These conceptual patterns come and go over time.
Which is your preference, and why?
My thought about small layout concept and design has probably become fairly visible over time. Itās pretty counterintuitive to todayās layout thought, especially the large ones, but I thoroughly believe in underdetailing a layout rather than superdetailing it. In real life, details are almost never crammed in next to each other, but rather spread out fairly widely. Overdetailed urban layouts in particular make me claustrophobic, with back alleys featuring a barrel or a pile of trash every square inch. But thatās just me and a reflection of the rural setting Iām familiar with.
Accordingly, being a rural line, the Gulf Coast Extension only has five structures on it. I do plan to add a water tank and maybe one more corrugated metal warehouse but thatāll be it.
The GCE is a 16 foot long layout. Thatās one structure every 3 feet. The Midland Western in Metairie has 40 feet of visible mainline and it only has nine structures. Thatās one structure every 4 feet. The only other things I plan to add to that layout, if I ever get to spend any more time over there, is an open air locomotive shop and a three building crossroads downtown, as it were.
I see my layout as an impressionist backdrop to the trains, not an attraction in themselves. I also these days really canāt see extreme detail anymore and I donāt miss it if it is isnāt there.
I for one like to have details, and I have been adding more details gradually to my layout as work progresses. So itās an ongoing process. But I wonāt add details that will hamper operations. I also avoid details in front of the layout where elbows can create damage.
Simon
Iād probably like details more if I had more time to actually work on the layout. I had a lengthy commute for years for my last job so I was hardly ever home, had just enough time at night to switch for a half hour or 45 minutes and then I have to go to sleep to wake up at 4:30 for the commute the next day. I retired and thought Iād have all day long. But it didnāt work out like that, ended up transitioning very soon into a caregiver role that takes all my time now. So I get to do a little stuff, but mostly have done just do just enough scenery so the train is not on a bare piece of wood and appears to be in a reasonable setting.
Iām fortunate in that I like a sparsely settled Railroad with mostly scenery instead of highly detailed crowded buildings.
I like building models and adding details, and take my inspiration from (early days) Roadside America, and later John Allen and George Seliosā F&SM, so my layout tends toward details, also since a previous 24 x 24 room and 30 yearsā worth of modeling now has to fit into a downsized 14 x 22 space. That being said I do enjoy looking at the more ārealisticā modeling that showcases trains running through expansive scenery.
1 Like
I donāt consider my modeling less realistic, just more thinly spread than usual.
I always think it is about how long a person is willing to spend detailing the layout or if it is from an overall collector or a prototype modeler. I have a few different layouts with different main ideas, my main ho layout is simply for running trains but my n scale layout is a western late 1940s layout with a real (ish) prototype.
IMO, a smaller layout can devote more time to details whereas a larger layout requires more effort just for trackwork alone. Iām limiting my layout to 4 x 8 with a 2 x 4 extension wing. Without adding details, I could comfortably complete the trackwork in a month or two and run out of things to do, but I want to stretch it out to 10 years. 
When there is no room to go big, which is where I am at now once again, with no more space than for a maybe a 50cm (20in) x 100cm (39in) layout, the ongoing projects cannot be in extensions. This is where maintaining fun in ever more little details comes in, to make it all more realistic. From dogs and cats prowling the neighbourhood, to playing kids, to signals and traffic lights, curtains and red lights in houses, stores with merchandise tables, a street party, teens going skinny-dipping in the pond, the local cop trying to arrest the extra-terrestrial, who landed on the warehouse roof ā¦ what else CAN you do on a small layout?
After many years now being forced into a small N-scale layout again, I realised, that I always had the most fun with a small layout, simple and fast to build to get operational fast, and then slowly decking it out!
Otherwise, it gets boring fast!
1 Like
Iāve never been bored with my small undetailed layout. It was designed from the beginning to replicate the operations of either a branch line or a short line, I go back-and-forth between them, but the operation is always the same. Itās what I watched as a kid and I never get tired of reliving those days on my layout.
Now, to the part thats going to get me excommunicated from the Model Railroad world.
I have never particularly liked the layouts of both John Allen and George Selios, for very clearly stated reasons:
-
When I was a kid, I thought John Allenās layout was pronounced Goar and Daffa-tid. His mountain stuff is just overpowering and too intense to be realistic. Nowhere in the world do you find three and four railroads stacked above each other on the same cliff, no matter how spectacular all that floor to ceiling scenery is. Some of my reaction, of course, comes from being a lifelong flatlander, with mountains being a very unfamiliar environment to me. Also, if John had an operating scheme, Iāve never been able to figure it out. Point A on his layout was the port apparently, but where did it go and what was the purpose of the Railroad? His modeling is exceptional, though, I take no issue with it. Although some of his scenes I recall being relatively overcrowded.
