Trains.com

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

All Hail John Allen!

21911 views
479 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    December 2002
  • From: Sydney, Australia
  • 1,939 posts
Posted by marknewton on Tuesday, January 3, 2006 4:59 AM
QUOTE: Originally posted by vsmith

Wow isnt it funny how we can still have Rivet Counters dissing other layouts that dont fit into thier predefined notion of what constitutes a "Real" layout?


It's no more funny than being told that John Allen's style of modelling is the ultimate we should all aspire to emulate.

I wouldn't be bothered too much about being called a rivet counter. A very wise old modeller once said to me that it was a term intended only to insult people who knew much more about the subject being modelled than the person using it...[:)]

Cheers,

Mark.
  • Member since
    December 2002
  • From: Sydney, Australia
  • 1,939 posts
Posted by marknewton on Tuesday, January 3, 2006 5:47 AM
QUOTE: Originally posted by jnkbritz

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.


"WOW factor" is entirely subjective - for me, it comes from realistic modelling of a believable scene. Even though though Koester and McClellan's layouts were both freelanced, they were grounded in reality. Allen and Sellios aren't, their layouts represent their individual fantasy worlds. There's nothing wrong with that, I just can't get into another man's fantasy.

All the best,

Mark.
  • Member since
    December 2004
  • From: Rimrock, Arizona
  • 11,251 posts
Posted by SpaceMouse on Tuesday, January 3, 2006 7:42 AM
QUOTE: Originally posted by marknewton

"WOW factor" is entirely subjective - for me, it comes from realistic modeling of a believable scene. Even though though Koester and McClellan's layouts were both freelanced, they were grounded in reality. Allen and Sellios aren't, their layouts represent their individual fantasy worlds. There's nothing wrong with that, I just can't get into another man's fantasy.

All the best,

Mark.


I would humbly suggest that your layout is your fantasy. While it more steeped in your version of reality than maybe someone else, you still choose what is included and what is excluded.

If you ignore or choose not to model roadside trash or graffiti, you are diverging from reality. When you choose to model a nice strip mall over the ratty trailer park next door, you are diverging from reality.

In fact, no matter how you slice these itty bitty trains, you are building your fantasy. To claim your fantasy is more legitimate because it matches your version of reality better than someone else's does is a tad myopic.

People model what they see. Some people see more than others. Some people see differently than others.

Selios saw the depression as a dark time and represented it with darkly weathered buildings. It is too dark for my tastes, but then it has the effect he intended. Allen sprinkled his layout with the absurd. I suppose he saw life that way.

Perhaps in the same way Koester's representation of reality, his fantasy, brings order to an otherwise chaotic life, and it is his way of making sense of things.

A modeler's pike is a representation of who they are, an extension of how they see things and how they think. It can be an expression of how they wi***hings would be. (Koester) Or it can be interpretation of how they see things. (Furlow.)

Chip

Building the Rock Ridge Railroad with the slowest construction crew west of the Pecos.

  • Member since
    April 2001
  • From: US
  • 3,150 posts
Posted by CNJ831 on Tuesday, January 3, 2006 8:23 AM
QUOTE: Originally posted by SpaceMouse

I would humbly suggest that your layout is your fantasy. While it more steeped in your version of reality than maybe someone else, you still choose what is included and what is excluded.

Selios saw the depression as a dark time and represented it with darkly weathered buildings. It is too dark for my tastes, but then it has the effect he intended. Allen sprinkled his layout with the absurd. I suppose he saw life that way.

Perhaps in the same way Koester's representation of reality, his fantasy, brings order to an otherwise chaotic life, and it is his way of making sense of things.

A modeler's pike is a representation of who they are, an extension of how they see things and how they think. It can be an expression of how they wi***hings would be. (Koester) Or it can be interpretation of how they see things. (Furlow.)


