Layout as a canvas…
The parallels between our craft and that of what many would describe as a true artist are perhaps much stronger than you may think. In recent weeks I’ve read others thoughts and discussed aspects with Chris, and I’m sure we’ve another longer conversation in the works as a result…
I shared a photo (below) by Dave Blazejewski with Chris commenting how it reminded me of Beaverbrook (above), which prompted a conscious appreciation of a subconscious development in my relationship with the layout, the project and its ‘location’.
This absolutely does have a very Beaverbrook look about it. I think there’s this temptation to lock ourselves into locations and mortgage our future work against that commitment. You’re not doing this and I love how you see other prototypes in this same place. This feels like discovering how not only does it suit now but the place is adaptable enough to continue to suit.
Chris has so eloquently stated a feeling I’ve begun to foster towards the project, and the comfort that I have made the right decision with the layout. Although based on a real location (which has obvious benefits in terms of building in believable composition) I wonder if the bland industries, simple track layout, and almost cropped cameo view allow the mind to ‘paint a picture’ of where it’s looking based upon the colours worn by the locomotive?
I love recreating locomotives in miniature. Prototypes from so many different locations and railroads. There is something about the variety, yet detail, that I can throw myself into, that I’ll never get tired of…
(There, I’ve said it).
So one day you may be picturing yourself on the BCR Dawson Creek sub watching a red white and blue CRS20, the next north Saskatchewan as a yellow and green Carlton Trail GP10 shuffles around a few cars… perhaps you’re watching the Susquehanna near Utica as a yellow and black GP40 shoves another car of grain into the mill or the Canadian Pacific in southern Alberta whilst a brand new bright red GP20C-eco spots a few cement cars?
Even today, as I progress the faded red Florida Central CF7 I’m imagining Beaverbrook to be Florida…
Building on Chris’s reflection, I’d go further… I’d say that the layout is a canvas painted in such an impressionist way that by adding that ‘shade of colour’ (the locomotive) our mind subconsciously interprets the scene as believable… this is a huge benefit to modellers, although I’ve stumbled upon it by accident with Beaverbrook it was something I had deliberately in mind with my British OO gauge micro, Pont-y-dulais. It has given an excuse to run any of my eclectic models without concern (or some strange justification) as to how they appeared in Moncton, New Brunswick. How can this be leveraged on your own project? Do certain prototypes lend themselves more to this approach? I’d love to hear your thoughts. More soon…
For some time, I have been searching for a layout design that is highly adaptable (universal?) for many modern prototype situations. After designing many small modern-day layouts, I have come to the conclusion that a good subject for such layouts usually consists of a single medium-sized industry, and one or two smaller industries in the same location.
ReplyDeleteWhile looking on Google maps, I actually started to see a pattern in track arrangements that could be easily adapted to a small room. In most cases, the medium-sized industry was on a spur by itself, and the other industries shared a nearby spur. Usually all turnouts faced in the same direction, to reduce or eliminate run-around moves, which also makes this much easier for us when adapting to our small spaces. Your Beaverbrook layout is even smaller, but the principles are obviously the same.
Hollywood has been recycling movie sets for years, so why shouldn't we take advantage of that same basic idea? The movie sets are easily transformed by changing the details to represent many locations and even different eras, and set the stage for the actors to bring it all to life in a believable manner.
I see no reason why the same concepts can't be applied to layout design to make our small spaces more versatile. Even in my example, if the medium-sizes industry had to be swapped out (the "flip-a-scene" idea found in Model Railroader magazine easily comes to mind) wouldn't be a major hassle as long as the track work serving the industry could remain unchanged. As you mentioned, it would be the rolling stock and motive power (the actors) that would set the stage.
Fantastic Rob, thank you for the comment and builds, and I’m pleased my words resonated enough for such a great response… I think we as modellers, as craftsman, as artists need to be honest with ourselves about what drives or motivates us… what we love, in my case creating miniature locomotives, suits this type of plain canvas… but for those with a drive to recreate a place, perhaps the actors set the time point rather than location. Either way, the layout forms a suitable canvas…
DeleteJames
DeleteA very interesting post, but first may I compliment you on your Simpson #900. It is really good and especially as it’s in N-scale. It seems to capture the essence of the lokey which as you know was Simpson’s first diesel and pretty unusual as an SW900 with dynamic brakes. I got to see this several times in 1999 and a favourite photo is one I took of 900 with a log train from the dry sort.
Your comments on the “layout as a canvas” are I think very true. In building our layouts we are aiming, I believe, to capture the essence of the operation and the locos and cars are often the objects were want our audience to concentrate on with the scenery giving the context- even if the audience is just me.
