Guys, I posted to the CSS post a request to have this diorama I'm working on be analyzed for layout and for build content. I plan on adding a boat under repair in the slipway and detail the docks and shoreline. This is being build to add to a layout so the orientation will be skewed with the smaller building up front. This is just the beginning and would love to hear real constructive critiques. Since it was not really part of CSS I've started a new thread to better allow me to monitor "my" work. Thanks for any input, Pat.
Pat,
do you have an overall plan of the layout, you like to incorporate this in ?
Based on your question in Jacq's logging project I put an answer there.
If you have a sketch of the TOTAL visible area around this diorama, please post it so I can give you some advise.
Jacq
Jacq, here is the plan of the layout that my friend Peter drew and we hashed out for quite a few months. Shelbys will go where it says dock with fishing industry on the right hand side. Pat
(https://www.finescalerr.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm3.static.flickr.com%2F2558%2F4136202018_eafef833d5_o.jpg&hash=9b172610092573c38d3e2dcf18c31621485cc9af)
Pat,
what is the scale of the plan and what are the dimensions of the room. Or what is the size of the squares in the plan ?
I like to get an idea of how close together your different "scenes" are. What scale are models and trains H0 or O scale ?
Jacq
Jacq, here is a floorplan of the room and I model in HO. Pat
Pat,
I make a sketch with some alternative positions of the area where you plan to put the wharf.
When ready sometime next week I'll post them. Need time to prepare for a dutch tradition "Sinterklaas".
All kids and partners still participate so it will be a lot of fun. One of the traditions is to draw a name and make a surprise present with rhyme
poking fun of the person. It has to be done within a fixed budget. It is also the traditional presents evening instead of Christmas.
Jacq
Jacq, look forward to the sketch.
It is true that we used to open our present on Christmas eve, and as long as you were good Zwarte Pete did not put you in his sack. As long as you did not get coal for a present you were lucky. Thanks for the flashback, Pat
Pat,
Looks like it will be a nice layout...I like that you have a good amount of "open space" (no structures) gives the sense of greater distance. I will take a closer look at the part that you requested...but I do have one comment right off the bat....this is something that I see on many logging oriented layouts, and it really annoys me.......an those are tunnels.....VERY few if only and handful of logging operations ever had tunnels...so they really do not make any sense to me on a logging layout. I understand the ones you have in the corners, as they are for practical purposes, ....but the one by th e trestle bothers me.....if you are using it as a scene seperator, I would say maybe consider just doing much denser forest on that mountainside, with tree canopy/limbs overhanging the right-of-way...this will give the "sense" of a seperation (tunnel) yet have that look of heavy old growth forest......much more realistic than a tunnel.
I am also not quite sure how that whole tunnel and log pond issue will look/resolve itself...they seem to be two contradictory items. I would maybe consider some way of bringing the log pond and mill forward...so the pond hits the edge (like in Jacqs scene)...and figure out another way with the track loop.
Marc
Marc makes an excellent point and it deals with one of my pet peeves: I HATE the mindless use of tunnels as scene dividers, to hide return loops, as an ubiquitous scenic element that has no apparent reason for existing, and for any reason other than to get through a rock or mountain that must be there. Every idiotic layout I see in Model Railroader or MRC has an unnecessary tunnel or two. Every idiot uses a tunnel to hide his "staging yard". (Let's use the real, unpretentious, term: storage tracks.) Is it never possible to hide those tracks behind a hill or a dense stand of trees or even some structures?
Tunnels can be interesting, even dramatic, scenic elements. I wish more hobbyists would use them with intelligence and good taste.
Russ
The points Marc and Russ brought up, are points that are bothering me too. Even to such an extend that I am working on alternatives, including a good place for the wharf, keeping the character of the layout intact.
Jacq
Pat,
Are you set on using these two structures?....The green one works fine for me...but the white one is incongruous with it...I know that buildings come in all sizes and shapes but....
It looks somewhat cartoonish/invented...no real sense of purpose or proportion.
It seems too small, and out of scale visually with the other.
It seems just a bit too far away, and disconnected from the scene.
I definitely think that the white structure should be bigger...in size and I sort of wish (at least would be curious to see) that one of the buildings had a roof line/gable that extended sideways as well.....a wing so to speak(or maybe the main body) maybe towards the adjacent building...maybe closed in above and open-air workspace below..., to help lead the eye/tie the structures together, and create a visual stop of sorts...so the eye lingers in the scene rather than looking/funneling through it.