Nonsense. For the vast majority of model railroaders the hobby is not about deep personal philosophies or Freudian interpretations. It's about attempting to replicate the real world to the best our abilities...often today based on reseaching a prototype. While some layouts may be so far off the mark as to be considered "fantasy-based", this is more often a matter of lack of modeling talent than it is one of intention...or is perhaps to cover-up such shortcomings and make it look harmlessly "cute".

On the other hand, there are also those few who intentionally model fantasy schemes, mimicing the supposed John Allen style, with the expressed intent of just trying to impress others (Furlow, for example). If you look at Furlow's Carbondale Central you'll see none of his quirky, over-weathered, tilting structures and weird suroundings - it's a straight forward, realistic, urban layout. If it was his personal philosophy to model fantasy, why then the dramatic departure there?

Chip, IMO there's nothing very deep or philosophical about the hobby for most of us, nor about most of our model railroads. Whether we are trying to model today or some long past yesterday, we're trying to model it as it really was, not as Walt Disney might have envisioned it.

CNJ831
  • Member since
    December 2004
  • From: Rimrock, Arizona
  • 11,251 posts
Posted by SpaceMouse on Tuesday, January 3, 2006 8:33 AM
QUOTE: Originally posted by CNJ831


Chip, IMO there's nothing very deep or philosophical about the hobby for most of us, nor about most of our model railroads.

CNJ831


You don't have to intend to have your model a reflection of who you are. It is an expression of your choices. The choice to fix a mistake. A choice to continue or not continue to completion. A choice to model a pickle factory or a strip joint.

Whether or not you choose to do so, your pike will reflect who you are.

Chip

Building the Rock Ridge Railroad with the slowest construction crew west of the Pecos.

  • Member since
    April 2001
  • From: US
  • 3,150 posts
Posted by CNJ831 on Tuesday, January 3, 2006 8:43 AM
QUOTE: Originally posted by SpaceMouse

QUOTE: Originally posted by CNJ831


Chip, IMO there's nothing very deep or philosophical about the hobby for most of us, nor about most of our model railroads.

CNJ831


You don't have to intend to have your model a reflection of who you are. It is an expression of your choices. The choice to fix a mistake. A choice to continue or not continue to completion. A choice to model a pickle factory or a strip joint.

Whether or not you choose to do so, your pike will reflect who you are.


When you've been in the hobby far longer and grow to have more experience, you will find that most modelers tend to copy parts of other well known modeler's styles to create their own layouts...which is why sales of MR have been a success for so long. There's no mumbo jumbo involved in the building of most layouts.

CNJ831
  • Member since
    December 2004
  • From: Rimrock, Arizona
  • 11,251 posts
Posted by SpaceMouse on Tuesday, January 3, 2006 8:46 AM
So you are saying your layout style has nothing to do with who you are?

Chip

Building the Rock Ridge Railroad with the slowest construction crew west of the Pecos.

  • Member since
    January 2002
  • From: Greater Montreal CANADA
  • 89 posts
Posted by steffd on Tuesday, January 3, 2006 9:03 AM
QUOTE: Originally posted by marknewton

QUOTE: Originally posted by SpaceMouse


John Allen is probably the most celebrated, imitated and honored model railroader in history.


He is undoubtedly the "most celebrated, imitated and honored model railroader" in the United States, but that's as far as it goes. In the rest of the world, there are many railway modellers who have never even heard of him. His fame is not as widespread as you seem to believe.

QUOTE: Have you paid tribute to John Allen. IF so, how?


No, I haven't, nor would I want to. I've never been impressed by Allen's modelling, nor that of his followers like Furlow and Sellios. I prefer realistic modelling.

All the best for the New Year,

Mark.



I don’t disagree that John Allen was a pioneer or that he produced a remarkable layout for it’s time or even by today’s standards for some people modeling the same period. However, he has also been placed on a pedestal for so long and received so much coverage from the various publications that over the years he has become somewhat embedded in the Model Railroader’s psyche. Even with those for whom John Allan was before their time including myself have been conditioned to view him as a legend, and like so many others I too own a copy of “Model Railroading with John Allen”. I suppose that’s what happens when you are a pioneer. I can certainly appreciate his work and what he has done for the hobby in North America but that’s about the extent of it in my opinion. Perhaps it’s a generation gap.

