faraway Wrote:That will become a great layout. I like the balance between space and tracks.

Bernhard, I was particularly able to appreciate that balance yesterday when I installed the bridge on the layout. We always have this natural tendency to fill the void, but going minimal with the Clermont scene is really paying off.









BTW, today I've sent 6 locomotives to get sound installed in them by a friend. 4 x RS18 (kitbashed Atlas and P1K) and 2 x GP9 (detailled Bachmann).

Matt

Some news from the layout. First, the bridge is nearing completion and fascia is being installed. Unfortunately, a section of MDF snapped when we tried to shape the contour according to the landscape...









Secondly, I’ve been experimenting with track painting a few times over the past years since I started using code 83 track. In the early 2000s, I would handpaint the rails with floquil roof brown… it was tiring. I even tried doing this using Floquil Rust on Atlas Code 100 (the old one with blobs instead of spikes)… no comment!

A few years ago, I decided to spray paint the track with Krylon Brown Primer then individually paint each ties with craft acrylic paint, varying the colors of the ties. It was also mandatory to apply a coat of dark brown on the rail to tone down the reddish primer. The result wasn’t half bad, but something was lacking.


Down: the test track; Up: QSSR module layout.

Recently, on my Quebec South Shore Railway module layout, I tried something similar to Mike Confalone’s technic. In fact, Mike’s technic is almost the same as mine, but instead, he use a more realistic dark brown paint. Thus, I painted the track using Krylon Camouflage Brown as a basecoat then applied light washes of acrylics over each ties. The result was good, but not that great. Color variation looked overdone to me. Also, the ties looked greyish, not brownish, like the real thing.

Last weekend, I decided to try another well-known method to mimick old wood: a light color basecoat followed by a dark wash. Most people using this technic are using Micro Engineering track. Supposedly, the detail is superior. But I’m using Peco 83, which isn’t bad at all, and was curious to see if things would be looking good.

First, I sprayed a basecoat of Krylon Camouflage Beige. This is a nice flat and neutral color that may represent a lot of material. It also handle well washes and can be spray without hiding details if not oversprayed.



I let it dry for about 24 hours and then covered everything with a wash of burnt amber oil paint and mineral spirit. I started with a wash with the consistency of a weak tea and quickly found out it wasn’t strong enough. My wash was almost opaque and at some point, I added small blobs of paint directly on the ties then washed them away with the thinned down mix. In retrospect, looking at my prototype picture, I must admit the ties are particularly bleached and a weak tea wash consistency would yield better results. The current experiment is better suited for turnout ties, which are always greasy.



I let it dry for a few hours then masked the ties and sprayed a coat of Krylon Camouflage brown over the plates and rails.



When dry, I ballasted it with natural rock from an abandoned quarry nearby.



Finally, I lightly weathered the rails using rust-colored chalk powder.



First, I remember Lance Mindheim recommended waiting about 4 days before using the oil paint washes and also waiting to let it dry again before applying masking tape for the last painting step. He was definitely right. At some place, paint peeled off. Also, when I applied the washes, the basecoat started to dissolve and exposed the shiny bare plastic. It also happened when I removed the masking tape. On some places, it was minimal and gave a realistic look, but on worst case scenario, nothing was left. I don’t know if ME track hold paint better than Peco 83, but it definitely a case of nothing stick to Delrin. I remember Atlas Code 83 was standard brittle plastic and handled paint better.

Anyway, am I interested to go this way on the layout. Seriously, the former technic is easier to do and give great results. I’m not sure about coloration, but it’s just a matter of using the right color oil washes. Unfortunately, this technic would need three work session to be done, including drying time. Other technics are faster, but also more tiring. They may even look artificial at some point if wrongly done. Anyway, there’s no easy way out. I think, I can do the oil washes technic without problems. Working sessions on the layout are short and once per week. Also, turnouts could be “pre-weathered” prior to installation. That would ensure a better application of paint and possibility to troubleshoot any electrical issues on the desk.

