes.

[twhite]

QUOTE: Originally posted by grande man

Hey! I just got my 4th star! Should I expect a check in the mail? [:D]


ETA- I agree with you completely, Tom. Allen was a pioneer and we're all further ahead because of his work.

Grande Man--CONGRATULATIONS!! Okay, I'll send you MY check, I forgot to cash it, LOL!
PS: How can you have too MANY bridges, BTW?
Tom

[SpaceMouse]

I've got an Atlas Bridge, but I'm tearing it out. Eric, it has nothing to do with yout or the quality of your bridges [snicker] but a scratch-built tressle (out of popsicle sticks) ala John Allen is more period correct for me.

[Anonymous]

I like realistic modeling.

You know what? Label me a rivet counter if you want.

I enjoy John Allens work, but he did not make the same impact on the hobby like people like Tony K have and people seem to forget Allen was a realistic operator. Furlow is a joker whos drinking his own kool-aid, and judging from Sam Poseys book, hes pretty close minded when it comes to people who dont like his kind of modeling. Sellios makes real nice buildings and details, but goes overboard on the weathering and sometimes you see a train on his layout, his modeling is like somekind of kafkaese bent on realism.

But people that pinoneered modern trackplanning and operations are the people who should get the credit, not only do they operate and have good trackplans but their scenery is realistic, it looks like the southwest, or the alengheny mountains not some fantasy world.

[SpaceMouse]

Stuck,

Are you saying that all model railroads should be realistic and operations based?

Isn't this a little like looking through the big end of binoculars?

[Anonymous]

My first exposure to John Allen was his spectacular G&D harbor scene. Also, one of these days I'll just have to put in a Timesaver switching track arrangement on my pike.

As for a monument, I'll have his name printed as a candidate on a few campaign posters. After, dead people vote all the time, so why can't they also run for public office?[swg]

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by SpaceMouse

Stuck,

Are you saying that all model railroads should be realistic and operations based?

Isn't this a little like looking through the big end of binoculars?

No I'm not, I got no problem with people having non-realistic layouts, if people want to have endless loops and scenery with upside down trees, all the more power to them.

I was saying that all MY model railroads, and my favorite model railroads are realistic and operations based. Sorry if it came off otherwise.

[trainfan1221]

I haven't read that much of this post yet, bit I will go on record as saying I am not a huge fan of John Allen's, at least not from a model railroad perspective. He probably should have taken more time to sit back and enjoy what he created, as from what I have read it sounds like he instead obsessively worked on every little detail. I also wasn't impressed with the old equipment he ran. I liked reading about his original small layout or his second medium sized one as much as his masterpiece. That doesn't mean I don't think he did some nice stuff, I just would as soon read about a railroad a little less detailed that struck me as a little more interesting.

[Cox 47]

John Allen was a artist his weathing , buildings rolling stock and operation broke ground for all model railroaders and then his photos would leave you wondering if it was real or a model...Cox 47

[BRAKIE]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Cox 47

John Allen was a artist his weathing , buildings rolling stock and operation broke ground for all model railroaders and then his photos would leave you wondering if it was real or a model...Cox 47

Never happen..One look at his pictures one had no doubts it was a model. Like the majority of the modelers in John's day,he wasn't really into operations.

[Roadtrp]

Wow. You don't need to personally like Picasso's style to recognize that he was a great artist. As far as I'm concerned, the same goes for Allen and Sellios. I don't particularly like the whole world in shades of grey like Sellios presents, but I would never deny his skill and commitment to his vision.

This thread has given me great confidence though. I'm pretty sure that most of you wouldn't think much of my layout either, which means I'm in some mighty fine company!!

[:P]

[ARTHILL]

I had not heard of the name, Sellios, before and then today I'm going through an old MR and on the cover of an 86 issue there he is. The artical was nice, the pics great. He certainly was into detail. The whole thing was a little worn out in its look but that is what things looked like in the early 80's. It was some of the most intricate detailing I have seen. There, I learned something new today.

