Here's something in HO scale I built for a contest entry. I would have added some crates of fish and other clutter to the dock, but the rules basically prohibited that. I got away with the boat because I was allowed "up to three vehicles." By the time I was done scratch building it, I was too pressed for time and too chicken to heavily weather it.
It represents an Eastern Rig Dragger, a picturesque type of fishing vessel that was once common around New England, now all but gone. I had a very difficult time finding prototype information, hence the simplified rigging. I mainly worked from a photo I found in Life's photo archive online. The hull began as a wooden, reject 1/96 scale Model Shipways tugboat hull.
Does anyone have any good reference material for this type of boat? I'd like to build a better one.
(https://www.finescalerr.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi655.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fuu276%2FDaveKrakow%2Feasternrigdragger.jpg&hash=339bb67e7863ec24d0497c36e32385dfa959253e)
Dave
More photos! MORE! -- Russ
haha ok :D
(https://www.finescalerr.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi655.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fuu276%2FDaveKrakow%2Feasternrigdraggeraftview.jpg&hash=bc50117ec88d683aa301580316516849c7615c73)
He put a 's' at the end of photo...
:)
Yeah. PhotoS. Don't be stingy. -- Russ
Really only needs a bit of boat weathering and some clutter. A nice cleanly built model!
Thanks Chuck. :) After all the work I put into scratch building the boat, and not having a lot of experience with weathering at that time, I was very hesitant to attack it with the chalks and washes, especially since I was working on a deadline for the contest and had no time margin for error. So I just scuffed it here and there.
Maybe you're the same way; once I call a model finished, I lose interest in it and focus on the next one. So it will just stay as it is. But I do enjoy looking at it and seeing the progress I've made since then.
(https://www.finescalerr.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi655.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fuu276%2FDaveKrakow%2Febay%2FApexFishGlamorShot.jpg&hash=750f940ac2370c46c704e87225d4c124f4c1e2b1)
Good lighting on the last photo. That's just a nice, pleasant, interesting model scene to enjoy. I like it without the huge amounts of clutter, massive barnacles on the posts, the usual wooden-legged old sailor sitting on a crate etc.
Just plain nice.
John
the last photo makes it all come alive. Nice model.
The boat is sweet, and I really like the overall scene, simple, elegant and plausible.
The stepped cornice detail on the building is also very interesting....quite unique, adds interest and yet is very real-world likely. I basically also like that all the roof lines are simple......something that so many weterfront models seem to ignore when they go with all sorts of fanciful, erratic and charicaturish rooflines.
Marc
Thanks :) Although I would have liked to add a little bit of clutter to the dock, I'm not a fan of that dense clutter that seems to be de rigueur in RR dioramas. I want the finished product to be something pleasant to look at, not an eyesore. I have enough clutter in my 1/1 world.
The structure was built from a kit, for a contest to promote that particular kit.
http://www.railroadkits.com/images/Reaghan_Feed_Mill1.jpg
Rules prohibited adding much material, or changing the basic footprint of the structure, so I was limited in what I could do. Basically I corrected most of what I thought was atypical about the design. That meant raising the top storey (which made room for the company name) adding the simple trim to the cornice, repositioning the first floor windows upwards, adding a foundation, changing the doors, re-orienting the annex, shortening the awnings etc. On both the structure and the dock, to be within the contest rules, I used only materials that came in the box, including the box itself. The pier pilings are carved from the kit's interior bracing stripwood. A nice side effect was having somewhat irregular pilings, not perfect dowels as usually seen on models. The substitute bracing was made from folded box cardboard. But most of the my labor went to making the boat. I bought a Seaport Modelworks resin fishing boat kit but I was disappointed with it, so I scratch built one. I got first prize for the dio, was happy.
Thanks again for the feedback.
Dave
(https://www.finescalerr.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi655.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fuu276%2FDaveKrakow%2FApexFishDockSide.jpg&hash=768e8eb5110f169adb3e30ab4fc144e9c6088deb)
One more photo. The siding repair scene on the roof was because I needed that siding to raise the 3rd floor from the kit configuration, and was limited to what came in the box, so I had to "steal" it from there, and replace with paper and stripwood. Under the dock, there's an oil barrel floating in the water, leaking a trail of oil. Its hard to see but its a nice detail I will use again someday.
Nice structure and vessel Dave. I too like that water level shot. Here's a line drawing of a small N.E. trawler you might find helpful. You will find that the Artitec shrimp cutter is a great model that is a super casting and nice details. I have some photos of it if interested.
