Model Railway Forum banner
1 - 20 of 41 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,202 Posts
Hi Dave,

Great find/buy sure you will have plenty of pleasure with it
a good compromise and alternative to building another layout.

Whatever others have said about your layouts i have always followed them in their builds and enjoyed seeing them develop
 

·
Totally Crazy.......
Joined
·
684 Posts
Hiya Dave,

I really like your layouts, i dont think they are c**p at all. Plus no one can say if it is or not any way cause its your work not theirs........ Please keep making your lovely small layouts... I love reading your threads......

Loads of support

Nikki
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
284 Posts
Seeing as you insist on quoting me again, i'm going to put the full passage of text you are referring to here....

QUOTE Hi
My honest opinion is this. As it is, it leaves me uninterested, but not enough not to comment.
I like small layouts and I like the process of building them and seeing pics of them..but only when they are highly detailed and with a high level of finish/skill or modelling ability.

I've seen another 3 of your layouts and again being honest they leave me cold. I know they have been well received by shows and the modelling press, in the case of your pier layout, but to me they fall short.

For this layout to work I would hope to see scenic detailing that can surpass previous work. For me the pier layout had a few flaws, I didn't like the use of hornby piers, they were spaced too far apart, had no interconnecting braces and were not convincing as gnarly old sea pier supports.

The tram layout's scenics were too simple, they did not convince me they were real. it felt too clinical and tidy for the real world.

The pier layout, tram terminus and the US shed layout lacked any operational interest, now I know that may not be the point and you certainly had a very commendable reason for the shed scene. However, as someone who, as well as being a modeller, goes to exhibitions as a DWK [dad with kids] your 3 previous layouts would have been walked past, i want to see trains moving.

Another point would be weathering, the US shed scene had none, the colours were garish and unrealistic. It felt like a collection of items glued to a piece of wood. Please I hope I am not offending you in terms of this being part of your recuperation, as i said I admire that, but in terms of this being a public model displayed at a show, I cannot understand how a little painting would not be possible as part of the healing process for your arm and thus making the model more realistic.

Finally, the positives so far with this plan.. LOL for me it's points!! I am pleased to see that you have a greater operational potential, but as I have said already, when it is limited, for me it needs to be backed up by some proficient modelling, at this size that means scratch building, weathering, realistic scenics and some sort of interesting scene to capture the mind/eye/heart

I hope you can appreciate my comments are from a constructive position and not a critical angle, I hope to see you be able to develope a potentially interesting and original idea into a high quality small layout

you are clearly upset by certain words I used and for that I am sorry, as it seems to have distracted you from some simple observations and you are now misleading people as to what was said. And they are just my observations. I'm nothing special or anything of the sort, but if you post on forums what you are doing you can only expect a certain amount of feedback. I took time to comment; not that I thought your layouts were crap, [your word] but that there were certain things that stopped them from being of the highest quality. This was a post completely unrelated to any other forum or comment you may have recieved about your inglenook plan and I feel you have jumped on my post as some sort of conspiracy to belittle you. I owned my feelings about you layouts as being my reaction to them. I did not project that onto your work as being crap or rubbish. Modelling is subjective and my experience was merely proffered so as that you might think,;might think, hmm, thats a fair point, maybe I can do better.

You seem to have a chip on your shoulder, and unfortunately I was wrong to think a few suggestions and personal observations about your layouts would be helpful to you.

Michael
 

·
garage hobbit!!!
Joined
·
1,715 Posts
A lovely little model Dave, good buy, cant wait to see how the inglenook turns out, great as usual, keep up the good work


Brian
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,499 Posts
Looks like a nice layout to me, A bit limited on the operational side but you could make a small fiddle yard for stabling more loco's to keep the operation side a bit more colourful with different loco's coming in to refuel etc!

Nice one mate and happy playing

Kind regards

Paul
 

·
Chief mouser
Joined
·
11,775 Posts
QUOTE (Doug @ 24 Mar 2009, 08:27) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>What is the difference between a layout and a diorama


As far as I am concerned a diorama is a static display designed to enhance a model, I believe this started with military modelling. Thus by definition a layout is a fully operational model.

Regards
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,499 Posts
QUOTE (BRITHO @ 24 Mar 2009, 12:57) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>As far as I am concerned a diorama is a static display designed to enhance a model, I believe this started with military modelling.

Britho, You are so right my freind I also do military modelling and yes a diorama is for static models. They are used to place a tank, aircraft or whatever into a scene that they would have possibly been in when they were being used in the real world. I have a couple of diorama's one with a T-34/85 in and one with an Israeli Sherman with some troops walking behind.

Kind regards

Paul
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,397 Posts
QUOTE (BRITHO @ 24 Mar 2009, 22:57) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>As far as I am concerned a diorama is a static display designed to enhance a model, I believe this started with military modelling. Thus by definition a layout is a fully operational model.

Regards
Agreed, however some "layouts" are so small and functionally restricted as to be essentially dioramas.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,611 Posts
QUOTE (neil_s_wood @ 25 Mar 2009, 11:01) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Agreed, however some "layouts" are so small and functionally restricted as to be essentially dioramas.

and some big layouts have so little happening on hem they may as well be dioramas!

john
 

·
Chief mouser
Joined
·
11,775 Posts
QUOTE (john woodall @ 25 Mar 2009, 01:41) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>and some big layouts have so little happening on hem they may as well be dioramas!

And they are often the ones with a small army of "operators"

Regards
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,611 Posts
I have a lot of respect for the modelling skills of military modellers, and they do make some great diorama's but have always wondered why they dont make the turrets turn, or when they have tanks on trucks none of the truck lights work?

John
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
771 Posts
QUOTE Posted 24 Mar 2009, 12:34
it will be interesting to see how you put your own mark on it.

Peter

Not sure which way to go yet, either spend more on British OO locos (not really my scene) or judging by the eBay photos, I may Americanise it by changing a few signs and removing the fuel point roof - depends upon when I receive the model.

Don't hold your breath, I am busy and my diary to the end of July includes 4 exhibitions (3 with WPT, 1 with Fuel Pad); Working throughout the Easter weekend on the Blackfriars Station and Bridge Project (My main job); Stewarding at the Stowmarket Railway Club exhibition; Auditing two of my clients; Having a short break in Scotland; and helping my mate Barbara (Piermistress) find a job when she returns from her 7 weeks in Tasmania.

Dave
 
1 - 20 of 41 Posts
Top