Realistic Modeling

Dennis

You are absolutely spot on. But I will add one more thing: Your photo is not overflowing with an overabundanace of details, people, signs, and cute vignettes, In my opinion an excess of those are distractions that derail the natural flow of the viewer's eye.  Sometimes what you leave out is just as important as what you put in.

Thanks, John. Absolutely!

I met Dennis about 3 or 4 years ago while re-introducing myself to the hobby.  Prior to that we had a small circle under the tree back in the late 50s.

I wish I had the space, patience and financial resources to accomplish a tiny fraction of what Dennis can do.

Ponz

An exceptional piece of modeling. First rate. Everything about it is well done. I very much like the hills and differences in elevation, the structures and visual depth, especially the factories in the background. The scene was very well planned.

MELGAR

My new creations are inspired by D.B.  I'm taking it a step further.  I learned a few things since my other layout. 

I can't wait to see your new layout!, Sirt. I know it will be stunning!

 Less is always more.  Some details are necessary to add to to the impression of realism.  But first and foremost the subject must have some authenticism to make a viewer look twice  or more.. and wonder is it real or is it a model'... Of course experience helps'.. Fifty Five years of taking photographs, and the ones I spend the least amount of time on come out the best'.. Go figure'... 

I almost said. Less is more. No clutter. Stick to an era you like.

Thanks Dennis.

S.

Dennis,

This is what happens when you have the happy combination of modelling/weathering skill that comes together with good taste in leaving things out that are "too much" and that take away from what you are trying to accomplish. It also helps if the scene maker happens to be a superior photographer technically and artistically who can make anything he shoots look effortlessly "right". 

Dennis, this shot is the definition of what good model railroad scenery should be.

Certainly will help the rest of us trying to do better in creating scenes on our layouts.

Wow, great!

Ed Boyle

Thanks, Ed!

I think spacing is very important also.  One of the most difficult things is fitting alot into a limited space without compressing too much and ruining the illusion.  It's easy to overwhelm by putting buildings too close together, streets too small, rails too close as we want to fit in as much stuff as possible.  Selective compression is an artform with many techniques to learn. 
At least that is a challenge for me...

@DennisB posted:

 

 

@DennisB, when I look at this shot Dennis, it reminds me of a scene I saw in a magazine from before I was born. I believe the article and pictures appeared in a run from 1967 or so that was one of my Uncle's that he gave me. The scene was somewhat different in it's overall content, but relatively the same in everything you said.

There was rails running through concrete with tractor trailers moving about picking up loads here and there. Big warehouses shipping and receiving material. Those were the closeup shots. The best was the far off shot that put everything together right down to the tops of buildings with their small water towers. When I look at your picture, it reminds me of that exact thing from my childhood that fascinated me into trains more than I had been at that you age.

Very nice, very well said,explained.  I still remember a former member who's name escapes me postwar realistic style layout (I know, and oxymoron when you haven't seen it) looks better than many completely scale layouts.  I think this is for many of the reasons Dennis has stated above and others have highlighted as well.

@John Sethian posted:

Dennis

You are absolutely spot on. But I will add one more thing: Your photo is not overflowing with an overabundanace of details, people, signs, and cute vignettes, In my opinion an excess of those are distractions that derail the natural flow of the viewer's eye.  Sometimes what you leave out is just as important as what you put in.

Truer model RR words were never spoken. The world, even now, is mostly empty space, and I'm not just talking about Montana. Even cities, especially after the automobile caused untold parking lot ravages, are full of empty space. I am fighting in my current layout "re-dressing" (nothing up to the standards in the photo) to leave a spot or two empty of anything but basic ground cover and maybe a tree.

So hard to do, and the bigger the scale, the worse the problem. This issue is one that makes N scale appealing - you can have so much nothing. Problem is, if you go that way, you wind up with...N scale. (Yes, I do like N - but N and O tickle two different fancies.) 