(https://www.finescalerr.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi191.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fz79%2Fchesterf%2Fblueprints%2F97de.jpg&hash=b2e133d3be3d831c9969be7cc7eebbf9f5b1ff97)
Thanks Chester. I have seen the Artitech models and they are beautiful. Unfortunately they are Euro prototypes and my diorama is meant to be an East Coast setting. Up till the late 60s or so, fishing boats had very clear regional characteristics, part of what makes them so interesting and picturesque.
Speaking of cluttered eyesores, here is an example. Its not realistic, not based on any prototype, and its all junked up with clutter. Its not proportional, and I don't think I'd give it a pass as a cartoon either. I don't understand the fascination with this grotesque style of model building. ???
Click here: http://fsmkits.homestead.com/files/emporiumSeafood_290.jpg
That style goes back to John Allen. He is now an icon so everything he did gets copied and embellished. Then the copies get copied and embellished. And then you end up with all the "me, too" laser kits and the Australian modelers' scratchbuilt clones (as well done as they may be) and all the rest of it. When modelers copy other modelers the result is an artistic abortion.
It happens in music, too. Can you say "rip off movie themes" or "Charlie Parker wannabes"?
Russ
Hey Russ, that sums it up. The current "craftsman kit" style is a distortion and re-distortion of John Allen interpretations. Plus its much easier and faster to build a model when you aren't burdened by such concerns as proportion, prototype, precision or quality, and "details" are just dumped out of the box to fill up space. And its immune to criticsm, sheilded as it is by the "caricature" defense. What I really want to know is why it doesn't just go away? Why can't people see this stuff is ugly and meaningless?
Your music analogy is too kind. The standard for these kits is past Charlie Parker wannabees. Its well into Elvis impersonators and drunken Japanese businessman Karaoke. Its just stale comedy now.
Dave
The design of that Emporium Seafood structure could only be appreciated by those who haven't been blessed with the gift of sight.
Paul
Manufacturers sell tasteless caricatures because tasteless hobbyists buy them. The most important thing I learned when I was in broadcast news is that the lower you set your standards the larger an audience you will attract; eventually it became more than I could live with so I quit. And, after twenty years, my tolerance for decay in the mainstream hobby industry finally is wearing thin. -- Russ
I must say I feel very proud to belong to a group that's such blessed with the gift of sight, and I fear the day when all the blind people have been cancelled and one has to find new criterions to sort the few survivors... I have seen many places in real life as messy as this wharf. I understand that a whole layout made of messy places is indeed a caricature, and I understand that one has the right not to love caricatures, but I've been feeling more and more uncomfortable for months about the despiteful comments adressed to a vast category of people. I see very well how excellent craftsmen people on this board are, and I am often blast by what they display, but I really cannot understand how the fact of despising others could make these excellent craftsmen better, be it by an epsilon.
Frederic:
You should know by now that by and large, we're a group of opinionated, obstinate and grumpy old men, not that that's a bad thing. ;) The important point about this forum is we're not afraid to speak our minds honestly about how we feel. Importantly, we also give credit where credit is due, that's an increasingly rare commodity in this age of "political correctness" and "diplomatic doublespeak." Yes, we can be harsh at times, but it is generally for good reason. We don't intentionally offend anyone and if by chance we do, I think you'll find we'll be the first to apologize and own up for doing so. I'd rather have one person here say "there's something not right about this" rather than see a bevy of shallow praise. I think you'll see that there is also a great deal of genuine respect here, though it can be displayed in rather unusual terms at times. Sweeping generalizations are always dangerous and there are always exceptions. Two beliefs I do see as common to at least the active members here are an abhorrence for crass commercialism and shoddy products.
Paul
Agreed, Paul. A forum like this one is outside the comfort zone for many people, I believe that was the point Russ made about the correlation between lowering standards and increasing audiences.
But I do think the point here is a general unwillingness in this country to really look and think about the subject matter and then treat it with respect of historians and craftsmen. Instead, the trend is to make a poor joke out of it.
It is a case of commercialism and sinking standards and that is fair game for criticism. It is not about who's skills are better than others. At the end of the day, it takes the same skill and time to glue sticks into something that looks like a place where real people once toiled over the tools and vehicles of their trade, as it does to slavishly copy an elaborate piece of smack-you-in-the-face nonsense.
My question is about how and why the hobby has trended away from thoughtful work and towards a commercialized false standard typified by the kit in the link I posted. As usual for this company, the advertisment claims the model is a "typical depiction" of a historic era and location, which is just not true.