[CNJ831]

QUOTE: Originally posted by BRAKIE

QUOTE: Originally posted by Cox 47

John Allen was a artist his weathing , buildings rolling stock and operation broke ground for all model railroaders and then his photos would leave you wondering if it was real or a model...Cox 47

Never happen..One look at his pictures one had no doubts it was a model. Like the majority of the modelers in John's day,he wasn't really into operations.

I think that there may have been an interesting coundrum at work when it came to John's fame from his published works. Probably 95% of his published subjects were over-weathered, caricaturish, gimmicky, or fantasy shots that included extremely deteriorated buildings and rolling stock, fantasy encounters with dinosaurs or strange little people, and/or purely tongue-in-cheek.

Now John was a serious professional photographer by trade and there certainly are layout photos by him that are as realistic as they get but they were a distinct minority in his work. A number of times in his writings and from his photo essays I got the impression that he wasn't always happy with those "cute" photos but they were the ones the magazines and advertisers wanted for publication. The same can be said even for the name of his railroad and it is fact that he was quite unhappy with that gimmickly, play-on-words name in his later years.

Being a fellow model railroad photographer and perhaps understanding his photographic efforts better than most, I've always been left wondering if John perhaps hadn't ended up famous for, in his own opinion, the wrong aspects of his great modeling talent and photographic expertise.

CNJ831

[BRAKIE]

CNJ 831,I agree with what you mention and I will add the couplers John use was a dead give away as well.[:D]

[twhite]

CNJ831-- you have a very good point there about Allen and the photographs. Quite a few of his photographs were used for ads for Varney trains, and I think that they were staged humorously to bring attention to Gordon Varney's products. Attention getters. Frankly, I looked forward to those ads at the back of the MR magazine back then, not so much for the Varney products (which I liked, BTW), but to see what Allen had come up with THIS time. He also made some fine photos for PFM products that were slightly different and less whimsical. But when he would photograph the G&D for a spread in MR, or one of the other publications, he usually got serious and showed us what he was really capable of. And for those of you who think the Ackinback Mountains weren't realistic--I suggest that you take a hike through the High Sierra in California around Yosemite, sometime. Allen knew what he was doing.
Tom

[Anonymous]

I certainly agree that John Allen and George Sellios were/are a tad lead-footed in filling their layouts with the unusual (and especially for Allen – exaggerated), as opposed to typical scenes. Call that a caricature if you want… but it definitely makes for a lot of WOW factor which is very important to attracting people to the hobby.

Allen McClellan and Tony Koester are, of course excellent modelers, and have carried the Armstrong torch of operations-oriented railroading to new dimensions. However as I remember back to articles about their layouts… impressive – definitely; more than most of will ever dream of accomplishing in our lifetimes - absolutely; but big time WOW factor? Not really, and especially not to a potential newbie.


As Terry Thompson so eloquently stated in a recent editorial “It was easy to point to pictures of John Allen’s work and claim to be a model railroader.”

[ereimer]

QUOTE: Originally posted by BRAKIE
Like the majority of the modelers in John's day,he wasn't really into operations.

to quote Linn Westcott from his book "Model Railroading with John Allen"

"Once a week the "G.D. Operators" gathered at John's home to run his railroad . At any one time the group was hardly more than half a dozen persons , yet over the years more than a hundred servicemen from military bases near Monterey , California , neighbors , friends , and visiting model railroaders took a turn at the throttles of the Gorre and Daphetid Railroad ."

there is a whole chapter in the book about how the railroad was operated , it may not be the same way we'd do it now , but JA used written timetables and a tab-on-car system

i'd say that qualifies as being "into operations"

[JDCoop]

The more things change, the more they stay the same....

As fate would have it, I read this thread earlier in the evening and then retired from a long day of staring at computer screens to re-read back issues of Railroad Model Craftsman. On page 118 of the January 1979 issue, a fellow by the name of Richard Francaviglia discusses these exact point in the "Observations" column. What is amazing is that he used the exact same examples that we are using today. In this column he makes the point on how "model railroading has reached a point of unsurpassed realism" and that was 27 years ago. He further draws the comparison of Allen's G&D to Koester and McClelland. He even goes on to address eccentricity and spontaneity...some of the same things we are talking about here.

