Making Model Trains Seem Real

As I re-play the above video, I see that the camera angle only slightly looks up, and I could have had the camera looking up more.

I think this one is a little better, especially towards the end:

Railking Northern pulling some passenger cars

This RPO is a K-Line product I converted from ESE to Texas Zephyr.  The original aluminum finish was too glossy, and the plastic chrome finished vestibule ends were even glossier.  The entire model sans window glass was over sprayed with a semi-gloss silver paint, and then decal work began.  The final step before replacing the windows was to weather it heavily (for a passenger car) with sooty grime and apply several layers of dull coat.  These pictures are of poor quality because the lighting isn't good plus I am not a great photographer.  The photos do not depict how "real" the car turned out.

Could use a horizon at the far end of the layout, and a more scale brakeman This turned out o.k.

I added this Firebox cover found on ebay the seller didn't know who made it would like a few more drilled out holes to see a fire, I did add a light, painted then added some (traintender) figures, on the tender added rear marker light that I had from A.F. This K4 was bought out of a box of PW engines that the train shop used for parts, repainted since it was all banged up, bought the Pennsylvania in gold from radtrains out of Brooklyn, NY might change the rear truck to the two wheel version that looks much better than the stamped out metal, that was found on older PW. God Speed

That PRR engine looks great! JohnA

It's so interesting to read these posts and learn about all the tricks and tips you Forum folks have done to make your model trains seem more real.

Little things can add make a big difference. Arnold

Arnold...

Re: "Making Model Trains Look Real"
...is why I left 'The Dark Side'...HO...years ago. Trying to finesse the subjects to just a few rivets shy of perfection seemed to rob some much of the fun I recalled entering the hobby 70+ years ago. Back then 'reality' was heavily dosed with imagination, dreams, pretending. Sure, Dad would take me to trackside vantages around the city to witness iconic streamliners departing/arriving Washington, D.C.. But, when I returned home, I'd make a bee-line to the basement, fire up the 2343's with the 2500-series passenger cars in tow, scrunch down to get my face as close to that 3-rail trackside as possible, and get every bit of the thrill of the 1:1's passing. It was my happy place, my little world. That they were "toys" and, at best, reasonable facsimiles never entered that impressionable mind.

Now, to be wholly up front I confess to yet building model railroad kits, scratch-building this and that, giving the best representation of reality I can to equipment and scenery. But, to a limit; when the effort is 'good enough', I'm done. If it's a chore, it's a bore.

OTOH, I admire those who enjoy improving the reality, and the fruits of their labor.  That's what's great about the hobby...something for everyone.
FWIW.

KD (a.k.a., Lucas Gudinov)

My friend Santiago (whom I correspond with via social media), in my opinion, has perfected making his model trains look realistic. Here are two of his YouTube videos to back my argument




His camera angles all appear as if a person is basking in the glory of these magnificent locomotives.

Bryce

I like this low level viewing of these two diesels on Scaletrax which has the lowest profile (height) of any 3 rail track. Always felt that the track greatly enhances the illusion of 'real' by making the locomotive appear more massive.

Camera angles, photo composition (i.e. subject matter, background, lighting, focus) and of course good modeling all contribute to realistic scenes.  This first shot I took years ago on my friend's O Scale RR is a good example (not that i'm a pro photographer by any means).  It is only about 3 feet +/- deep (from left to right in the pic) and 8 ft long and looked just as nice at eye level in person.

If doing close up shots be sure shadows make sense, dust is minimalized, and details "fit" the scene...

Gorgeous videos and photos, Bryce, Sam and Joe. Thanks for sharing them and your knowledge.

@Farmall-Joe posted:

Camera angles, photo composition (i.e. subject matter, background, lighting, focus) and of course good modeling all contribute to realistic scenes. 

.

In addition, if shooting video, run the trains at a realistic speed.  If using sound, keep it at a low level.

Here is a short video I took on my layout:

Tom

My favorite "realistic" model train shots of my own making:

I consider them "realistic" because I was trying to replicate actual photographs of the real thing. I think that is one way to achieve realism in model photos. Here's what I was following for the platform photo:

Very nice Tom and West Side Joe. My only question has to do with Tom's recommendation to keep the sounds low. Aren't real trains very loud?

