Where am I right now - Traditional or 3RS?

My understanding from you description is most of your posts would be posted to 3R Scale. IMHO. I believe that is also where most of my new posts will now go. 

I wouldn't worry too much about it, from what I read you're working towards a fine 3-rail scale layout and it takes time to accomplish that.  We can't expect a newbie to instantly have a perfect 3-rail scale layout...small steps grasshopper.

While most of my equipment is scale, my layout is far from what has been posted on the Weekend Photo Fun thread.  Once I finish a couple of projects I'm going to earnestly try to make my layout look better.  It may not end up any better but at least I'm going to give it a shot.

I believe that if you are on board with the 3RS goals, then there would be no reason why you could not post over here showing your progress toward the prototypical realism the is stated in the definition of 3RS.  Everyone has to start somewhere as they strive to achieve the "goal" so very much like the other forums and threads here on OGR, there are going to be folks at different points as they move toward 3RS.

As far as specific photos being posted, I think the idea is to post those pictures that best show what a 3RS scene should look like based on the definition provided.  This perhaps means that in the weekly photo thread, the pictures there should show 3RS as defined and hopefully inspire others toward those goals.  Any other pictures might be more appropriate in other threads within the 3RS forum.

This would allow one to be able to start a thread showing their different projects perhaps starting from plywood to finished 3RS scene.  Once they have a scene completed, then it could be part of the "weekend photos" thread. 

Anyway, I support this effort as all along this is the way I have wanted to go.  I however will not neglect any of the other subforums since I greatly appreciate what I have learned on all of them.  For me, I will probably still post more over on the largest subforum only because it is where most of my pictures "fit"....but I will be over here more and more as I learn from those that are further down the road toward the goals of 3RS.  This is very exciting and I really look forward to it!!

Alan

Since a a couple of people here have talked about weathering and Kadee couplers as major points to the 3RS movement, the fact that I still like to keep my trains how they came from the factory is really the main point I was concerned about disqualifying me. It's a desire that stems from the work I do with my father on restoring classic Corvettes. Factory originality, fidelity, and pedigree is quite literally everything in that hobby, with entire national judging events where points are awarded right down to the correct bolts and tie-wraps. The mentality just stuck after a while and I am not comfortable with making irreversible changes to my trains.

But anyway, thank you for the opinions and kind words so far guys. Looking forward to further discussion 

Nick....I understand about the changes to the originals....  I felt the same way but as I am going more and more toward making the trains and layout look prototypical, the oversized couplers and unweathered equipment / structures don't fit in with the goals of 3RS.  So....if I were to post, lets say on the weekend photo thread, a picture of my locomotive fresh out of the factory shipping box sitting on un-ballasted track mounted on plywood....then one can see that this would probably not be in the spirit of 3RS.  Now lets say I decide to make the layout as realistic as possible but the rolling stock and locomotives are clean, no weathering, and still have the original couplers.  Well...again, if that is as far as I am going to go, then again I have achieved Hi-Rail but not 3RS.

All of this still doesn't mean we can't participate over here because as we move our layouts toward 3RS, posting that progress will help others learn what was done in the process.  Where an individual decides to stop as far as weathering, etc. is up to them but as I understand it, the 3RS goals include making the models and layout to as close to the prototype as possible. 

Alan

Personally, I don't see the need or necessity to worry about which Forum is more technically correct to post in....so long as you're in the ballpark.  An intelligent or thoughtful post should be appreciated wherever it appears.

It is my opinion that the more people become involved in this hobby, the better.  The more discussions we have and that we can all participate in, the better.  I don't think it's fair or in the best long-term interests of the hobby to make members worry about which "bucket" their posts appear in....within reason, of course.

We all enjoy 1:48 scale model trains.  Most of us enjoy and are interested in real trains.  Some of us go to greater length than others to count rivets.  Some of us could care less.  Most of us are somewhere in between....and frequently fluctuate from one extreme to the other at various points in our lives.  But there is no right or wrong, per se.  There is just personal preference.  The hobby is there for each of us to enjoy....in whatever manner or scope or intensity we chose.

I would rather us all be a Band of Brothers than Forum nitpickers.  Keep the posts coming!

I agree with all of the above, except the concept of restricting the content of the weekend photo fun threads. Respectfully of course, Alan and the moderation team. I just don't think setting such restrictions and standards is too inviting a concept to those starting out in 3RS and wanting to join in the fun. Who knows, I may one day up and decide to throw my hesitations out the door and weather and Kadee up everything I own. I would still like to be qualified to participate in weekend photo fun until then. After all I'm still trying to assemble and operate my trains in the most realistic manner I comfortably can, right?

