Tehachapi, BC

[Ed Kapuscinski]

One other thought - you might want to try increasing the contrast a bit and see what that looks like.  I've seen many printed backdrops where the contrast and/or colors are not strong enough (was someone trying to save on ink?) and it gives the shadow areas a sort of bland, washed-out effect that detracts from the depth of the scene.

So this is a really interesting point and starts getting us into some cool questions about our modeling.
The backdrop needs to follow the layout's color scheme and palate. In my case, the slightly desaturated look is what I'm going for. But for sunny SoCal? You'll definitely want a different look.

Also, I agree about removing the poles. They always cause visual issues.

[nuno81291]

I think you are very close with your first iteration. Even the ground color of the backdrop looks awfully close to your painted ground color. I wouldn’t scale it up too much as mentioned there is a great forced perspective effect happening. Whether it is too green for your taste I cannot speak to, but overall really sets a sense of place and depth.

[Cajonpassfan]

One more thought, Gary. I find it relatively easy to push the rules of perspective with relatively freeform objects like trees and hills, but not so much with man-made geometric shapes like houses. In your pic below, the eaves and ridge line of the house on the right point toward a distant vanishing point below the roof edge, at "eye" level. Just placing a 3D tree or a tall shrub, even a shallow one, in front of the offending perspective line would help. It may also help blend your 3D scenery into the 2D backdrop.
Fun stuff, Otto

[GaryHinshaw]

^^ Spoken like a true architect, Otto.     I will take that comment under advisement in future iterations of this scene. 

Time for another photo bomb; this time with the same scene printed 20% larger than before.  First an overview for some context, to remind you how this scene is tucked away in the back corner of the room:



Bakersfield staging on the left, Kern Jct in the centre, and a main line that curves around behind the Vortex on the right.  Next, a few shots showing typical operator viewing angles:







The ever-problematic model railroad corner isn't too offensive here:



(Pending approval, the section on the right will be replaced with more of this new Streetview scene, and the sky will be extended to the upper benchwork.)

I think this sizing is much better.  It also seems to be a bit less saturated when printed larger, so that's another improvement (in my book):





I was a little worried that a signal 1" away from the backdrop would stand out, but that seems to be ok in the above shots.  So the next step is to blend the Streetview images to remove some artifacts, extend the sky, and such.  In this shot you can see where a few of the images were combined (where the telegraph wires appear and disappear, and where the railheads at the bottom of the image poke up and don't join very cleanly):



Those things will be fairly easy to fix.  Then to investigate better printing options, and to figure out how to mount it w/o mangling it...  Comments/suggestions always welcome.  I, for one, love the trackside atmosphere you get from these images.

[John]

Gary - what's the height difference between levels - looks to be about 12-15?

[GaryHinshaw]

Much smaller:



Those two scenes under the Loop shelf were never intended as more than filler.   The lower deck scene connects Bakersfield to Edison, the middle deck brings the central peninsula (left) to the Vortex and then the Loop deck (right).   This is how I handled the unconventional choice of a 6' deep upper deck scene (the Loop shelf).

[Scottl]

This larger version looks very good @GaryHinshaw.  The perspective seems dead on to me and I don't think any of the features in the backdrop are distracting or problematic.

[James Costello]

I, for one, love the trackside atmosphere you get from these images.

Me too! Between the backdrop and the lighting, I'd be super happy with this outcome. Looks great Gary!

It takes me straight back to standing trackside at Kern on a very warm late Spring / Summer's day. 

[Cajonpassfan]

Looks really good, Gary. I didn't realize how tight the vertical dimensions are. This actually works to your advantage by limiting the range of viewpoints/elevations. By the time the perspective begins to gets funky, you can't see it anymore...
Nice progress, exciting.
Otto

[jagged ben]

The larger print looks good from here.

[GaryHinshaw]

Thanks for the feedback.  I'm pretty happy with that test, so I'm going to clean it up and figure out how to get it printed nicely.

Another photo bomb.  I started thinking a bit about the other side of the lower deck, towards Edison.  On the prototype there is about 6 miles of tangent track between Kern and Edison, passing by trailer parks, substations, and scrub land.  The first test on the other side of the Vortex was a trailer park scene behind a noise wall:





Not terrible, but kind of meh.  If I go with this, it will need a bit of resizing and repositioning.  A little further east, the main passes an interesting looking substation, so I thought I'd have a go at that too:






The problem here is that the substation is much closer to the tracks than the nearby housing (and it's at an angle), so the perspective is all wonky.  Fail.

Recall that this corner is at the end of a nearly 20' section of tangent track (a.k.a. workbench... ), where the tracks should continue straight.  The only saving grace is that this corner is deep under the Loop shelf:



I wondered if something eye-catching on the backdrop there might disguise it, but that substation isn't it.  Just to the right of this facility, the scenery becomes quite benign again:



I think I'll stick with something more like this all the way to Edison, but suggestions always welcome.

[John]

I'd be tempted to put a low relief structure in for the power station ..   maybe something like this .. cut back

https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:5089946

[ednadolski]

I wouldn't be afraid to drop the power station completely if it becomes problematic.

Ed

[Mike C]

  Maybe shrink the power station down a bit so it doesn't loom so much ?

[James Costello]

I wouldn't be afraid to drop the power station completely if it becomes problematic.

Or go the other way, given the lack of structures in general around here. If you had enough depth, you could always model the substation or the adjacent building and it may be possible to incorporate part of the substation as backdrop still, but an interesting structure in front of would at least take your attention. You could even move it either direction away from the corner to suit and it may work better visually - keep the benign in the corner because it works pretty well.