Just some random thoughts......not sure if they are the solution...but something about that white structure in the scene bugs me...sorry :-\
MR
I agree with Marc about the white building. Something about it just isn't working. It might look more appropriate in a densely built up harbor with little room to spread out, but a second story on top of a shack, with its own exterior staircase, doesn't look right in this environment. I think its guilty of trying too hard to be something other than a shed, when a simple shed might be more appropriate.
Dave
Men, thanks alot for the input. As for the tunnels I have not started this layout yet so maybe some fine tuning is still to come. Perhaps when Jacq sends me his drawing he might have a work around for the mill section. Hint hint??
Now for the structures I'm going to make some diagrams with dimensions, as I believe it may be my pics that is giving the impression of the size discrepancy. Here is my thinking of the two different structures, the green is large because it needs to be able to fit a ship inside to work on them. The white/gray structure is a small fish, bait and tackle shop with the second floor being the residence of the proprietor. This area will get build out with details and a sign facing the "ocean" and a free standing one on the road. Lobster traps on the dock, a ship tied up at the dock.... Don't you think all these things will increase the feel/size of the overall appearance?
I would like to hear more about the thinking as in regard to the build out to the side. I was wondering about perhaps make a corrugated roof over the hoist section of the green structure, but I thought it would block the scene not lead as you guys seem to feel??? With the roof scenario in place, the boat I have planned will then be on its way up the slipway and not in it yet?? Look forward to the replies, Pat
Pat,
Don't roof the hoist...it adds caharacter and diversity and visual interet the way it is.
IMO None of the things you suggested help the white building......raze it and use a new one. The whole cutsie baitshop thing just scares me more. The scene lacks a defined focus. I think you should select a real theme for this scene......"Boat works/Industrial fishing".....not boatworks/cutesie weekend-fisherman-FSM-inspired. Look at the more masculine/brutish/functional appearance of the green structure.....the other one should have the same feel/character. (maybe even a third that is related to canning, ice, net repair, or ither undefined adjunct to the industry). Tell one story with this area of the dio..."commercial fishing and it's associated industry"......leave the cute shit to those modeling New England tourist trap wharves. Looking at this scene, and the time period you are doing I see very little reason that this bait shop would exist at this location.....a small shack with a fold up opening at the front possibly, for the weekend dork that got lost or thought the boatyard was a good place to fish from...but beyond that, it just doesn't work for me.
MR
Pat,
Another thing got me thinking....
I do think you should have some additional small structures in the scene...to sort of crowd the the larger ones....then I realized something else that I think is not helping your scen...the piers/docks, their shape and the height of them, and the building locations above the "water" why are both docks these snubbed flat ones...why cant one be the snub one, and the other be a long narrow one that extends way out into the water? maybe even with a structure on it or near the end? And why are both buildings and docks at exactly the same height?...a building could be right down at the water line, or be nothing more than an open shed, or it could sit sideways to the water, or askew.......
Look at the images below.....not perfect examples, some are better than others, and a few far to decrepit or modern, for what I am getting at...but by looking at all of them and taking it as a whole, maybe you will better see what I am geting at in terms of these above items, and the general feel/mood of stuff.
