Not for the first time I've been doing a lot of thinking about layout design.
If I was to wind the clock back a couple of years and ask myself what is different about my approach these days I don't have any doubt that the answer is that I'm now "driven by the prototype."
Now bear in mind that two years ago I thought I was as well, so what has really changed is my interpretation of what that means.
Some of it is that details I once thought were unimportant now matter to me. I never thought that I would spend my time at a model railway show looking at point rodding, but I do.
Moe importantly though is how this makes me think about how to put a model railway together. My mantra is becoming "Prototype down, trackbed up"
I suppose I need to articulate this a little more, though to be honest I'm struggling to do so.
I think we often fall into the trap, I certainly did with Apa, of beginning with the track plan, not the overall track bed within the railway boundaries. Yet so much of the atmosphere of railway is set within that extended area. To get that right it has to be thought about at the very beginning because it is very hard to retrofit features within that space, or perhaps more importantly, to increase that space if you haven't allowed for those features. Anyone who has tried laying point rodding alongside a platform when you've already ballasted the track will know what I mean. Getting the track bed right provides the backbone on which the rest of the layout is built.
I was looking at a layout the other day and thinking that had the builder thought through the infrastructure needed to operate the full size version it would have fundamentally where he'd positioned lineside features and acted as a natural brake on his tendency to cram in too much into too small a space. That is another tendency we all have I suspect, to want to cram in that little bit extra, and it starts at the design stage.
That's the trackbed up part of the equation. The prototype down part is perhaps harder to explain. For me I think it has strong links with photography, because I know what I want to to create in a model is a scene that can be photographed to resemble the real world. That doesn't happen by lucky chance...except perhaps it did int he case of Apa. What I think we do too often is build up layers of scenery in the hope that the final effect will be realistic, rather than deconstructing a scene and thinking about how to recreate it.
Moving from an OO gauge micro-layout to an EM gauge compromise, via a rather major diversion into both 7 1/4" gauge and minimal space OO9
Labels
Layout Design
Blodwell
Buildings
The Art of Compromise
Photography
Llanrhaiadr Mochnant
Scenery
Signal Box
Baseboards
Goods Yard
Track
45XX
Apa Box
EM
Lcut Creative
Travel
Backscene
Concepts
Railway Exhibitions
TVR
USA
Upwold
14XX
Anyrail
Bridge
Cuba
Cycling
Fencing
Lorry
Narrow Gauge
Point rodding
Points
Templot
Turnouts
West Maryland
Books
C+L
Fiddleyard
GWR
Hales
OO9
Phil Parker
Rolling Stock
Signals
State of the hobby
Tillig
Warley
Weighbridge
trams
2012
AC Railbus
Albion Yard
Allt-y-Graban Rd
Apa Valley
Balloch Pier
Bas
Bath Green Park
Brickwork
Bridgnorth
Bryn-y-Felin
CSX
Charmouth
Clarendon
Class 25
Cliff Railway
Coldrennick Road
Corris
Crich
DCC
Disused Railways
Dukedog
EMGS
Edwin Smith
Electrics
Emett
France
Gloucestershire & Warwickshire
HO
Hobbies
Hope under Dinmore
Hospital Gates
Iain Rice
Iliffe Stokes
Inspiration
Ireland
Kings Lynn
La Baraque
Lasercut
Leamington & Warwick
Locos
MSTS
Mainly Trains
Military Modeling
Mishaps
N guage
NEC
OOn3
Percy
Pier Railway
Porth y Waen
Preserved Railways
RTR
SMP
Seend
Sentinel
Sketchup
St Minions
Stockholm
TGV
TRAX
Tansey Bank
Techniques
Technology
Tim Horn
Trade
Trees
Ultrascale
Veldhoveh 1935
Watertank
Williamsport
diorama
manning wardle
painting
procrastination
pug
ships
simulators
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I always think that the more you know, you realise the less you know...and the hobby is so deep and limitless once you get into serious observation of the prototype. I am like you, I never thought about point rodding...now I delight in spotting it in photographs and noting the different types of proprietary equipment. Far from being limiting, as some people would say, it is liberating, because you know how it would be done on the prototype and that eliminates another doubt...as well as adding a level of authenticity, even if it is only for those who know what they are looking at!
ReplyDeleteIt is a good point that in some ways it is liberating. It also provides some structure to work around that I'm sure contributes to a more harmonious whole without needing to descend to rivet counting. The downside is being prepared to models something knowing the day it is finished an elusive photo will turn up to prove your interpretation wrong. Or worse still you'll notice something in an existing photo that is glaringly obvious once you see it.
DeleteIain makes a very good point, it's all part of the learning curve and whilst some of us are content to open boxes, have masses of track with several trains running at the same time, others delight in studying the prototype, settling for something simpler and well detailed but where do you stop ?
ReplyDeleteFor me, following what Iain Rice describes as a 'middle ground' approach works well, rather than descending into the world of rivet counting I stop a little short with some detail only being suggested rather than modelled in full, imagination filling in the gaps. If I get the interpretation wrong I put things right as more information comes to light and constantly try to improve my standards as I go along.
Geoff, the elusive middle ground lies somewhere between "That'll do, nobody else will notice" and "I'll just try one more thing" It seems to move every time I look to put down roots there. The two words I keep coming back to at the moment, across the range of all my interests, are mindfulness and authenticity. It is so,so easy to inadvertently end up copying another model.
Delete