Dave
And I want to add a post script: Pointing out flaws or lapses in taste need not necessarily be snobbish or deprecating. Thirty years ago, when I was trying to break into jazz as a professional, a bunch of L.A.'s top musicians did a recording session with me -- for free. Among L.A. musicians, that is a really big deal. But that didn't stop my mentor from announcing I'd hit a clam (wrong note) in one of my solos even though another guy thought the note was fine. They also sometimes criticized the hell out of the way a well known musician played on an album or in a live performance. They were doing the same thing as we do here: Pointing out what is not so good, even by a "big name" jazz guy, so I and others could learn what is good, what is mediocre, and WHY.
That is how I learned. Sometimes one of them would tell me I should learn the melody to a tune. Sometimes somebody would suggest I stop playing a tune until I learned the chord changes. I suppose I could have taken offense and felt bad. Instead I learned the damned tunes better!
That is what this forum is all about. If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen.
Russ
Yes yes yes.
Uncle, I personnally have no real problem with criticism towards my personnal model jobs. Even if I may sometimes not share the point of view of the person who criticizes, I often find something to improve from his or her comment. I even have no problem with criticisms coming from people who have shown skills worse than mine, because the gift of sight and the gift of craftsmanship are quite different, and not being able to make something doesn't mean you can't see the necessity of the thing (it's easy to find music comparisons for this. I'll never play the Rhapsody in Blue but can hear a clam in it...).
You'll note that there's a whole group of good modellers who simply will answer any criticism from someone they consider less good than them : "Show me first what you do", and will never accept - or very reluctantly - what I said above. To which I don't belong : I can take the heat, even if it comes from a bad cook.
But this is not the point I wanted to make here. Maybe the lack of precision of my English doesn't help me write the things exactly how I think them. What I can hardly understand is how a full category of people could be so despisable as model railroaders seem to be when one reads a number of posts here. I think that, at least, a bit of literary nuance could be used, and that using it would not make the people who speak worse modellers. To answer more specifically Paul's comment about "political correctness" and "diplomatic doublespeak", I have recently noticed a trend among an increasing number of people towards "political uncorrectness" and "undiplomatic simplespeak". I find this trend as inadequate as the first one, and observed that it is generally a rhetorical comfort used by people who want to put their contacts into difficulty, most of the time without opening any space for dialog and argumentation. What do you think model railroaders will want to share when they read the comments mentioned above, if moreover they are afraid to be answered the dreaded "show me first what you do" they certainly have heard before?
Frederic,
QuoteWhat I can hardly understand is how a full category of people could be so despisable as model railroaders seem to be when one reads a number of posts here. I think that, at least, a bit of literary nuance could be used, and that using it would not make the people who speak worse modellers.
you are aware of the fact that some 2 years ago I started on the RR forum in search fro information on sawmills and logging operations.
The comments and reactions from so called experts on the
very good, valuable and correct advise I received, was such that I decided not to post there anymore. It was the start of my participatin here.
When you mentioned Kirks Troels work, I visited the forum again for the first time...... Lovely details, good craftsmanship, nice atmosphere but suffering from the general trends of cramping too much into a too litte space, taking away the effect each individual scene can have. Hardly or no natural transitions.
Re the detoriation of values and standards, there was a newsflash today, here on TV, regarding the steps the teaching staff at Harvard is taking against the pranks and stupidities done by students during lectures.
It all has to do with respect and certain standards.......even in modelrailroading. When at university I was openly confronted with my mistakes and I learned the value of direct critism. But also to defend my views and to discuss differences. There is a saying in Holland " Soft doctors leave stinking wounds"
The best is to leave opinions ventilated here within the constrictions of this forum, here they are understood within the context. If ventilated on other forums, they will not be understood as they are based on completely different philosophies...
Jacq
Its just human nature to want praise and be defensive about criticism. It is a problem when people with a low threshold for criticism are permitted to set the limits for acceptable discussion. Jacq is right. That form of political correctness is part of how standards are lowered everywhere and how commercial manufacturers such as Wonderbread have been able to create and maintain a false perception that their crappy products are high quality, high nutrition, wholesome or "accurate depictions."
Dave
I think I understand what you are trying to say Frederic, and to some extent I agree. The people in this forum have a different kind of goal in mind with their modeling than the typical model railroader, but I don't understand why all those model railroader's that aren't interested in doing the type of modeling promoted here should be so harshly denigrated as a group. So what if someone prefers the caricature style of modeling? It's their money, their time, their model railroad. Just because we don't like it doesn't mean it doesn't have some value to him. I'm sure to that type of modeler we look kinda silly too, spending so much time on a single model and being so preoccupied about technical accuracy in something they view largely as an adult toy. It's all about what each individual wants to get out of the hobby. Different strokes for different folks as they say.
