Given that none of us has an unlimited amount of time to work on our railroads, we have to strike a balance between the level of craftsmanship we want and the size of our layouts. Very few modelers have been able to do high level craftsmanship on a large scale. John Allen and George Selios are two exceptions that come to mind. Even a pioneer like Allen McClelland admitted it was necessary to accept the good-enough approach to structures and scenery on his famous V&O layout. On a small layout with only a handful of structures, one could take the time and dillegence to make sure each structure was top drawer. On the other hand, if you have a very large layout with dozens, maybe even hundreds of structures, for most of us that is not realistic. Perhaps we might try to put a few show pieces on our layout, but for the most part, we have to settle for the good-enough approach.
I am curious as to which way other modelers lean in striking a balance between size and craftsmanship. In my own case, I have opted to build a large layout (roughly 46X26 with a center peninsula). On a scale of 1 to 10, I strive to achieve a level of 7 in the quality of my structures and scenery, although admittedly I sometimes come up short. Where do you stand?
I think there are a number of factors that can drive quality/quantity decisions.
Skill level of a modeler
Definition of what a “10” level of quality (or “good enough”) a modeler has.
Financial resources a modeler has.
Time a modeler can (or is willing to) dedicate.
Permanency of a layout (or how long a modeler expects to have the space they will build in).
I’m sure I missed a few, but the point is that everyone is going to come from a differing viewpoint when determining the level of Craftsmanship they achieve.
I think that a finished and realistic look is what most of us are after, however, that is a somewhat subjective issue, for the reasons mentioned above.
I do think that you’ve hit the nail on the head as far as the good enough approach with a few standouts for good measure.
I feel the big question you have to answer is are you trying to build the layout and also build the trains at the same time?
I had about 24 ‘layout ready’ engines and about 300 ‘layout ready’ freight cars when I started my layout. The layout(25’ by 20’ room) took up a lot of my modeling time. I think a lot of folks try to build models and a layout at the same time. Usually something starts to suffer. In my case, I started building a lot of plastic structure kits(straight out of the box, just painted/weathered) as I was constrained on time.
Other layouts I have visited have a lot of ‘box stock’ engines and cars - the owner just does not have time to detail/weather or even replace the wheels. We all have to schedule our time and I am now looking to replace some of those ‘temp/marker’ structures with a decent kitbash of scratchbuilt structure. Another area I just have not gotten around to was a signal system(sort of ‘designed’ it in from the start, but cost and time caught up to me). I bought a bag(about 2 dozen) of those old plastic Bachmann signals at a train show for a $1. I repainted them aluminum/black and they are now the ‘marker’ stand-in’s for the eventual $20 signals as I get time and funds.
I didn’t mention rolling stock in the original thread but of course you are right that we have to make decisions on that as well. I don’t spend a lot of my time on rolling stock. Whether it is RTR or kit built, all I do originally is slap on a little weathering, check the coupler with the gauge and put it on the layout. If it performs well, I leave it alone. If I have problems, I’ll correct the problem. I don’t do any extra detailing.
Other areas that are low priority for me are a signaling system and weathered track. A working signaling system to me is one of those real fine details I can add when the layout is otherwise fairly complete. I am a lone wolf operator so a signalling system does not have a practical benefit.
I would love to be able to weather the track, but at this point there is too much else to do. Now would probably be the time to do it because I have only ballasted the main yard and a little of the mainline. I think it is a great effect but not one most people will notice unless they are looking for it. Ballasting is usually the last thing I do as far as scenery goes so once I get the main scenery features done, I may rethink this but as of now, I have not weathered the track.
Part of the quality aspect has to do with what distance the subject is viewed from.
There are two “schools”. One is the “general illusion”, and the other is “super detail”.
Of course super detail wins awards, and gets ooo’s and ahhhh’s in the magazine pages, but depending on the individual’s focus on railroading and the placement of the item in question, the general illusion may be equally effective. In other words you can’t see detail at a distance (or count rivets on a moving train).
Backdrops are a great example of this principle. You need a lot of detail in your backdrop when you want it to be a continuation of the foreground scene. If you are trying to represent something off in the distance, it shouldn’t be crisp and clear with lots of detail. Too much detail can detract from the illusion.
In my mind the key is balance. Put enough detail in places where it will be noticed and appreciated, and create an illusion with the rest. I think weathering is far more important than detail parts on cars and engines. It is much easier to see.
The focus has to be QUALITY, quantity is just more of the same.
I think you said it very well. I don’t really have anything to add except that each of us should do what pleases ourselves. For me if it doesn’t please me, I start over again. The only deadline I have is that day when they pry my DT400 out of my cold hand! [:D]
An old man told me one time when i was young: “son no matter how long it takes,” “always put your best into anything you do”…I find that this was very sound advice…it’s going to take me at least 10 years before I can say my 23’ x 25’ railroad is finished but I am and will put my best into it…I think i’ll appreciate it more …everytime i’ve gotten in a hurry on any project to get it completed in a hurry, i’ve usually screwed something up, so taking the old man’s advice is and will pay off in the end…chuck
You may an excellent point. My philosophy is that I am building a model railroad so I want the focus on the trains. I actually enjoy running trains over bare plywood at times. It keeps my interest going and encourages me to build a better stage for them. That is why it is not that important to me to build super detailed structures. The trains are usually going to be moving through a scene and the eye isn’t going to be able to absorb all that detail anyway. I want my structures to be good enough so that they are not a distraction. The trains are the stars of my show and everything else is the supporting cast.
