Hobby Celebrities

[Enginseer]

As a new member I am loathe to comment on another model railroaders artisitic skills or knowledge base, however, it's a subject close to my heart.

What I've found interesting over the years is that much of the modelling done by the so-called celebrities is average at best. I can appreciate detail work on a layout, but many folks have the awful habit of adding too much to a scene making it look almost comical.

To some, more stuff equals detail and this is simply not true. It just becomes a cluttered mess.

I have seen some absolutely beautiful layouts and more often than not, they take the minimalist approach. I know much of that is a matter of taste, but some folks think realism is how many poorly painted Preiser figures one can jam in a scene.

One of the things gotten wrong almost universally is vegetation. Grass is one of my pet-peaves and I spend HOURS trying to get it to look right.

I would never put my work as the standard for any modeller and I can appreciate the guys who just want to operate trains. I do get my "underware in a bunch" when I see articles about certain modellers; self-proclaimed and those bearing the title celebrity unwittingly (perhaps) due to their skill. Why someone would want to emulate much of that work is beyond me for the most part.

[torikoos]

Reading through this thread, and some of the discussion and points made, here is my , very own , personal view.

I don't consider any modeler a celebrity. Some are just very skilled modelers, with strengths and weaknesses, they're human.
Lance Mindheim has been mentioned here a couple of times, I think he's misunderstood by some. His blogs are about his own personal modeling (and life) experiences, he takes you along for a ride in his world, and currently the focus is that of the theme of his current layout(s), modern branchline railroads in the Miami area.
He shows us how things operate there, and if that doesn't include signals, no problem to me, it's how things are done in that area. I'm sure if he modeled another railroad / area, where signals etc are abundant, they would be included and he'd operate accordingly.

I also like how he shows how he builds things, using styrene, cardboard, photo laminating etc etc. It is not the gospel truth, and I don't read it as such. I read it as one of many ways things can be done. It seems entirely suitable for the area he's currently modeling and writing about.

I've picked up a few useful things from him, and while my own modeling skills are not (yet) of the same standards, I've learned a few things, and hope to improve my own skills through that.
Similarly, I've also learned a lot from what members of Big Blue are posting on this website. Some of the work is outstanding, and sometimes it's a simple technique on how to paint something, or actuate a turnout, or wire something up, that I find useful.

This is my personal approach to modeling, and whatever Rod Steward, Lance Mindheim,George Selios, Tony Koester,Mike Cofalone, Joe Fugate or any other 'well known' modelers are up to, I learn something from all of them, just as I do from the less well known, members here, friends at the local club etc.

In the words of a famous Martial Artist and actor, ' Absorb what is useful, discard what is not, add what is uniquely your own : ( by Bruce Lee) ' , it's an approach that works for me.

Happy New Year!

Koos

[Brakie]

One of the things gotten wrong almost universally is vegetation. Grass is one of my pet-peaves and I spend HOURS trying to get it to look right.
----------------------------------------------------------------
I find modeling wild grass and weeds around industries a tad tougher then modeling well manicured lawns since wild grass and weeds grows in some odd places-Mother Nature seems to have a warp sense of humor at times.

[Catt]

I have the grass fairly well under control but the wild grass and bushes are another story altogether.

[MountainMan]

For what it's worth I don't consider any modeler a celebrity.
Dave

The modeler isn't a celebrity - the celebrity is a modeler. Big difference.

By-the-by, MR Mag is paying another visit to Stewart's layout, which is allegedly finished.

[Sumpter250]

One of the things gotten wrong almost universally is vegetation. Grass is one of my pet-peaves and I spend HOURS trying to get it to look right. I find modeling wild grass and weeds around industries a tad tougher then modeling well manicured lawns since wild grass and weeds grows in some odd places-Mother Nature seems to have a warp sense of humor at times.

Just a thought - - - Weeds, are tough, they can survive almost anywhere ! :o
I've tried some of the Scene Master "Botanicals". Not bad when viewed at some distance, but not exactly a "seven sector call out" when viewed up close.

The available "Tall Grass" , is about the same, great at a distance, but still not exactly "natural" enough for super close up viewing.
"The best we can, with what we have to work with, but always looking for the better way "
Sometimes, "hinting at" can better than trying to recreate in exact scale detail, and even then, it is all in the eye of the beholder.
Here, the trees in the background look, ( for the time being ) acceptable. the foreground grass? :o there has to be a better way. ( and I will keep looking until I find it )
   
Here, the vegetation is "so-so ", the driveway ? I was hoping for gravel, I got Boulders !! and I was using some extremely fine beach sand !! I wasn't thinking about a photo from this point of view or I would have painted the inside of the garage ! :oops:
   

Regardless of anything else, the "model" should be the "celebrity", not the model builder.

[Brakie]

Another hard thing is those "shrub" trees you find behind industries..They look like a thick branch growing out of the ground.