Arnold! Sounds are really impressive. They should be dramatic ( perhaps a scale volume) and Not melodramatic IMHO.
Of course when I run a scale diesel it really depends on how close my eye is at trackside! Loud enough to get my attention without Unbalancing the inherent beauty of a Subtle weathering. “ Scale sound “ is about balance I believe.

I might try to do this sometime. Neat stuff here. 👍

I need to learn how to use a camera first. 🙄

Quit pulling our collective legs here Erik :-)     That's a fantastic shot!    ...or an amazing painting!

It was mentioned on another recent thread that the Lackawanna ran mixed consists of milk and passenger cars.

Below are short videos with camera angle upward of an Lionel Postwar Erie Lackawanna FM Trainmaster hauling milk and passenger cars:

Arnold

@Erik C Lindgren posted:

I might try to do this sometime. Neat stuff here. 👍

I need to learn how to use a camera first. 🙄

Amazing!!

When I first saw Arnold's post I thought just add a link to Erik Lindgren's posts and be done.

That aside, just getting the camera down to 'eye level' seems to be the biggest aide to making our little toy worlds appear realistic.

Obviously the camera has an advantage over the human eye when it comes to trains. The level and angle you shoot something is critical, when you shoot a "god's eye" kind of thing, it is like looking at it with our eyes, we see context and relative sizes and know this isn't 'real'.  Lighting has a lot to do with it, indirect lighting that is the right color/warmth will go a long way to making it look good. Likewise, shooting with the right F stop, you limit the depth of field, so the picture is focused on a relatively small portion of the scene you are shooting (pinhole cameras if I remember correctly are sort of an extreme example of this).

Then there are the obvious ones mentioned many times. Shiny track doesn't really exist in the real world, nor are railroad tracks and their areas "clean", painting the rails, having debris, dirt, makes a big difference. Likewise buildings are rarely 'perfect', they will be muted from weather, might have things wrong with them. Streets if you have them won't be perfect, newly laid asphault, so cracks and potholes and rough edges make it look more real. Weathering trains, or at least making them less shiny, goes a long way.

Details of course are huge. If you keep the person looking at the picture looking at all the detail, they are less likely IMO to see things like oversize couplers, non scale size cars and of course the third rail. It is kind of the opposite, losing sight of the trees for the forest, you are looking at a total impression. The other thing of course is who is looking, if someone is a real rail enthusiast, they will pick up anomalies  a lot more easily than if I looked at it. 

These shots are certainly not in the league of some others in this thread, but there's definitely something about shooting from an eye-level--or even slightly-below eye-level--view that makes model (or toy) train photos look so much better than the common "aerial" view!

@CNJ #1601 posted:

These shots are certainly not in the league of some others in this thread, but there's definitely something about shooting from an eye-level--or even slightly-below eye-level--view that makes model (or toy) train photos look so much better than the common "aerial" view!

Joe, your model trains in your photos are, IMO, artfully weathered, which also makes them seem more real. Arnold

Looking up big time:

@Tom Densel posted:

In addition, if shooting video, run the trains at a realistic speed.  If using sound, keep it at a low level.

Good point, and if you run postwar legacy equipment that really *can't* move realistically at slow speed, as I do, you can cheat a bit and run your full-speed videos through an on-line conversion process that will preserve the original sound quality while slowing the video by half or even more. Here's a sample I shot, converted (slowed by 50%), edited and posted on YouTube some time ago:

https://youtu.be/AMDLKfemQEY

On the main point, though, the best technique I've seen is to use direct outdoor lighting if at all possible, or come as close as possible with indoor lighting. For example, Luke Towan is known and revered by many as a 'realism master', and if you notice, he almost always shoots his finished results outside in natural light, often with real landscaping strategically located behind the diorama model. Knowing how to shoot for maximum realism does not reduce the craftsmanship involved, but is really only an aspect of that craftsmanship IMHO.

Arnold you've come up with yet another wonderful topic.  Here are some scenes that I consider to capture realism on my railroad.  Although I've posted these photos prior on other threads, I thought they may work on this thread too ... as I provide a back story to each shot.  