However, with this said, It is also important to also note that there are so many wonderful talented modelers all around the globe that do not get the same much deserved credit. Unfortunately they don’t have the same exposure or emphases placed on their status or talents as John Allen or the other “Great ones” have. Also, I think it’s a little arrogant to claim that he may be the most celebrated modeler in history. Although I have been a Model Railroader for 20 years, I have been modeling European prototypes now since 2003. I have discovered some pretty amazing individuals producing some of the most exquisite detail work imaginable with a level of detail and accuracy that boggles the mind and in my view rival or surpass some of the known individuals mentioned. One of them is Bernhard Stein from Germany, who has built a plethora of layouts over the years for most of the European model railroad manufacturers for their public displays for conventions and trade shows, including many layouts for himself. Just a little fact, Europe is where Model Railroading as we know it really began with Marklin in Germany in 1891 and then the UK before crossing the Atlantic.[:)]

Stephan
Happy New Year!

Modeling a little piece of Europe in the Basement and a little piece of Canada in the Backyard!
  • Member since
    April 2001
  • From: US
  • 3,150 posts
Posted by CNJ831 on Tuesday, January 3, 2006 9:07 AM
QUOTE: Originally posted by SpaceMouse

So you are saying your layout style has nothing to do with who you are?


Certainly a very great deal less than you wi***o imply. Today it may influence the region you model and the era. But be assured, if left totally on our own we would never model the layout we current have. Modelers have been so heavily influenced by what we see in the magazines that we take on the styles of the greats who impress us and far more attempt to mimic their work than create what we might ever have done if left totally to ourselves. The result of such influence is the basis of this very thread...initiated by you!

I've found that in many hobbies newcomers attempt to imply all sorts of deep philosophical implications as to why folks have joined, why they do things a certain way, that there is a certain romance to a hobby, etc. But when one gains some longterm experience in the particular field, much of this false mumbo jumbo just fades quitely away.

CNJ831
  • Member since
    October 2001
  • From: OH
  • 17,574 posts
Posted by BRAKIE on Tuesday, January 3, 2006 9:16 AM
Chip,I completely disagree with your thoughts.The day of Micky Mouse and cutesy pie themes is slowly but surely coming to a end.Todays modelers wants CORRECT engines and cars,they design prototypical layouts base on real railroads and locations...Of course this is not a CNN breaking news story as this trend has grown over the years I been in the hobby and has gain momentum over the last decade as witness by todays engines and cars.
No,modelers today are far beyond the G&D type of modeling as witness by todays excellent layouts seen in the pages of magazines.
Oddly the switch from fantasy to prototypical modeling had taken root in John's day by us younger modelers that wanted more out of the hobby then generic modeling and fantasy layouts.
So,you see Chip,there is a whole new breed of modelers today compared to yesteryear...Heck,I doubt if my Dad( who died in 68) would recognize the hobby today but,would be happy about todays models.[:D]

Larry

Conductor.

Summerset Ry.


"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt  Safety First!"

  • Member since
    February 2003
  • 1,138 posts
Posted by MidlandPacific on Tuesday, January 3, 2006 10:00 AM

CNJ831 - Are you Vic Roseman? Just curious.

I find it sort of odd that Chip's innocently intended post has provoked this kind of criticism. I mean, if JA and George Sellios and Malcolm Furlow really AREN'T interesting to the greater body of model railroaders, then why bother discussing them? Why waste time criticizing their work?