The new layout is devoid of any complex trackage, only a single main line, its industrial sidings and neutral surroundings. Thus, I feel track must be done with extreme care in this particular case because each little piece of track will be under scrutiny.

And now, I have to find ballast matching better the prototype. The one I used is too bluish to look good.

Feel free to comment!

Naturally, modelers are entitled to spend their time in the ways they think are most productive. However, while I go to SOME effort at least to tone down any plastic shine on my track, my own view is that there are so many things in a scene that catch the eye that, in my view, it's more productive to spend most of my time on something else. Just at random, I found a photo that shows some track in it:

[attachment=18158]

Two things occur to me here. One is that the track is mainly just dark brown, and there isn't all that much of a difference in shade between the rail and the ties. The ballast comes up to the tie tops, which means that any effort spent below the tie tops is wasted. The second thing is that the reason I took a picture here that included the track was that there was something else -- the relay case for the grade crossing -- that got me interested enough in the scene to take a picture. In my personal view, the thing that drew my eye overall was something other than the track. In fact, I would think that just about anything in a model scene -- a telephone pole, a battery vault, a relay case, a switchstand, a signal (not to mention a train!) is going to pull attention away from the track itself. This says to me that beyond any basic time spent making the ties flat brown and keeping the rails from looking like shiny nickel silver might not be as well spent as time on other details, scenery, structures, or trains. Your results may vary.

You do mention Lance Mindheim -- I drop by his site a few times a year. The last time I did, he was obsessing with the exact color of concrete ties in the Northeast Corridor, building an NEC layout with the ties that had the exact color, but not catenary. I assume the guy who was paying big bucks for him to do this thought this was a good use for his cash. I wouldn't spend mine that way!

jwb: Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I do agree, most of the time, rail and ties are almost the same color, particularly on well maintained track. It is more of a concern when the track is less well-maintained and ties are older and in bad shape. A scene is a complex assembly of track, ballast, roadbed geometry and several other "usual" things as utility poles and signs. In some parts of a layout, track will really catch the eye. In other ones, it won't. I don't mind paying attention to details like painting my track, it is a part of this hobby I actually enjoy. Anyway, There is not that much more effort involved in adding a wash and just spraying the track. But you're right, a crappy ballast job is the best way to ruin a layout, whatever the effort put on painting the track. Our eyes will always see the roadbed first. There's no way to redeem such a big mistake, so I agree with you on that, it really catch the eye first.

As for Mr. Mindheim, I see him like any other modeller, following what I think may work for me, trying out and altering the technics or just not doing them. He's merely passing down, like most people out there in the hobby, what he learned from others and tried himself. The day I'll think a human being hold the Truth hasn't yet come. But some provoking thoughts are sometimes needed to reflect on our own actions and to figure out what's really goind on. On the same way, you very pragmatic comments help to balance things.

I won't comment about the NEC corridor because I don't know what the customer asked. It's easy to throw rocks at the guy doing the job, but you must know before what were the constraints put on him. Maybe it was a specific request to not include the catenaries, maybe the give will add them himself or just don't have the cash for them... maybe not. Who knows? It's not because one is ready to throw away a lot of cash to make talented people do the job for him that he's got taste!

About the tie color, anyway, once you determined a color, applying it isn't different that applying the wrong color. But, if we have to judge a layout depicting the NEC without the iconic catenaries, I also agree the guy will have a hard time trying to convince me (I've seen too much posts by GEC to be duped!). Too often, people overlook those "boring" details. Planting telegraph poles isn't just about poking them on the layout. Many lines had specific crossarms arrangement and that is a big hint to get the sense of the place. I wouldn't depict the Murray Bay Subdivision with triple crossarms poles!!! Just two lines were enough for their minimal needs.

Anyway, I prefer to put a little bit more time on my track work than doing seminal stuff like nude people bathing under my bridge or a truck crash spilling oil in a river. And trying a technic on a 2-3 inches long piece of track isn't taking a lot of time and it's the best way to figure out how to do things and know first hand what works and what doesn't work.