Using natural light I shot this photo on my I phone 6.   This angle would be my viewing angle as if I were sitting on a nearby low rise retaining wall watching the train action during a late afternoon.  The afternoon sun reflects off the Docksider which has been in the elements for decades.  The crewman on the ground has just uncoupled the engine from the gondola.

Standing trackside as a VO 1000 exits the tunnel and a SW1 is about to be swallowed by the same tunnel. Photo taken with a Canon Powershot 360.

Riding across a grade crossing on my bike I see this view.  The weathered boxcars lend credence to the realism.  Taken with a Canon Powershot 360.

A SW1 as viewed by a kid standing trackside.  To me this photo eminates the brute power of a locomotive. Taken with an I phone 6.

A N&W J class speeds by as the brakeman on the switcher provides  a visual inspection.  Taken with a Canon Powershot 360.

This scene, at night, was shot in the dark using an I phone 6.   I used front lighting to create a scene depicting a full moon.   I imagine someone walking along the tracks and looking over to see the gondola loaded with scrap basking in the light of a full moon as a pickup truck passes nearby.  

The brakeman keeps a steady eye as the Docksider eases the train back onto a siding.  Again weathering lends credence to the realism as does the lower camera angle.  Again the angle is as if viewed by someone sitting on a retaining wall.  Taken with a I phone 6.

Patrick (Trumptrain), I just glanced at your photos immediately above, have not yet read any of your text except the 1st paragraph, but will read every word of it in a few minutes.

My initial reaction: Wow! Stunning! Masterful! You truly are an artist when it comes to scenery, color, scenes, photography, composition in photos, camera angles, lighting, etc.

My favorite is the 4th photo from the top in which the camera is pointed up at the diesel locomotive heading toward the viewer with bright lights and a very nice backdrop in the background. That photo makes the locomotive look awesome (like a real locomotive) and the overall effect is breathtaking.

I also love the entertaining stories you include in your Forum posts. I think what we have most in common is a desire to entertain our Forum friends when we post on this Forum. Arnold

@Arnold D. Cribari posted:

Below are short videos with camera angle upward of an Lionel Postwar Erie Lackawanna FM Trainmaster hauling milk and passenger cars:

Arnold

The basement window certainly looks real...the unsupported track and speed of that milk train...not so much.

Mark in Oregon

@Strummer posted:

The basement window certainly looks real...the unsupported track and speed of that milk train...not so much.

Mark in Oregon

Agreed.

Realism on my layout is one of my goals, but not the the primary one. For instance, I also like the toylike features including tubular track, 022 switches and Postwar accessories, among other things.

My attitude about my layout is the same as that of the late Btuce Manson about his layout. I remember Bruce saying about his own layout at the beginning of the McComas & Tuoy Pennsylvania Suite video featuring his layout: "this layout is for my own enjoyment."

I say the same thing about my layout: This layout is for my enjoyment.

I encourage others to feel the same way about their own layouts.

Do I like to share my layout with others? Absolutely. That's obvious from all the photos and videos of it that I post on this Forum.

Why do I do that? Again, I primarily do it for my own enjoyment, but I admit that I also like entertaining others.

Does it make me happy when I get compliments from others? Yes.

Do I care when someone is critical about my layout? Not really.

LOL, Arnold

IMO, this video, which is the last one I shot of my layout, is more realistic and reminiscent of The Put:

I believe one might have seen something similar railfanning 75 years ago in Northern Westchester County, NY along The Put. Arnold

@Arnold D. Cribari posted:

Agreed.

Realism on my layout is one of my goals, but not the the primary one. For instsnce, I also like the toylike features including tubular track, 022 switches and Postwar accessories, among other things.

My attitude about my layout is the same as that of the late Btuce Manson about his layout. I remember Bruce saying about his own layout at the beginning of the McComas & Tuoy Pennsylvania Suite video featuring his layout: "this layout is for my own enjoyment."

I say the same thing about my layout: This layout is for my enjoyment.

I encourage others to feel the same way about their own layouts.

Do I like to share my layout with others? Absolutely. That's obvious from all the photos and videos of it that I post on this Forum.