(https://www.finescalerr.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm3.static.flickr.com%2F2280%2F2320107205_3cc3c89b13.jpg&hash=41773a02765be327e51b2208799877491291dc9e)
(https://www.finescalerr.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.yourlocalweb.co.uk%2Fimages%2Fpictures%2F22%2F37%2Fboat-repair-yard-on-afon-seiont-220864.jpg&hash=886e9a991592205393fe17ff4ff658c5f5431661)
(https://www.finescalerr.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg1.eyefetch.com%2Fp%2Fci%2F447443-3f97309f-627d-454e-89be-72c544f9ef57.jpg&hash=6d35ff411d8c85e8bc6b55031c4c2feb27ea88fd)
(https://www.finescalerr.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.boattransporter.co.uk%2Fimages2%2Fboatyard-slipway-L.jpg&hash=ca256ede6ec84f3d4489536178c30a2172bc58ba)
(https://www.finescalerr.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Flh3.ggpht.com%2F_6LrPPOkSCrc%2FR0AYykBQdsI%2FAAAAAAAABR4%2FrBGSx-DdkIQ%2Fs640%2FP9040036.JPG&hash=eab709e822a56dad8ff924fe38e59641128aa0bf)
(https://www.finescalerr.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F1.bp.blogspot.com%2F_zTD8QWq8UVY%2FRg-pZmBdwQI%2FAAAAAAAAAOY%2FAuvXcYi5k60%2Fs1600%2Fboatyard1%252B%282%29.jpg&hash=bb30fa0e1f900a5a131c6e06caef99fb71d38f56)
http://i.pbase.com/g5/37/585437/2/68523320.CSUhh5v6.jpg
http://outdoors.webshots.com/photo/2368572310045485662DrolBI
http://www.flickr.com/photos/asmundur/121771242/sizes/m/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/asmundur/141879073/sizes/m/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/scottdavis/2281707180/sizes/o/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/11280522@N03/3721265582/sizes/m/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/98342273@N00/3065432490/sizes/m/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/hueystar/3555309933/sizes/m/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/justinglynn/3573621257/sizes/m/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ben_salter/1453032299/sizes/m/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mrtidd/3430928485/sizes/m/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ryanwoodwardphotography/3751539277/sizes/m/
(https://www.finescalerr.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm4.static.flickr.com%2F3253%2F2311144276_41b6bea4e9.jpg&hash=82f8b7b6cbf0ed0f027681a76be1e54feb805ada)
MR
Great examples and observations, Marc. Note also from the photo examples that a plain rectangular structure with a pitched roof can have so much character and appeal.
A lot of these kit designers seem to reject a rectangular structure as unacceptably plain, but a scale model of a complicated structure is hard to design, so they end up disguising rectangular boxes with staircases and balconies and lofts and funny roof shapes, unrealistic signage, sprinkling it with a bunch of castings, ending up with a doofy cartoon.
Dave
Amen, Brother Dave, amen!
And, as usual, Brother Reusser's sharp eye and research has provided good examples of actual waterfront architecture and design. Keep going with ideas and suggestions; I'm taking notes myself!
Russ
Pat,
first sketches coming up soon. I have to clean them up to make it understandable. I will add a number of cross sections for explanation.
In the area of the waterside scene near the mill, it will be along Marc's photo's. I was surprised with how little the idea's differ.
Jacq
Hi Pat,
I have to agree with the other guys. The white building jsut doesn't look right. Maybe it's the contrasting roofs. The flattened barn (Dutch?) roof seems odd for such a small building, unless it's a shed from the Home Depot or Lowes. I like the green building.
On a detail note, most, if not all of the boats works I have been to always had a collection of boats beyond repair sitting in the weeds. Piles of them.
If you want another business near the boatworks may I suggest a Prop shop. Someone is always beating someone elses beat up props back into shape. Oyster reefs are particularly brutal on props.
Just my 2 scents.
Russ
Pat,
here a first very quick sketch based on your original concept.
(https://www.finescalerr.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages17.fotki.com%2Fv28%2Fphotos%2F1%2F1437817%2F7089307%2Fpatslayout1-vi.jpg&hash=6a89bf1d6ba32a8678b320f962bc3e002ad4848f)
the mainline is still a dog bone with 2 loops and only 1 tunnel. The tressle in the curve is replaced with a stone/snow gallery and repositioned along the short side of the island and now represents a steep gorge where the line follows on a ridge with the tressle where it crosses a waterfall. On the other side the line follows rivers dissappearing around a curve to dissappear out of sight still within the visible pandscaping.
The mill has it's own sortingyard and tracks to the logdump, green chain and slab storage. The mainline dissappears behind buildings / trees and makes a full turn ( inside the buildings on a hillside to connect to the line along the river.
This is a first impression. I am presently preparing 2 more idea's. One where the mainline is more dominant and storage space under the station.
The second one with a much shorter mainline, still with storage under the station) but with a much larger logging area. The waterfront and sawmill will be in the same area, but with some more freedom for great landscaping.
