heres a wierd topic. model railroading in some circles has the reputation of being too expensive. my self i belive it can be as expensive as one makes it. all the layouts featured in model railroader the owners of the layouts all tend to be doctors, contractors, dentists, retired airline pilots etc, i have not seen many layouts from the average person who doesn’t make a lot of money, or able to spend 40 plus hours a week working on the layout. maybe some average Joes or janes can get there layout in the magazine some time.
You are absolutely right. And I think it is quite a reasonable approach. While there are many notable 4X8, and even much smaller layouts in all scales that are absolutely stunning, the fact is that the average Plywood Pacific is just not much in the way of eye candy.
Let’s be honest and agree that, for the most part, creating any kind of appreciable work, in any field, takes time and talent, but also skill. It is a fact that, with exceptions, one is far more likely to find an noteworthy bit of modelling in the efforts of someone who has been in the hobby for a while. And, since many in the hobby share a house with at least one other person, often with children, being able to spend hours upon hours perfecting one’s craft is not going to be conducive to harmony in the household. Instead, the professionals who retire will have the time, often near 60 years of age, sometimes earlier. Many of us have to work in our 70’s, and often two jobs just to keep up. Again, it is hard to produce something eye-catching that our hosts would want to put on display on their monthly cover in those circumstances.
And, to give them credit, if I may, a fair bit of their time is spend teaching people how to plan and to complete the smaller layouts so that they look good.
I’ll let other members talk about layouts they know of that were done on low budgets and few hours that also made it into MR. I’m sure there are examples. But the safer money, statistically, is on the retired guys with bucks and time…but also the know-how.
Crandell
While you can trade money for time and vice versa to some extent, there is still a cost to this hobby.
But the bar is pretty high for getting your layout published. There are too many good though costly models out there - RTR and kit. The hobby press really likes close up shots that require lots of detail that you don’t really notice from a couple of feet away. So a layout based on economy kits like the old Athearn BB, Atlas buildings, and code 100 track just doesn’t cut it any more. Doesn’t mean you can’t have fun with that, you just don’t get press coverage. With some paint and landscaping they look fine.
One trick that may not be obvious from the layout articles is that you can super detail one or two scenes, a couple of cars, and a locomotive and take all the pictures with them. The rest of the layout can be the Plywood Central running BB cars and diesels with horn hook couplers. Visiting a well known layout that had gotten national press coverage was a real eye opener for me.
But, really this hobby is about having fun. You can always set up a web site to share pictures.
Enjoy
Paul
All you have to do is write the article and take the pictures.
Thankk goodness for the folks with the time and money that enjoy this hobby. Without the demand they create on the market, us little guys might not beable to create enough of a market to keep all the manufacturers in business.
I have visited one layout which probably qualifies to meet your description, it is huge, beautiful and was overwhelming to me on first visit. However, I enjoy modeling with friends, who like me, have to keep an eye on their pennies and have maybe one nice piece, if that.
As said above, the objective of this hobby is to have fun, whether you have a 4x8 or 40x80 (was I just watching a DPB video?) Guilty!
Have fun,
Richard
Lots of good points made by other posters - especially the one about what you see in the magazine is only the good bits and right behind the photographer could be plywood with a maze of wires running over it.
I think the main thing is that we average Joes and Janes you mention have, in general, average-looking layouts. And sure, I’ll look at (and operate) a friend’s average-looking layout any day - gladly. But we pay for MR, and most people don’t want to pay for average. And though it is obvious that the MR staff truly enjoy the hobby, our hosts are in this for the money, it is their profession to sell people the magazine and sell advertisers page space. As such, they are going to “go for the gold”. Same reason you rarely see “average Joes and Janes” modeling average-looking clothes in Esquire or Vogue.
