Diorama orientation/layout

[DaKra]

yup, cohesion is a really good description, goes back to my point about the "organic" quality of the real world.  Old towns aren't a whimsical conglomerate of prefab structures that are plopped down out of the sky and self-consciously sprinkled with debris and foliage. Dioramas actually ARE, but should never look that way!  That means taking a lot of care to match the organic look of something that basically grew out of the ground over decades, to serve a purpose.

Dave

     

[Frederic Testard]

Problem with it now is, what the heck do I do with the boats when done, as I no longer model in that scale...and I really have no need for a boat diorama  ......maybe I can tie it into some kind of scene with structures, a stone breakwater, and a boat repair building, so I can pass it off for a dio at the NNGC ....or maybe a bombed out harbor scene for a mil. dio there are still some techniques involded with it that I want to get to and try...so at some point I will probably at least do those parts.

I've recently found an interesting solution to this problem, Marc : I've built a diorama to offer it to one of my friends, I had an already built little scene that I offered to another friend, and funny enough, I'm currently working on a remake of Dave Revelia's diorama featured above in this topic to offer to my swedish friend Troels Kirk whom you certainly know.
This way, I can do what I love : building models, and yet keep a reasonably tidy benchwork at least as soon as the things are offered (technically, I could also add to the list "Arizona Dream", but since I gave it to my wife, it's stil here at home).

[marc_reusser]

Frederic,

Though a nice thought, the problem with giving my built stuff to someone, is that I am generally not proud enough or happy enough with it to do so,....... especially because in doing so it continues to "exist" long after I have moved past that point of work/quality.....so IMO there remains an embarassing piece of my work out there that can be seen by others....I have done this a couple of times and pretty much ended up regreting it.....so I no longer consider that as an option.....the only real option is the waste bin, or dismanteling the stuff and salvaging any usable parts for a future project. 


Sorry,...but I have no idea who Troels Kirk is 


Cheers,

MR

[Frederic Testard]

http://www.railroad-line.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=23577
(There are 97 pages currently...).
I understand your feeling about a piece being somewhat frozen in time. You might on the contrary see this as showing the evidence of your progress.

[marc_reusser]

I'll check out the link thanks.

You might on the contrary see this as showing the evidence of your progress.

I think my progress leaves/has left, enough of a slime trail all over the web. .....that's the problem with the web...it's like peeing in a swimming pool...once it's in there, you'll never get it all out again. 


MR

[marc_reusser]

http://www.railroad-line.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=23577
(There are 97 pages currently...).

Apparently without knowing it, it was Troels' work, that I was referring to in my post at the bottom of page 2  of this thread:....... I think Pat could learn a lot from his buildings and settings.....even though they are highly and wonderfuly artistic...they still embody a really good sense of reality, and natural composition......unfortunately I think Pat seems to be basing his scene layout almost verbatim on Carl Lasky's version of Shelby's........which I personally find fairly uninteresting/uninspiring/cliche, though he did at least angle the smaller structure a bit, and he thankfully didn't do an arced roof on the small building.


MR

[finescalerr]

Troels is the new hero of the model railroading world. Apparently Mario Rappinet "discovered" him and, within days (Troels told me), almost every model railroad magazine on earth signed him up for an article. He is a watercolor artist by trade and, to my eye, has created three dimensional versions of his paintings on his layout. I admire his talent; he seems to be in his element on RRLines. -- Russ

[shropshire lad]

Frederic,

Though a nice thought, the problem with giving my built stuff to someone, is that I am generally not proud enough or happy enough with it to do so,....... especially because in doing so it continues to "exist" long after I have moved past that point of work/quality.....so IMO there remains an embarassing piece of my work out there that can be seen by others....I have done this a couple of times and pretty much ended up regreting it.....so I no longer consider that as an option.....the only real option is the waste bin, or dismanteling the stuff and salvaging any usable parts for a future project. 


Sorry,...but I have no idea who Troels Kirk is 


Cheers,

MR

  Throwing away or dismantling any of you projects just because you're not happy with them would , in my opinion , be criminal and downright offensive to the rest of us modellers . None of it is poor quality workmanship and stands up very favourably to many finished project by other people . Just hold onto all of them. Put them away in a box and forget about them , but don't destroy them .

