I’m in the process of building a large factory that will have roll roofing. Has anyone tried using masking tape for the roofing.
In the past I’ve used strips of styrene over a styrene core but have trouble with the roof wraping, even when well braced. I’ve used strips of kleenex for small roofs and like the wrinkled, gnarled results but its more gnarled than I’d like for this roof. I’ve also used strips of typing paper with success. Really trying to find a “preglued, precut” short cut
Generic masking tape will eventually turn loose its adhesivity, turn brittle, and eventually crumble to dust. Generally not a good building material. I don’t know if painting would help, nor if some of the newer “super” masking tapes might last longer.
I normally use strips of printer paper or construction paper to represent rolled roofing, but have used masking tape before for really large projects. The tape has enough “texture” to yield nice results. One suggestion though - spray the surface of the roof with a spray adhesive like 3M to make sure the tape will not lift up over time. The two sticky surfaces touching almost create a contact cement-like bond. Another neat effect is to first place several rows of Campbell shingles on the roof, then lay torn masking tape over them. This will expose the shingles underneath to give the impression of an older roof that was covered.
i’ve used masking tape for roll roofing for the last seven years with only good results to show for it.
start on your bottom course at the lower edge of your roof. rolls are 3’ wide
splice in a “new roll” every thirty feet.
overlap each subsequent course a prototypical 2" as your work rises to the crest of the roof.
paint it grimy black (for the tarpaper look), and if desired, a wash of color over the black to look like a colored cap sheet. flat roofs are done with tarpaper also; the pricier jobs add hot tar.
as the finished project ages, it will develop a prototypical wrinkling, and tend to weather itself. when dust accumulates; rub it in instead of off.
i know this system will last 7 years, and it looks like it’s good for another twenty.
Masking tape works fine for roll roofing, paint it with chrcoal acrylic and weather to taste. Here are a couple examples, and they don’t turn to dust after a few years LOL. . Fred
Being a total novice to structure-building and roofing, I put down masking tape and then painted it with hand-mixed black and white acrylic. I got the desired shade of uneven gray by not mixing too thoroughly. However, once it got humid, the tape has started to lift off the styrene so it looks like a poor roofing job indeed. Unfortunately, the styrene underneath is white, so it looks like a bad job of modelling a roof, rather than a model of a bad roof.
While masking tape is (and has been) widely used to represent rolled roofing in the hobby for many years, in actuality it is highly unrealistic in appearance when compare to aerial or elevated views of actual structures roofed in this manner. From the viewing distances typical of our layouts, rolled roofing would have no visible texture whatever.
Just as with over-weathering models, the use of masking tape to represent rolled roofing results in a caricature of the prototype which, for some reason, many modelers have come to accept without question. A far more accurate and believable technique is to use light weight, appropriately cut strips of common printer paper painted with grimy black paint, similar strips of tissue paper painted over after application, or the commercially available scale rolled roofing, which I think is a type of thin foil.
As with selective compression and other tricks, making our models look what is perceived as correct outweigh making them actually scale, at least to the majority of modelers and viewers. I get more positive comments from one of my caricature models than all the scale perfect models I have built. I think exact scale models look boring and plain and maybe even uninspiring. It’s like the difference between the Mona Lisa and a color photograph of a pretty woman. Fred
Having an appreciation for art and some artistic talent with watercolors myself, it is my hope to translate that artistic eye into the modeling that I do on my layout. I like the idea of having some “artistic license” with modeling, it gives a personal touch to what I am doing. And selective compression is such a wide area, it leaves much room for intrepretation. Heck, some of the best weathering I have seen could really be explained as a “work of art”, in the hobby that is. I am not so sure that we will ever be seeing many UTLX weathered tank cars on display at
A point that was brought up a little while back on a different thread (over-weathering, I think) is worth noting in this discussion. It was indicated there that a great many modelers don’t seem to honestly make the effort to model from reality but rather will shortcut by copying some other hobbyist’s interpretation of reality or simply their techniques seen in the magazines, be they good or bad. This idea would certainly account for why so many model railroads appear as caricatures of the real world, rather than being truly realistic. You will note, however, that at least 95% of the grand layouts that are featured in the magazines are most definitely NOT of the caricature type. So the folks at the top of the hobby don’t seem to favor unrealistic modeling. That said, is so-called artist’s license perhaps often little more than just an excuse to justify having done a poor modeling job? I have to wonder.
I totally disagree. Without going into a deep proof by citing popular layout after layout that has been built to caricature standards, just buy or borrow a book called; Model Railroading with John Allen by Linn Westcott and see if you can find any caricature models in it. Guess he is just a copy cat and a poor modeler in your book? I repeat, all model railroads are caricatures, even yours. Old croocked lea
I would love to know which magazine features layouts that so overwhelmingly feature true prototype modeling. Aside from Jack Burgess’ Yosemite Valley, I can think of none. And even his layout with its rock for rock and tree for tree scene duplication is still a caricature by definition.
Anyone who uses scale figures has created a caricature IMHO. The only realistic figures I have ever seen were on Malcolm Furlow’s G-scale masterpiece featured in MR many years ago where he used actual photo cutouts of real people in his photography work. Anything short of that is a caricature of human life. Do the headlights on the vehicles have actual lenses or white paint dots? Is there a driver behind the wheel? Do the power poles have scale lines, transformers and guy wires? (I’ve heard people argue that “Scale phone lines would not be visible” - funny, but I’ve always seen them when I drive down the road) Are the ties wood with plates on every one and joint bars every 39 scale feet? If not, these too are caricatures. Is the backdrop painted? I would argue that all paintings are caricatures - even the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel or the Mona Lisa. Only photographs reflect true reality. </
How many popular layouts are there in caricature standards? Having one or two leaning buildings in decay is fine as the real world has them, but a whole layout is a little too much character to be believeable.As for roofing,try using fine, smooth typing paper or even wrapping tissue, painted the shade of age you’re striving for, cut into strips, and it doesn’t wrinkle like tissue. A large factory will have a visable roof, take your time and it’ll look better than masking tape .which has a little to much texture.
Is that leaning shanty a model??? You gotta be kidding me!! I was SURE that was the real thing - especially with the scenery around it. Outstanding work!! The roof is one of the most realistically weathered ones I have EVER seen. Chalk a huge one up for masking tape - you da man, Fred!!!