It had genuinely seemed to me that the mindset was the qualifier, but if the qualities like Kadees and weathering truly are mandatory, then my posts really don't belong here until I decide to take the plunge. Just trying to gauge the official consensus here, and I appreciate and encourage more discussion.

This is one of the best replies possible. I look at all the different categories as exclusions of individuals more than anything, and don't really like it. I would rather read the debates and opinions of all (you learn more that way).

That said, Nick, I think you fall into the traditional category quite well, with some things non-proto OK, some not and your penchant for leaving stuff as "stock" as you can. But some times you do count rivets so hard the posts are more fitting for 3rs too! I cant decide, you are balanced "on the rail", so maybe you'll be kind enough to just post a little in each!   

Do you enjoy your trains?  If so, then who cares?

Well Nick....I just joined this discussion because you invited some discourse.  I certainly am not part of a "moderation team" and I don't intend to get into a raging debate.  Rich stated the "goals" of this 3RS forum so if one is going to strictly follow those goals, then it seems obvious to me what kinds of postings are being encouraged.  My thoughts above and on the weekend photo thread are just "opinions"...no more and no less and as a matter of fact I only mentioned a few ways to satisfy both sides of the coin so to speak suggesting how one could participate.

Alan

With remarks like this, why do you even participate on the forum?  It sounds like you have all the answers and once you reach that point, what's the need?

Those that CARE, want to take their trains to the next level, closer to what the real trains looked like.  Convincing the manufacturers to make more prototypical items, more accurate decals, more paint, more parts, can only benefit us all.

I enjoy my trains more when they look like what my favorite RR used.  If I have to contact a manufacturer to make better trains or make an item myself to fulfill that enjoyment , that's the course I will take.

This discussion--and it is a worthwhile one--exemplifies why I have long preferred the term "Hi-Rail" over any other sub-category as applied to the 3-rail hobby.  To my way of thinking, there really is no such thing as "3-rail Scale" because (1) you are using 3-rail track to begin with, and (2) the track itself is not to scale.

And where, exactly, is the dividing line, for lack of a better term, between a nicely done 3-rail layout and the layout considered to be 3-Rail Scale?  Who is to make that determination, and what qualifies that individual to do so?  Are the distinctions universally  understood and accepted (obviously not)?

Over many years I have seen, in person or in photos and videos, many hundreds of O gauge layouts, and I can rather quickly distinguish a toy train layout from what I personally choose to classify as a Hi-Rail layout.  But if you ask me to separate the 3-Rail Scale layouts from among the ranks of beautifully executed Hi-Rail layouts, I wouldn't even attempt to do so.  Most importantly, it doesn't matter to me, but there's also the matter of blurred distinctions when it comes to separating 3-Rail Scale from Hi-Rail.  When I see/view a layout I enjoy, it stands on its own merits, be it a toy train layout or something where the builder has endeavored to capture the essence of the prototype.

I very much dislike the divisiveness some have tried to introduce into the 3-rail segment of the hobby.  I don't believe anyone really benefits from shoehorning sub-categories into what has traditionally been the most accepting, inclusive, and fun-filled segment of model-railroading.  And the result of such attempts is fairly evident here.  Nobody should ever have to question where he or she falls on the spectrum of O gauge that ranges from a loop of track on the floor to a world-class modeling effort that can't easily be distinguished from the prototype in photos. 

That sums it up for me too.

Where I post is determined by the audience I most want to see that posting.

If I want the feedback of the scale guys or think something is of particular interest to the scale crowd, I'll post on 3 rail scale. If it is more of a general interest topic or photo, I'll post on the "main forum".

I don't worry if something is "good enough" for the 3 rail scale forum.

By the way, did anybody notice how many non-scale items appear in my second photo this week on the 3 rail scale photo thread?  

Nick, your layout and your approach to the hobby in general is great - post to whichever audience you choose. 

Jim

You are where you think you are. If there are standards for scale couplers and weathered equipment, than I guess I am not there either. But I am having fun. And thats what counts!

You have completely misconstrued my post.  Rather than argue, I would say I was unclear and that the point I was trying to make is to enjoy the hobby, and by implication, the forum however you want and not to worry about such things.  Stated differently, if you want to go full scale, great.  If not, no worries.  The point is to enjoy and not worry about some sort of spectrum of where you are in the hobby or where to post.  

