I just finished reading the article about John Schoonenberg’s Chicago, Milwaukee, and North Western layout. In it he mentioned that structure building is one of his favorite parts of the hobby but he finds building scenery challenging. I found this interesting because with me it is just the opposite. I find structure building to be tedious and unforgiving. Whether one kit builds, kitbashes, or scratch builds, structures demand that parts fit together precisely in order to look good. In addition, painting the small details is terribly time consuming and prone to errors. I have spent the better part of the last three months building HO structures along one side of the street on about a 7 foot long section of my layout and there is still more detailing that needs to be done (signs, roof details, weathering).
On the other hand, I could have easily filled a space that size with scenery in a matter of days. In addition, scenery building allows one to be more creative and requires much less precise work. If it doesn’t look right, it is easy to either add layers until it does look right or scrap it and start over without a lot of wasted expense. Often, the best effects happen by accident. What we end up with is often better than what we intended. I find scenery gives you much more bang for the buck than structure building and also goes much faster. The one area of scenery building I am a little apprehensive about are the water features. It has been over 20 years since I last did these on my old layout. I did two streams using Envirotex. Both looked good when finished but for some reason, then one never completely hardened. It remained a stiff gel until the day it got dismantled. I also modeled a large pond with a product that created a wavy look but I can’t remember the name of that product.
I’m curious about how other modelers view these two areas of layout building. Most of us need to do some of each. Does your preference for one ov
I guess I would lean toward the author’s preference, too. Although I enjoy and desire seeing both done very well, I’m more “comfortable” in the “tedium” and “precision” of structure building. I like regimen and tend to shy more away from “freedom” and creativeness. However, just because one is more “comfortable” in one aspect rather than another, does NOT mean that they don’t enjoy both.
For me, making both aspects blend together well so that they appear “natural” rather than contrived is what makes a layout a great layout, IMO.
I’ll try hard to be short in answering…short as in not long, not short…oh, never mind.
I do enjoy layout building, but not so much. In fact, I sort of endure it just so that I can enjoy trains in a fairly realistic setting. I prefer generating scenery to buiding kits of structures. By a ratio of about 4/1, if that makes any sense. Scenery looks best when done somewhat randomly, but not carelessly or sloppily, and certainly not without some forethought and planning. Yet I find that it is so easy to produce what looks like a sloppy structure. Maybe I need coaching…I dunno.
I see humblingly stunning models that some of us produce, and clearly they are labours of love and patience, not to mention skilled eyes and hands. I am too impatient and find it hard to leave something discrete, like a structure kit, partially completed…I want it done in 2 hours. Yet, in 2 hours I can produce a lot of decent scenery for my tastes. It is not piecework, so I don’t mind doing 2 square feet and then leaving it for a couple of days. Gluing two roof halves together, propping them up just so, and then having to go away drives me around the bend.
I can relate to much of what you said, especially the part about being impatient. I also don’t appreciate the process of layout building as much as I do the finished product. If I could snap my fingers and instantly get the layout I have in my mind, I would do it without hesitiation. If I could afford to have the layout professionally built, I would take that option. I have started using more ready built structures as more of those become available and some of them are coming pre-weathered which makes it even better. Right now, I’m spending far too much time building the layout and not nearly enough running the layout. Hopefully, I’ll reach a day when that will change and I can spend most of my time running the layout and the only work will be in m
I don’t have a layout, do my modeling on modules. Model building is what interests me the most, not operating nor scenery creation. I’ll do scenery because I need a place to sit my models. Some like electronics, other fiddling with brass engines, others with DCC, etc. That’s one of the greatest aspects of our hobby, there are so many things that one can do!
Re your Envirotex not hardening, it looks like you may have not followed the instructions properly. They say to mix the two liquids 50-50 and stir vigorously for two minutes. Less than that and they won’t be mixed properly and will not harden.
One of the fellows in our modular group was using a product similar to Envirotex, sort of a “no name” brand, and had the same problem, it would not harden. He had to take out his wharf scene twice because of the problem. When I asked him how he mixed it, he told me the product did not come with instructions. I told him what Envirotex needed, he tried it, and it worked!
Here’s a lumberyard on my modules that I scratchbuilt, using plans in an older issue of MR:
There has never, ever been a structure kit produced that I couldn’t screw up. Glueing two sections of plastic together ranks right up there with a trip to the orthodontist to me. Do you get the idea I’m not good at it therefore I’m not exactly fond of it? That doesn’t mean I don’t admire a well built, especially scratchbuilt, structure. Because of the way I am, I probably admire them even more because they’re unobtainable for me. I think it takes a level of patience I’ll never possess. I have a friend that really loves the (for me) tedium of building a structure, and has them populating his layout. Now, I’ve seen what a person that is very, very good at it can do, you know… the museum quality structures… and believe me, that ain’t his. But, he enjoys it so that’s all that counts, I suppose. I have another friend that is pretty close to what I’d call a master at it. Most of his structures are of the craftsman kit, laser cut variety. He’s in the process of building a layout now and I think it’s going to be something to behold when complete. He’s one of those that love structure building and is darned good at it.