Why do I do that? Again, I primarily do it for my own enjoyment, but I admit that I also like entertaining others.

Does it make me happy when I get compliments from others? Yes.

Do I care when someone is critical about my layout? Not really.

I fully agree with the sentiment, Arnold. However, given the title and posts on the thread so far, Mark's comment, directing attention to the elements that interfered with making the scene "seem real", was IMHO fully appropriate.

The very essence of what we all do is attempting to create a model of something in the real world (or, to be fair, more often something we imagine *might* have been in some alternative to the real world!). Sure, at some level there *has* to be a willing suspension of disbelief by the viewer, an ability to ignore discordant elements in favor of the illusion of a miniature world, but I read the purpose of the thread as focusing attention on how to maintain the illusion, and celebrate efforts to do so. From tin lithographed cars rattling at high speed around a simple loop of tubular track on the carpet around the Christmas tree to the most elaborately staged and operated layouts, every model railroad has to deal with "edge effects", where the meticulously crafted miniature world we've brought into being has to transition into the "real" world we live in, and in which our miniature world actually exists.

[Sorry to be so wordy and somewhat metaphysical, but my wife and I just attended our first theatrical presentation in a long while, a staging of "The Tempest" at the Round Theater in DC, in which real stage magic was incorporated into the Shakespeare classic in collaboration with Teller, of Penn and Teller fame, and I'm still recovering. More than a little meta, with the base plot of course involving illusion and deception, and stage magic elements added to deepen the theme, to marvelous effect IMHO!]

Arnold

Steve "hit the nail right on the head"; my observations (not criticisms) were based solely on your "making trains look real" title.

Mark in Oregon

Mark and Steve, I have no problem with you expressing your point of view. In fact, I would fight for your right to do so. Indeed, on reflection, I largely agree with it. In fact, the first thing I said in my initial remarks to Mark's comments was: "Agreed."

I think that when I first read Mark's initial reply, it also reminded me of what the late Bruce Manson said, which I quoted. I thought that sharing Bruce's attitude that his trains and layout was for his own enjoyment was my truth and useful and helpful to share.

Maybe what happened was that I channeled Bruce Manson for a moment. LOL. (I'm skeptical about channeling but wonder about it.)

I bet Bruce's criticism of my layout would be, among other things, in sum and substance: "are you crazy, you want realism and at the same time have 3 rail track?" Indeed, he jokingly referenced the debate about American Flyer 2 rail and Lionel 3 rail during that video.

Bruce's layout was a 2 rail, S Gauge, American Flyer layout.

@Arnold D. Cribari posted:

Mark and Steve, I have no problem with you expressing your point of view. In fact, I would fight for your right to do so. Indeed, on reflection, I largely agree with it. In fact, the first thing I said in my initial remarks to Mark's comments was: "Agreed."

Fair enough, except you were the one who mentioned "being critical". As you like to say "LOL".

I think we're done here.

Mark in Oregon

I’m still very happy how this came out. Started airbrushing finally and made this my first engine to test it on. Might go back with a lighter dusk color to cover up the rust look. Here’s a good shot with some of the cab detail I did.

@Trainwreck nate posted:

I’m still very happy how this came out. Started airbrushing finally and made this my first engine to test it on. Might go back with a lighter dusk color to cover up the rust look.  Here’s a good shot with some of the cab detail I did.

Beautiful work, and IMHO a *very* realistic depiction of rolling stock that hasn't seen a good wash in far too long! In fact, the only downside I can see is that it makes the rest of your layout look far too pristine . . .

You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.  Start with scale or very close to scale size items.  Follow photographs of prototype engines and cars when weathering.  Do not run at 'Lionel speed".  Just the basics, camera angle helps but you ought to have the basics before worrying about that.

John

@Steve Tyler posted:

Beautiful work, and IMHO a *very* realistic depiction of rolling stock that hasn't seen a good wash in far too long! In fact, the only downside I can see is that it makes the rest of your layout look far too pristine . . .

Thank you I know, it’s a good thing that layout is coming down soon. Especially now that I’ve started weathering stuff. It all just looks off.