The premise of his column was how the layouts of the day were becoming more realistic but were lacking in character. I follow his premise to certain extent, but not completely. I subscribe to the thought that your layout is an extention of you. The work and craftsmanship that falls from your fingertips has your character built into it. We could gather the 10 greatest modelers in the world and have them build the same exact 100-ft stretch of prototype railroad in HO scale and none of them would look the same. Sure, they would be similar because they would be modeling the same 100-ft stretch of track, but it would be the character and the personality of the modeler that would inject a certain degree of individualism into the scene. No two sets of eyes see the exact same thing the same exact way.

I am not a novice or a johnny-come-lately and I am still impressed by the work of Allen/Furlow/Sellios in addition to the work of Koester/McClelland. I appreaciate the craftsmanship, as well as the heart and soul, that went into thier layouts. Sure, Sellios may create scenes that aren't protoyptical, but I sure would like to have the ability to build structures the way he does.

And just maybe Furlow has a hard time accepting criticism for his type of modeling because there are people out there who call him "a joker who drinks his own kool-aid." I wouldn't be open to that kind of criticism myself. If you don't like his work, fine, then criticize his work. Calling him "a joker who drinks his own kool-aid" isn't constructive by any definition.

I'll close with a thought of Mr. Francaviglia and then one of my own. He wrapped up his column by stating: "Capture the essence of what you see...What you do in your creative moods does not have to be approved by anyone to make it valid. After all, it's your railroad and therefore a little of your character." My closing thought is that if everyone liked the same thing, all of us would model the midwest, drive a Chevy truck, and be married to my wife. All of us have our own likes and dislikes and the reasons for each. If you are a strict prototype modeler (note I did not say rivet counter!), that's cool. If you are an eccentric freelancer, that's cool, too.

Jeff

[selector]

I agree, Jeff. There wouldn't be much selection in locos, either. We'd all sincerely appreciate my BLI PRR K4s. No Challengers, no Cab Forwards, no Shays. There'd be no market for a single diesel older than an RS 3.

I am not in the same league as most of you gentlemen, so I am keeping quiet. Like you, I marvel at the abilities of one or two champions whose works I could only dream of emulating. Others' styles just don't leave me breathless. So, since there are trends and fads in MRR, just like in music and in theatre, our heros come and go. The truly great stick out, but not without argument about Beethoven's Violin Concerto being the quintessential over another fan's Mendelssohn. Selios over Allen over Armstrong...

I can tell you that the single greatest contributor to my layout was the feller who does the 4X8 in WGH's DVD. Who got him going is anybody's guess.

Realism, like beauty, lies in singularity.

[marknewton]

QUOTE: Originally posted by hminky

Not to sound negative, unless you present pictures of your work you shouldn't criticize others. Most people who object to Sellios, Furlow, etc. usually pour their scenery out of a Woodland Scenics box, and air brush everything roof brown and grimy black. If you have an objection show that your work is better before tearing down others.

There's two flaws in this argument, Harold. One, and it's the major one, is that I didn't criticise, object to or tear down Allen, Furlow or Sellios. I simply wrote that I'm not impressed by their work, and prefer realistic modelling. We both seem to agree that their style is fantastic, not realistic, yes? That's an observation, not a criticism.

The second flaw is in the idea that I shouldn't voice an opinion about John Allen's work unless I offer my own for review first. That strikes me as being a bit silly - rather like expecting a literary critic to write and publi***heir own novel before offering an opinion on anyone else's. It's an abitrary limitation, and one I'm not inclined to accept.

All the best,

Mark.

[marknewton]

QUOTE: Originally posted by rolleimanI would like to see what your version of "realistic" is.. You clearly had nothing positive to add to this particular thread but yet you chose to bash it.

Nothing "positive"? Is that also a requirement? I offered an opinion which differs from the consensus about John Allen. If you reckon that's bashing, you're either far too sensitive, or you haven't met and exchanged views with too many Australians...[:)]

Anyway, this is my version of realistic.





All the best,

Mark.