I think the values we share in this forum can be promoted without being so negative toward those that are interested in a different kind of modeling.
David
Frederic, your English is easily good enough to explain what you mean. (Frankly, I am amazed you can communicate so well. Moreover I respect your intelligence and your opinions.)
I guess sometimes we, including I, sound too harsh or too critical or too broad in scope when we launch into a tirade. I doubt any of us would write with such fire on another website or for print. But, on this website, we are talking to our peers. Sometimes we may speak too strongly. If so, it usually is out of frustration.
David King makes the point that people have different goals and preferences and perceptions: I could not agree more. And I have put my money where my mouth is. When I published Outdoor Railroader and Finescale Railroader I would print photos of models by every reader, whether the model was good or horrible. I did that not just because I agree with David's philosophy but because I want to encourage everyone interested in hobbies, crafts, and the arts.
I usually reserve my criticism for those in business. Dave (DaKra) began that jab at business with his condemnation of "caricature kits". I agreed. That is because I hold business to a higher standard than the consumer. Even though I realize it is idealistic, I would have business lead by example, not cater to an ever lower demographic with the hope of making more money. The steep decline in our culture, education, politics, and business ethics is a direct result of the attitude of catering down.
By contrast, higher standards in several fields generally were maintained from the 1920s through the 1950s, an era almost everyone would acknowledge as the Golden Age of American culture.
If you grow up on a diet of Spam, prime rib will taste bad. Somebody must assume the responsibility to show the difference between quality and crap and, if possible, to influence business to produce quality. If not, literature descends into decadent gibberish, music trades melody for gangster rap, education is reduced to socialization and indoctrination, and hobbies become laughable.
Russ
David,
it is not a matter of being denigrating, I do not look down on work of others, it is their effort. In that respect Frederic is putting the group
in a certain perspective..........................If I am denigrating it is against the lack of realism.
Again :
QuoteThe best is to leave opinions ventilated here within the constrictions of this forum, here they are understood within the context. If ventilated on other forums, they will not be understood as they are based on completely different philosophies...
Jacq
I agree that we often paint with a broad and what may be somewhat denigrating brush.....but...and this does not justify it...... look at how much of the "other side" paints those that have shall we say more "focus and commitment" to detailed modeling......they are no better....on the RRL Forums for example, out of the tens of thousands of "atta-boy" posts, there are probably a mere handful of honest critiques and criticisms.....and should you happen to mention something that is completely valid...even in the most constructive way....there is a huge contingent that flames out, runs to the defense of the modeler, an starts to cry "it's a hobby...bla, bla, bala..", "We're in this to have fun....bla, bla, bla,"...."You're being nit-picky, and rivet counting...bla, bla, bla".....not only online mind you....but also via PM. And they are mild compared to the "No Stinking Standards", and "We are Funner", and "I'ts my hobby" rants that you encounter in places like the ON30 Conspiracy.
None of us here is mean spirited,....we just tend to be a bit more brash and harsh in our commentary.....I cannot think of a single vocal and opinionated member here that would not offer his time, help, advice and research, if he were asked, or can ( I am talking about REAL in depth help and information...with some weight behind it...not just rehashed and watered down stuff) That is truly more than I can say for the other forums I used to belong to.
Lastly....if you are concerned about political correctness or about our opinions being somewhat harsh....at least we are honest and open about them, and we receive as good as we get.......unlike and I speak from experience here, a place like the RRL Forum......The last straw that caused me to leave that forum was because two religious nut jobs complained to the administrators that my avatar was "offensive to their beliefs"....so the moderators simply took it down.....what was my avatar....a photo of a cartoonish looking Bobble-head devil doll in a tuxedo......and all the while allowing people to use avatars where peoples heads are getting shot-off, or that are pointing a gun at you, or that have Christ's cross in them.........talk about hypocrites, intolerance...and political incorrectness.
Like my tag line once said..."I would rather be hated for who I am, than liked for who I am not." I would also much rather be amongst agroup of people that let me know where I stand and where I fall short, than one that says nothing but "good job", which gives me no guidance, motivation, inspiration or cause to evaluate my work/process/approach.
I learned long ago that any work or models you produce are just a "thing"...yes, you can be proud of them, happy or unhappy about them.....but they are not your life, or who you are....even if you put your heart and soul into them....in the end they are just objects.