You mentioned doctors, contractors and airline pilots. Let’s not forget that many of them started their careers as med students, carpenters, or USAF 1st Lieutenants. At which time they probably had very little time or money and had the same average-looking layouts (if any) as the rest of us.
the layouts featured in the magazines are often those of well to do people. that does not mean the hobby is only for the wealthy. i am a retired railroad employee who ran a very small business for the last 20 years of my working life. other modelers i know and keep in contact with include a retired cop, an ambulance service director, an equipment salesman, and other plain vanilla folks. if i want to see an example of their work, i just pay them a visit or they send me a photo via email. if i want to look at the “high roller” layouts, i look at a magazine. i don’t feel magazine articles set a standard for modeling, they just show what can be done and hopefully inspire others to try improving their own skills.
grizlump
While I agree with the OP’s opinions, there are some other things that you need to consider. Every type of hobby or magazine that appeals to a particular interest is going to feature some article and pictures of something that the average reader is yearning to have, but lacks skills, funds, and other resources.
For instance, look at any custom car or 4WD truck magazine that are on the newsstand. They show vehicles that the average reader shows an interest, but can only dream of owning something like that. My future brother in law is like that. He subscribes to those 4WD truck magazine, but his truck is basically stock. He would like to customize, but he lacks the funds.
Besides, if I want to view photos of people’s layouts who are more limited in their hobby funds, I’ll view Weekend Photo Fun.
The same can be said for any specialty interest magazine. If you expect to see the average suburban tract house in Better Homes and Gardens… Likewise, the House Hunter TV programs all started with budgets (and showed examples) 'way above my rather modest means.
I am building a large layout - at my own speed, as the spirit moves me. If it ever approaches the appearance I hope for, I might submit a photo article to MR, and it might get published. In that event, the sidebar will describe me, accurately, as a retired Air Force MSgt.
I recall one MR feature layout that was the work of a retired farmer and included a model of his rather modest farmstead. That layout looked as good as any, and probably represented years of work.
It’s also possible that the kind of mindset that typifies a model railroader is found in people who follow professions other than landscape gardener’s assistant or fork lift pilot. If non-model-railroader Joe Couchpotato prefers watching NASCAR or college football while soaking up beer and chomping delivery pizza, he probably also can’t afford model railroding. NOT soaking up beer, and baking my (cheap) frozen pizza in my own oven, gives me funds to spend on my model railroad.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - behind schedule, under budget)
As for me I am a retired military officer, I was retired due to wounds, but I have been in the hobby since the late 70’s. My latest and greatest layout is the MOAL= Mother of all Layouts, it’s a labor of love and trial and error over the years with previous layouts. I can and do s
Class warfare is the last thing this hobby needs! I enjoy the large layouts often featured in MR, as the methods and craft art that goes into them can often assist me in developing my own humble (for now) switching layout a-building at present. Those of us with modest means and time share one thing with our better-financed fellow hobbyists- a love of what we do with trains!
And as for old Athearn BB cars and engines, Atlas track and even Walthers Cornerstone buildings, there is nothing wrong with any of it- you say “toe-ma-to” and I say “to mah-to” but the old stuff looks pretty good to me, even though years have gone by.
Perhaps these articles on layouts by those who can spend the extra money could also be more informative if the modeler would be allowed to comment on the “history” of his layout’s development. I am pretty sure that there is a humble 4 x 8 plywood sheet lurking somewhere in the past!
The same can be said for any specialty interest magazine. If you expect to see the average suburban tract house in Better Homes and Gardens… Likewise, the House Hunter TV programs all started with budgets (and showed examples) 'way above my rather modest means.
Chuck, you raised an interesting point here…we had a relative who bought an Eichler home sometime in the mid 1960’s as a ‘simple’ tract home…
Now, after one of my sisters inherited the thing we found this…http://www.squidoo.com/eichlers....and this…http://totheweb.com/eichler/...and this…http://www.eichlersocal.com/....so what we have here is that what once was an 'affordable modern home for the average man" has become something of a collectors home…
I don’t have a home layout, my modeling has been done on two pairs of HO scale modules. I made these while a government employee, I’m now retired. Both pairs of modules have been featured in the press - I did the articles and photography.
I’ve photographed other layouts that have appeared in magazines, not one was one of the professionals mentioned. One owner was a school teacher, another a food company representative (retired), another operated a small sign shop, and another one whose occupation I never determined; he lived in a modest home.
The only professional I know is in our local club, and he does have a huge O scale layout in its own building; it is still a work in progress. But others in our club are of more modest means. The largest basement filling layout is owned by a retired teacher, he’s been working on it for 25 years. Another late friend of mine had a large room with everything Lionel, he worked for the local power company. There are no other professionals in our local club, we have two church ministers, one with quite a large layout.