I think the answer is in part that the easiest form of criticism to make in this hobby is the deviation from prototype. I won't make the argument that anyone can be a rivet counter, because I don't think it's true: it takes a lot of time and talent and effort to do successful prototype modeling. But I do think is that it's a lot harder to get to the bottom of why modeling like John Allen's or Malcolm Furlow's is appealing or attractive, and it's a necessarily subjective judgment. I don't think either of these men made much of an effort to follow prototypes rigorously, but they nevertheless produced something that was and is intrinsically attractive. And whether you like it or not, that's an achievement. It's called "art." This is not to take anything away from good prototype modeling - but it's important to remember that even the best prototype modeling requires some sleight-of-hand to appear "realistic."

At some level, this ongoing debate reiterates a point I made earlier: good art defends itself by surviving. Say what you like about JA, the mere fact that we're discussing him thirty-plus years after his death is a sign that he earned his place.


http://mprailway.blogspot.com

"The first transition era - wood to steel!"

  • Member since
    August 2001
  • From: US
  • 791 posts
Posted by steamage on Tuesday, January 3, 2006 10:06 AM
I remember back in the 60's,the magazines had far fewer authors that shared their layouts, mainly because of the photography standards that magazines needed to print pictures. If you look at who was getting published, it was modelers like John Allen, Ben King, Paul Janson, Jack Work, all who had good paragraphic skills. Paul Janson's, SP model photos were an inspiration for me. They had the prototype look of what I thought modeling was about.

  • Member since
    March 2005
  • From: New Brighton, MN
  • 4,393 posts
Posted by ARTHILL on Tuesday, January 3, 2006 10:21 AM
Well Chip, you stirred up interest with this one. As an old guy who has been in HO for over 50 years and who has a degree in Philosophy, I reluctantly admit that I think you are right and that most people will not want to admit such. I have alway thought I could learn more about the modeler than the prototype by looking at the layout. It was part of the fun. That certainly is my case. I love the prototype people, they are doing amazing stuff. I just don't do it. It has been suggested that is it a generational issue, Maybe not. However the young people who like JA do not have the same connection as those of us who looked forward to the next Varney Ad to see what he concocted this month.
If you think you have it right, your standards are too low. my photos http://s12.photobucket.com/albums/a235/ARTHILL/ Art
  • Member since
    October 2001
  • From: OH
  • 17,574 posts
Posted by BRAKIE on Tuesday, January 3, 2006 10:41 AM
Art,I When I was younger I recall l looking forward to the next Varney or PFM ad that feature John's work..Then somewhere along the line something change..I was like the other young modelers I knew and wanted to do more realistic modeling.However,I kept the generic approach to layout designs but,under the disciplines of prototypical operations.
Art,I dunno..Heck the hobby has grown up so fast over the last decade its getting harder to draw a line between good enough and being overzealous in our modeling styles..I fear some day good enough/close enough modeling will be scorned as old fashion and outdated method of modeling and plan fantasy modeling will be long gone.Come to think of it that day is drawing closer.

Larry

Conductor.

Summerset Ry.


"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt  Safety First!"

  • Member since
    December 2004
  • From: Rimrock, Arizona
  • 11,251 posts
Posted by SpaceMouse on Tuesday, January 3, 2006 10:46 AM
CNJ and Brakie,

The mind is an incredible tool, but it cannot process all the information we experience. That is why you can walk into a room and not see the curtains, unless you need to.

The mind selects what it deems important and you live your life based on those selections. The rest of it is disposed of by processes of deletion, generalization, and distortion. So you can read a sentence like:

a
bird
in the
the hand.

And take from it only what you need. The rest you generalize, delete and distort to fit your world view.

If you do this just in your daily routine, then by extension you do this when you determine what is real. You see what is left after the mind is done with it and you further delete, generalize and distort when you model it. Generally, a person sees what they intend while others see what they leave out.

You cannot help but express yourself in your creations. It is simply impossible.

Did you see the second the in the example?

Chip

Building the Rock Ridge Railroad with the slowest construction crew west of the Pecos.

  • Member since
    November 2003
  • 760 posts
Posted by Roadtrp on Tuesday, January 3, 2006 10:57 AM
If a layout is not a reflection of who you are, then why bother? If all I want is a layout that strives for the ultimate in realism, why shouldn't I just hire someone to come in and build my pike for me?