Marc
QuoteEven though I realize it is idealistic, I would have business lead by example, not cater to an ever lower demographic with the hope of making more money.
Yes that is very idealistic, but we do need some idealists in the world. ;D I'm sure it's a fine line and a tough decision for many business owners wether to go after more market share by compromising your ideals or hold fast to those ideals at the risk of failure in the business world. Obviously you've held to the latter Russ, and we thank you for it, I just hope by some miracle it works out for you in the end.
I lament the decline in culture as well. There are far more hobby "artists" attempting to emulate Bob Ross than there are of those attempting to emulate Asher B. Durand, but maybe that's not such a bad thing? If excellence were prevalent would it seem so excellent? Those of us on this forum appreciate and attempt to work at the very pinnacle of quality modeling, but that pinnacle is the very tip of a short pyramid with a very wide base. However, that makes the work of master modelers such as Chuck Doan all that more impressive.
I beleive it's far more effective to preach the positive than the negative. You are doing that with the publication of the Finescale annuals. I always take the Modeler's Annual to my local model car club meetings and pass it around. While most of the info in the Modeler's Annual relates very little to the interests of those in my club, they all appreciate the level of talent and skill demonstrated by those articles. Showing what can be done with modeling, the best of the best and highlighting that and explaining how it's done to as many people as possible is the most effective way to market this ideal. If someone sees what is possible yet is not interested, well that's their decision. On the opposite side, if other types and levels of modeling are belittled by us, then we might get viewed as elitist snobs and possibly turn off someone that may have otherwise been interested. I'm sure many modelers we never know about view this website, many of whom that get lumped into the "caricature" modeling genre, and if they see us just bashing their style of modeling they may automatically just tune us out rather than staying and perusing and learning and possibly some day even be inspired to give it a shot.
Now, I'm not saying that there really is all that much real "bashing" of other modeling styles going on here but many comments made here could be construed as such by the uninformed. Remember, this is the internet, there's no telling who exactly is reading what you post in any forum.
David
Quote from: RussEven though I realize it is idealistic, I would have business lead by example, not cater to an ever lower demographic with the hope of making more money.
I totally agree with you, Russ, and this is why I felt exactly like you about the guy who wouldn't publish excellence lest it could deter readers from his magazine. I've always found it utter nonsense, and I have heard it for years and years. But as you say there is business and there is the individuals.
Quote from: DavidOn the opposite side, if other types and levels of modeling are belittled by us, then we might get viewed as elitist snobs and possibly turn off someone that may have otherwise been interested. I'm sure many modelers we never know about view this website, many of whom that get lumped into the "caricature" modeling genre, and if they see us just bashing their style of modeling they may automatically just tune us out rather than staying and perusing and learning and possibly some day even be inspired to give it a shot.
An observation I've often made. Being kind and not openly negative will often get better results, and may sometime reveal very unexpected talents.
Marc, how I understand your feeling about the attitude of some people with God and what God lovers think they have the right to love and not to love. But I'm not sure sharing our views publicly wouldn't degenerate into a really bad and probably not very rationnal argument...
Those modelers who buy "caricature kits" may not be aware that they are working in "caricature style" instead believing they are building to realistic standards. The advertising used by the companies that make these cartoons stress "realism" and "typical" they mention specific eras and locations, with no reference at all to the C-word. Model builders' discussions online are full of prototype concerns and buzzwords, realistic weathering and painting techniques, scale lumber dimensions, endless debates over nail holes and roofing materials... what good is it, if what you are after is a cartoon? Has anyone ever seen a kit praised for its cartoonish qualities? I haven't. Are people unhappy with super accurate rolling stock that has become commonplace? I think not. No, the caricature term is mostly something I've seen used to squelch advocates of higher standards of accuracy.
godda love the simple machine forum! quite a discussion. BTW I concur.... keep tearin ass! ;D
"can't stand the heat then get outta the kitchen"
Pillup ;D
To be honest, I do not mind or dislike caricature in a model or scene...I often quite enjoy it.....IF it is done really well (not only design, but also build, finish, and consitency)..... I can also appreciate rust, nails etc. done in caricature or over emphasized....AS LONG AS IT HAS IT'S BASIS IN REALITY/PLAUSIBILITY...and that is where so much of the stuff falls apart. Modeling caricature, without the basic knowledge or understanding of what you are modeling and why. Caricature is not an excuse for ignorance, laziness or lack of skill.....quite the contrary.....it is an art, and you need to understand what you are representing, and what to accentuate, what to dramatize and what to leave out, and you need an eye for detail. You need to understand the basics of 1st, 2nd and 3rd read. ....unfortunately, the vast majority of don't have a clue, and simply copy, someone's copy of a copy, of an ill informed original....when they should be researching the what/where/why/how of what the are doing/building/representing, occurs in the real world.
