Large Scale Central

Deception

General Discussion
#1

reading the thread about hand laying and spiking track, made me think.

what do we want to achive with a layout?

i think, we want to decept. decept ourselves and all the other observers of our layout.
and we are in it together with the decepted. they expect to be decepted.
because a modell, a layout is a “make believe”.
we know, and our guest as well know, that is is not real.
but we try to achieve the impression of the real thing.
so like a theatre presentation a layout has to impress.
that is best done by decepting our senses even if our brains know, it is not real.

proof of this mutual deception is wood.
if we want something to look real, we use real wood. our eyes see the 1:1 woodgrain and signal to our brains, “that is wood”.
so we accept the idea, that it is 1:20 wood… - rationally knowing very well, that 1:20 woodgrain should be invisible to our eyes.

over the decades i have made some decorations for our local theatre group.
there i learned, that overkill in detailing is contra productive.
a decoration shall just give the idea of a landscape or a room, or whatever.
the real impression has to be made by the actors.

transferring this idea to our layouts, one could call the locos and wagons the actors.
things like bridges and stations, where the trains stop are the “extras”.
everything else is background.

if a train is in motion, where do we look?
we look at the train. everything else, like tunnel portals, track, bridges we just notice as being there, but they do not get our full attention.
only, when the train stops, we look harder at the surroundings of the train.

if i am right with this idea, we should all be rivet counters with our locos and roling stock, should put some detailed buildings, figures and acessories arond the train stops, but be “sloppy” at modelling track and trackside buildings and items elsewhere.

that is for enhancing the idea to be transmitted: moving trains.

hmmm… am i still on track?

#2

Korm,

I see your point and I think it is a valid one.

#3

Of course, but you need to learn to conjugate the verb “deceive.”

The whole point of modeling is to make something look like what it is not. It might be a scrap of polystyrene, but we apply our talents and make it look like what it isn’t.

#4

But Tom:

Oh what a wicked web we weave when first we practice to deceive!

:wink:

#5

Such a position would require trains to be running for the viewer to “get the most” out of the railroad experience. I see things differently. When we’re out and about–whether actively railfanning or just going to the store, the majority of time we see railroad artifacts, there’s nothing moving. We see tracks; we see stations; we see cars sitting on the sidings, etc. We see indicators of impending action, but far more often than not, no action in itself.

When I model a scene, that’s the perspective I model from. I want to create that sense of realism that stirs that anticipation of what we expect to come when the train passes through. I don’t run trains on my railroad but once a week or so during the Summer, and far less during the winter. Yet I spend a great deal of time looking at it out the window. I see what I see on the prototype in real life–stations with freight and passengers ready to go where they need to go, tracks waiting for a train to run over them, tunnel portals that at any moment could expel a fire-breathing dragon.

I know what my railroad looks like when trains are running, so seeing these scenes even without the trains anywhere nearby stir those visions in my head. The railroad works because it draws you into the scene and lets your imagination take over from there. For me, the actors aren’t so much the trains themselves as the buildings, figures, and landscaping.

Later,

K

#6

Im with Kevin. I find myself looking at my layout often and most of that time their are no trains running. For me the buildings etc… are also the actors when trains are not running. One of the main reasons why I leave my buildings out year round. I love looking out my window and seeing a dusting of snow covering the layout. It looks like more when compared to areas outside the layout.

#7

Korm,

I think you have hit upon what really makes modeling work – that is, the ability to “deceive” the viewer (even ourselves) into seeing something that is not there, or to not see something that is there.

Here is an editorial that I posted on my web site last year that explains what I mean:

Some of you folks have told me that I build super-detailed models. I appreciate the kind words, but – in all honesty – I have to let you know a little secret. I only build models that make you think they are super-detailed.

Sure, I put a lot of details into a model that will catch your interest. But, in the big scheme of things, what I really try to do is create an illusion of super-detail rather than to create the super-detail itself. It would be nearly impossible to create a model that faithfully replicated every item in a prototype. There aren’t enough detail parts available – or money to buy them – or time to make them.

I attempt to divide a larger scene into smaller view bites; and to concentrate on detailing those individual bites. When you see the model, your eyes jump from bite to bite. The details within each bite are like candy to your senses, saturating your ability to take it all in. I hide little things within the bites to generate extra sensory excitement; I think of these hidden items as “Easter Eggs”, just waiting for you to discover them.

I try to play other tricks on your sensory perception as well. I use lighting and sounds to either reinforce or disguise certain aspect of the model. If I want you to concentrate on a certain bite, I will use colors, textures, repetition, or other queues to guide your eyes there – “look at me!” If I want to hide some area with little or no detail, or where I have had to make modeling compromises, I will use sensory queues to distract you from looking there – “move along, there’s nothing to see here.”

I use your own imagination to multiply the effects of the actual details. If I show you a few strategically placed NBW castings, you will automatically assume they are everywhere – same thing with nail holes, or knot holes, or just about anything else. I give you a stage with a few major actors and your own sense of reality populates the supporting cast for me.