Jacq
when the 2 others are ready and published, let me know your preference and I'll work out some grades, curves, transitions etc
Jacq,
Tha's a great plan. I really like pretty much all of it. The mill layout is great, and the proximity/connection to the fishing/boat piers is nice and cohesive. I like the relocationof the logging camp and loading area into the 'U' on the left, and I really like the relocation of the trestle to the front side of the visual block (ridge). Each of these areas really is a nice secene on it's own, and works well as a whole Each having its own character and feel...yet working together due to their locattian/arrangement on the layout. The whole thing looks like it could be built in a series of "shadow boxes" and be just stunning.
The only thing I don't care for...even though prototypical, is the snow shed....it seems a bit long especially at such a prominent point.....I think I would prefer a much shorter one....or just have a really nice graceful curve passing through the a rocky and forested hillside...the kindof place they used to take photos of in "the old days"......I think it combined with the trestle and tunnel, combine to give even a more different feel from the rest of the layout...it gices that open country/mountain feel that som many layouts strive for, yet can never achieve, because there is always a structure/town somewhere in the sight line.....your scheme eliminates this problem (that is if Pat refrains from sticking buildings in the scene)...and gives you a real feel of "distance" and the small scale of man/railroad in the mountains.
MR
Marc,
in my opinion, there should be no buildings from the river towards the tunnel. Only country side. I drew the snow shed to "camouflage" the sharp radius and the large angle of the curve. It can easily be replaced with an open line and some protruding rocks with cuts to break the length of the curve as you are proposing.
Jacq
Wow, guys don't stop by for a few days and see what happens. Marc, thanks so much for all the reference material, the one question I guess is still how does one know what the size perspective between two structures which are not owned by the same business should relate? I keep coming back to this because maybe I'm not understanding the relationship.
Jacq, thanks so much for working on the plan, my poor eyes and small computer screen don't allow me to see the plan very well could you perhaps email it to me? pjmelec10434@optonline.net Thanks Pat
That's a nice plan. I especially like the switchback.
Wish I had room for a layout after seeing this.
Pat
The point about dimensions of the buildings in your scene is about artistic composition and how the buildings and other pieces relate to each other in terms of balance and proportion. These are factors that artists and photographers work with to make interesting, successful compositions. Dioramas are no different. I agree with Marc that the large building on one side, with small building on the other is just not a successful composition. Imbalance is dynamic and can be very interesting, unfortunately here the buildings don't really relate to each other, so the imbalance isn't serving any visual or narrative purpose. Where you do have balance, in the roughly equal dimensions of the piers and alignment on the square base, it looks static. That building on the right is the main culprit, its trying hard to be cute and interesting but only looks outlandish. That is the chief failing of many "craftsman" type structures.
Dave
I wish everyone planning a layout would read this thread. -- Russ
What about artistic composition in the real world? Doesn't always apply, does it?
I don't have a problem with the little white structure. Don't think it's cartoonish or outlandish or whatever. It happens in the real world whether we like it or not.
I grew up in a harbor town along Lake Michigan in the 50's. On the east side of the river was the C. Reiss Coal Company. Along the west was fishing shanties used by the commercial fisherman. The largest shanty belonged to Schwartz Fish Company and it was huge. They processed tons of fish there every day. Right next to it was the DNR shanty. Looked much like the small white structure except it was broadside to the river. Even had outside stairs. On the other side was a small retail fish market.
Scattered along the rest of the river to the 8th street bridge and the mouth of the harbor were various other sized shanties. Couple of boat repair shops, one diesel engine repair shop and Lyle's Bait and Tackle. He had the 8x10' shanty filled with anything you needed. Bait tanks were outside under a tin roof.
Nobody thought about artistic composition when those shanties were built. Each housed a business where many people made a living off the water. And I can still see them as if it was yesterday. I think there is only two or three left.
Sorry about the mini rant, but not everything in the real world is pleasing to the eye. I'd keep the white structure.
Most modelers start off with a wish list of items to be incorporated on their layout. This list of want and greed is often the reason why layouts do not come beyond the modeltrain stage.
Here is a formula that is incorporating all our wants (and greed) so we do not forget even one item andstill gives areasonable possiblity for a realistic setting.
Make a list of ALL wishes.
1 sort of railway
2 amount of rolling stock.
3 scenes with wanted structures.
4 scenery ( rural, city, industrial )
5 timetable to built the layout.
Now make a plan incorporating all these points and assess the realism. When satisfied start when not do the following.
Now remove 90% ( not less) from the list. Give reasons why the 10% should remain and what the relation is between these items.
