Hi Guys,
Earlier today I replied to a posting where a guy wasn’t sure if he was having fun anymore in the hobby. Below is my response. I decided to create my own posting with my response because I think some of you may benefit from my thoughts.
I told the guy that:
You alone should be dictating how much to spend on your hobby and more importantly, how much attention you want to give to prototype modeling, including fast clocks, signaling, scenery etc. I don’t know you but someone else previously mentioned that you have made a lot of progress on your more or less first layout. It sounds to me like you have linked up with some rather advanced modelers and THEY are the ones pushing you in the “rivet-counting” direction.
There’s good and bad with that. The good is that you have very experienced help. The bad is that you may not be as ready as you would like to be to “absorb” all the “rivet counting”. It takes time, even years in this hobby, to really know what all your “rivet counting” options really are and make decisions as to where to begin “counting”.
Please understand that I’m not for or against “rivet counting”. To me, model railroading is the best hobby in the world. I’m 58 years old and just received in the mail a couple of Kadee cars that I bought on Ebay. Opening up those boxes made me feel like the day I opened up my American Flyer train set back in 1953, when I was just 5 years old. That was the best Christmas ever and think about it, I’m feeling that way today just because I bought a couple of Kadee cars on Ebay. It doesn’t get any better than that.
Regarding “rivet counting”. I use the term loosely to mean getting a little more into the world of “true” model railroading, whatever “true” means. When I first started in this hobby, I saw weathered engines and rolling stock and commented to my buddy that I couldn’t imagine messing up a perfect paint job with all that weathering. I expected to keep all my engines and rolling stock look
With my HO and On30 stuff I am trying to make it as realistic as possible with sound, details and weathering. I also want to have a railroad that can be operated like the prototype.
Then with my G scale I just put them on the track and run them, the curves are too tight, the paint is shiny and the trains are too short,(in number of cars that is, or it won’t fit in the space I have).
Both types of modelling are fun and people starting out definitely feel more at ease with the G stuff as it’s straight out of the box. So I suppose the G scale allows me to take a break, step back from the more demanding stuff, works for me. Let’s hope the guy you replied to can maybe try something else, take it easy and enjoy it again.
There’s a kid of about 15 at our club that has been coming for a couple of years running his trains on the test track, they are mostly second hand and not prototypical formations but he has fun and chats to everyone. On Thursday he set out his toolbox and did some work on his model for the model competition I run once a year. The building he was working on was fantastic, made from card with interior furnishings, leaded windows and textured walls. I can honestly say I was astounded at the quality and detail and I count myself as fairly competent. I complemented him on the model and in chatting found that he knows a lot about how buildings are made but he’s not really gone into the same depth with the trains so he’s happy to run whatever.
You could look at the trains he runs and never realise how skilled he is, he’s learning at his pace and not getting intimidated by being pushed too fast. I’m going to give him some plans for buildings for the club layout after the competition and I see what he comes up with when he tries modelling in plastic.
One of the reasons I’d recommend anyone to join a club as there are usually people at all levels of ability so you don’t feel so intimidated by the best modelling.
Mondo–I think you’ve given us ALL something to think about.
I know in my own experience, that my model railroading endeavors have been to re-create something I remember with a great deal of affection, and since I’m about ten years older than you, it’s big steam in the mountains immediately during and after WWII.
I grew up with SP around Donner Pass, and the sight of those big cab-forwards, MT 4-8-2 and “Deck” 2-10-2’s and the other SP steam always excited me. I was rather sad when the diesels came in and replaced them (never have been able to look at a diesel the same way, but that’s me). About 40 years ago, having been discharged from the service in Texas, I took the ‘long’ way back to California by train via Denver and the Moffat Tunnel and fell in love with the Rio Grande. Not the diesels, particularly, but the country that the railroad ran through. I started collecting Rio Grande books and found that their steam was as memorable as the SP that I remembered. Over a period of years, I decided that Rio Grande steam was going to be my primary focus, with SP running a close second.