Bottom line … it’s all a mind game. You only see what I want you to see, what you expect to see and what you think you see. It’s all about your perception, expectation, and imagination; and my ability to influence them.

Sorry to disappoint those of you who thought modeling was an art; turns out it’s just science after all.

#8

Tom, i would be gratefull if you would give me that conjugation. maybe i’m not too old to learn it.

Kevin & Shawn, aren’t you afraid of “overkill”? if everything would be perfect, apart from being much more work, would it not stress the observer’s senses too much?
if, as Bob describes it, ones eyes are not guided to the important pionts, how does the observer can get the intended impression?

Bob, you expressed, what i wanted to express. only much better written.

edit:
i often think, that all our pics in the forums might missguide us.
for getting interesting pics for our distant pals, we treat the area to be shown in a pic like a diorama.
every little detail is made, to be flash-lighted, and observed at a distance, that in “normal” watching would make our noses collide with telegraph poles or other stuff in the foreground.

#9

Korm overkill to me is when I look at a layout and I can see everything or the layout is overcrowded with track and buildings. I think that is more stressful then having to walk around a layout to see each individual scene. I think its important to have less scenes but more detail, not necessarily to the point of being a rivet counter. My goal has always been to create a layout that tricks people. For example I have had a tire swing tied in a tree. People don’t notice it until they walk around the layout a few times. I don’t want people to see everything the first time they walk around the layout. Every time people walk around the layout they find something new. The scene doesn’t have to be super detailed in order to accomplish that. Its more like a game.

#10

I like your description Korm.
For me my RR is about photo shopped snapshots. When my train goes past a big oak tree my mind removes the tree and focuses on the train. When the train pulls into my main yard the lattice panels behind it disappear. Some of my RR is anything but “real” and it is more functional so instead my eye takes notice when the train and scenery blends well and blurs the line of real vs model. It helps to have a really good imagination.

Like your experience in the theatre I don’t super detail my structures letting my imagination fill in the gaps. I also like to look out my windows and see a building with a boxcar sitting on the track. My mind jumps reality and I can imagine how cool it would be if a engine was to come around the curve to pick up that boxcar.

I think no matter the detail level or a model RR we all need a bit of imagination for our minds to pull the illusion together.

#11

As my railroad is in the garden I have no made scenery as such: the flowers, plants, bushes etc. through which the railroad weaves its way, at ground level around my back yard, are the scenery. A deception of course and I try to portray a North American atmosphere in the few structures I have built and of course the railway rolling stock, hopefully, helps completes the illusion.

Originally I mentally based my shortline location in Colorado, it just did not seem correct. So a move eastwards to the Shenandoah Valley in VA seemed better plan and more in tune with the greenery of my garden. Even so my grain elevator - prairie sentinel - is less in keeping with the area but I felt the elevator to be iconic. A covered bridge (based on one in Wisconsin), a flag stop station (Colorado style) and a red barn are the home built scenics.

I think a garden railroad can always provide a built in ‘anticipation’ of trains especially if it is not possible to see the whole railroad from any given point.

Whatever the end product enjoyment and fulfilment are what is is all about.

#12

Yes, there are some layouts that a packed with scenic items. Each to his own I suppose.

Maybe less is more?

#13

Korm, it can be done to “overkill.” I see this most often on indoor railroads where every last little inch is detailed to the hilt. There’s no room for the mind to take a break–it’s constantly looking around for new details to discover. I don’t know that I’d say that’s a “bad” thing because they’re very well-done railroads (I’m thinking along the lines of those by George Sellios, Malcolm Furlow, etc.) But my mind does tend to get a bit overwhelmed by the amount of detail and it might make me lose that sense of intimacy which detailing a scene to the hilt might otherwise invite. I leave wondering what I missed seeing, as opposed to enjoying the concert of what I did see.

In the case of my railroad, I’ve detailed these various scenes around the railroad, but they’re only a few very focused scenes–the handful of industries where the railroad stops to do work. The rest of the railroad is mostly single-track mainline through a scale garden. Nothing terribly detailed, but the track, plants, and ballast are all in scale to still convey a sense of overall proportion that’s consistent through the railroad. I don’t have hobo camps or lineside sheds that would otherwise place a human element along the track, as it’s really not needed. The landscaping maintains the sense of scale and place, and then when your eyes arrive at the “hubs” of activity (such as they are on a very rural narrow gauge line), you get to meet the human element that relies on the trains. These sites just seem to grow organically out of the landscape, then return just as quickly. None of my communities are metropolises by any stretch of the imagination.

If there is one thing that doesn’t work for me “visually” on a railroad is a situation where the railroad seems to exist in two separate worlds. On one hand, you’ll have these intricately-detailed scenes around the stations with businesses, people, etc., all very well researched and replicated in miniature. However, once the train “leaves town,” it goes into this 1:1 world where there’s no attempt to select scale plants or landscaping–it’s a miniature train running through a full-sized garden. There’s nothing wrong with either approach by itself–I’ve seen some wonderful full-sized gardens beautifully complimented by trains running through them. It’s just that when those two worlds collide, the railroad as a whole becomes somewhat schizophrenic.