My layout, rookie effort that it is, came from my imagination and nothing else. I wouldn't want it any other way.




-Jerry
  • Member since
    October 2001
  • From: OH
  • 17,574 posts
Posted by BRAKIE on Tuesday, January 3, 2006 11:34 AM
Sorry,Chip I don't buy what you say about observation.IF that was true I would have been KIA in 'Nam by not seeing trip wires,ambushes and other surprises..
The power of observation is keen this is how we observe danger and how we survive in everyday life.

Wasn't for keen observation we could not tell the difference between locomotive phases by just looking at the prototype and we would not see the finer details.Now add the the serious modelers that model right down to the tree stump by the track maintenance shed by doing what is called prototype modeling how are these modelers expressing their selves?.

Larry

Conductor.

Summerset Ry.


"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt  Safety First!"

  • Member since
    February 2005
  • From: Vancouver Island, BC
  • 23,330 posts
Posted by selector on Tuesday, January 3, 2006 11:49 AM
QUOTE: Originally posted by CNJ831

Originally posted by SpaceMouse

Originally posted by CNJ831


Chip, IMO there's nothing very deep or philosophical about the hobby for most of us, nor about most of our model railroads.

CNJ831


You

When you've been in the hobby far longer and grow to have more experience, you will find that most modelers tend to copy parts of other well known modeler's styles to create their own layouts...which is why sales of MR have been a success for so long. There's no mumbo jumbo involved in the building of most layouts.

CNJ831


This is patronizing.

There is too much learning that goes on in a person's life to consign them to neophyte (and therefore uneducated) status on a dimension such as the impressionistic value or attributes of a hobby such as ours. I know that Chip has taught at the college level, so he's no stoop, and the same can be said for me, if I may. While we may not know much about the integral technical requirements of the hobby, we are able to express our understanding of the expressiveness that we see in what others present to us.

We are all heuristically programmed, so we 'make' our own discoveries based on what we sense and based upon our learning and preferences. As I said earlier, reality lies in singularity. Each of us creates our own, by definition, and where there is transferrence and generalizability, we encounter brief moments of 'recognition' of what others call their reality. It is this that generates the impetus of the hobby, the recognition that each of us gets, from time to time, in 'seeing' the reality of others. That means that some of us do not recognize our ourselves (our reality) in the works of those whom other modelers hold in high regard.

-Crandell
  • Member since
    December 2004
  • From: Rimrock, Arizona
  • 11,251 posts
Posted by SpaceMouse on Tuesday, January 3, 2006 11:53 AM
The examples you give fit my argument. You see the mines because that is a matter of survival. You don't see the mushroom next to it because it is not important. You see the differences in engines because that is important to you, but you don't see that the tree behind the engine is a fig tree. What is important is your reality, what is not is deleted, generalized or distorted.

Let's put it another way. There are 12 buildings on a block that you want to model. 11 of them are easy to model, you can get close replicas of them at any LHS. The last building, the second from the end, is architecturally different and clashes with the rest of the block. Furthermore, it has awkward angles. You have room for 3 buildings on your layout.

Do you choose 3 easy buildings?
Do you scratch-build the odd ball and put it at the end of the block.
Do you scratch-build the odd ball and put it in the center.

Each of these clearly doesn't not represent the block.

Your types of choices, made over and over, create a layout that is a personal reflection of your choice processes that is individual to you and how you think.

Did you see the second the?

Chip

Building the Rock Ridge Railroad with the slowest construction crew west of the Pecos.

  • Member since
    September 2002
  • From: California & Maine
  • 3,848 posts
Posted by andrechapelon on Tuesday, January 3, 2006 11:55 AM
QUOTE: Originally posted by BRAKIE

Sorry,Chip I don't buy what you say about observation.IF that was true I would have been KIA in 'Nam by not seeing trip wires,ambushes and other surprises..
The power of observation is keen this is how we observe danger and how we survive in everyday life.

