Posing A Question About THe Hobby
#16
Some of y'all need to lighten up some.You seem to be forgetting that this is a hobby ,and hobbies are meant to be enjoyed by the hobbiest in their own way not yours.Personally I don't care how the layout was built or who built it for who,or even what scale it is.

If there is something useful to me that I can adapt to my scale(s) of choice I am a happy camper.If the layout is neatly done and true to its scale I am a happy camper.I may be a bit jealous of the fact that someone else could afford to have their layout built for them,but then I'm thankful I have the time to build my own where as this person may not have had that time but did have the money to have their modeling dreams become a reality.

Parting shot,Remember this is a hobby meant to be enjoyed "YOUR WAY"
Johnathan (Catt) Edwards
"The Ol Furrball"

"I'm old school,I still believe in respect"
Reply
#17
MM, I am in Whole Hearted agreement with you. What's more is, this is not the first time for MR to do this. The other was an engine terminal layout, which was featured about a year ago?
I know that someone here is replicating it, but they are doing all the work.
I am into hot rods. If I bought a kit car, I could say that I built it, but it is not a real hot rod. If I bought the original car, and made the modifications, that is a hot rod.

Matt
Don't follow me, I'm lost too.
Reply
#18
wgrider Wrote:Well part of me agrees that there's alot to be said about a layout or kit that was bought from a builder. There's nothing like getting knee deep into layout building or structure building , then again I purchased a few of my builds from someone but my layout is all me as well as a bunch of other stuff I 've built. I like the quote The "limited space" was something like 20' x 40'... that is funney I only dream about a space that big . Ya I think your being too much of a purist. Icon_lol

About which point.? The 20' x 40' issue wasn't raised by me.


Or do you mean that buying a pre-built structure for your layout is the same thing as hiring a contractor to do the whole thing for you professionally? I don't agree with that concept, as I've said.
Reply
#19
I don't really care one way or the other. If the layout in question has something in it that I can learn from, it doesn't matter if the builder is a "professional" or just a modeler doing it for fun. If it doesn't show me anything I can use, I may read it out of curiosity. I probably buy less than 3 issues of Model Railroader and Railroad Model Craftsman per year. Some years I don't buy any. If they only have 1 article that I can find use for, I look at it and decide if it is an article that is likely to be combined with other similar articles to be put into a book. If that is the case, I'll wait for the book and see if it has enough useful information to prompt me to purchase it.
Reply
#20
My opinions on custom designed or custom built layouts in Model Railroader Magazine ?
1) I can learn something about how to do things on my own layout from seeing how others do things on other layouts.
2) I don't really care who that did the thing I admire and want to emulate.
3) It is none of my business whether someone else did their own e.g backdrops, benchwork, wiring, engine painting or whatever on their layout.

Your mileage may vary Goldth

Smile,
Steinjr
***********************************************************************************************************************************************

Whatever blows your skirt up, but I see a very big difference between "getting some help" and hiring a contractor. I imagine other modelers do, to. Where I do agree with you is in the instances where "help" with a layout comes from professionals such as electricians, computer experts, artists and others of that caliber. When that happens, I would require it to be labeled and presented as a "professional group build", not the work or layout of the owner/operator.
Reply
#21
I am in agreement to a point. I feel that there is room for any layout whether or not you built it yourself. I also feel that if they didn't mention in the article the name of the company hired to build said layout the idea of MR "sponsoring" a 5 page advertisement for the builder would be eliminated. And I would be fine with it then.

Dave
-Dave
Reply
#22
Puddlejumper Wrote:I am in agreement to a point. I feel that there is room for any layout whether or not you built it yourself. I also feel that if they didn't mention in the article the name of the company hired to build said layout the idea of MR "sponsoring" a 5 page advertisement for the builder would be eliminated. And I would be fine with it then.

Dave
************************************************************************************************************************************************

I don't think they are allowed to do that legally. It would be like quoting something without crediting the author.
[b]

Re: Posing A Question About THe Hobby

Quote:Postby Catt on Wed Jan 28, 2009 7:15 am
Some of y'all need to lighten up some.
***********************************************************************************************************************************************
[b]Is discussion and debate a violation of forum rules?
Reply
#23
I think that we're losing sight of the original topic here, which is not about the validity of commercially-built layouts, but with this particular presentation of them in MR, where the layout article appears to be more a display of what one may buy from the builder, as opposed to what the owner was able to build himself. Usually, a feature article on a layout focuses on the owner's accomplishments, not on the work of a "for hire" company.

As noted, this is a hobby that we each pursue in our own way. Because we may disagree with another's methods doesn't make those methods "wrong". In my opinion, though, a magazine that purports to promote the hobby should, editorially-speaking, promote it as a hobby, and leave the commercial aspect of it to the Advertising Department.

Wayne
Reply
#24
I prefer to do my own construction, but that is a function of my nature, my circumstances (retired), and my solvency (limited). I would never begrudge, nor judge, those who use common sense and other resources as they deem suitable to find a way to enjoy this great hobby.

As for Kalmbach's editors' decisions to print articles of the kind they do, I suspect that those decisions are borne of the mandates given to them in keeping with running a publishing business. With some room for exploration and creativity, the bills have to be paid. Salaries are owed. When those needs can be met via a certain formula of publishing from month to month, and if it works, I wouldn't stand in their way. I am always in a position to buy their monthly or decline to...which I did this month.

When they realize that their formula, or policies, begin to weaken their business footing, the staff at Kalmbach are sure to make some adjustments if they want to stay in business. Some of that would be preceded by an exploration, perhaps via working groups and focus groups and surveys. At least, so I would surmise. So, I wonder if this particular article isn't either explorative or in response to something they learned from focus group discussions or some other substantial feedback. If so, I would have to conclude that my own tastes are irrelevant, but only in this edition. I do not find, nor feel, that my tastes are not being met consistently, and not even most often. To that end, I am prepared for the occasional foray into new territory, or a reversion into previously covered territory, as long as I can continue to enjoy the magazine. Even so, if the time comes when I no longer purchase it from month to month, I have other avenues of readership.

