Back in the prewar and postwar period, almost all catalogs were illustrated, and they were good illustrations, with good artists. Now, catalogs have photos. I myself aint a big “detail” person on what i’m buying. I think Lionel should go back to illustrations, more of a nostalgia issue. I know many people would disagree with me, but illustrated catalogs just, have something about them that I like. What are yall’s thoughts?
Grayson
To be honest I like the illustrations more than I do the photos (although I don’t dislike these either). Where the photos are nice, the illustrations are nostalgic and neat looking. It be awesome to see all the new stuff in illustrations.
sorry, but I’m a photo guy. When I shell out that much cash I want to see exactly what I’m getting, which is normally why I don’t buy from websites who only show an illustration of the train they’re selling. Plus, the photo is usually what sells me on a particular purchase and its the details that are available in a photo that help distinguish one manufacturer over another.
PHOTOS!
I’m a photographer and I also want to see the product I’m getting for my $500.
If the photos are of the product, fine. But when they take a photo of a real engine and doctor the background you have no idea of what the final product will look like. See the 2007, vol. 1 Lionel catalogue pages for the UP heritage desiels. These are doctored photos of real engines.
Hi guys
I rather liked the old 1960’s Hornby catalogues ( those are the ones I am familiar with)
They had a cuneo (Spelling) painting on the cover and a combination of illustrations and product photo’s so you could see what you where buying
regards John
The “pictures” in the catalogs could be anything from illustrations to photo’s to retouched photo’s to 3d CAD renderings. Some of the vendors routinely used other scale models for catalog work and would put in small print * disclaimers indicating the images were not of the O scale model. It used to be easier to detect this as they were often photographed on non O track. With Photoshop you can take the HO scaled engine, scale it up and drop it on a piece of 3 rail track. I’d just like them to say what it was we are looking at in a type size that doesn’t reuqire 5X jewlers loop to read.
Agreed, I didn’t like that at all, this in no way lets you see what the model looks like, and for $400 each dollars I honestly expect more than this to convince me to purchase. tisk, tisk, tisk [:(!]
Catalogs in the late 90’s were illustrated drawings, very similiar to the catalogs of the 50’s. I liked them. They gave you a little more to dream about. And some interesting perspectives. I remember the N&W J and Commodore Vanderbilt illustrations were worms eye view, very cool.
[2c] I really don’t mind, in fact I enjoy seeing, the artist’s rendition in the catalogs when I’m just looking and dreaming about my next purchase. But, when it comes to actually spending $, I would prefer to see the real thing. (Especially if it is a high-end product) Thanks for asking.
I whole heartedly agree.
This discussion has been going on for years and years. The “photo” fans are greater in numbers than the “illustration” fans.
Photos may (or may not!) accurately depict the train item, but they cannot convey the more ephemeral essence of them. Illustrations, such as those used in the great catalogs of the 1950’s, are all about selling a mystique rather than an actual product. I find them far more evocative, but most do not.
One interesting thing: you CAN have it both ways, as the Lionel catalogs of the mid-1990’s showed. And if you can get a copy of the Lionel “Traditional” catalog from 1985 you’ll see how well the two mediums can be blended. It’s ironic that the catalog that year was so good in aesthetic terms when the product line itself was at a low ebb! They took a poor line-up and made it look about as good as you possibly could.
I wish they would do both. Back in the 70’s and 80’s they were photo’s that looked like hardware, but you knew what you were getting. The modern catalogs seem to be computer generated images that seem to be somewhat out of proportion and the actual color is anybody’s guess. I would prefer a photo of the real thing with an illustration alongside. In today’s preorder world, I guess we are stuck with computer generated images, or photo’s that have been touched up from another scale.
Yes. This is the way to go, you get the picture of the product to show the detail and the illustrated scenery. Truly the best of both worlds.
As far as I’m concerned, NONE of the stuff in recent catalogs are actual photos, like you would find in a train magazine. And color-wise, I think most of the stuff looks better “in person”, than it does in the catalogs. A case in point…the new Lionel semi-scale Mikado. I had little interest in it from the catalog, but ordered one after seeing it in person. One of the train magazines reviewed it, and their un-retouched photo looked great.
I enjoy looking at the postwar catalog illustrations, but I don’t think they would be very good to convince an adult to part with $700. plus. Joe
You can’t beat the 50’s catalogs. The scenes evoked many a Christmas dream/wish and brought the imagination to life. Photos are soulless and dull, and, as previously mentiioned, the doctored semi- photos or “artists concepts” are no guarantee what the actual product will look like either. I say put the “wish” back in the wish book!
I like the illustrations better. I think the reason why they used illustrations back in the 60s was that they were mainly targeting children (use imagination) and today they use photos because they are targeting adults (see exactly what you pay for). Theres also a lot more detail to show off than there was in the post and prewar eras.
And this is exactly why they used to use illustrations, because those illustrations looked a whole lot better than the real deal, and now that there is a lot more realism the illustrations no longer do the locomotives justice, whereas before it was the locos that didn’t do the illustrations justice. Sorry to all you postwar fellas.
I have to say that I really like Lionels catalogs, they are several levels better than MTH’s in my opinion (I get both) but I find it hard to define exactly why. There’s something about the Lionel catalogs, they seem to generate excitement (in my crusty old heart anyway) whereas MTH’s seem more like a manufacturers listing of available models. I frequently re-read my Lionel catalogs and dream of being able to order all the cool stuff from over the last few years, my MTH catalogs get one good look through and then go into storage which is why my Lionel catalogs that I want to hang onto are getting tatty!
In fact, in the recent MTH catalog, there is a picture of a Premier Challenger locomotive (or some other large steam locomotive), that is seen passing a Model Power lumberyard building in the background, the exact same model I have on my small N scale table layout. I think that building is only available in N & HO scales, so it is obviously an HO (or N??) scale model, unless they Photoshopped it into an N/HO scale scene.
I agree that I need to see the photograph of a product before I buy it, especially if it costs $300 plus. Unfortunately, some of the photographs that you see (if there are any) are usually of the prototype or pre-production model, and the final result may look very different. I would almost rather take my chances and wait for a local hobby shop to get something I wanted, just so I could see what it looks and sounds like in person.
As far as this catalog business goes, I wish they’d do it by asking people what they want, and then create the product and have the actual, production product be in the catalog. Then, once you see in in the catalog, you could get it as soon as you wanted.