Since I came back to raifanning and modelling in my late teens, as a result of seeing narrow gauge and industrial railways ( I was never a train spotter ), those were the railways I tried to reproduce in my models. I have therefore always looked at both the operations and the atmosphere of these. In the late 1970’s I settled on a US forest products shortline in the Pacific Northwest, as this seemed to typify the atmosphere I was looking for, and a BIG plus- it all ran better and I did not have to scratch build as much as a British industrial railway would have required. I have continued with this interesting prototype as it kept me focused at the time when my time and resources were limited However I am always tempted to other prototypes and I think his is possible if you could build smaller modules or scenes, as I think James you have managed to do. I have thoughts of a sugar cane tramway, a New Zealand bush tramway, a Spanish/South American mining railway or even a British cement works operation but no real progress on these to date
On a larger layout (mine is 15 feet by 12 - not big by US standards I know) having a change of locale is, I think, more difficult to achieve but different scenarios within the same area and prototype is I believe possible. For instance I am modelling, at the moment, the very late steam and earlish diesel era around 1962, but have stock, vehicles and some changes in structures and operations for, say, a 1985 and a 2010 time frame. This will need a change to dry sort at the mill and maybe a change to contract switching rather than the company doing its own switching. Having the alternative stock etc. means I can also build a module to FreeMo standards based on a pulp mill in the mid-west or southern states to exhibit.
Best regards
Alan
Alan, thanks for the comment, and yes I’m pleased with 900, still a few things to do before she’s finished and gets a blog post to herself though…
ReplyDeleteI am in awe of your staying power, focusing on one subject for so long. Your choice of switching timescales is another idea indeed, although you’re mention of Freemo modules reminds me that this is an aspect of North American modelling I thoroughly dislike, but if it gets you a chance to run longer trains with like minded individuals there is something to be said for it… personally, I couldn’t handle the inconsistency in appearance from combining works from several different artists together in one…
You mention another artistic parallel, whereby the layout, the scene, the composition are merely a way of je eye being focused on the subject… which is true… but where a great layout rises above the rest is I believe where the whole scene sings together. When that canvas can have several roles suits my personal needs, but I’m sure not everyone’s driver, this hobby is big enough for a myriad of approaches.
James
ReplyDeleteYes I agree with you about the jarring effect of different canvases as they apply to FreeMo. I also have a few reservations about the how prototypical operations are, but as a way of getting close to running a railroad it is probably the best we have without the basement sized empires found in parts of the states. However my modules are “built to FreeMo standards” but intended to run with a club layout and we have tried to keep the colour palette and scenery consistent on that. The module(s) are based around operations at a pulp mill ( the prototype is the now closed West Tacoma Newsprint in Washington) and I hope to be doing in plant switching and feeding traffic on and off the main layout ( Essex Belt Lines) as a branch to that. I have the base boards but Covid has prevented too much progress!!
I am surprised I have been building/operating around the same theme for as long as I have, but I guess that is testament to what I discovered way back when. I feel that the situation of having an industrial plant in a forest/rural environment is very appealing. Since I am a least 6,000 miles from the prototype research is very important and that takes time but is enjoyable. I also had to reconstruct part of the layout to convert to DCC but have not regretted that, although I was a late convert.
I spent a long time looking at prototype track plans and seeing how I could distil these and only then did I look at model track plans to see what I could put in the space. I came to the conclusion that even a large plant might be modelled if one concentrated on what a friend in the states said were the “wet and dry” sides i.e. the inward and out bound spots and yard. This also made me conclude that having different “industries” on a small/medium layout was not necessary. My forest products plant gives “industry spots” of inbound logs, wood chips and chemicals and out bound lumber in box cars or flats, plywood and pulp and the differing requirements for cars for each. I have tried to keep the track work simple and no switching puzzles.
And just finally I also agree the layout whether large or small should be a consistent canvas and I think avoid the weird and wonderful
Best regards
Alan
The discussion on modular layout building is interesting to me, as I've long thought that a solution to the issue of disjointed module edges is to build each module as a cameo. That way the wings of the cameo would hide the edges of the modules and therefore any disjoint between the scenes. Of course, should the backscene extend around the sides of each module, it would likely be a bit fiddly to get the track joints aligned. This is the approach I'd like to take when I get to the layout building stage, as the layout can be built up in stages.
ReplyDeleteI'm definitely over stretching the metaphor here, but I believe that by doing so you'd have yourself not a canvas but a gallery.
Tim
Tim, thanks for the build, and for commenting. I love the fact that sometimes these conversations develop, it adds a lot of depth to the content and I enjoy thinking about what others have to say, and how it relates to what I’ve experienced and strive for…
ReplyDeleteOne thing in particular I like, it the sound of the gallery. Chris Mears and I have touched on this in conversations in the past too… many years ago, my friend Tim and I had plans to connect our two narrow gauge layouts in a similar way. I think it may be too abstract for what many who build modular layouts are striving for, which I suppose is at the least a long run for their stock, but it’s a neat idea.
Alan mentions his club aiming to use similar materials… there is another conversation to be had I think about realism vs consistency. I think actually these two go hand in hand, and the challenge for any joint or club project must be how to manage this effectively. I’d love to hear how others have achieved this…