Okay, that was the decision. I was now in the ‘rivet counter’ category.
However, I did NOT know the Rockies well, but being a native Northern Californian, I DID know the Sierra Nevada like the back of my hand.
Out came the ‘rivet counting’, in came the ‘what-if?’
Perfect answer: the Yuba River Watershed, midway between SP’s Donner Pass route to the south and WP’s Feather River Canyon to the north.
Rio Grande decided to build their OWN line west from Salt Lake. The rest was simple.
The Yuba River Sub runs Rio Grande steam into Northern California, SP has trackage rights. I’m as authentic as I can be about the motive power (hence by neccessity I’m one of those weird brass collectors that actually RUN their locos) and they’re painted and decalled with the proper loco numbers and classes, but after that, it’s pure enjoyment. My main focus is running long trains up mou
had a layout years ago and met a gentleman at one of the local clubs. I eventually invited him over to have a look at my layout. After 1/2 hour of “you shouldas”, he was asked to leave. Then, I realized, "no wonder he’s the “loner” of the club… he has no permanent layout of his own. Sadly, some people fall into this. Thank God for the sake of newcomers to the hobby, there are more helpful people who offer criticism of another’s work only when asked for it. It’s a hobby, not an obsession. The bottome line? HAVE FUN!! My [2c]
Much of these discussions have lead on a path of referring to “rivet counters” as those who choose to superdetail their models. For much of my time in the hobby, “rivet counters” has been used to describe those modelers who put down efforts of others because “there weren’t the correct number of rivets” on their models.
These guys could pick apart anyone elses’ models, but very rarely had any of their own to show as examples. Thus “rivet counters” got to mean people who critisized modeling of others without being any better modelers than they were.
I’ve always thought “rivet counter” was a rather inane insult, used by someone whose knowledge of the prototype was considerably less than the person they were hoping to insult. [:D][:D][:D]
I believe that most people who devote a significant portion of their life to any hobby or activity will find themselves more drawn into that hobby. It is a natural process that comes with developing experience and skill. When I look at the models of real masters I am quite spellbound by the time and effort that went into research and constuction to get the completed model. These folks posses skills and patience that far exceeds mine, but they set a bar for me to aim at. I think it is human nature to want to do things better and to strive for improvement. These people are “master modellers”. Some would call them “rivet counters”. It seems to me that even when used in this context, it is used in a disparaging way, as if to imply that there is something strange about putting that much effort into something.
This is not in any way specific to MRR. If you have ever experienced the classic car movement, you will know that total perfection is admired, but often dismissed with comments like “It’s just a trailer queen”.
I think my friends that it is just human nature as well. It is hard for us humans to just accept openly the skill of one, without seeking to diminish it in some way. Some folks get it a lot worse, and really wallow in picking apart the work of others. There is nothing more unpleasant than the self proclaimed “know-it-all” expert that can find nothing to commend, but plenty to critique.
Anyway, enough waffle. Suffice to say that as Bob B, says above, it has evolved into a put down, no matter how it is used.
Well put Mondo and the rest. My own two cents regarding this hobby is that there is just something enjoyable buying and running model trains and my two sons, 10 & 13, feel the same. I have been in the hobby for about fifteen years and will soon be building my fourth layout as we are moving south. Along the way I have met some very nice people and some “rivet counters” who I prefer to call Model Railroading Snobs. When encountering this type of person it seems that only they know how to model correctly and everyone else is wrong. They do not wi***o engage in conversation they only wish to pontificate.
As for true rivet counters I think we owe them a great deal. The merchandise available in H.O. these days is extremely realistic and most manufacturers have jumped on the band wagon to offer realistic cars, buildings, engines etc. Gone are most of the dual wheel drives with traction tires, horn hook couplers, over flanged plastic wheels etc. This I think we owe this to the rivet counters.