(BTW. all the things that need to be understood to do a successful caricature, are the same things that need to be done/understood to do a realistic model like Chucks.....the only difference is the artistic interpretation/approach.)
....heck, I don't model prototypically accurate (probably couldn't if my life depended on it)...but I do try to model "plausibly", try to "imply" reality...and have a basic understanding of what I am doing and why. Why, do I do this?.....because I want to enjoy my model building time, and I personally do not have the patience or interest to sit down and build an exact model of something....so, Frederic, in many ways and at some level, I model exactly like, and have some similar sentiments to, those that are sometimes ranted about here.....but you see; I don't care what people say about me, or about what I do, I am secure in who I am.....so I do not feel the need to be defensive when comments are not favorable, or I get criticized......I can chose to ignore such comments, or I can look at them to see what validity there is in them, and then try to improve/learn/grow....but I do not find it necessary to hide behind lame excuses of "it's only a hobby", or behind the support of other forum members, as is so commonly the case on other RR forums.
There's a an apt saying for these modelers that feel hurt by the slightest critique: "Grow a Pair!"
Marc
... And that is the reason I suggested we appoint Marc our Minister of the Arts. -- Russ
Marc,
amen,
QuoteTo be honest, I do not mind or dislike caricature in a model or scene...I often quite enjoy it.....IF it is done really well (not only design, but also build, finish, and consitency
One of the best sample of the type of modeling mentioned is the
Rymenzburger Chnollebahn from Marcel.
Jacq
I like a good caricature too, have absolutely nothing against it.
I love the scenery in Grant Wood paintings, Smurf and TinTin comics, graphic novels, Tim Burton movies, the 1/1 scale buildings in Disney parks, French impressionism and so on. I even love candy coated primitives like Grandma Moses and Michel Delacroix. These unrealistic works are appealing on many levels, from humor to nostalgia, but ultimately they are all well crafted, artistic renditions that are pleasing to the eye. And as everybody knows, art is one of those definition-defying concepts, like Jazz, that if you need an explanation, you just don't get it.
Marc nailed it. Kit designers use the "caricature" excuse as an easy way out of the research and precision work necessary to make a good scale model, and a defense against any criticism. But caricature is very difficult to pull off well. Besides the firm grasp of the real-world subject necessary for scale modeling, caricature requires a special form of artistry and imagination which few people are blessed with. Otherwise as Marc said, they are forced to copy someone's copy of a copy, increasing the distortion with every generation, losing wit, proportions and charm, repeating a cliche ad naseum. These models are primitives at best, but being knockoffs made for commercial series production, they lack the sincerity of a primitive.
So I am back to my observation, they are just eyesores, grotesque fad items. I don't see any craftsmanship or charm in them, nothing resonates with me. The John Allen elements have been bleached out long ago. The fuzed-together heaps of generic barrels, crates, toy car tires and clock gears only make them uglier. The designer's struggle to repackage and disguise the same 3 basic structures in his repertoire is pathetic. I only see mediocre work sold as something that it isn't, to people who aren't really looking at what they are getting.
Its sad that so many adults automatically categorize observations like these as competitive, then start feeling defensive and put-down. For one thing, criticism is essential to craftsmanship, its another set of eyes to find things you can improve. For another, nobody here is interested in ranking, only in promoting better quality work standards and stop the decline into gibberish that Russ mentioned. I don't think that can happen as long as people refuse to look critically at this "craftsman kit style" and start seeing it for what it is.
Not being a tremendously well educated person myself, I often find myself lost in the level of intelligence in the conversation on this forum. Does this intellect have something to do with the quality we see shown on this site (not a rhetorical question)? Marc points out that the quantity of understanding on a subject has much to do with the level of quality a modeler displays in his work and I agree. The more we know of the object we mean to model, the more we are able to replicate it accurately (given the level of modeling skills exists in us). I find researching a subject to be one of the most challenging (and enjoyable) aspects of modeling. The problem I see with the craftsman kit mentality is that there requires little or no knowledge of the events, locale, era and/or details of the subject meant to be modeled. It is all done for us with a plethora of cast metal, photo etched and laser cut materials already planned out and all that is left is for the piece to be assembled and finished. This is entirely understandable then, and acceptable to the average model railroader since they want to fill their layout in a reasonable amount of time.