So I guess it can be true that some large layouts featured in MR and other magazines can be owned by professional people, this is not the case in my area.
Keep in mind most of the excellent magazine featured layouts did not pop up overnight, they were usually built over many years, the owners spending as they could. Of course there are the exceptions, those layouts built by layout building professionals. I don’t really think of their owners as model railroaders in the traditional sense, they are “layout buyers”.
As several previous posters has suggested, MR shows off layouts of a calibur that for the majority of so-called hobbyists will forever remain just a distant dream. Appreciate at the same time that selling dreams is really big business in our culture these days.
The most basic fact of the matter regarding this topic is that very few of us would be willing to pay $45 a year to subscribe to a magazine whose coverage centered around most of the layouts of just “average” guys on a more limited budget. By what one all too often sees in the way of “average” layouts by “average” hobbyists on some of these more basic forums, they are often so far below the mark of what is to be found in the pages of MR that it would prove disheartening, not encouraging, for most hobbyists to see multiple articles addressing them. Are there some exceptional layouts created by average Joe’s? Sure there are, but I think that that any serious accounting would find far fewer than you currently believe.
The last time one of Model Railroader’s editorials addressed the subject of hobby costs, certainly better than a dozen years ago now, they pointed out that the commonly accepted figure for the cost for building a quality layout amounted to about $100 per square foot. At today’s inflated hobby prices that figure would undoubtedly be at le
Here in New England, we have an annual event called the Tour de Chooch. It’s a free, self-guided tour of a couple of dozen layouts, whose owners graciously open their homes to a parade of visitors. Most of these layouts are located in neighborhoods of small but well-kept homes, with Toyotas and Fords out front.
And most of the layouts I’ve seen on the Tour have been beautiful, well deserving of publication if the owners chose to do so, at least a Trackside Photos entry. Perhaps it’s the desire for publication that runs more in the professional ranks, because beautiful layouts are by no means an “exclusive” item.
I would say that the difference isn’t whether they necessarily have huge layouts or not. There have been hundreds of layouts in MR that have been smaller. For example both the February and March MR’s featured 2 home layouts in each issue. In both issues one was a basement sized empire and the other was a 4x8. So I don’t see size as that critical as a factor.
What I see as the difference is that the magazines ONLY publish the articles that are WRITTEN.
That is where “professionals” have the leg up. They are used to writing more things, which gives them more confidence in their writing than somebody who doesn’t do a lot of writing. If they have an advantage, its that they have better camera and can take better pictures. If you don’t have good pictures, then you layout’s story will never be published.
You can get your layout’s story published, BUT you have to have reasonable modeling skills, you have to be able to write a compelling narrative, you have to be able to form sentences with proper grammar, spelling and punctuation and provide clear, sharp, focused, well composed photos.
I see that last paragraph as the hurdle that separates the published from the unpublished. I have always maintained that two of the most important subjects you can study in high school are public speaking and english composition.
While some of the featured layouts are huge, expensive empires, owned by the rich and famous, many aren’t. I have read quite a few articles that show photos from a small portion of the layout. Text explains that the rest is under construction, yet to have scenery finished. Locally, most of the layouts I visit aren’t owned by millionaires. Most are working stiffs, some are retired. Several have photos publishing in this years Walthers catalog. They would compare favorably with those featured pikes. Check out the trackside photos section of MRR. I am not angered by those fortunate enough to spend more time and money on the hobby than I.
It’s no different than football or hockey. How many of us can afford to buy our own teams?
…Or even just a hot dog and a beer… [:-,]
John
There’s something that appears in every plywood and BB layout that the press will never capture even with their finest cameras.
It’s the aura of FUN, floating above the pike. It’s always invisible, but the owner of the layout, their family and all who visit can feel it when they enter the room. And that’s what counts. Marvel over the exquisite photography in the mags for inspiration and education, but in the end we all have our own layouts to cherish and share.
That is easily explained. There are many different types of personalities in model railroading with different modeling capabilities.
next discussion please.
Rich