Wasn't for keen observation we could not tell the difference between locomotive phases by just looking at the prototype and we would not see the finer details.Now add the the serious modelers that model right down to the tree stump by the track maintenance shed by doing what is called prototype modeling how are these modelers expressing their selves?.


Brakie,

You saw the trip wires, ambushes and other surprises because seeing them not only was important, it was vital. IOW, you paid attention to those details because it was important and you were trained to look out for them.

Chip's right, the mind can't encompass all it sees. Unless something is important for some reason, we tend to tune things out or at most let them ride at the edge of conciousness. If we focus on observing something because it's important, we automatically lose focus on something else.

Minor example: I was driving on I-40 westbound just west of Winslow, AZ. Since the BNSF tracks are close by, I was looking for trains. My wife, who wasn't paying attention to the tracks spotted a truck that had a small steam locomotive and a passenger car on the trailer. I completely missed it as I drove by. If it hadn't been for my wife mentioning it and my slowing down to let the truck pass, I never would have seen it. I was only paying sufficient attention to traffic to ensure that I didn't get into trouble. IOW, I saw the truck as just part of the traffic and paid no attention whatsoever to the load until my wife spoke up.

Andre
It's really kind of hard to support your local hobby shop when the nearest hobby shop that's worth the name is a 150 mile roundtrip.
  • Member since
    December 2002
  • From: US
  • 403 posts
Posted by bcammack on Tuesday, January 3, 2006 11:57 AM
QUOTE: Originally posted by CNJ831

QUOTE: Originally posted by SpaceMouse

I would humbly suggest that your layout is your fantasy. While it more steeped in your version of reality than maybe someone else, you still choose what is included and what is excluded.

Selios saw the depression as a dark time and represented it with darkly weathered buildings. It is too dark for my tastes, but then it has the effect he intended. Allen sprinkled his layout with the absurd. I suppose he saw life that way.

Perhaps in the same way Koester's representation of reality, his fantasy, brings order to an otherwise chaotic life, and it is his way of making sense of things.

A modeler's pike is a representation of who they are, an extension of how they see things and how they think. It can be an expression of how they wi***hings would be. (Koester) Or it can be interpretation of how they see things. (Furlow.)


Nonsense. For the vast majority of model railroaders the hobby is not about deep personal philosophies or Freudian interpretations. It's about attempting to replicate the real world to the best our abilities...often today based on reseaching a prototype. While some layouts may be so far off the mark as to be considered "fantasy-based", this is more often a matter of lack of modeling talent than it is one of intention...or is perhaps to cover-up such shortcomings and make it look harmlessly "cute".

CNJ831


While not specifically about deep personal philosophies or Freudian interpretations, the end result cannot be unaffected by those things, acknowledged or not. The "real world" is a slippery thing and subject to interpretation through the unique matrix constructed of our own personal life experiences. Sellios models his perception of the Depression. Allen interjected the whimsey that he perceived in life that others seemed to forget to appreciate.

What it all boils down to is, "Do you prefer abstract art? Impressionism? Photo-realism?" If we all perceived the world the same way, there would be no reason for different forms of artistic, creative expression.

As the philosopher/cartoonist B. Kliban once wrote, "One man's mate is another man's person."

Happy New Year, ladies and gentlemen.
Regards, Brett C. Cammack Holly Hill, FL
  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Nevada
  • 825 posts
Posted by NevinW on Tuesday, January 3, 2006 12:12 PM
Yesterday I happened to pick up and old model Railroader from 1997-1998 that had a John Allen retrospective in it and I looked at those pictures again. I have to admit that this guy could do some serious modeling and photography. Those photos looked beautiful. When one considers that many of these photos were taken in the 1960's, I am very impressed. He was also doing real operations on that railroad when most modelers were just trying to get it around the track without derailing. Certainly, all one has to do is pick up any Shortline and Narrow Gauge Gazette to see modeling and photography that IMO is better than John Allen, but compared to what was the standard in the 1960's, John Allen had clearly talent. He set the standard and was ahead of his time.