In the end, yes, someone could get a nice mainline track with minimal effort, just spraying it with Krylon camouflage brown and maybe adding an india ink wash between the rails once everything is ballasted and maybe a few hints of weathering chalks where needed. That would be more than good enough, even for the camera lense. But I think, a few more efforts on disrepaired sidings could pay off. Thus, I think I will probably segregate parts of the layout where more efforts are needed and act accordingly to make sure the ratio effort/effect is pertinent to the project.

Matt

So out of curiosity I went to Mindheim's blog (I think it was the June 1 entry), and frankly, I wound up getting confused. You spray some light gray. Then you spray some oils on. Then you wait four days, unless you were supposed to wait four days before you did this. Then you spray some more oils on (I think). Then you wait four days. Then you mask the rail and tie plates and spray on some Rail Brown, unless you can't get it, in which case you spray something else. Then you wait a day. And you can do 15 pieces in the same time it takes you to do one (something well over a week). I sort of had to squint to see what the effect was supposed to be.

I'm not throwing rocks at the guy, I'm just trying to understand what he's saying and why he's doing it!!

Matt,

I'm with you on this one. I used a very similar method on my trackwork http://bigbluetrains.com/forum/viewtopic...30#p118158 . Unless we all reinvent the wheel, it is inevitable that methods that work for painting track for instance, that are published will be used.

Just because we both used a method of painting track that was recommended by Lance Mindheim, that doesn't make either of us slavish disciples of Lance Mindheim as some seem to believe. In fact it a poor modeller that will not use a method or idea just because it came from someone who they disagree with.

I'm looking forward to seeing the progress of your layout, and I hope when it comes to deciding on what to use for backscene that you don't copy the 'kindergarten cartoons' I've seen on this site, because surely if anything is going to pull your attention away from the railroad it is poorly executed modelling.

Robin

Didn't post a lot in the recents days. In fact, I was working like a crazy on the layout. A lot of changes occured and I think it looks even better than I thought.

@jwb: it's always a pleasure to have your input. Diverging opinions are the best way to improve oneself and look out for improvement. There's nothing more dull than people devoid of any opinion. And when I was painting 7 turnouts with this method, I almost felt I should have followed your advice!!! Anyway, the result is pretty good and I hope to post some ballasted picture before the end of the summer.

jerseycentraluk Wrote:Matt,

I'm with you on this one. I used a very similar method on my trackwork http://bigbluetrains.com/forum/viewtopic...30#p118158 . Unless we all reinvent the wheel, it is inevitable that methods that work for painting track for instance, that are published will be used.

Just because we both used a method of painting track that was recommended by Lance Mindheim, that doesn't make either of us slavish disciples of Lance Mindheim as some seem to believe. In fact it a poor modeller that will not use a method or idea just because it came from someone who they disagree with.

I'm looking forward to seeing the progress of your layout, and I hope when it comes to deciding on what to use for backscene that you don't copy the 'kindergarten cartoons' I've seen on this site, because surely if anything is going to pull your attention away from the railroad it is poorly executed modelling.

Robin

Thanks Robin, I must agree. We must separate individuals from technics. Funny to look at your painting process, we exactly did the same thing.

Getting the right balance of elements is hard.... extremely hard. Takes a lot of self-discipline, which isn't the most funny thing to do. While designing the actual paper mill and river scene, I added a lot of details on plan. When building it, I found out most was unneeded. The right landshape makes more impression than contrived scenery. And getting rid of unneeded extra elements saves a lot of time than can be used in a more effective way.



That said, for progress shots, please visit my blog. The last six entries will give an excellent idea of the progress. Most scenery was done with florist foam. Works wonder albeit a little bit pricy. The brown stuff is what Confalone calls Universal Mud, taken from an old trick of Lou Sassi. It's papier-mâché mixed with latex paint and a little bit of water. Works wonder for me, easy to use, forgiving, lot of time to play with it and can hide mistakes easily.

http://hedley-junction.blogspot.ca/





















Meanwhile, I also repainted my GE 44-ton switcher after discovering pictures of it taken at Clermont in 1978.



