I recently added a 30" x 24" Masonite backdrop along side an existing 48" x 24" Masonite backdrop.
On the existing backdrop, I built the front of four buildings out of Walthers Modulars across the street from my downtown passenger station to simulate Daerborn Station in Chicago.
In front of the new backdrop, I am going to place the Bachmann City Series Ambassador Hotel.
I want to place two more building fronts made out of Walthers Modulars and then add some Instant Horizons paper buildings for the appearance of depth, just like I did on the existing back drop.
My concern, however, is that the modular building fronts not dwarf the Ambassador Hotel.
I made cardboard mock ups in HO scale as seen in the photo below, but the modulars seem to dwarf the hotel. So, I have thought about using the N scale modulars to make them seem more distant in order to showcase the hotel.
I’d do something a bit counter-intuitive - bring the background closer to the hotel. Add side walls to the buildings directly behind the hotel, or possibly add one side wall and mount them against the walls on an angle. This will bring the background structures more into the foreground scene, and join the whole thing together. The Hotel will look like it’s an older structure that the rest of the city has grown up around.
Rich I agree with Mr. B. Adding side walls, about an inch thick Gives that 3-D look. Also raise the paper cutouts higher than the fore ground bldg.'s sort of what I did below., and moving the hotel closer to the backdrop will also help
Yeah, when I put those original four modular buildings together, I thought about adding side walls, but space was at a premium. I agree that the side walls would add depth.
What about the notion of using N scale instead of HO scale for those two modular buildings behind the hotel? Good idea? Bad idea?
The Hotel and layout are looking real good. IMHO inserting N scale buildings behind the hotel will only give you small buildings and not the depth you are seeking. In most cases where I have observed the forced perspective working well the smaller structures were placed on some type of hill that gave the backdrop the needed elevation for the eye to believe that the small structure was indeed in the distance.
I think Ollevon and Mr B are on the money with their suggestion to get a bit more structure in front of the backdrop. Ollevon’s backdrop is beautifully done. Note how much visual interest he has packed into the scene and that his structures rise up as the they go away from the viewer.
Yes Rich, Those are the Walters Instant Horizons. I cut the sky off of them, and also cut some of the buildings apart to position them one in front of another to make different arrangements. I also glued the cutouts to black foam board then mounted them to the wall.
The dark gray building on the lower right is not a DPM kit. The DPM kit is the light gray building on the lower left that is the 4 story bldg. The dark gray 5 story building on the lower right is still available from Scale Structures LTD. It is the Victoria Falls Hotel, Kit # 1505. Kit # 1705 is the Victoria Falls Hotel, false front. which is still available as well. These are real nice kits and easy to build. Most of their Kits are cast resin kits. Log on to; ho scale structures ltd, and you should find them.
What exactly do you mean by the modulars dwarfing the hotel? 'Cuz my obvious suggestion would be to make the modulars smaller.[:)]
I agree with the comments that suggest adding side walls to the modulars. Also, if the buildings are lined up along a street or an alley, we need to see that intead of grass. If the buildings back up to grass and are not constrained by some right-of-way, then altering the depth of the side walls (AND roofs) will make the scene look more real.
The big issue is the difference in the angle we are viewing the hotel in the foreground compared with the viewing angle represented by the modulars and the backrop buildings.
The photo looks like the viewer will be looking down on the scene. If we can see the roof of the hotel, we should also see the roofs of the other buildings (of similar or shorter height). Also, importantly, we should see horizon carry “beyond” the backdrop, i.e: up the backdrop.
You know that Lake Michigan is a flat body of water. But viewed from a Chicago skyscraper, the lake looks like a wall of water from the beach to the horizon, if you think of it as a 2 dimensional backdrop. The miles of horizontal lake you see actually looks vertical if it were only 2 dimensional. like your backdrop, because you are looking down at the lake. You would actually have to paint a wall of water up the backdrop in order to represent the viewing angle you are suggesting in the photo, right?
Since we cannot see the roof tops of the buidlings in the backdrop, it suggests that they are farther away. Therefore, the bottom of their foundations should be above the benchwork.
I would lean towards putting smaller flats by the backdrop, instead of the very tall ones you have there. That way you’d be able to see the buildings on the backdrop. It wouldn’t be that unusual to have lower buildings like warehouses, a railroad commissary building, Railway Express Agency building, or US Post Office by the tracks. Make these say 3-5 stories high and I think they will blend with the “downtown” buildings on the backdrop better.