  If anyone is fortunate enough to get hold of any of your stillborn projects they will know that they are just "works-in-progress" and judge them accordingly.

  I don't know , you highly strung artistic types are all the same . Nothing you do is good enough .

  What's a Rembrandt working sketch worth these days ? Or , in your case, a Picasso might be more fitting !

  Nick

  Anyway , if you scrap all your unfinished projects you'll have nothing left .

[DaKra]

I've developed an entirely different approach to scrapping old models and parts.   If there is one lesson to be learned from eBay its this: somebody out there really wants your garbage.   

[jacq01]

  Pat,

  do you have problems with a storage yard underneath the station along the long wall and easy reachable ?

  The variant I am preparing now is based on a main/short line going through the scene and a logging line. The main line can be organised to run automatically so you can see trains run through the landscape while you run manually the logging operation in the woods or in the mill.
  It is also possible to run the layout with a couple of friends, each operating his own area ( assuming you run DCC)

  After the selection of the final plan, I'll give elevations, cross sections and if required, some tips for benchwork, station panel and wiring.

  Jacq

[Belg]

Jacq, one thing you have to keep in mind with me is that I'm 6'6" tall and the ceiling in the room is 6'8" so I can't raise the main level too high for visitors and other future operators. Peter and I worked on keeping the consists rather short as to allow operation (which for me is NOT the main focus of the layout) I do plan to get DCC to operate this layout so any help along these lines would be very helpful, I know if i ASK 6 PEOPLE i'LL PROBABLY GET 6 DIFFERENT ANSWERS BUT LET PUT IT OUT THERE. Sorry hit the button by accident.

Thank you so much for the continued support, Pat

[jacq01]

  Pat,

  here a proposal with a fiddle yard / storage area for trains under the main station.  Grade of mainline continuous 2% from point 0.
  Track to mill and waterside slightly up. Track to log loading grade 4%. 
  Landscaping / scenery from floor to ceiling with a transition possible by placing a waterfall acros the isle from the main station.

 

   plan with 12" division markings ( plan drawn 1:25)  The reverse loops have been replaced with down grades to storage area under mainstation.

 

   sections.  Valance lower level is at approx 1.80m which would be your eye hight above floor.

 
   When things are not clear, let me know. I'll hope this is giving you enough information to start.

   Jacq

[glaskasten]

Pat,

Jacq presents 2 good modifications of your original layout.   I believe the second design has more options and recommend a point to point versus a continuous run as these are more realistic and lend them to a longer life based on operational interest.   

The inner open area of the G shape layout is tight for the operator(s).   You might consider moving the trestle to the inside of the loop versus the outer edge.    I think moving the switchback to the outer side of the G would help.  The Main track could run around the lake shore and a trestle would be high above climbing towards a siding for timber.  Moving the high mountain siding to the outer edge will help present the layout when visitors (and yourself) enter the door.  Do you want to see a wall of forest or a small section of your diorama?  The first items you will see are important.  The town will be hidden behind the harbor and the hillside with trestle.

The level at which all the items are located is important.  The G design brings the trestle close to the harbor at the other end of the turn around.  Is this Harbor to be above the surrounding countryside or is the harbor to be at the lowest point of the region?  The supporting land under the trestle appears to be lower than the water level of the harbor.  This will look odd.  I would recommend keeping the land at the water level of the lake.  The trestle could be running along the steep shore on the opposite side of the lake from the Harbor. 

Paul

[jacq01]

  Paul,

  you have some very good arguments to think about.
  The operators room in the isle is only 2 feet due to the room layout and the required minimum radius of the turn.
  In a third proposal, I have a backdrop where the tressle is now, forming a wall between the workbench area and the layout. The mainline is shorter and the trestle gone. The passage between the layout legs is larger and the mainline disappears near the post to run underneath the landscape to the storage under the main station. The logging switchback gets that way more room and the front along the complete layout is matching . One can imagine riding along the edge of the lake or sea inlet. In this proposal, the sawmill complex is changed a bit to give room for a possible mooring place with a lumber schooner or typical west coast fishing boats like purse seiners etc.


Jacq

[marc_reusser]

So Pat...are we going to see any progress on this anytime soon....or are we now just talking hypothetically!


Marc