Tehachapi Upper Tunnels on a Shelf Module

[GaryHinshaw]

Oh please, Bob, no one is  "encouraging Ed to lower his standards to please uninformed onlookers", and to suggest we are is irritating.

Modeling is often about creating illusion.  Case in point with the ballast: having a realistic level of ballast on the tie tops can look fine from one angle but may look too heavy and crude when sighting down the tracks, no matter how realistic it might actually be.  In my case I'm finding that my sample doesn't look convincing, even though I applied it to be as prototypical as possible.  So I guess I'm considering lowering my standards to please myself.

I'm curious to hear what Ed thinks of his test.

-gfh

[robert3985]

Oh please, Bob, no one is  "encouraging Ed to lower his standards to please uninformed onlookers", and to suggest we are is irritating.

Modeling is often about creating illusion.  Case in point with the ballast: having a realistic level of ballast on the tie tops can look fine from one angle but may look too heavy and crude when sighting down the tracks, no matter how realistic it might actually be.  In my case I'm finding that my sample doesn't look convincing, even though I applied it to be as prototypical as possible.  So I guess I'm considering lowering my standards to please myself.

I'm curious to hear what Ed thinks of his test.

-gfh

Gary Gary Gary,  Odd that you would include yourself in my comments. I admire your work too, and truthfully, I did not find anything in your post that encourages Ed to lower his standards to please uniformed onlookers, except you agreeing with Lennart. 

You will note, I did not quote you.

I beg to differ with your statment that "no one" is encouraging Ed to lower his standards.  Lennart does, along with Jim Kelly, encourage Ed (and all of us) to lower his/our standards, simply to please uninformed onlookers.  I can read it (I just did again).  To say that "no one" is doing that doesn't fit the facks man.

Gary, you establish your own standards, as do we all.  However, all of our standards fluctuate depending on what we find ourselves to be capable of, what we enjoy, what we prefer or what kind of pizza we had for lunch.  It's okay to change our own standards to please ourselves. 

However, I do not agree that changing our standards to please uninformed onlookers is okay. It just doesn't smell the same, because it isn't.

Your advice to Ed about ballasting concrete-tied track is based on your own experiences attempting to achieve the same thing Ed is, so, it is good advice, since you are definitely NOT an uninformed onlooker.

So, I do not know why you would be irritated at my post.

Lennart's advice, on the other hand, is based solely upon the published advice of Jim Kelly and is given to Ed (an obviously skilled and expert modeler) to assuage the criticism of potential uninformed and ignorant onlookers, who may or may not exist...but who might possibly exist, so lower your standards Ed.  It is not based on any of Lennart's own experience about ballasting concrete-tied trackage if any.

Now, I don't have anything against Lennart, and I enjoy many of his comments and much of his advice.  However, I totally disagree with this advice.  Nothing personal Lennart...really.

I have had the same experience as many of us have had, of not being able to get it "just right".  So, I compromise my own standards to please myself, or until I learn the proper methodology to achieve what I want from someone else.

But, I sure as hell don't compromise what I've spent hours and days researching, photographing and spending the time, effort and money to develop a technique for, just because some uninformed onlooker thinks it doesn't "look right", or that I'm being "sloppy" as Jim Kelly advises!

However, if Ed, or you, or Otto, or Nate, or Skibbe, or DKS, or any of several modelers I admire were to tell me it didn't look right, and tell me why, I would at least take a second look at what I had been doing, with an eye to improving it.  I would not be offended one little whit.

As to your implication that I do not know about the "illusion" of model building, I'll say this: Kinda difficult to portray the "illusion" of ballast on top of concrete ties without actually placing ballast on top of the ties, don'tcha think?? If you've placed ballast on top of your concrete ties as "prototypical as possible"...and you think it still doesn't look convincing, I'm going to guess that it's not the ballasting that's the problem, but some other aspect of your trackwork the ballasting emphasizes, such as weathering, tie color, tie texture, ballast rock size, rock color, rail fastener size, color, shape...etc., etc., and...etc.  It could even be it doesn't look "convincing" because your track is not in a scenic setting yet, but just sitting there on your benchwork.

I'm gonna bet that Ed has already taken a long, hard look at his from every conceivable direction and is pretty happy with his illusion!

Nuff said...time for mo' pizza!

[packers#1]

Four words:

IT

IS

A

HOBBY

  Keep calm and train on 

[robert3985]

Four words:

IT

IS

A

HOBBY

  Keep calm and train on 

Not for everybody here.  Some of us make quite a few bucks off it too.  I really enjoy the income generated by my model railroading...so, it's not "just" a hobby for me...or others who publish articles, do custom work, produce detail parts, cast engine bodies out of resin, or work for various model train manufacturers.

Anybody not calm??

[GaryHinshaw]

Ok Bob, I'll agree with you that a literal interpretation of Jim's advice is to lower your standards for the sake of onlookers.  But I'm pretty sure that Lennart meant it in the same spirit that I did: some things are hard to pull off convincingly, so be careful.  I'm sure we all agree that Ed can and will settle for no less than convincing himself; and that we're lucky to behold the process.