I have also read that he regretted some of his more whimsical components to his modeling such as the silly name and the dinosaurs as he got older and wished that he had taken the railroad in a more prototypical direction.

Sometimes people forget that what we are talking about here is taste, and tastes vary and taste changes over time. Today's TK inspired prototypically exact duplicate of the real world maybe considered passe in 20 years (even though I fully admit that those are the kind of railroads I like best). Remember garden railroads are where much of the growth in the hobby is these days and most of those are not duplicates of a specific prototype. - Nevin

  • Member since
    October 2001
  • From: OH
  • 17,574 posts
Posted by BRAKIE on Tuesday, January 3, 2006 12:37 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by SpaceMouse

The examples you give fit my argument. You see the mines because that is a matter of survival. You don't see the mushroom next to it because it is not important. You see the differences in engines because that is important to you, but you don't see that the tree behind the engine is a fig tree. What is important is your reality, what is not is deleted, generalized or distorted.

Let's put it another way. There are 12 buildings on a block that you want to model. 11 of them are easy to model, you can get close replicas of them at any LHS. The last building, the second from the end, is architecturally different and clashes with the rest of the block. Furthermore, it has awkward angles. You have room for 3 buildings on your layout.

Do you choose 3 easy buildings?
Do you scratch-build the odd ball and put it at the end of the block.
Do you scratch-build the odd ball and put it in the center.

Each of these clearly doesn't not represent the block.

Your types of choices, made over and over, create a layout that is a personal reflection of your choice processes that is individual to you and how you think.

Did you see the second the?



Chip,You are dodging my question about prototypical correct modeling.Now due to my combat experience in 'Nam I will see that that fig tree and what lays beyond that..
Contrary to what Andre said I was not train for close obersevation..That came by the need to survive in a hostile environment...Observation of details is natural..You may not realize that but,try this..Every time you walk out of a store glance around and see what the eyes tells the brain.Your natural instincts will kick in if you will allow it to and sharpen what you are seeing..Even the American Indian knew that long before he met the white man .

Larry

Conductor.

Summerset Ry.


"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt  Safety First!"

  • Member since
    December 2004
  • From: Rimrock, Arizona
  • 11,251 posts
Posted by SpaceMouse on Tuesday, January 3, 2006 12:42 PM
Brakie,

Could you repeat the question?

Also, could you answer whether or not you saw the second the?

A
bird
in the
the hand.

Chip

Building the Rock Ridge Railroad with the slowest construction crew west of the Pecos.

  • Member since
    April 2001
  • From: US
  • 3,150 posts
Posted by CNJ831 on Tuesday, January 3, 2006 2:33 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by selector

There is too much learning that goes on in a person's life to consign them to neophyte (and therefore uneducated) status on a dimension such as the impressionistic value or attributes of a hobby such as ours. I know that Chip has taught at the college level, so he's no stoop, and the same can be said for me, if I may. While we may not know much about the integral technical requirements of the hobby, we are able to express our understanding of the expressiveness that we see in what others present to us.



If indeed so astute, you would both be well aware that persons entering a new field of endeavor are typically overly enthusiastic concerning it, as well as bring full of misconceptions about it. As one becomes steadily more educated in that field, they begin to appreciate the realities of that particular pursuit and their zealot attitude and misconceptions are replaced with an understanding of facts that they were unaware of at first. The result is a final realization that they actually knew very little about how and why things work the way they do in that field at the outset. If you don't understand the hobby in detail first, then appreciating expressiveness as applied to it is not necessarily straight forward.

CNJ831
  • Member since
    April 2001
  • From: US
  • 3,150 posts
Posted by CNJ831 on Tuesday, January 3, 2006 2:42 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by rripperger


CNJ831 - Are you Vic Roseman? Just curious.



