|
|
 Posted - October 19 2011 : 7:31:05 PM
|
Well, Its still a good joke! If I had skills that good!
|
Country:  USA ~
Posts: 1102 ~
Member Since: July 28 2011 ~
Last Visit: July 01 2015
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
 Posted - November 24 2022 : 07:28:04 AM
|
Nice outdoor photos of your model train equipment.
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 5878 ~
Member Since: February 12 2014 ~
Last Visit: April 25 2024
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - November 24 2022 : 9:22:08 PM
|
this is abit TOO much I admit
still haven't done the roads yet 
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 14689 ~
Member Since: February 23 2009 ~
Last Visit: April 24 2024
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - November 25 2022 : 12:44:24 PM
|
It seems to me the overall object is to have fun. To that end, it is more important that your layout run well than anything else. Nothing else matters if your trains derail every time you try to run them.
After that, I think there has to be a balance. I know many rivet counters who don;t understand that all that detail doesn't mean a thing if it doesn't look right. A good example is a friend of mine who had this freight station built to exact scale. The problem is, it was so huge it took up more space than the town it was supposed to serve. I seriously have built entire layouts in less space than this thing took up. And it looked out of place. You could have built a small steel mill in that space and it would have looked right.
The other extreme is the guy who sets up his train set on the floor, throws down a few buildings and calls it a layout. It is not. A layout denotes some sort of permanency to it, and some effort in getting some sort of plausable scene down.
I think a good balance between the whimsical and the accurate would be the right balance to strike. You can't lose sight of the forest for the trees, but there also has to be a forest to get lost in......
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 483 ~
Member Since: December 22 2013 ~
Last Visit: April 25 2024
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - November 25 2022 : 3:01:05 PM
|
My general level of detail and plausibility is to try to create a scene that's evocative to me. I'm not looking for a particular prototype nor counting seconds for the imaginary brakeman to unlock the imaginary switch lock, but I'm also not pulling twin-stack container trains with Thomas the Tank Engine. That's my balance and it works for me.
That does not mean I can't enjoy the layout of the person accurately modeling the Pratt Falls Division of the Long and Tedious Railroad on October 16, 1967. (Engine 77 was wrecked the day before, so don't put it on the layout.)
I can also enjoy the layout of the guy pulling a hot intermodal with Thomas.
It seems that the real controversy, here, is not whether to count rivets. The problem comes in when anyone with any approach treats everyone else as if his approach is the only one. Anyone can do that from the most fanatical rivet counter to the most eclectic freelancer.
Another problem arises if you want to construe anyone advocating his approach as condemning all others. If a rivet counter enjoys what he does and tells you why it's fun for him, that doesn't mean he's closing all other doors to you.
Carpe Manana!
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 2353 ~
Member Since: September 17 2013 ~
Last Visit: April 25 2024
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - November 26 2022 : 9:37:59 PM
|
yes do think this Corgi old time loco & passenger car looks silly without a tender hehe
heck even the Majorette train with passenger cars had no tender either 
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 14689 ~
Member Since: February 23 2009 ~
Last Visit: April 24 2024
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
Home
Forums
Events Calendar
Forum Admins & Mods
Register