I found your initial (and second) post....absolutely spot on.

We all participate in this hobby for our own enjoyment.  Period.  None of us need to justify our tastes or preferences in model trains to anyone else.

Running a loop of standard gauge track on your floor is no more right or wrong then, say, a Norm Charboneau layout.  Ditto for anything in between these two extremes.

I think this right here pretty much settles it for me, as that has been part of my original thought process as well. I will continue to follow that model - thanks everyone for all your great collective input 

Guys who dig their own drumming... following their own lead.

That's where the magic happens.

Rick

Nick;

If you are concerned some will not like your couplers and lack of weathering, then post pictures of scenery with the train in the distance and at an angle the couplers do not show. Your Scenery is certainly Scale enough. And the train will look that way from a few feet away and angled just enough to hide the couplers.

Problem solved.

Like posted above:

This is all about enjoying trains, So do that !

How's this Russell?

This is our old layout (my first) that I was endeavoring to create the illusion of real with my limited experience and abilities. The E6 is a scale model and the coupler is not visible. Neither are the flanges unless you really look close. 

I used Scaletrax because IMO it is the closest to overall scale appearance and lower in height than the others and I weathered it.  Two of the bridges above are scratch-built and fall short of my intent but I hope to do better next time if building another.

I look back at it with pleasure however and consider it a good start!

Spot on Allan!

Take it from someone that spent 2.5 years trying to figure out where I fit in S gauge. Fragmenting the hobby is not wise IMHO.

Hi-Rail means running O gauge trains in realistic scenery. I think that "realism" is the main point. I don't think the type of couplers or pilots that you run is worthy of its own sub-forum. Those that want to talk about those things will, and those that don't won't. No big deal. I have always had an issue with the original 3RS manifesto, which I am glad to see has been changed. I always try to learn something from each modeler/layout I see. Even if it isn't my particular cup of tea.

Like the OP I don’t feel my layout fits into any particular slot but, it does please the guy that’s building it and his CEO/Landlord/Wife and at the end of the day that’s all that matters.

 I run Scale non-weathered equipment with factory couplers on out of the box Atlas track that I will ballast one day.

 I refer to my backdrop as the million dollar backdrop as it is comprised of Department 56 buildings in front of a larger than scale skyline silhouette made from ¼” MDF and will eventually have scale building fronts in between the two.

Here are a few unfinished fronts just to give you an idea of the look I’m going for.

Something I absolutely love is realistic scenery and scale scratch building even going as far as making detailed interiors.

I do the bulk of my posting on the scenery forum and although it doesn’t have near the traffic that other forums have.  I’m not seeking a large audience just sharing what I’m learning along the way so there is where I feel my work fits in best.

 I’ve never understood the mentality of those that make disparaging remarks about someone else’s work because it’s not up to their standards, it’s a hobby it’s supposed to be relaxing and fun and I’m quite happy not fitting into any particular category. If you were to ask what type of layout I’m building I guess I would have to say my type and that suits me just fine.

Nick. You've transitioned from toy train to 3rs without passing through hi-rail (toy trains in a scale environment.) Go where it leads you and don't worry about any negative responses to questions. It's a hobby. Enjoy yourself.

Just saw weekend photo fun got locked. Have to say I don't really get that 

To quote a familiar tune "Don't worry, be happy."  If people dealing with life and death situations (the military, police, emergency room nurses) can maintain a sense of perspective and humor, surely adults who love model or toy trains can do the same, no?

Have any of you read Mr. Melvin’s definition of 3 Rail Scale? The first paragraph sums it up! 

“3-Rail Scale is an approach to model railroading that strives to achieve the most true-to-prototype realism possible with locomotives, rolling stock, paint schemes, scenery, operation, and other aspects of the hobby within the context of using 3-rail O gauge track.”

Short sweet, probably couldn’t define it better. Well done Mr. Melvin

“-I still prefer factory originality in my trains, so for the most part I do not make permanent alterations such as weathering, fixing pilots, or adapting Kadee couplers. I do take on projects where parts can be interchanged and the originals saved, such as mixing and matching various Lionel products to recreate Hudson #5344 in its late configuration as a "Super Hudson"  

That’s not 3 Rail Scale

“My layout is currently a hybrid of toy and scale. The track is ballasted GarGraves with some realistic structures around the perimeter, but the town in the middle is comprised of my late mother's Department 56 collection” 

Dept 56 anything is not scale at all. Closer to traditional.