A couple of days ago, I finished decalling and weathering a reefer. I realized it was the first actual “train” thing I’ve done in months. Everything else has been structures, scenery and vehicles.
I enjoy structure-building a lot. I take a week to build the simplest DPM model. I enjoy painting the detail parts and mortaring the bricks. I have fun creating interiors and making up the signs for the ground-floor businesses, too. Finally, I add some figures to complete the scene, and then the scenery fills in around it.
Scenery is fun, too. My layout is small and kind of packed with stuff, so I don’t have many broad expanses of open space. Still, it’s satisfying to get it done. And I’m totally paranoid about starting water scenery, too.
For detail frustration, though, build a Jordan vehicle. You’ll never complain about how hard it is to build a structure again.
If I could build structures that good, I might enjoy the process a little more too. However, my passion is for the trains themselves. They are the star of the show and the structures and scenery are the supporting cast. They are there to make the trains look good.
It depends on the level of detail and accuracy. It you want to have each and every leave on all bushes in the best possible way done it is terrible time consuming and requires lots of skill.
Have a very close look in detail on a road side in the New England states. You will be amazed what has to be done for a really good replication in 1:87.
Although one can do “generic” scenery, like backgrounds or large forested areas on a back edge rather quickly, I think it takes as much time (and “tedious” labor) to do a good, front edge scenery job as it does to build a craftsman level structure.
Both require a keen level of attention to detail and an eye for what looks real. And both take a lot of time and effort to do well.
Fortunately, I enjoy doing both and try not to rush through either in my eagerness.
To my way of thinking, structures are simply a part of the scenery.
If you want tedium and fussy detail work, try making a realistic standing dead tree by twisting a gaazillion strands of fine wire into the trunk, then dividing, subdividing … down to the individual single-wire twigs. Fortunately, there won’t be many standing snags in areas that have been logged over.
Immediate foreground scenery will be fussy and detail-intensive, whether natural, man-made or a combination of the two. More distant scenery can be, and should be, simpler and less detailed, to avoid drawing attention away from the most important scenery of all - the kind that rolls through on flanged wheels.
While I have much more experience building structures than scenery, both have their unique advantages. I tend to classify scenery construction as “permanent” and structures as “transitory,” in that I can pack up, move, and re-use structures but not scenery. I’m in a rather akward position in that my house has been on the market for about 8 months now, so my modelling has been subject to the fickle winds of the local housing market. For instance, over Christmas week we had a showing and then a second showing and it seemed there was a very good chance of the house selling, so I put a Stop Work order on the scenery and was content working on a building kit that I could put away on short notice. When we discovered on New Year’s eve that our house was the buyer’s second choice and we’d likely be here a while longer, I set the finished building aside and went about forming a hillside on the layout.
To a certain extent it is all just a little tedious.
About the only part I really enjoy is benchwork and subroadbed; I do not like laying and ballasting track but I do it because it is necessary; I assemble/build structures; I form scenery; I string wire; sooner or later everything goes together and then I can set back and admire - or groan - at my handiwork. Despite the tedium I have built and demolished more than one layout and am preparing to build another one.
You are right about one thing: structure building is perhaps the most demanding and a poorly assembled structure is going to look like just that; scenery, on the other hand, can be repaired even if that entails a demolition project; wood from benchwork - and wire - is salvageable but subroadbed can only be set aside with hope for future utilization.
Interesting thread. I’ve gotten a lot of satisfaction building structures, and I guess they also have the side benefit of reducing the “scenery” I have to build.
It’s fun to see how a scratchbuilt building, sign, etc. looks when I’m done. I don’t rush any of my structure building (ha, ha…that’s why some started early in 2007 aren’t done yet, I suppose). But I really do enjoy the painting and detailing to bring out those tiny n-scale details. Likewise, I enjoy working on the consists.
Benchwork–I’d just as soon forget it! Give me a table, shelf, or door to work with any day.
[#ditto] I agree on this point , the buildings are scenery too. As such I enjoy the creating of the city scene as much as the countryside. I’m not the meticulous type my building are far from perfect but I really enjoy building and detailing them as much as the “country”.
Scenery work can be “sloppy” and be fine – it’s just a bigger rock or a smaller tree. No biggie.
Structure work, however, needs precision. Measure twice, cut once is the order of the day.
I like both scenery and structures, like the bridge, tunnel, and mountain in this scene
(click image to enlarge)
I find both to be fun, but in different ways. And when it comes to things like bridges, the two overlap, since you need to accommodate and integrate the bridge into the scenery for the final result to be effective.
I would presume those who are uncomfortable with the more “artsy” or “seat-of-the-pants” nature of scenery work would prefer structure work. With structures, things need to be precise and defined, and if you like that aspect, then you will prefer structures.
Myself, I enjoy the change of hats and the disciplines of each.
I am more of a builder and enjoy scratchbuilding wooden structures and rolling stock, however, I also enjoy making extremely detailed individual scenes. I find assembling craftsman kits or kitbashing very frustrating compared to scratchbuilding. Scratchbuilding allows me much more freedom because I can design and build it MY way. One reason I chose an oddball scale and gauge is because there aren’t many commercial structures available - I get the incentive to scratchbuild them and have structures that are unique.
