Diorama orientation/layout

[DaKra]

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   
   

[Belg]

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

[TRAINS1941]

Excellent thread.  Lot's of good information.

Jerry

[Ray Dunakin]

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.

[marc_reusser]

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

[marc_reusser]

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

[marc_reusser]

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

[marc_reusser]

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. :






MR

[marc_reusser]

Oh...and maybe some old pilings in the water......

[jacq01]

   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
 

[marc_reusser]

Isn'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).

seeing 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.   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

[finescalerr]

Pat, I shot that photo of Revelia's diorama in Denver. -- Russ

[TRAINS1941]

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

[MrBrownstone]

This has been a very interesting read.... 

Mike

[RoughboyModelworks]

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