Today is a good day for me. First off its my birthday (Yay!! BTW, in case you were wondering, Brass is fine… Secondly, it’s been a great week, I’ve gotten about half (more or less) of my benchwork completed and have the whole day and most of the weekend to work on the layout!
Finally, we have a guest author this week: Phil Coulter (ShayFan84325) has offered up an interesting idea for us to consider…
There you go, the only art appreciation riddle I know.
This is not intended to be a post about model railroads as art. We’ve beat that around before and it usually wasn’t fun. Let’s not go there. This is about how we see our work, expressed in terms of artistic style. To illustrate, I’ve put together an illustration (see above). While it is not intended to depict the entire spectrum of artistic style, it gives us a starting point for discussion.
I believe that model railroads reside somewhere within the blue diamond, but where to place them is the basis of today’s questions. I consider George Selios’ and John Allen’s layouts to be somewhere between points B and C. I’ve seen layouts that were very heavy on the D ingredient. I believe that most of us stay away from the A corner, except when it comes to backdrops, some of our lighting, and building interiors. F
Another good treatment of model railroading as art is the article John Armstrong wrote on his use of Edward Hopper’s Nighthawks as a scene on his layout. Or maybe it was a companion article, they are together inthe same issue of MR and while most of the discussion centers around getting the proper perspective and so forth, there is a bit of discussion about the types of art that would be suitable.
As I am in the early stages on mine I’m shooting for the “A”…don’t know if I’ll acheive it this time or not. The old layout was aimed in that direction and came pretty close.
Hopefully I won’t end up in the area you didn’t even include, the Pablo Picasso look!!!
I dunno Phil, I’ve seen some beautiful backdrops that were more “Impressionistic” in style (Type “D” in the illustration), and I must say, aside from the slight start it gives you at first, your mind just sorta goes with it after a few minutes and I think it can work really well as a backdrop. In fact, I’ve been going back and forth between weather I want something photo-realistic or impressionistic for the backdrop on my own layout. Obviously I don’t think I would want Andy Warhol or Salvador Dali doing my backdrops… or… maybe I would at that-- then I could sell 'em and never have to worry about buying trains again! [(-D]
Yes, I like a lot of Edward Hopper’s stuff and think a lot of it would be good and suitable for MR backdrops. He did a lot of urban / city scenes, and the types of scenes that would be suitable alongside the tracks. I think I did a PF post on that awhile back in fact.
Well I’m not an art student or “art” fan, so I’m not really sure where I fit, but any “artistic” leaning my modeling may have is directed toward portraying life as being “better” than it actually was, not worse.
I’m a positive person, but a realist, I purposely exclude a lot of negative things from my life, I avoid watching/listening to too much “news”. I am purpose driven to take care of my family and achieve my personal goals. I value quality and hard work. So that’s what I model - a successful, well run, productive, modern, inovative railroad in 1954.
We don’t let things get too dirty, too run down, too rusty. We have an account at the paint store and the communities we serve are mostly like minded people - it’s 1954, we won the war, saved the world, and progress, optimism and high standards are the order of the day.
I have to say I shoot for somewhere between impressionism (A) and realistic caricature (B). It’s not so much a matter of trompe d’oeil (trick the eye) as tromp d’émoi (trick the emotions).
My last layout (way back in the 80’s) was just a town and some industries with some semi-arid scenery and ATSF-flavored rolling stock. People liked it fine, but after I had a girlfriend paint a clear blue sky over a large landmark cliff on the backdrop (even though she was just going from memory and one bad photo), visitors said things like “Oh, that’s Castle Rock (Colorado). I remember that building!” Well, all the buildings were generic and mostly box-stock, but the cliffs, scrub brush and trains allowed their imaginations to take over their actual memories.
Interesting topic. I’ve used the art analogy before in talking about model railroads. I’ve described my modelling as being somewhat impressionistic - trying to get the right “feel” or impression of railroading in a certain period, rather than trying to get everything correct to rivet-counting detail.
I´d certainly put my layout in being into the “A” camp. The impressionists did not aim at giving a highly detailed and “true” picture of reality, but tried (to great success for my taste) to create an atmosphere, provoking emotions. And that´s exactly what I am aiming at in the creation of my layout - not only for the backdrop, but the entire layout.
No question whom I´d like to commission to paint my backdrop - William Turner of Oxford, a contemporary of the J.M. William Turner, but not to be mistaken with him.
Since I’m modeling my hometown, I’m hoping for “C”. Knowing my tendencies towards “good enough” I’ll probably end up closer to “B”. On the other hand, I’m going for the general feel of Mankato in the late 40’s, early 50’s. I think an impression (A) of the real thing is what I’ll end up with. I have a few key buildings that my family will recognize, the rest is a complete fabrication. It’s what I could fit in the space I had, with the budget I had, and the skills I don’t have.[:D]
As far as the backdrop goes, I’m undecided. I know a painting by me will not cut the mustard. A photo backdrop the size that I need sounds expensive and wouldn’t be right anyway. I could always take a picture of the real thing and use that, but it’s 2011, not 1950. If I could choose an artist it would be Bob Ross. I like the idea of happy little trees on my layout. They would set the stage for happy little trains!