This discussion has led me to say that there are some questions to be addressed that go beyond merely tossing opinions on this issue. So what is it that modelers that possess a higher degree of modeling skill can do to improve the overall level of quality we see on the average layout? And how can they promote quality in the hobby in a way that doesn't exhibit what is perceived as an arrogant demeanor?
Russ has certainly shown how with his wonderful publications but I ask these questions particularly of those that are just modelers and contributors to this form. Perhaps the answers are obvious. ???
Chester, as a guy with a high school diploma and no other formal education I have thought the same as you, that the more education the individual has the more in depth the model research seems to go. I would love to be able to this more dutifully but time constraints and a general dislike for reading anything technical leads me to look at a picture and say I like that, I want to build that. Breaking this down is on me.
Folks that have the time or the ability to build a model in Cad before ever cutting a single piece of material have it hands down over those that can't. Computer skills also tremendously upgrade the building of quality models. The fact that most have some technical training like engineering, architecture and the like go a long way towards being able to think in scale.
I tried myself to work thru a presented diorama for information and either lacked the insight or ability to change, I also mentioned in my thread that constructive criticism as such also be tempered with a "softer or smaller hammer" if memory serves.
Russ, I think one of the reasons there are not more folks on this forum is just because to the majority it is just fun, not a contest so to speak. If these folks come here first they are intimidated to ever show their things for the fear of getting bashed. You can't sugar coat generalizations like this by being blunt. I think the relationship between the membership here and your publications go hand in hand. Also not really being to able to choose which books one can buy is what left me out. I understand that I can sell them later but that is not something that interests me.
My two cents worth, Pat
I don't think there is necessarily any correlation between education and superior modeling. I think it's more an attitude. Some guys like to research, plan, design, and approach things meticulously. Others create more impulsively. I'm kind of in the middle as I suspect most people are.
What is much more important is the attitude toward excellence. Most dismiss excellence as "out of my league" and walk away muttering words like "snob" or "rivet counter". Others find it inspirational and try to apply some of what they see to their own approach. That doesn't mean copying. It means extrapolating.
Example: Until I read about Chuck Doan's approach to peeling paint I wasn't very interested in that technique. After I saw his step-by-step I decided to try to emulate it in my own way, on inkjet printed cardstock.
To be really blunt, I would say to the guy who shakes his head and walks away, "Good-bye. You may be a great guy in some respects but you are not somebody with whom I would want to talk about modeling. Your attitude is simply incompatible with mine." (That is not to say I might not really enjoy talking about music or politics or chicken recipes with that same guy.)
As for my publications, I never expected everybody to buy every book. After all, some guys simply have no interest in logging or in narrow gauge or in modeling. But the content of the books extends into all areas of the hobby: Finishes, structures, construction techniques, history, whatever. So I am surprised and very dismayed that a majority of people in our niche don't buy at least one book per year whether locally or by mail order. Why? Because, to me, I publish "Playboy for trains". And what red blooded heterosexual male does not enjoy looking at the girls in Playboy regardless of whether he could date one, whether he is married, or whether he is too old for it to matter? (Please, don't take this analogy too far, okay? It only works up to a point!)
And, Pat, the reason I can't offer just one book to guys like you is that the sale would occur after the book goes to press. From my standpoint, that makes every individual copy sale a "back issue" and would put me back into the unprofitable retail end of the business. That is what hobby stores are for. I create, I don't retail.
Russ
Thank you Russ. All that having been said, I have a great chicken cordon bleu recipe.
I've been to your blog; I think you have far more than chicken to offer! -- Russ
Quote from: finescalerr on April 25, 2010, 02:56:11 PM
Because, to me, I publish "Playboy for trains". And what red blooded heterosexual male does not enjoy looking at the girls in Playboy regardless of whether he could date one, whether he is married, or whether he is too old for it to matter? (Please, don't take this analogy too far, okay? It only works up to a point!
Russ
The issue is, of course, dependent on what point you're working up to... ;)
Paul ---> heading back to the corner
The refreshing no-bullshit attitude is why I joined this forum, even though I've only posted a few times.
I'm presently working on some waterfront stuff myself. It started with one of Bar Mills' less goofy structures. It was a gift, I never would've bought it. But since it was given to me I'm kind of on the hook to complete it-- the things we do for love! I've been able to un-fuck the thing into a fairly realistic model of a marine supply/chandler business, freelanced, yes, but based on lots of research of historical waterfront scenes.