Matt

That bridge scene is shaping up very nicely!!! I hadn't heard of "universal mud" before. Looks like it works beautifully!

The more I look at this developing bridge/river scene the more I want to rework mine.

Today, I received my order from Shapeways. It is a CN woodchip gondola prototype for the layout. Many mixed feelings, but I knew perfectly in what I was venturing and decided to experiment anyway. Nothing ventured, nothing gained.



First of all, the material. Since is it a car that will see a lot of operation, I wanted it to be strong enough. The White Strong & Flexible (WSF) material was a good choice in that respect. However, and I knew it, it would be rough to the touch and need a lot of sanding.



Replication of detail is inconsistent. Many small details are well rendered, but for no reason, big holes are where there should be material to attach the trucks.



In fact, it needs a lot of sanding. The material is indeed strong and hard to get smooth. I suspect only surface primer will do a decent job. I'll take a try at take next time I can.



All in all, I'm happy to have tried this. But let's face the fact, just preping the surface is gonna take a lot of work, maybe more than just building in from scratch in styrene. Also, the cost is still high. Printing this large car in better material (yet more brittle) would cost over 150$, which makes no sense.

For these reasons, I think it is not advisable, with the current technology, cost and market to print large cars. Since the model is "easy" to build from styrene sheets, I think it is the way to go at this moment. Sanding require too much work and details aren't crisp enough.

However, if I build a large fleet of these gondola, I'll probably print the underframe with truck bolsters, brake apparatus and coupler boxes. It is one place were printing would save lots of works and where I don't car if the model is a little bit rough.



That said, the model looks great on the layout! Definitely a nice prototype to replicate.

Matt

If any of you have suggestion for 3D Printing companies or other material to try, let me know.

Thanks!

Matt

sailormatlac Wrote:If any of you have suggestion for 3D Printing companies or other material to try, let me know.

Thanks!

Matt

Matt!

You have made the experience i have had made a couple of years ago. The state-of-the-art today's technology in 3D printing is not developed enough to create smooth surfaces like on cars.
But were it will made satisfying surfaces are things like this:
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.mcgill.ca/maps/mountain-3605">http://www.mcgill.ca/maps/mountain-3605</a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Square_Mile">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Square_Mile</a><!-- m -->
Hard and difficult to scratchbuilt structures, but 3D printing will made the work much easier.

my 2 cents

Lutz

Thanks for posting the pics and assessment of the shapeways cars. It's something I have been considering, but was worried about what appeared to be a rough texture. Now I know

@ Lutz: You're totally right. Where rough surfaces are needed, that's probably the best thing out there. The technology and cost are not up to date for HO stuff, except if you wish to put a lot of bucks in the bucket. Also, hard to tell what is these material's shelf life. We will see.

@Nacho! It's been years I wanted to try. I think the technology is probably quite good for small non structural parts, but not for entire 60' long cars.

Matt

I'm actually in the process of photoshopping several pictures and merging them into a credible photo backdrop. Not an easy task, but still very interesting.

Tonight, I worked on Malbaie River backdrop. I had a few pictures which made a nice panoramic view of the river seen from the street bridge. However, I had to mirror the scene, Donohue and the railway brige were visible in the background too and were erased. Instead, I tried, using several pictures, to make the river disappear in the background with distant mountains suggesting a wide valley.



Also, the river was extremely agitated. I needed to make it looks more like a calm stream. Finally, the shore didn't fit with the layout. The right shore was lowered and the trees modified. It took about 6 hours to complete the backdrop.



I'm quite happy with the results since many iconic buildings that setup the places are there. Placing real structures on the layout there would be ridiculously hard as there's at best 6 inches from the track to the wall.



To scale the picture correctly, I inserted it in a photo I took of the bridge. This will help me to find the right scale for the backdrop and print it correctly.

Matt