Often this is caused by the railroad owner focusing on the “downtown” elements to the exclusion of everything else, and just needing something–anything–to fill in the gaps between towns. A trip down the “Annuals” aisle at the local nursery fills in these gaps very easily and colorfully. The next year, as a little more time can be spent on these “gaps,” the landscaping might change to a more thematic approach. I found on my railroad that it was pretty easy to keep certain elements close to the track consistent from end to end (such as using similar varieties of thyme, sedum, etc. for a cohesive look) then filling in areas along the fence or other open areas that just “need something” with whatever strikes my fancy at that point in time. Chances are that if it was an annual, it would have to be replaced the following year anyway, and even if it were perennial, it might still have to be replaced because it didn’t survive the winter.

That’s one neat thing I like about my railroad–for as limited as the buildings are on it–few have changed much at all in the 10 years since I began–the scenes are always different because the plants are always doing something different each year. The sedum might die out and be replaced with thyme, or I might lose a boxwood or spruce and swap it out with something different. I don’t think these are major differences that visitors year to year would ever notice just casually observing the railroad, but I certainly notice it, especially in photos.

Later,

K

#14

I see modeling as a way to make things look real. One can never over do a railroad there is so much one can add. The more scenic and detailed the more I enjoy the RR. Is that not what we are trying to do when we model? Later RJD

#15

Overkill??? Nah, just “A bit over the top!”

This is Vic and Sue Thies Too Much Fun Railroad. Sue is our Secretary of the Orange County Garden Railroad Society and this video was made from our Oct 2014 meeting at their home.

I love these people dearly, but one can get carried away. Vic asked me to make a motorized balloon for them to land in Oz.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=X3eR-pdqM3g

#16

I think “deception” is not quite the right word. Deception has a dark connotation to it. What we do is stage the scene. I don’t go for a lot of detail in most of what I do, because details tend to get broken. Besides, when viewing a real barn from a hundred feet away, one doesn’t usually notice nail holes or other small details. So when viewing my barn from 3 feet away (a scale 72 feet) a myriad of small details would either not be noticed, or appear to be a caricature of reality. Just in my opinion of course.

If one adequately details a scene, then from 3, 4 or 5 feet away, the viewer will “fill in” certain details himself. Now of course when one takes a super close up picture, then all the added details put into the scene show up. But from a distance some of the added detail is mostly unnoticed.

The mind sees what it is looking for, and doesn’t see what it isn’t looking for, for the most part. That is how a stage (or scene) can be set up and certain things hidden from the viewer in plain sight. The viewer isn’t looking for something, so, if its camouflaged, or enough other distractions are placed near it, the viewer doesn’t notice it. Is that a deception, or just staging?

#17

well, even if a “Bell curve” (whatever that is) for me was something related to the oil business, i think boomer’s remarks are on the point. we are not all looking from the same viewpoint. (thanks for that, makes life less boring)

and it seems something gradual.

for instance, while Kevin’s first post (for me) seemed opposing to my point of view, in his last post are a lot of thoughts, that i could sign.

Todd, thanks for that video.
i looked it twice, including stops to study some models with enough time.

but, that layout shown is everything, i try to evade.
they have it all! and some.
but to my eyes it looks crammed or cramped.

i at least prefer, to exclude a lot of good ideas and scenes, restricting myself to just a few settings, to be able to make a RR in a room of 16’ by 43’ look spacy.

i just “folded” the room, not the scenery.
although i have 400 plus foot of track, there is just one viewpoint, from which one can see more than one track (plus passing sidings at places) at a time.

#18

I think everyone’s eye goes to different things.
When people visit our club layout some people see the trains but as they watch the trains they are drawn to the details, even the minor ones.
I enjoy listening to the conversations. I have been surprised by what they see on the layout that I don’t pay much attention to.
If I were to visit your layout Korm I would be looking at the details on your layout Korm and not the trains! I really enjoy your building details.

#19

If deception is not the correct word then maybe illusion is.

But that, in no way, alters the veracity and interesting points raised in the thread.

#20

One thing that always fascinates me is when visitors come to the railroad, then send me copies of the photos they took. It allows me to see the railroad through others’ eyes–the things that they found important enough to take photos of. Sometimes, it’s right in line with my “vision” for the railroad. Other times I’m left thinking “why in Heaven’s name did they find that remotely fascinating?” But such things always sit in the back of my mind as a reminder to always be willing to take a fresh look at the railroad myself, and to engage with visitors about what they find appealing to them. In many ways, it keeps things from getting stale. As I wrote earlier, my “hubs” of activity aren’t very large, so there’s not a lot of detailing I can do (or even want to do, lest I lose that rural, laid-back atmosphere I’m trying to convey.) I’m always looking for new ways to build a sense of cohesiveness to the entire railroad, and getting this kind of feedback from visitors really helps in that endeavor.

Later,

K