The next issue was obtaining the requisite region- and era-appropriate vessels. There pretty much aren't any acceptable ones available. There's no way I'm going to drop a hundred bucks on a resin Norwegian prawn trawler and simply plopping it down next to the dock and claim I have a representation of truth. And trying to modify it to look like something one would see on a southern waterfront a hundred years ago would be an exercise in futility. So now that I've researched the characteristic waterfront architecture of the southeast, I've been led into lots of research regarding the characteristic watercraft of the southeast, their use, and their construction so I can build a fleet of the things. So now I'm scratchbuilding boats, which I never saw coming . . . I'm a train guy, damn it!
From my experimentation with psychotropic chemicals I knew in an academic sense that "like, everything is totally connected with everything else, man." But it took modeling to really make me realize this interconnectedness in a concrete fashion. ;D
Sure, it's just a hobby, and hobbies are supposed to be fun. But for me, part of the fun is doing it right.
Quote from: chester on April 25, 2010, 07:21:46 AM
...So what is it that modelers that possess a higher degree of modeling skill can do to improve the overall level of quality we see on the average layout?
For some reason I only just now got around to reading this particular thread, and I'd like to take a shot at addressing this particular question.
I think the most important thing that any modeler can do to improve the quality of his/her modeling, is getting to know the prototype (whether it be a loco, a structure, scenery, etc.) I don't mean an in-depth, technical study (although that can, at times, be very helpful). I mean getting to know it visually, through study of the real thing either in person (when possible) or by photos -- preferably both.
To do this, one must often "unlearn" what they think they know. For instance, if you asked someone to make a model of their house from memory, and they'll probably get the basic layout more or less right. But unless they go outside and really look at it carefully from all angles, and examine all the little details and textural variations _with an eye towards modeling them_, they probably won't get those things right, even though they may think they know these things.
Another example: We all _think_ we know what an old wooden fence looks like, and most people can turn out a fair model of one. But to make an excellent model, you have to study the real thing (or photos of the real thing), drinking in all the little details.
Gin Sot: A trawler is absent from the dock at least as often as it is moored there. But you often find a couple of row boats tied to a piling. If you are unenthusiastic about modeling big boats, knock out one or two dinghies. They will make the point. Unless that little essay was your way of telling us you now are into modeling fishing boats.... -- Russ
Quote from: finescalerr on April 25, 2010, 02:56:11 PM
I don't think there is necessarily any correlation between education and superior modeling. I think it's more an attitude. Some guys like to research, plan, design, and approach things meticulously. Others create more impulsively. I'm kind of in the middle as I suspect most people are.
What is much more important is the attitude toward excellence. Most dismiss excellence as "out of my league" and walk away muttering words like "snob" or "rivet counter". Others find it inspirational and try to apply some of what they see to their own approach. That doesn't mean copying. It means extrapolating.
Hi Russ
It is all attitude but I wonder if that leads back to intellect. After all people on here all pushing themselves, trying new stuff, looking to understand what they are modelling. Thus they have a natural bias to ask questions, take another point of view and learn.
I used to be an illustrator in the licenced character field. There is nothing special in being able to draw, Everyone does it. Try and describe your signature in terms of graphic shapes and you will soon realise that its a very complex object you are creating. Why people cant draw 'things' is they dont know how to look at it. They see a chair and the brain goes 'chair - next' they dont look at it. They dont see what it is - a lot of people couldnt even tell you what colour it was!
I think its this ability to see that makes all the difference. Its the reason why people do not accept a copy of a model. (or the reason why they shouldn't)
Over in the UK model railway world we have the rivet counter label but also the dreaded elitist tag too. A lot of UK modellers are almost embarrassed to say 'i built this and its damn good' for fear of being branded elitist.
Anyway - back to the original post - great scene!
Cheers
Jim
QuoteGin Sot: A trawler is absent from the dock at least as often as it is moored there. But you often find a couple of row boats tied to a piling. If you are unenthusiastic about modeling big boats, knock out one or two dinghies. They will make the point. Unless that little essay was your way of telling us you now are into modeling fishing boats.... -- Russ
Oh, I'm terribly enthusiastic about modeling boats. That's the problem-- not enough hours to model everything!
Since you mention it, I have knocked out a nice little flotilla of styrene dinghies to prepare myself for the oyster sloop I'm currently working on, which will prepare me for the schooners and steamers that are a little further out on the construction horizon . . . .
I don't think I've offered a "good job!" to the OP. That's a really nice clean diorama, definitely not suffering from Sellios Disease. I particularly like the lettering.