One becomes aware of how locations are arranged as seen in reality. This "feeling" for the "virtual" scene to be turned into a layout makes it possible to prepare some first realistic sketches. It enables a blending of the scenes, together with the impression that it all is part of a locallity or theme. Selected compression is necessary, but not to the extend that it makes a caricature of the scenes next to each other.
Here the trackplan of my H0 layout. This plan has evolved along the points described.
First there was a double mainline with a station having 6-7 tracks with a turntable and large engine facilities, etc ect.
Than the rubber became my best friend and I started asking myself what the purpose of each item was in relation to the theme I wanted.
The result is a single main line climbing into a valley, with a steep section requiring assistance for the heavier trains. I learned a lot about tractive effort, allowable hook load and brake loads. All necessary to built a realistic layout. Industries ? Yes, but matching the location, so in this instance rural based on natural resources ( lime, basalt, gravel, wood, etc. ) figures can make or break a scene. In this case ther is only 1 person in the station, talking to the station chef. Is he going or arriving ? the same with figures around. I tried to create scenes where it is very difficult to determine an exact hour with the figures at rest.
And so the list can go on..... the main point is AWARNESS of what you built and a realistic transition from scene to scene.
(https://www.finescalerr.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages53.fotki.com%2Fv419%2Fphotos%2F1%2F1437817%2F7089307%2FJacqslayout-vi.jpg&hash=de53642934b5ef7e1a3002cb42e480e7e8071a85)
(https://www.finescalerr.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages28.fotki.com%2Fv1029%2Fphotos%2F7%2F1437817%2F7198225%2FDSC_2320-vi.jpg&hash=7855a1d5cc0cd7177072cecb68dec41b9728c0b2)
(https://www.finescalerr.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages24.fotki.com%2Fv851%2Fphotos%2F7%2F1437817%2F7198225%2FDSC_2332-vi.jpg&hash=e0ef7906320d83c6586b62bb82930f19dd6b2811)
(https://www.finescalerr.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages46.fotki.com%2Fv1452%2Fphotos%2F7%2F1437817%2F7198225%2FDSC_2323-vi.jpg&hash=508415a4a089f614eec1d43bdaf3b361043187c2)
(https://www.finescalerr.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages24.fotki.com%2Fv873%2Fphotos%2F7%2F1437817%2F7198225%2F1585FFcopy_edited1-vi.jpg&hash=c066fb6b9fb38a8e9f70cc978179bcfd2688cfc4)
Building is not difficult, understanding what you do is the most difficult part.
Jacq
Marken,
Noting like a good rant to let off steam ;) ;D
QuoteWhat about artistic composition in the real world? Doesn't always apply, does it?
True, and I agree....."but"....we tend to have a different visual cone/field of vision when we look at something from our perspective in the real world, and how we see a scene on a layout or diorama.....and when we (most people) take photos of a real world scene, regardless of what it is...we do usually try to frame or balance it, to make it look visually interesting, or bring our eye into the focal point, object, and we do tend to crop out/not include things that we feel are unsightly or do not work in the shot. This to some extent is what you are trying to do as well when creating a diorama/scene......we are trying to create a scene that is realistic/believable in a visually interesting way.
Quote....Along the west was fishing shanties used by the commercial fisherman. The largest shanty belonged to Schwartz Fish Company and it was huge. They processed tons of fish there every day. Right next to it was the DNR shanty. Looked much like the small white structure except it was broadside to the river. Even had outside stairs. On the other side was a small retail fish market.
Scattered along the rest of the river to the 8th street bridge and the mouth of the harbor were various other sized shanties. Couple of boat repair shops, one diesel engine repair shop and Lyle's Bait and Tackle. He had the 8x10' shanty filled with anything you needed. Bait tanks were outside under a tin roof.]....Along the west was fishing shanties used by the commercial fisherman. The largest shanty belonged to Schwartz Fish Company and it was huge. They processed tons of fish there every day. Right next to it was the DNR shanty. Looked much like the small white structure except it was broadside to the river. Even had outside stairs. On the other side was a small retail fish market.
Scattered along the rest of the river to the 8th street bridge and the mouth of the harbor were various other sized shanties. Couple of boat repair shops, one diesel engine repair shop and Lyle's Bait and Tackle. He had the 8x10' shanty filled with anything you needed. Bait tanks were outside under a tin roof.