Sorry, but your modeling falls under traditional/Hi-Rail not 3 Rail Scale.

You openly asked for opinions.

“Just saw weekend photo fun got locked. Have to say I don't really get that”

Maybe because it was hijacked and way off course.

Kurt

Alright, so far I count 12 votes yay and 1 nay on whether or not I should put my scale related postings here. How about an official ruling from our host?

You asked for opinions and you got an honest one. Obviously, wasn’t what you were looking for? 

“Alright, so far I count 12 vote’s yay and 1 nay on whether or not I should put my scale related postings here."

Voting now?  Thought you asked for opinions?  In all honesty, most of your yay votes are from non 3 Rail Scalers anyway,

Just an opinion.

“How about an official ruling from our host?”

Our “host” locked the photo fun thread and I don’t blame him at all! I don’t think he will make a ruling here except to lock it.

Kurt

And you think that makes it right???  There was NOTHING wrong with that photo thread.  I'd rather believe all our opinions are valued here (by most of the participants anyway).  When you treat people like adults, they act like adults.  When you treat them like children, well.... you can finish the sentence any way you like. 

David

Best way I can put it is I was both confused and curious about them. Like I said, it all started with it being mentioned to me that this forum had undergone a revamp and the highly prototypical project I was beginning would go well over here. Then I happened to arrive here right as the 3RS "definition" crisis reignites, so I just wanted to get an official consensus on what exactly was going on here.

Make no mistake though - I am VERY happy with my interests and modelling techniques as they currently are and I am happy to post in either forum. Like I said, it was mainly a matter of curiosity as to which would be more appropriate. In any event I guess this brings the tally to 13 and 1 

David,  The photo fun was way off topic. Almost no photos.

Nick,  don't forget to report in over on MTJ

Nite all

Are we talking about different threads? I remember a bunch of great photos. But if you're looking for even more, perhaps the shortage is due to much too stringent restrictions and criticisms on what's allowed to be posted?

I hope everyone is eventually able to get on the same page on this and perhaps the restrictions lightened a bit so more people can participate. As it is we've already lost a few people because of it; seems like one step forward and three steps back if revamping the forum was to encourage more participation. But if your position is truly how things are here, then I too will be sure not to post here again.

This need to exclude and look down on others,  and assure one's own values are observed,  is unfortunately more common in society than one might like.  Carry on regardless .

I have nothing useful to add but two thoughts:

I like Nick's layout.  (Is that a cigar in your mouth, btw?  ;-)   )

Given that Berkshire President is also a Ghostbusters fan, one of my favorite lines:

"Ray, when someone asks you if you're a god, you say "YES"!"

That's it.  Let's keep it light and fun gentlemen.  

PAPA, you are one of the kind for sure! as Frank's Layout, you don't need any title to appreciate your wonderful craftsmanship, that in my opinion worth a lot more than an expensive brass engine. The wallet can buy anything, but the power of creativity has no classification and is priceless!.

the rest is only semantic.

Andre.

Indeed it is. One of my guilty pleasures and a very fun night we had in that photo 

Interesting thing is, I am sure, given these guidelines, I could pick apart anyone's layout as not being scale.  That is, if they are all taken to the T, point for point, in a legalistic approach.

However, as they are written and described as general guidelines I would find the opposite to be true.  Coming from HO I am very in tune with what it means to be scale.

It is all an attempt to achieve scale, which is what the OP Nick is going towards so anything within that realm would be appropriate by the guidelines given.  The examples give ways in which one can attempt to be scale, however, the guidelines did not attempt to be a checklist where all must apply.

I would suggest that for all those saying otherwise, put up your greatest attempt at scale realism next to the prototype and let us pick it apart.  If it doesn't pass muster then by your own definitions you must be relegated to the O27 forum, correct?

My point was to strike out against the elitist mentality, not to embrace.  By the guidelines given, I would think all who attempt scale realism are worthy, whether achieved or not.  My last line was meant as a strike against the elite who think their work is so worthy while others is not.  I know that we could take any of the elite's work and find issues with it.

My suggestion was aimed at all the naysayers who suggest that Nicks posts belong in the toy train forum.

Personally, I think all the sub-forums are unnecessary.  I think too much is missed and lost this way.