As for me I am not a rivet counter but I can not watch my NYC Niagra pulling my double stack freight cars. Something just doesn’t look right. [;)]
A very thoughtful post, Mondo. I agree, it really is about what the individual wants to do with the hobby. After all, that is just what it is for most of us–a hobby! And a great one at that!
I’ve just read John Teichmoeller’s Pennsylvania Railroad Steel Open Hpper Cars: A Guide for Enthusiasts. It is an outstanding book. One of the great things about it is Teichmoeller’s realism. By realism, I mean both the attention to detail (rivets?), and the limits thereto. For example, Teichmoeller’s purpose was to research the hoppers and then model at least of of each class and subclass. He admits that after awhile this became psychologically exhausting (something to which many of us can relate). Bottom line: the book provides a nice balance between rigorous realism and what is realistically possible. [:D]
Each of us travels our own road to “good enough” in our hobby, and the journey is both similar and different for each of us. This is partially due to what we learn along the way. At first there is that “that’s neat syndrome” where we acquire the stripes and plaids of mismatched eras, truss rod box cars and Bill Board reefers hauled by GP 30s & 35s, F units or Sharks, with a smattering of 2-8-0s,4-6-2s, and 4-8-2s thrown in, all count among some of my favorites, but not necessarily “prototypical” and some mutually exclusive. Add to that the level of detail, hinted at by plastic injection molded on parts that should stand out from the model not blend into it. In some cases weathering can hide a multitude of “sins” but as better detailed equipment is added the “sins” become more obvious, and it is time to add to the display shelves or cull. the herd. It is part of the journey, and the development of that internal, nitpicking, rivet counting.
All of this comes as we progress to knowing more today than we knew yesterday. My friends and acquaintences will probably still refer to it as “playing with trains”. So be it. Some water needs to roll off my back, and some needs to be wiped up or dealt with in some form or fashion if I am going to “model” my equipment. At this point, I have an era and an idea of what I want to accomplish, but two grand sons may cause a side trip off to the Isle of Fodor(?) and some blue tank engines.
It remains our journey, and each fork in the road takes us onto new less traveled paths.
Lets hope each of those decisions “make all the difference”. There is much to be learned from “counting rivets”, but let us not let that get in the way of what we are all here for to enjoy our participation in our hobby.
[2c]
People no matter how accurate you get a model it is still a model and therefore it is a toy.
Anyone that is not a modeler will look at your model and only see a toy. (ask any wife, girl friend, sig other) and see what an answer you get!
You can believe what you want and try and tell everyone modelers and non-modelers alike that this is not playing with toys but you know that it is still a toy!
And YES I play with toys, I make money off these toys and when you lose site of this hobby as playing with toys then you move in the being a rivet counter. Be it an amateur counter (the ones that think that they know it all) to the professional counter (that does know it all and gets paid for knowing it all).
I have to say that some people do not have the right “intelligence” to be creative and to construct something that they would proudly display to others. These people take their cues and their reference from others, so they are actaully incapable of doing anything other than comparing what they see to what the ideal that they have adopted is. This person had taken another’s standard as his guide, and when what he saw in your layout was sufficiently disparate from that mental set of notes, in his eyes, he proceeded to do nothing more than annoy you with his obvious lack of creativity and vision…to say nothing of tact.
Life is thus.
-Crandell
Edit- I forgot to add my usual caution, though, that if you invite people to see what you have created, they have no choice but to compare it with their “world view”. Some will have the integrity to express their dismay if what they see is awful, while some will hold their counsel and nod politely and grin. If we invite others to see what we have created, we should have the courtesy to accept what they offer in the way of comment. Your invitee above was honest, you must give him that much.
If your models are not static, that is you run them on rails, then you’re playing with toys. The difference between modelers is their intensity. Evidently, some modelers are wound tight as a drum; others are as loose as a goose (pardon the metaphors).
