On the Prototype forum there is a thread by jjryan, “Pics of Downtown City Layouts.” Someone offered this site as an example of what can be done, http://www.trevinocircle.com/FSM.asp . I am blown-away by the photos of George’s layout, as I’m sure most everyone is. I am light years behind him not only in skill but also in the shear determination to model to that level of detail.
But I do have this to say; it’s not a criticism, but an observation. Everything seems to be not just weathered, but heavily weathered; everything seems to be old and dull. I know George is going for a look and a feel-a 30’s city in the depression and a railroad struggling to make ends meet. But in any given time or era there would be a certain number of new things; new buildings; buildings newly painted; new billboards; signs on new businesses that have recently opened; automobiles newly washed; people with new colorful clothing.
I haven’t seen Georges’ layout in person, so maybe the photos don’t show us some of the things that seem to be missing. And maybe I’m speaking out of turn by saying somethings missing, after all it’s his railroad. Does anyone else have any comments about this approach to modelling verses the, weather nothing and everything is new and shiny approach?
I offered that link as an example of city modeling. In many respects it’s a well modeled city in that it represents the close4ness and grime of a city. You’re right in that it’s a bit over weathered and in some ways it almost a caracature instead of a true-to-life model.
I understand that he’s now in the process of changing some of the scenery to get a more “real” feel to it and he’s removing or repositioning some of the people so it doesn’t look so crowded.
You have a good eye though for picking up on that so quickly. I was so blown away be the details when I first saw those pics, that I didn’t pick up on that for a while.
George models in what is loosely termed the “caricature-style” of modeling, where weathering and a state of general dilapidation are over emphasized to convey a particular feeling or effect. John Allen was one of the first to show off this modeling style 50 years ago but his approach was often more tongue-on-cheek than some of its later proponents. But you’re right, it does not, and is not actually meant to, depict any reality. No major New England city in the 1930’s was any where near as universally rundown and destitute looking as Franklin.
In short, it’s just a particular, long established, modeling style and some of us favor it…and some don’t.
The weathering effects and other details may be slightly overdone, but certainly not over the top. His layout is set in the depths of the Great Depression so one would expect that there wasn’t a lot of new development and existing structures might not be kept as well maintained as in more prosperous times. His style is more artistic than totally realistic. It is the difference between a painting and a photograph. The photograph is going to be more realistic but which is the most visually appealing. To me, it doesn’t hurt to enhance our models a little. After all, the real world is often very bland so if we can create visual interest by kicking it up a notch (sorry Emeril), I see nothing wrong with that.
Love how people comment on Georges time frame but if you were there it was not far from the truth and remember you are near the tracks and steam engines are dirty belching beasts, not clean, thats one reason I love steam but my problem is I spend so much time building craftsman kits that I hate to dirty them up to make them more real.
No one can deny that George is a superb craftsman; his layout and business are testaments to that.
BUT…I don’t necessarily like his artistic vision. It’s a definite caricature of reality, and I, as a historian, don’t like how he’s interpreted things. Whatever George is modeling, it’s definitely NOT the Great Depression. Frankly that level of grime was more prevalent in either the 1890s and the late 1960s than during the GD.
But so long as people realize that they’re looking at a freelanced road, and not a window to history, I suppose I’m fine with that. Problem is that most people DON’T do that. Just like with movies, they’ll see the FS&M and think that’s the way things really were.
Several months ago I was offered a personal trip with my son to see his layout. His layout is different then the pictures. It seems like everything falls into place when you see it in person. It is by no means over weathered. Apart from that he spent time with my son personally while I looked over the layout. George knew my son has Leukemia and offered a full day of MRRing during his busy schedule. It was me, my son and him and his wife. He even let him run some trains which he NEVER does. He is really a down to earth great person and I will always be thankfull to him for it.
Apparently, my eyes are going bad because I don’t see that level of grime in pictures I have seen of the F&SM. Nothing I’ve seen on his layout looks over-the-top to me. It may be accurate to say some of his scenes are overly detailed to the point of being cluttered but I don’t buy descriptions of his layout as being a caricature or cartoonish. To me, a caricature is something that is grossly distorted. That is certainly not an accurate description of George Selios’ work. I think most people when they look at his scenes would say they look fairly realistic. Unless someone points out to you that the scenes are sometimes overly detailed, that wouldn’t occur to most people.
to weather or not to weather (and how much weathering) is a personal preference , and as such there is no correct answer except what you choose for your own modelling
i’m sure George would be first to admit his layout does not depict any actual time or place , or even that it is a realistic representation of any time or place .
personally i like to see something like George’s layout or Bob Grech’s (look around this forum for many photos of his layout) that has character . that’s one of the reasons i often buy "narrow guage and short line gazette’ even though i have no intention of modelling narrow guage , the layouts in there have that look , like everything is just about to fall apart .
I share these sentiments about George’s work. Undeniably artistic, superbly rendered, but not something that I would rave about or have represented in my own work, not even photographs of the same. It is a matter of taste, like everything else in life. I don’t happen to share his interest in this genre.
After doing a in depth study of the roaring 20s and the “New Deal” 30s I can assure you the depression varied from area to area.Some suffer while others continued to work.Ford,Chevy,Buick,Olds and other car manufacturers continue to build cars for those that could afford to buy them.The Empire State building was finish in 1931.The Morgans,Vanderbilts and other multimillionaires kept their millions.Mobsters flourish.Railroads was still hauling freight and passengers,some banks failed while others continue business as usual.
The “Great Depression” wasn’t great but,wasn’t exactly doom and gloom for everybody either.
It’s not just the clutter, it’s the fact that EVERYTHING is weathered, and usually heavily. NOTHING in any of his scenes is shiny and new. People DID still wash their cars during the Depression, and white paint was REALLY cheap (that’s why there are so many white structures today: it became a habit to paint everything white during the 1930s, since the paint was cheap, easy to find, and looked “fresh”. It spelled the end of fancily painted houses well into the 1980s). And have you niticed that EVERY one of his roofs is patched and falling apart?
Moreover, he doesn’t seem to have a good grasp of architecture. Most of his masonry buildings would have collapsed under their own weight while being built (WAY too tall), and many of his wooden structures have rooftop additions which would be impossible to access. I love antique houses too much to be able to let these “little” things slide.
But as I said, he IS a superb craftsman, and works FAST. I do envy him that.
When we progress beyond the 4X8 level we’ve got 2 directions to go…impresionist or realist. As mentioned above, John Allen seems to have been the founder of the impresionist school of which George Sellios and Malcolm Furlow are prime desciples. In the realist school we have the NEB&W and the La Mesa club in San Diego with their model of the SP/ATSF Tehachapi line. All require great skill and effort and which one you prefer is a matter of taste (I favor the realist school) and as such is not subject to “right or wrong” labels