I would contend that there is in fact only one artistic approach, or “school”, in model railroading today and that is realism. Neither is our hobby like fine art, where paintings and artists can be attributed as belonging to various schools by their styles. I firmly believe that even the majority of those we describe as modeling in the caricature style these days honestly believe that their layouts reflect a realistic representation of a past reality, at least as they see it.
The degree of realism exhibited on any given layout is simply a reflection of the hobbyist’s skills as an artist, not that he is purposely pursuing any particular “style” other than realism. Impressionism, realistic caricature, even strict caricature in many cases, as applied to model railroad layouts, can be interpreted simply as distortions (often accidental!) of attempts at portraying realism. The only actual dividing line is that which separates those in scale modeling from tinplate modelers with regard to “style”.
Let’s face it, no self respecting hobbyist today purposely buys and runs caricature, or fantasy, models, unless for the benefit of their small children. Just look at the recent brew-ha-ha over the thread concerning the Boy Scout train. The simple fact is that the entire model railroading industry, as well all its scale publications, are absolutely realism-centered these days.
Thus, I can only regard myself as modeling in the class C realism style and my layout’s backgrounds are largely photographic.
Well, John … I do still wonder how you think up all of these questions. [swg]
Rearding John Allen, I recall he include whimical scenes, and he may have a dose of “D” in his layout as a result…
I try to be realistic, but I have a great amount of fun with creativity at times. Call it model railroader’s license or whatever. I think my end result has doses of all four types.
When I was much younger, back in my Lionel Years, before the Wonder Years, we would visit my grandmother, who lived in an apartment in Brooklyn, NY. Being an older person’s home on the 3rd floor in a city environment, we didn’t play outside, and there wasn’t much else for young children to do, so I usually headed for the magazine cabinet, which was full of old copies of the Saturday Evening Post. And so, I became a fan of Normal Rockwell.
Many years later, I viisted his museum in Stockbridge, Massachusetts, (yes, the Arlo Guthrie town) and spent some happy time looking at the paintings. While they aren’t total “realism,” there is something about them that captures the spirit of the subject. And, when we left and walked around town, I realized that the people I was seeing, residents of Stockbridge, were the descendents of Rockwell’s models. The eyes, ears and faces of old Yankee stock were still breeding true.
So, put me in the Rockwell camp. My modeling doesn’t try for photo-realism, but rather seeks to draw things from my own memories of the late Transition Era. I model what I remember about the scene I’m trying to re-create. So, I put a lot of effort into the tile walls of my subway stations, because that is the strongest memory I have of them. And, as many visitors to my layout share those same memories, the models work for them, too. Norman Rockwell drew from his “present day,” but the elements he chose to highlight were those which have stayed with me for all those years. By being faithful to those fragments of the whole picture, and highlighting them on my layout, I think I evoke the past better than I could even with a higher level of “realistic” detail.
I think I’m firmly in the Rockwell Camp too. As good as some people’s layouts are, I’ve never had one fool me into thinking it’s real. Mostly because it is the lighting that gives it away. With that said, I think Rockwell’s style and approach to the subjects just “fit” my model railroading approach to a “T”.
I think it would be interesting to have my backdrop painted by M.C. Escher. That way I could operate a point-to-point track plan but a train would run through a scene an infinite number of times!
As far as where I fall in the artistic spectrum, I’d say I aim for photo realism knowing that I’ll never achieve it. But then, the real pleasure I get from the hobby isn’t so much the destination, but the journey. I enjoy observing how much closer (or less far distant from in my case) an effort comes to realistic than previous efforts.
First off, this art stuff is way over my head, but I will try and answer the best I can. [banghead]
– Where is your layout in the diamond? Is it in the diamond or someplace I didn’t think to represent?
I think it is in the diamond somewhere, but I don’t know where. I followed John Allen’s layout articles and style for a long time. I liked the way he represented things and that is what I am trying to do. I also like a little humor in there as well.
– Is your layout where you want it to be, or would you like to revise it to move it closer to one point or another? If you’d move it, where would you move it to?
My layout is turning out how I want it except the backdrop could be much better. I am more of a technical type, but have enough artist in me to create my layout fairly well.
– Finally, if you could have any of these four artists paint your backdrop, whom would you choose, and why? See the next answer.
– If you could have any unusual (non-realist) artist paint your backdrop, who would you pick?
I would probably find some college art student to do it for me.
Secondly, it’s been a great week, I’ve gotten about half (more or less) of my benchwork completed and have the whole day and most of the weekend to work on the layout!