-gfh

P.S. As I said originally, I think the top view looks really good!  I'm just curious how Ed thinks it looks in the long view down the tracks.

[svedblen]

I'm sure we all agree that Ed can and will settle for no less than convincing himself; and that we're lucky to behold the process.

May I just add one last thing, since it apparently was my comment that initiated this. I did not mean to make Ed "lower" his standards. To me it is a matter of choosing between prototypical fidelity and prototypical plausibility, and not of ranking any of them as "higher" or "lower" (Not meaning they cannot most often be combined and exist at the same time).

Happy modeling! 

P.S. Sorry to have dragged Mr Kelly into this.

P.S. Ed, looking forward to your next post.

[Smike]

Not for everybody here.  Some of us make quite a few bucks off it too. 

ok...

It's
Just
A
Job?

[ednadolski]

I'm curious to hear what Ed thinks of his test.

I've been slaving away cleaning out the garage & basement most of the weekend, so I'm just now getting the chance to catch up. (And I still have a small stack of scrap lumber to saw apart for pickup.)

You guys all raise some very valid points and I'm really appreciative for your thoughts.  These last pics were just a test, and admittedly it was kind of a hurried one, which is I think why I ended up leaving on more of the top-side ballast than I'd try for on a finished scene.  I apologize if that gave any kind of wrong impression.  My main goal in this case was to get an idea of the color and the granularity vs. the AZRM.   Looking at it in person and under the room light, it's kind of a mixed result.   To me the Minitec looks more to scale in terms of the granularity,  however the color is noticeably darker.  The weathering powders make a difference too, and I'm not yet sure if I have quite the right combo.  I'll probably end up playing around with a few more variations since that's really the only way to figure it out.

Meanwhile, the track crews have been getting started on Tehachapi.   Roadbed (cork) is in place and sanded; and the concrete ties just went down.   These are stripped from the C55 flextrack and glued down with adhesive caulk.  After the caulk set, I cut away the webbing between the ties with a Dremel cut-off wheel.  (A bit tedious, and I'm glad this is only about 28" of track.   It does make me wish for something like the Central Valley HO scale tie strips.)

Sorry these aren't the greatest pics.  I expect to be moving this into the basement soon since the garage is starting to get a little too cool to work in.








Next step is to lay down the C40 wood tie flextrack.   I've already pre-painted it, and stripped the ties off the sections that will go over the concrete ties.  This C40 is fairly delicate stuff, so a careful touch is definitely appropriate.  (The tunnel portals are calling too -- I still have a few more to make.)

Ed

[GaryHinshaw]

That's coming along nicely.  Are the narrow bits in the roadbed where the tunnels will be?  What is the thinking behind keeping them narrow? Access?

I apologize if that gave any kind of wrong impression.
Ed

Apology accepted.   

[svedblen]

Apology accepted.   

+1   

...What is the thinking behind keeping them narrow? Access?

I'm also wondering about that.

[ednadolski]

Are the narrow bits in the roadbed where the tunnels will be?  What is the thinking behind keeping them narrow? Access?

I look at it a little differently, in that the wider part is there to represent the flat areas alongside the tracks.  So I didn't see a need to make then wider inside the tunnels, and there was a chance that the extra width could perhaps get in the way if I wanted to use stacked foam for the land forms.

One of the narrowed sections is not actually in a tunnel.  I don't have much detail, but just outside of Tunnel 15 on the north side there is some kind of drainage pipe or culvert, so the roadbed isn't quite as wide there.

Ed

[Sokramiketes]

Did you leave the rail in the concrete ties while laying them, or did you lay just the tie strip?  If the latter, how do you keep the curves smooth?

[mcjaco]

Did you leave the rail in the concrete ties while laying them, or did you lay just the tie strip?  If the latter, how do you keep the curves smooth?

Wondering the same thing. 


As for all the other fluff in here, I will quote Mr. Denton after last year's Trainfest, "At the end of the day, they're still just toy trains." 

[ednadolski]

Did you leave the rail in the concrete ties while laying them, or did you lay just the tie strip?  If the latter, how do you keep the curves smooth?

I left the rail in for the sample pics I posted a few pages back.   But I found it somewhat tricky to remove the rail without also pulling up some ties.  (It actually was also a little harder on that curved sample since I also glued in a small piece of stripwood for a subtle superelevation.  I'm pleased with the effect, even tho it's not really noticeable in the pics.)  For the diorama the concrete ties are all straight, so I just stripped them off the flextrack a few inches at a time, and laid them down without rail against a straightedge.

I tried pre-painting the C40 wood tie flextrack to see how that would work out, but in retrospect that wasn't such a great idea.   The ME flextrack is stiff enough as it comes, and the paint just made it all that much stiffer.  So it took me a bit of extra effort, but I've at least got the flextrack to the point where it's just about ready to glue down, as soon as I get some more time to work on it.

Thanks,
Ed

[ednadolski]

The concrete looks a tiny bit pink in your shots... Probably a slight color balance issue?

Something I didn't notice at first, but you're right.  The sample track is just glued down on the blue foamboard, and that seems to fool the camera's auto balance, esp. with all the other neutral colors in the frame.

Ed