No. But I consider myself a longtime student of his. I long studied his methods, concepts and efforts in the area of model photography. During the early 1990's I also carried out a correspondence with him on subjects like scene composition, image blending and even optical design. I went on to create my own special extreme DOF lens systems and modeled my own ultra close-up, award winning work on his concepts.

CNJ831
  • Member since
    November 2003
  • 760 posts
Posted by Roadtrp on Tuesday, January 3, 2006 2:51 PM
[bow][bow][bow][bow][bow][bow][bow][bow][bow][bow]
-Jerry
  • Member since
    October 2001
  • From: OH
  • 17,574 posts
Posted by BRAKIE on Tuesday, January 3, 2006 2:59 PM
Chip,One more time.
Now add the the serious modelers that model right down to the tree stump by the track maintenance shed by doing what is called prototype modeling how are these modelers expressing their selves?.

And yes I saw the second the..Stevie Wonder could see it.Terri Gibbs could see it as well as Ronnie Milsap.It sticks out like a sore thumb when you read the words..[:D]

Larry

Conductor.

Summerset Ry.


"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt  Safety First!"

  • Member since
    December 2004
  • From: Rimrock, Arizona
  • 11,251 posts
Posted by SpaceMouse on Tuesday, January 3, 2006 3:09 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by CNJ831


If indeed so astute, you would both be well aware that persons entering a new field of endeavor are typically overly enthusiastic concerning it, as well as bring full of misconceptions about it. As one becomes steadily more educated in that field, they begin to appreciate the realities of that particular pursuit and their zealot attitude and misconceptions are replaced with an understanding of facts that they were unaware of at first. The result is a final realization that they actually knew very little about how and why things work the way they do in that field at the outset. If you don't understand the hobby in detail first, then appreciating expressiveness as applied to it is not necessarily straight forward.

CNJ831


As Crandall pointed out, we are not talking about technical aspects of the hobby, rather we are talking about principles of expression which, by virtue of having toured the academic circuit lecturing, have a tad of knowledge there of. These principles apply whether you are doing abstract art or empirical studies. You bring to the table your mental outlook and you can't change that. You can't write something, paint something, build something without altering it to conform to your world view.

Chip

Building the Rock Ridge Railroad with the slowest construction crew west of the Pecos.

  • Member since
    December 2004
  • From: Rimrock, Arizona
  • 11,251 posts
Posted by SpaceMouse on Tuesday, January 3, 2006 3:19 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by BRAKIE

Chip,One more time.
Now add the the serious modelers that model right down to the tree stump by the track maintenance shed by doing what is called prototype modeling how are these modelers expressing their selves?.

And yes I saw the second the..Stevie Wonder could see it.Terri Gibbs could see it as well as Ronnie Milsap.It sticks out like a sore thumb when you read the words..[:D]


I directly answered you by example. You express your self by the choices you make. Why do you choose the stump over the tree. Why do you paint the shed grey instead of silver? Do you choose a metal roof or shingles?

QUOTE: There are 12 buildings on a block that you want to model. 11 of them are easy to model, you can get close replicas of them at any LHS. The last building, the second from the end, is architecturally different and clashes with the rest of the block. Furthermore, it has awkward angles. You have room for 3 buildings on your layout.

Do you choose 3 easy buildings?
Do you scratch-build the odd ball and put it at the end of the block.
Do you scratch-build the odd ball and put it in the center.

Each of these clearly doesn't not represent the block.

Your types of choices, made over and over, create a layout that is a personal reflection of your choice processes that is individual to you and how you think.



Clearly here, if you choose any of the options above and stick to that type of generalization, you are determining your style on what you choose to delete from reality as well as what you choose to show. Either way, your choices reflect who you are and you express yourself through those choices.

Chip

Building the Rock Ridge Railroad with the slowest construction crew west of the Pecos.

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Users Online

Search the Community

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Model Railroader Newsletter See all
Sign up for our FREE e-newsletter and get model railroad news in your inbox!