Steve, still waiting to see those shots that were taken down'.  I looked closely on your site, but they are not there'.. I was impressed with the blue switcher going through the elevated warehouse located on the corner of the scene. The cemented in trakcs leading to the warehouse were perfect'...  I would like to see those shots agian'...📸👀😁

What impressed me about the Sandy Harbor was how you were able to keep the track level and vary the terrain and scenery, which looked totally natural.

A number of years ago, I wrote to Eric "Eric's Trains" Siegel asking about his track weathering technique.  Eric replied cordially but declined to discuss the weathering details because he had learned from your book and thought you should benefit directly.  I went online, immediately, and ordered a copy.  It remains my go-to reference for track weathering and the photographs of the completed layout still amaze me.  You make O Gauge railroading look real and I don't even notice the "claws", even when you're looking straight at them.  What a fantastic contribution to the hobby!  Thanks.

Aside from the great modeling, IMO, that scene reflects a terrific sense of perspective, both foreground and background. It all feels very natural with just the right amount of elevation change to peak your interest and make you want to look around. And, the more you look, the more you find. 

That is a terrific picture, I'd love to see the rest of the layout.  I really liked your explanation and descriptions of the picture.  Rapid Transit Holmes mentioned your book, how and where do I go about getting a copy of your book, I'd really like to read it.  Thanks for a great discussion and topic.  It really got the ol' brain to ticking this morning, at 5 AM it was still in the wake-up mode but your post moved it into run mode.  Great answers guys.

Hi JEM. My book "Realistic Modeling For Toy Trains: A Hi-Rail Guide is available on my website (www.brennansmodelrr.com). 

Dennis

@Quarter Gauger 48 posted:

Steve, still waiting to see those shots that were taken down'.  I looked closely on your site, but they are not there'.. I was impressed with the blue switcher going through the elevated warehouse located on the corner of the scene. The cemented in trakcs leading to the warehouse were perfect'...  I would like to see those shots agian'...📸👀😁

Those were real photos in Brooklyn found on the web. Sunset Park area I am using for ideas. I deleted them per forum rules since they would be considered copyrighted.

Hi Dennis, It's impossible to see a vignette like that and forget it. Everything about it is memorable. That is true of all your layout work - unforgettable and easily recognizable as your creativity.

Bravo!

FrankM

It is a very good good scene.  I agree that it helps a lot when nothing dominates the scene - when the realism and "eye candy" are distributed everywhere roughly in the same measure.  it takes a certain discipline and balance to achieve that look.  This is a very good looking, natural scene that is pleasing and complete.  Not to criticise, but it looks almost too neat and too lovely.  

I work hard to replicate a realistic look on my layout, particularly in my downtown area which I am doing now.  One thing I note that helps the sense of realism a lot is that the real world is messy, cluttered and imperfect.  I try to replicate that too, by adding hedges that aren't perfectly trimmed and weeds growing out of cracks on the edge of the street, or as you see here, a bit of clutter, trashcans and litter in the street gutters, and "ugly stuff" like the rusty storms drains with litter in them you see below. 

Great photo Dennis!

My thought is why can it not be all that Dennis mentioned excluding the realism part. Does it have to be realistically believable to be a good photo or skillful modeling? I included an example photo of what I am thinking. Thank's for sharing your expertise with folks Dennis.

@TexasSP posted:

Very nice, very well said,explained.  I still remember a former member who's name escapes me postwar realistic style layout (I know, and oxymoron when you haven't seen it) looks better than many completely scale layouts. ...snip...

Probably Frank53.

@PRRMP54 posted:

Probably Frank53.

Yes, that's him.  Thank you very much!

" Denny loves Sandy"--my favorite shot of the Sandy Harbor.

That's been my favorite shot, too, Dennis.

FrankM

@DennisB posted:

" Denny loves Sandy"--my favorite shot of the Sandy Harbor.