I’d also move the large building (hotel?) back towards the backdrop, and maybe turn it so the front faced the aisle. It woudn’t be that common to see a hotel built with a double track mainline only a few feet from the building.
Doughless, you reply is extremely thoughtful and helpful. It really gets me to thinking about what I have done and what I need to do.
My reference to the modulars dwarfing the hotel is a concern over the hotel looking very small and isolated just sitting there all alone with big flat buildings behind it.
I will try to elaborate on my thought process in a subsequent reply.
Thanks again though for your reply. I appreciate it.
This whole thread has produced some interesting and informative responses.
Now, my head is spinning over what to do.
I started out a few years back with the 48" wide Masonite backdrop, and I was pleased and satisfied with that. Being no artist, what I did was “good enough” for me.
Then, this past winter, I expanded that end of the layout and, as a result, I needed another 30" wide Masonite backdrop to match what was already up.
I opted for the Ambassador Hotel because it was reminiscent of the Hilton Hotel in Chicago. But the Hilton Hotel was not in that location on the prototype nor were those curved tracks. So, my argument was a form of “selective compression” to justify the scene. LOL
Now, I wonder if I should scrap the whole scene and go in another direction.
The points made on this thread about the lack of side walls on those modulars and the absence of roof lines make good sense. When I built those original four modular buildings, I was trying to replicate the prototype look across from Dearborn Station, and I tried to do it as a bac
I would avoid having N scale buildings as the only background because it would convey the idea of a pretty significant distance between the foreground and the background with nothing in between. The wonderful photo of Dearborn suggests a couple of ideas. First a layered set of background structures, not just one. Second, a decreasing notion of detail – the farthest buildings just barely seem to have windows just vague darkenings in regular patterns. At the farthest reaches of the background you just see small bits of structures peeking out between others. This can be simulated with lightened colors even though as you can see some of the distant buildings are very likely quite dark when you are near them. But you aren’t near them. And third look closely and notice that there are really very few buildings in this photo where you see the entire building.
In other words smaller scale alone won’t convey perspective if the detail is just as sharp as the foreground. Smaller scale needs to go hand in hand with more generalized detail – which in turn can be conveyed with a toned down paint scheme that makes the buildings progressivelky more bland.
One local modeler in the Milwaukee area famed for his backdrops uses stiff strathmore board in a multi layered effect almost like a contour map, perhaps 3 to 6 layers. The board is not thick but it is just thick enough that it conveys a 3D sense of distance and perspective, and lightened colors and deceased detail for what is farthest away conveys a most convincing sense of distance. Following that logic you could have layers of 1/8" scale to something closer to TT (1:120) and finally N or even smaller than N.
I guess it is worth pointing out that what looks marvelous to the eye often does not photograph anywhere near as well. That is why stage sets in a professionally produced play or opera look incredible to the audience, but when you see a photograph
What I’m thinking is something like this picture of an Amtrak engine terminal in Chicago. You can see how the “horizon” has a series of low buildings, with the skyscrapers of the city behind them.
BTW I did recognize the buildings, you did a good job on the flats. It just may be a little hard to get the 3-D buildings, flats, and backdrop all organized to get everything “just right”.
Have you thought about using your photo as the backdrop? Take it to a printer and have it made up to the size you need. I’m not sure how expensive that woud be, but there would be no doubt in anyone’s mind what city you’re trying to represent. If you needed “more sky”, you could paint your backdrop sky blue, then cut the sky out of your photograph and just adhere the buildings to your backdrop. You could stil place some low relief buildings in front of the back drop to gradually go from 3D to 2D.
I agree with Scott in that this photo would make a great backdrop. You would hide the tracks with your modular buildings (BTW- the tracks go “up” the photo due to the high position of the camera, and you can see more of the roofs of the cars as they get closer, and the roof and floor of the platform on the right)
Cram your modulars together so there is no suggestion of streets in between them. Make some of them low-rise modulars so those buildings in the backdrop show through and make sure the tracks are hidden (or cut out like another has suggested).
Either use the hotel or not.
I’m not sure you have enough room to do all that you want by just using that corner of your layout. You could replace the hotel with a smaller building. I think a filling station would look great next to the tracks where the hotel is. Maybe put a small storage building in between the gas station and the modulars to hide where the modulars would meet the benchwork.
