I was sitting wondering about scaling down a locomotive from actual to 87 times smaller, there must be a formula that at a certain reduction, the item will disappear, such as a small valve or small diameter pipe, in order for it to be in exact scale it would not show up on the model, OR, if the pipes, details are visible, they must be larger and out of scale, is this true?(it must be, I wrote it) conversely stair treads or a windshield wiper on a diesel reduced 87 times will be invisible. Just what is the formulae for reduction, does anyone know (or does anyone care???)
I use a scale ruler and stay true until it does not look right. As in all artistic endevours, you need to take licence to get the desired look. The art world has dealt with this forever and the impressionist/expressionist debate still goes on. With photoetched brass and laser cut stock, it is easier to go scale than it used to be. Barbed wire still seems to escape us all.
I don’t particurly care as long as it looks good.
[#ditto]
I, personally, use the 50 (scale) meter test. If its absence isn’t obvious at 50 scale meters (2 feet, close enough to make no difference,) I don’t worry if the model doesn’t have it. At that distance the absence of the eccentric rod on the valve gear would be obvious, but only someone with telephoto vision could tell whether there was a cotter key installed in the clevis pin holding it in place.
By that standard, the slender brass air tubes leading to the sand valves disappear into the grunge on the boiler jacket.
(Later the JNR stripped the paint, cleaned the grunge and started polishing the [censored] things. Fortunately, in 1964 that practice was still in the future, because they are now obvious from clear across the room.)
When it comes to cosmetics, this confirmed operations nut has one standard - if it looks good enough, it is!
Chuck (modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)