This too is my favorite shot!  Dennis had achieved just the right amount of realism with the Sandy Harbor.  He did not overly weather and dirty up everything and crowd structures into engineering impossibilities ... rather everything is balanced and his lighting was perfect...very believable.  Dennis' work reminds me of something I remember when in architecture school when a professor said of those that admired Frank Lloyd Wright's work...."His artistry is unmistakable ... not easily changed or copied"  That can be said of the Sandy Harbor...a piece of model artwork that many of us use as the standard which we hope to achieve at least to a certain degree on our layouts.

I agree with Dennis and others who think that cluttering the scene with too much stuff, such as, vehicles, buildings, trains, and tracks, etc. is not realistic and not photogenic.

Looking at this scene again, I wish my own environment was as uncluttered in real life as the mini-realities Dennis creates and photographs. Just a thought

A probably unpopular comment on the original Realistic Modeling picture, it is very well done, but it is cluttered with buildings and trains can hardly be seen.  Perhaps the trains and tracks are in another section of the model layout. 

Charlie

@DennisB posted:

How many of you even noticed that's a PW type switcher?

It blended right in to the scene, courtesy of the subtle weathering and the scale sized boxcar behind it, (and the boxcar is likewise subtly weathered) along with careful composition to mute the large coupler. 

I do agree that overcrowded and hyper-cluttered scenes seem to distract me, but by the same token, if a scene is too clean, realism can suffer from the lack. Such a fine balance.

Personally, I have never taken scenery to these levels on any of my previous layouts, so it remains to be seen how succesfully, or not, I can accomplish my mental visions.  (My previous scenery efforts were in the very formative stages: Land forms, some basic coverage, etc.)  I find that when I see a good scene, I typically will study it to see what elements appear to contribute toward making it a good scene.

Andre

The NYC engine photo is very nice. I like the photo angle. 

Dennis, I remember the Sandy Harbor series of articles, very enjoyable.

It seems that multi-dimensional scenes like that are most interesting to view and enable the viewer to become a part of.

I think the challenge for 3-railers is how to far can we go with realistic scenery and 3-rail track, because no matter how realistic the scenery is the 3rd rail and height of rails sticks out, sometimes like a sore thumb. It doesn't bother me as I am a dedicated 3-railer, yet it remains the Achillies heal of 3-rail. To be sure, if I had the space and the skills I would model in 2-rail O-scale, it just cannot be beat IMO. Now, the track in the scenes above cannot be scene, so its not a factor in the overall impression.

Nope, not on my next layout. I found a way to hide or remove the third rail including improving the look of GARGRAVES Switches. Modeling street running scenes and 2r rusted sidings by snapping out the MTH Scale Trax center rail. Also customizing paper photos using M.S. Excel is the best way to create real buildings. Started the pavement and cement areas this week. Build the buildings first then I plan the track work and bench around them. I weather from the inside out, bottom to top. I paint backdrops from the back to the foreground. Sky top to bottom - Dark  down to light. I do everything in reverse.

                                                        Siding lead in for BTE.                                                  

Only extra work is that Atlas O is the only 036 curve track supplier. I  solder everything together to the MTH Scale Trax solid rail. G.G. is also soldered with them and all outside rails are jumped together for reliable operation. Scale Trax needs shims to adjust the rail height. 

SIRT when you say Excel does this mean you're sizing and scaling the photos in Excel? I hadn't thought this. Seems a really good idea.

@DennisB posted:

Hi JEM. My book "Realistic Modeling For Toy Trains: A Hi-Rail Guide is available on my website (www.brennansmodelrr.com). 

Dennis

 

I like it so much I have 3 copies.....I tend to misplace things and I once misplaced my copy for a few weeks........so,  I purchased another copy at a local train show....used, for a great price........then at a subsequent York I saw another at an even better price......so, now I have 3.  I keep one on each floor of the house.  I am always referring back to it. Every time I read it, I learn something new.

Peter

Yes, you can copy - paste - over lay other photos, home made signs. Crop, drag to size. I have been doing this at work for many years. Some thing will also work in WORD too. When you have the look and size you need, print. You can use photo paper as well but I don't prefer a perfect photo. Just crop or use drag to size as needed. I choose "better quality" generally.