Subject:
|
Re: New mod to double decker passenger train
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains
|
Date:
|
Sat, 22 Jan 2000 16:47:58 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
johnneal@uswest%IHateSpam%.net
|
Viewed:
|
730 times
|
| |
|
|
Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> Tony Priestman wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 22 Jan 2000, John Neal (<38891BB1.735F7B6C@uswest.net>) wrote at
> > 02:53:57
> >
> > > BTW, when are you going to forsake the Eurotrash and start modeling some real
> > > trains?;-) <Running, to the tune of "The Star Spangled Banner">
> >
> > Eurotrash?
> >
> > Surely, there's more skill in getting detail into a small model than
> > messing about with overbloated Tonka trains :-)
>
> Do you mean his 8wides? I tend to agree, and it wasn't till recently
> that I realised it... 8wides make modeling too easy, you get more room
> to work in. That's fundamentally what bothers me, he's cheating.
lol Fundamentally you don't know what you're talking about;-) No, building
*smaller* is easier I'm afraid. You have a lot fewer options building smaller, and
thus less possibilities for creative building. [1] How many people have built
boxcars? Not many, because they are basically just a boring box 6 wide. Now I
could probably incorporate some of my 8 wide techniques into a 6 wide, but then it
would look out of proportion.
The main reason to build 8 wide is *not* because it's easier, but because they
*look* better because they are more to scale (if realism is what you are striving
for, which I am:) Having your trucks as wide as your trains is a worst brutal; at
best toyish. Depends upon what you want.
-John
> Or do you mean the fact that US proto are larger? In that case I don't
> agree... larger whole does not mean larger parts, it means more of them.
> There is as much fine detail present in a US proto (that you mostly have
> to skip or elide or compress) as there is in a euro proto.
[1] After having reread what I wrote I would like to amend slightly. I thought
about Karim's SW micro-models and realized that his designs took a lot of
creativity as well. But the difference is that Karim's creativity occurred about
90% in his head; the building was the easy part (compared to building, say, an 8
wide locomotive where a lot more creative decisions occur along the way to
completion). By that token I'd generally say that the larger an MOC is, the more
creative one must be in order to complete it (by virtue of the *number* of creative
decisions necessary to complete it-- qualifying by quantity)
>
>
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: New mod to double decker passenger train
|
| (...) My point seems to have been missed here. The smaller you build, the more creativity is required, because you are more constrained. Microfig scale is very very tough and requires extreme creativity because you really really need to know your (...) (24 years ago, 23-Jan-00, to lugnet.trains)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: New mod to double decker passenger train
|
| (...) Do you mean his 8wides? I tend to agree, and it wasn't till recently that I realised it... 8wides make modeling too easy, you get more room to work in. That's fundamentally what bothers me, he's cheating. Or do you mean the fact that US proto (...) (24 years ago, 22-Jan-00, to lugnet.trains)
|
26 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