-
Now, George Selios. His layout is apparently set in New England somewhere, where many towns are very compressed with everything up against each otherās shoulders. At least thatās what I remember seeing up there. On a layout with Limited space, cramming details in is a natural impulse, especially if you like to build things and keep on making things to put on the layout. I find his scenes, although extremely beautifully detailed and well created, are just too jammed in together with too much going on per square inch for me. A lot of my reaction is not the fault of his work, but that my entire life has been spent in a very different setting and I find the world that he created very foreign.
There. Iām done with my rant. I have dared criticize the mighty gods. Someone tell me where to turn in my NMRA card. 
I want my layout to look like real life. I am also working toward the NMRA Golden Spike Award and achievement certificates and they are very much a part of my guideline.
I have what is becoming an overdetailed layout. It didnāt start out that way. I enjoy building things, and I have built more and more buildings over the years to add to the layout. I like them, and I donāt want to take some down just to make a more sparse layout.
If someone were to visit my layout, they might say it was overcrowded. To me, I like the way it looks, and if I live a few more years, itās going to get more crowded.
1 Like
My layout is definitely underdetailed right now, but given it is still being constructed, thatās okay. I honestly think itās a matter of āwhere.ā There is obviously going to be much more detail in a downtown or city than a swath of plains. My goal is to make it look āright.ā Given my layout is based on Oklahoma and transitions from open plain into a downtown, Iāll probably be taking the āless is moreā approach.
1 Like
We all want our layouts to look like real life. But real life can vary between individuals.
For those who want the NMRA awards certificates, go for it, itās one of many ways to enjoy model railroading. It was enough work for me to study for and achieve my professional license years ago. I make my own milestones as I go but none of it really matters much since Iām the only personās ever going to see my layout down here.
to each his own
1 Like
āLess is moreāwas definitely the motto when I was a teenager and had no money for anything! It had to be!
Underdetailing was all I could afford!
For a long time, I bought Kadee number five couplers instead of anything else. That was definitely a good choice though.
Conversion to knuckle couplers is always expensive for the young modeler.
About 10 years ago was still buying rolling stock that came with plastic knuckle couplers. I replaced them all with Kadees but saved the plastic ones for what they might be needed for. And I found the best use. I put them out on the counter at the club and told the young teenage guys they could have them, to replace the horn hooks on their cars. They were like piranhas going after those things, it was hilarious.
3 Likes
I prefer to add enough detail to make the layout look convincing to the average non-railroader visitor. I painted my own backdrop (southern Appalachia) and have a reasonably high scenery to track ratio. Yards, towns, industries etc are detailed just enough to give an overall impression of realism. I model N scale since 1969. My layout fills half a garage, and I utilize walk-around operation. When operating, Iām engrossed in switching cars, train movements, manually throwing switches, etc., so excessive detail is not particularly noticed by me.
I find that moderately weathered equipment successfully enhances realism. So overall I take an Impressionistās approach to detailing that does the job for me and any visitors.
2 Likes
I agree that layouts can be overdetailed. Real life scenes are usually not that interesting. Iād rather have too little detail than too much. To me, detail that is missing is not that noticeable whereas detail that is wrong can be an eyesore. If your layout has too little detail, you can always add a bit more later. Iām much more interested in getting a scene to relative completion than putting in every last detail imaginable. A scene with relatively little detail can still be convincing. When we look at a photo, we usually donāt pick up on every detail the first time we look at it. Likewise, we arenāt going to notice every little detail in a scene when a train is only passing through it for a few seconds. Super detailing can be impressive in photos but on a layout where our eyes tend to follow a train, much of that detail is lost on us. Spending a lot of time on super detailing gives diminishing returns.
Like so much in this hobby, this is a matter of choice. We can make our scenes as detailed as we want. There is no right or wrong amount of detail.
1 Like
Exactly my approach, both Bob and John
There is a poster on Facebook known as āIndustrialmodelsā that posts video clips from what I presume are of his O gauge ālayoutā.
The video clips are highly detailed and in many cases you have to take a āsecond lookā to realize it is model railroading and not the real thing. The clips capture the sights, sounds and ambiance of ground level railroading.
1 Like