Finally, as others have pointed out, even a bad article must have something in it that is of value. Not that I feel this was a bad article or a bad move...there was nothing on the cover that appealed to me, so I opted to leave it on the shelf this month. But as Stein has said, no matter the author, the image taker, the planner, the person who drove the last screw or soldered the last feeder, the product has a Gestalt where the whole is greater than all its deficient, defective, commercial, hand-made, or divinely inspired parts. It is what I would look to in a determination of what it could offer me in the published form, not its provenance.
Reply
#25
Selector: you should have been a politician.
Reply
#26
MountainMan Wrote:I see a very big difference between "getting some help" and hiring a contractor. I imagine other modelers do, to.

Just curious : why is this "very big difference" important to you ?

Smile,
Stein
Reply
#27
I see a lot of articles like that in MR. Sure the layouts are very nice , but I just cant get into it the same way as something like, a club layout built by it's members or, a personal layout built by the owner. It's like some one saying "look what I paid __________ CO. to do.'' Not ''Hay I did this and here's how." I am just more interested in the personal effort and skill than the $$$ spent.
 My other car is a locomotive, ARHS restoration crew  
Reply
#28
e-paw Wrote:I see a lot of articles like that in MR. Sure the layouts are very nice , but I just cant get into it the same way as something like, a club layout built by it's members or, a personal layout built by the owner. It's like some one saying "look what I paid __________ CO. to do.'' Not ''Hay I did this and here's how." I am just more interested in the personal effort and skill than the $$$ spent.

I think that is well said and thats how i feel about those articles as well Thumbsup Thumbsup
Josh Mader

Maders Trains
Offering everyday low prices for the Model Railroad World
Reply
#29
steinjr Wrote:
MountainMan Wrote:I see a very big difference between "getting some help" and hiring a contractor. I imagine other modelers do, to.
********************************************************************************************************************************************
Just curious : why is this "very big difference" important to you ?

Smile,
Stein
********************************************************************************************************************************************
Why is anything important to any of us? Is it somehow wrong to hold a specific belief or position on an issue? Why is my opinion of such importance to you? In a very real sense, modeling is all about our passion for a hobby. Why shouldn't that passion extend to our thoughts on the hobby, as well? Beyond, that, I'm not sure the very basic human issue of what we believe in and why is suitable for a forum as limited in scope as this one is, and it is certainly way too controversial.

MR Magazine purports to be devoted to the modeling public. That is who they sell to, and that is who their advertisers sell to. I'm not sure if a magazine devoted only to the commercial modelers would be economically feasible, but perhaps they should give it a try. We could all write in from time to time and specify what kind of layouts we wanted to see, and MR could solicit the layouts from the commercial model makers for their published payouts. That way, we would see only the best of the best, and we would be getting tips and advice from true professionals. Would you be interested enough in such a magazine to subscribe to it? My feeling is that there are dozens of such magazines and books already on the market, such as the entire professionally created series by Kalmbach, for one. But perhaps you are right, and that is the way they should go. And we should stop our feeble efforts, write down our "givens and druthers", and compete with each other to see who can afford the best commercially built layout.

As I said earlier, the primary problem I have with the entire concept is that someone who knows absolutely nothing about trains at all can hire someone to construct an award winning mega-layout using such an approach. Is that really "model railroading"? Is that where we want this hobby of ours to go? That was the thrust of my original question, and the answers so far have ranged from "H*** no!" to"Heck, yes!"

But if MR is truly a magazine "for the modeler", then the question remains: is this the way for them to go? Is this what you and I, as modelers ourselves, are interested in reading? Personally, I have a library of professional publications on "how-to". I'm interested in what other modelers do, by which I mean people like me who do this as a hobby, not for a living on someone else's money, but that's just me. I'm a modeler, not a client of one.

Incidentally, if you read the article, then you know that virtually no information was provided on actual construction. Frankly, I doubt a professional would want to openly publish his methods and techniques when he's trying to make a living, but who knows? Maybe they're just waiting in the wings, pining for the opportunity.

I wrote a letter to David Popp, the editor. I'll let you know what the reply is, but I'll bet you that his reply includes words to the effect that MR does not wish to alienate the hobbyists at all. After all, we are their paycheck, literally, and the shelves are already filled to bursting with those professional "how-to" manuals.
Reply
#30
Note: Have not read the article... However, my $0.02 follows.

Perhaps the purchaser's interest is in running trains, not building them. Perhaps he has no talent for the more "artistic" side of the hobby, but a real passion and knowledge of railroad history and operations. If this is the case, why should he not be able to put his (presumably hard earned) cash to acquiring a model railroad that he can operate?

To various levels, there is a lot of this going on already. Buy R-T-R? Use flex track? Acquire a completed model at a swap meet? What about rock molds? If the true measure of how much one is a model railroader is in how basic the inputs to a given model are, then only those who mine their own ore, and grow their own trees fully qualify...

It may be a subtle difference, but the magazine is Model Railroader not Railroad Modeller, implying (at least to me) that it is not necessarily the models, but the railroading that's the focus. Rod Stewart was featured in Dec 2007 - he builds the models himself, but none of us have his financial resources to afford the space, materials, or time he can. Does that mean his efforts fall into the same category as the guy who commissioned the layout?

Despite the perceived lowering of standards at MR and much repetition/recycling of material, I think it is interesting that they continue to present different ways to be involved.

Andrew
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)