I agree with that! There is a tendency to equate the word “quality” with well-detailed scenery. But as we know, there are many aspects to model railroading. To me the scenery/detailing part is the least interesting. The fun for me is the trains! I define quality as quality electrical work, track work, and good rolling locos and cars. I love laying track, building bench work, hooking up a signal light, or messing with DCC. Painting a mountain, gluing lichen, or sprinkling ground foam… not so much.
So, I would much rather have a large layout with lots of trains, and lots of places for them to go than a smaller one with lots of detail. If that makes me a quantity over quality guy… sign me up!
This is one more compromise in a hobby of compromises.
On the one hand I would like to start at one end of the layout and build each section completely with handlaid track, scratchbuilt or craftsman kits, scenery, etc. Finish and detail each section of the layout before moving on to the next.
On the other hand I want to run trains from one end of the layout to the other as quickly as possible.
I am planning to build a large, but not huge layout starting this winter. To that end my plan is to use RTR locos and cars, flex track, etc. to get started. Once all the track is in and operational, do a quick scenery base, then work on details etc. You mention John Allen above and he did exceptional work. But in 20 years he never completed the main line - this with no family, and mostly retired the whole time. Fortunately these days, there are some really nice RTR locos and cars as well as flex track to use. My choice is operation before detail, but I can fully appreciate going the other way.
Paul, good luck with the new layout. Your plan sounds like a good one. If it is not already part of your plan, may I suggest that once you get the track down and turnouts powered and I ready to run, you do some actually operating sessions before you begin with the scenery. This will point out any flaws in your track, turnouts, uncouplers, etc.
It is at the bare track stage where fixes will be the easiest to make. I’m great at giving advice to others that I ignored myself. I have a hard time focusing on one aspect of layout building at a time, so I began scenicking and ballasting a few sections before I gave it the acid test. Now I am finding flaws in some of the ballasted portions of the layout which is forcing me to tear up and throw out some of the trackwork. I haven’t figured out how to pull up ballasted track without trashing it.
I come up with a “10” every time, because I do things the best that I know how. Someone else might can do things better than I, but since my railroad is the measure of my work, I have to say 10.
I put running over detail.I put the roadbed,track,and ballast down first,then started work on the scenery.I know my work isn’t perfect,but it sure beats running trains on a bare flat board.With two background photos of mountains bought at a LHS,plus supplies from Woodland Scenics,my layout looks pretty good to me.
When your talking about craftsmanship and a nice looking setup, I would put mine at about a 7. I could go the extra mile and do more detail work and put more time into it. My layout looks good"unfinished though" but I have seen better. Sometime I think that if mine was smaller it would look perfect and be finished. I do a square foot at a time, it makes things easier after the track is all put down anyway for me. I spend way to much time working on loco’s for freinds and buying and selling HO items. I should fini***his puppy up, it looks strange when your running the main line and the loco enters the dead zone where there is no scene or anything.
I’m applying the bitter lessons learned on my previous layouts, taking the slow-and-steady-wins-the-race approach. I’ve spent almost a year on my current 17ft by 16ft, 3-peninsula HO layout. At this point all the track is semi-laid (wired and in position but not permanently fastened); I want to weather the track before applying the ballast, and also test for flaws before I attach it permanently. I figure maybe another month or two and I can start running trains on it.
Flawless operation is my immediate priority. Once I achieve that, I’ll add the ‘placeholder’ structures and rolling stock necessary for operation. The way I see it, I have a whole lifetime to add ‘quality’ cars and structures to my layout a little at a time when the basic infrastructure is completed.
well guys im 13 so i have a few limitations!! first off money is a huge factor. I have just started my new N scale railroad about 3 weeks ago it is a 4x8 with a 36x80 backwards L. right now i have some of freight yard 1 (Redwood yard) built and some mainline in. I plan to be reach a stage of basic completion by mid spring. the layout will have ballasted track with manual switches. and it will be DC with shut off switches. the scenery will be New England including the Motive Power. there are some things i cant do just because of my limitations. i can not really build great quality scenery because of my $$$ restrictions and dont want to fork over the money to get DCC i was offered it for my B-day but opted for money for my trains. It would add a lot of cost to the locos and in N scale in loco sound decoders are not as easy to get as Ho ones. I would like to have such things as Dcc a working signals remote switches but they are just not realistic goals for me to set at this stage in life. when i am older (adult) i will have realistic scenery a big layout and all those luxurys but for now i will stick to what im doing just running my trains!!! (with some set up operations) I aslo plan to weather some of my freight cars[:D] Tim