...and there is the artistic composition at work.....the large structure was a center/focal point amongst the many random smaller structures. The numerous smaller structures also visually balanced the larger one. This is the issue at hand with Pat's scene......one large...one dinky....no balance.....if he wants to keep the small structure, maybe he should consider adding smallish structure to the other side of the green one....even it it is just one of those open air shed type ones (like in the images) down by the water line. he could even add two smallish ones at that side one down lower, one up hiher somewhere.
And I definitely agree with all that Dave said....and in particular the part about the similar piers making the scene very static.
Pat: The size/distance perspective between two disimilar business structures is really an open ended quaestion....in reality this obiously varies wildly due to all sorts of reasons.....but for a scene/diorama purpose, you need to try and see it through the "camera lens".....this relates back to the above and Dave's post. This though is where a fine balance between reality and fantasy/caricature comes in,...it is definitely trial and error and takes some experimenting with mock-ups...or moving the actual structures around a bit to see how they create the best scene (and still retain a sense of realism). If we are talking boat yards.....and though they are very different from yours, IMO the two that work very well in this regard are the old Nash & Greenberg boat yard scene, and the more recent shipyard building scene by Dave Revelia. There are others as well, but I cant bull them out of my mess of a brain at the moment.
There is some guy that is doing more east coast style wharf scenes using Water color paper buildings.....don't know if it was in a thread here or elswhere, but I feel he has a really nice sense of composition, scale, character and plausability as well.
Marc
Some excellent info!
To Marc's post I can only add that the real world is inherently "organic". Buildings and clusters of buildings tend to follow a discernable logic and evolution, shaped by real world purpose, available space, epoch, location, owners, builders, materials, money and so on. This is especially true of working structures. That's part of the beauty of a ramshackle fishing town, its completely authentic and purposeful. Everything down to the seagull droppings belongs in its place and looks it. There's always a rational narrative, a history to how things got to be the way they are. Also the real 1/1 world generally requires no convincing of the senses, the viewer is not required to make any judgement about plausibility or implausibility of a scene. It just is.
Models are artificial constructs, so the organic quality and narrative that makes a scene convincing must come from the model builder. Sometimes that just means dropping the frills and the "prototype for everything" argument and going for the most typical. Fortunately, there is something about miniaturization that makes typical, familiar, commonplace, and even plain things very interesting when shrunk down small. Even squalor takes on a certain charm when its reduced to miniature. I think a lot of craftsman kit designs overlook that point in the struggle to be whimsical, cute, elaborate, different (or styled after you-know-who).
Dave
Dave, you are much better than I am at expressing what I was thinking have you been looking inside my head? ;) I appreciate at least one other person likes my perceived idea. I like the idea of adding another level of dock with a small shed/covered storage area to the smaller building's side.
Its funny you mention Dave Revelia his diorama which I'm attaching a shot of (Taken by Rick Schintler I believe) is what I loosely based my layout of my diorama on. I know I'm nowhere near that good but in my head the interplay between his 3 structures is not that far from mine in size that is. I totally see the point you guys are making with the docks being at the same level. On another note I have read so many times, that the modelers on this forum try to build to a more exacting standard which I don't deny, the quality is always top notch. I think no one here would deny that Dave is an excellent diorama/layout builder but to my mind his model here still shows the caricature many of you find so objectionable, I personally love this dio and if that means I like "caricature" well so be it. I want people to find a balance between fun and realism, to this end I hate the attaboy mentality and have asked for sincere helpful critiques just like I'm doing here.
Marc. from what I can understand and focus on in my overfilled (info) brain, the 1/1 proto is being over ridden by the focal points trying to be established by the diorama needs? Granted each person's eye is subjective and sees things differently, are there rules of thumb that apply when comparing the size of related structures (dio based)? Also when do you know when a given structure would work better on an angle or any other related placement? Again it comes back to the person building the dio and if it looks good to him/her how would they know its not "right"? to be continued
Excellent thread. Lot's of good information.
Jerry
I agree, very interesting thread with lots of good info.
Jacq, I love the gravel crusher/loader scene in your second-to-last photo! Looks so true to life, I almost feel like I've been there.
Pat,
Like you say, lots of leeway and subjectivity in all this. I do not have an issue with "caricature", so to speak...everyone (except maybe Chuck ;)), imparts some sort of caricature, or fingerprint/signature look, on their work....thats the whole artistic side of it.....I just hate implausible, poorly thought out, inconsistants, and senseless caricature.....or caricature used to cover up lack of knowledge. Hell...other than in armor models, everything I do is "implied", (so in a sense a caricature) or hopefully, heavily based on plausibility and fact...when was the last time you saw me build a spot-on, exact, replica of a prototype....I like to collect all sorts of info, photos, data, dimensions, and one particular example to start from, and base my project on,......and then roll from there as I see fit...but always trying to stay within the realm of plausible, functional, and based on prototypical construction precepts/methods. The whole thing usually comes down to does it look right/believable.
This is actually not the Revellia dio I was thinking of (it was the one where they were building the ship, and there was a yellow house on it, and some kind of stone jetty with a truck on it)....but this one will work just as well.
IMO, If we sort of do a gut level quick analysis of it, you will to some degree see some of the things that have been discussed. Note that the large structure is the focal mass, yet it is balanced by the combined mass if the shed, boat and water tank..even though these are seperate items....they are clearly a visual grouping and as such have a combined visual weight mass. If we look at the large building and then the small shed, note that the shed is balanced by the hoist and masts weight on the opposite side. Note also that the boat visually steps down the dock and sightline to the water level...much like the stone wall and rollway do on the other side. One could also look at this scene and say that the masts on one side, and the weight and vertical lines of the water tank, stump and shed wall, bookend or frame the scene...they keep your eye from wandering off the edge so to speak. The only thing that really annoys me and is to me sensless caricature on this is the two dormers...I actually think that they hurt the scene.
Note also that the difference of the building sizes is not that extreme....they are almost proportional to eachother.
MR
IMO The scene really breaks down into 3 individual balanced parts. (shown by the vertical red lines), and notice the the balanced visual lines/arcs on each side of the main structure...and notice how these lead the viewer outward to both sides to include the adjacent scenes....whether this was all intentional or not I can't say...but it is working in the scene.
This kind of stuff has no rhyme or steadfast rules, and nothing is the same for every situation....but the idea of visual balance, wheight, focus, etc....all are aspects that need to be taken into consideration in a scene......you are trying to compress real life...or the concept/interpretation thereof....., and adapt it into one focused scene/area....and because of this you should have/employ all the same things that one would do in a photograph.
MR
Pat,
I went back to your orig photos, and had some thoughts....
One thing, regardless of what you do, that I really think needs to be changed is that arced roof on the white building...there is no ryme or reson to it, it's only different for the sake of being different, and it draws way to much attention.
In the top image below:
Maybe consider moving the white structure to the other side of the green building, and adding a water level type structure (this structure could be related to the boat repair shop...or maybe a fishing net/bouy storage shed run by them (or leased from them by someone)...the waterlevel structure might even work better with it's roofline paralell to the shoreline.
I like how the roof line of the green building visually follows out over the gantry and then to the ground. Maybe an old boat and or stacks of small boats...and/or a fence, or such stuff to end the scene could be done where the white structure currently is...or even a longer open air shed roofed storage structure for parts, wood, tar drums, paint etc. By moving the white structure to the left of the green building I am hoping to achieve a sim visual line outward....right now that tall wall on the green building is very abrupt.
In the bottom Image below:
The two "no" comments refer to the alignment of the docks and buildings...there is no reason for this, and even in real life would not necessarily happen...I think thius contributes to the static feel of the scene. There is also not any reason why these structures would need to be completely paralell to eachother (plus it ads to the static nauture of the scene)....yes, they could be in real life...but they could also have been built to be paralell to the waterfront/tideline instead....which brings me to another point, you may get more of an interesting feel/look in the finshed layout, if both of these are not perfectly paralell to the front edge....maybe one can be and the other s slightly off. this could be accentuated with a longer narrow pier/gangway extending from the bait shop structure , as the "line" created by the pier and structure would be longer and thus more noticable.
...anyhow, just some rambling thoughts. ;)
MR
Just some stuf I stumbled across...not my style of art...but they are boatyards; maybe not completely applicable to your specific scene...buy maybe it can give you some additional ideas inspiration. ;):
(https://www.finescalerr.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.newmastersgallery.com%2FArtistRamsay%2FRamsayNew2009-Schooner%2520at%2520ballard%2520Boat%2520Works-19x25.jpg&hash=ca71d6fea05c714f8f9070b5ee5165c35e9fbadf)
(https://www.finescalerr.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.newmastersgallery.com%2FArtistRamsay%2FRamsayNew2005NNNN-Boat%2520Yard%2520at%2520Willapa%2520Bay-WA-14x21.jpg&hash=39c7c0f807db03b7f0a156ac7a033dc3173c6129)
MR
Oh...and maybe some old pilings in the water......
Marc,
looking at the info you put up, it looks to me that the style of the buildings do show ( logically) similarities. Isn't it logical that in a specific area's buildings look a bit alike, especially building details ?
seeing those pilings.....do you still work on the sunken boat dio ??
Jacq
QuoteIsn't it logical that in a specific area's buildings look a bit alike, especially building details ?
Yes in an overall/general sense, though there are always unique/individualistic structures or parts of structures, where somone decided to include an idea/design/interpretaion from elswhere....also....remember that during this time we were a country populated heavily by new imigrants from all over Europe...and these folks would often include design/detail/inspiration from their home country. The boat yard stuff though was really primarily "functional" architecture...and so would most likely be purpose, task cost and expediency driven, rather than decorative. ...or at best...one might find the working buildings in the boatyard to be functional...but if there was a small seperate office building, this might jave been more decorative...or at least have a decorative facade.....but if so this would likely be with larger boatyards in more urban areas, catering tho the private boat owner, rather than the guy trying to eke out a living fixing everyday vessels. (BTW. I know nothing about boatyards specifically...this comment is merely based on my experiences with historical and vernacular architecture).
Quoteseeing those pilings.....do you still work on the sunken boat dio ??
It's still sitting right there on top of my back table.....but so are three other projects. ;) ;D i have not yet shelved it....really would like to get back on it...at least to do a little at a time. 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.
MR
Pat, I shot that photo of Revelia's diorama in Denver. -- Russ
Quote from: finescalerr on December 10, 2009, 01:04:42 AM
Pat, I shot that photo of Revelia's diorama in Denver. -- Russ
Great diorama and a great photo. That was one of the many highlights of your books.
Jerry
This has been a very interesting read.... ;D
Mike
Quote from: jacq01 on December 09, 2009, 10:30:03 PM
looking at the info you put up, it looks to me that the style of the buildings do show ( logically) similarities. Isn't it logical that in a specific area's buildings look a bit alike, especially building details ?
Jacq
I agree with you on this Jacq. It's a logical outcome of the social/economic/cultural makeup of the community. True, details will differ based on the individual purpose of the structure or character of the individual, but by and large there will a cohesive sense to the overall construct.
Paul
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
Quote from: marc_reusser on December 09, 2009, 10:54:44 PM
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).
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
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.
I'll check out the link thanks.
QuoteYou 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. ;D
MR
Quote from: Frederic Testard on December 11, 2009, 03:44:35 PM
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
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
Quote from: marc_reusser on December 11, 2009, 03:35:36 PM
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 .
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.
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
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
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.
(https://www.finescalerr.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages54.fotki.com%2Fv551%2Fphotos%2F1%2F1437817%2F7089307%2Flayoutplanpat-vi.jpg&hash=2b5299ccacc2d52f61e77b9e1ea178e865a2b7ec)
plan with 12" division markings ( plan drawn 1:25) The reverse loops have been replaced with down grades to storage area under mainstation.
(https://www.finescalerr.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages52.fotki.com%2Fv638%2Fphotos%2F1%2F1437817%2F7089307%2Flayoutsectionspat-vi.jpg&hash=be4b901891b2f7000f29402671dd6115aff38d35)
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
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
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
So Pat...are we going to see any progress on this anytime soon....or are we now just talking hypothetically! ::) :)
Marc
Marc, Jacq and I have been working on this behind the scenes and corresponding via email. Pat
Quote from: Belg on February 05, 2010, 02:20:09 PM
Marc, Jacq and I have been working on this behind the scenes and corresponding via email. Pat
Yes , Patrick , but that doesn't actually answer the question !
Nick
EPIC THREAD. ;D
Just didn't want it to get buried too deeply.
Dave