Subject:
|
Re: Are LEGO "Train" Clubs endanger of becoming LEGO "Town" Clubs?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains.org
|
Date:
|
Fri, 10 Aug 2001 04:51:46 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
370 times
|
| |
|
|
Its not often that I get to respond to thread before its burned out so here
is my two cents... and excuse me if it gets too philosophical. Lego
railroading is a huge "tent" with room for people of many interests. Some
are collectors, some are operators, some spend countless hours discovering a
new combination of elements to model a special locomotive. And some like to
build structures and scenes. Its no different than scale model railroading.
It all depends what you are looking to get out of it... and modelers'
interests shift around over time. That's why clubs and the social aspect of
the hobby is so great! If you love making only engines, then you get to
pull a train from a guy who has been focusing strictly on passenger cars.
If you model structures then you get to surround them with the creative
touch of someone who excels at landscaping. And then there is the guy with
the electronics background who always seems to help wire everyone's module.
And some people (I'll count myself here) pull back and focus on the overall
vision. What the scene shows... or in the case of the Royal Train, how a
sequence of scenes tell a story. At this level the trains, structures,
everything becomes a prop used to move the storyline along. My trains are
all designed to a certain length so as to provide optimal viewing angles and
views around them while parked at the station. They use specific colors
that stand-out against the backgrounds (the black and white half-timber
buildings are not arbitrary... they allow the colourful foreground trains
and people to hold the viewer's focus). Aside from scene blocking and color
theory, I use a lot of forced perspective to enhance the depth on a layout
that is only 18 inches deep. So foreground structures are overbuilt minifig
scale, while the ones only inches behind them are slightly smaller (take
another look at the front and back towers on the viaduct bridge in
"http://www.royal-train.com/gallery_winterthur1.jpg"). So not even the
trains are the real focus. They work with the structures, landscaping, and
minifigs to create scenes that tell a part of story.
And, like John, I subscribe to the "don't waste time and bricks on stuff
that is never seen" theory. My buildings (including the Wintherthur
station) are mostly false fronts. Some trees are missing their backsides.
These are never missed except by an occasional detail builder who insists on
full interiors. For these visitors I keep the Royal Train itself handy just
to show-off the complete interior detailing including kitchen, throne,
detailed boiler backhead, working firebox light, and articulated three-axel
suspensions. Usually by the time I get around to showing them the
hand-wired ceiling lamps and microplug power feeds between cars they start
to quiet down. And like the scenes themselves, this too is slight slight of
hand, for it keeps them focused on something impressive and away from the
hollow structures.
- BMW
In lugnet.trains.org, John Neal writes:
>
>
> Chris Leach wrote:
>
> > In lugnet.trains.org, John Neal writes:
> > > A very interesting question, JT. As for my own club, the GMLTC, I know that we
> > > won't be including a train yarn in our initial building phase because some
> > > perceive cars just sitting on tracks as "boring". Nothing could be further
> > > from the truth for me, but if you are looking at it from a "townie" POV, then
> > > maybe.
> > >
> > > Personally, I changed horses in mid-stream with my home layout, going from a
> > > predominantly train yard layout to an almost exclusive cityscape layout. That
> > > was more of a space management issue, and if I had more space, I'd most
> > > certainly add a yard, roundhouse, etc. Working O scale really eats up real
> > > estate:-/
> > >
> > > But I think that when you get right down to it, the bottom line for the
> > > established clubs is trainstrainstrains. At least it is for us. Sure, the
> > > backgrounds are getting cooler, with more and more detail, but I think the
> > > emphasis will always be on the trains. For me, making the backgrounds cooler
> > > is just another way to make the *trains* look cooler. Reminds me of Brian
> > > Williams' work-- he is an absolute master at this (although he uses "real"
> > > backgrounds, not LEGO ones). Here is a pic of one of his trains, and were it
> > > not for his amazing decal work, would be a pretty straight forward train in
> > > terms of construction. But when he places it in that background, WOW! It
> > > *really* makes that train come to life!
> > > http://www.royal-train.com/gallery_winterthur3.jpg
> > >
> > > When I'm making cool buildings, they are merely backdrops for the main event--
> > > the train. I get flack from the club because I don't "detail" the insides of
> > > my buildings, but to me that's a waste of time, because I could be building
> > > more trains!
> > John,I don't detail my buildings either,Instead of putting money toward the
> > inside of the building i use the money/bricks/resources to make more
> > buildings.They are there to fill in and make a complete layout(and once in a
> > while put on fire/crash planes into).
>
> lol (for those following along at home)
> http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=57539
>
> > IMO a bunch of trains going around a
> > empty peice of board or whatever is boring.A complete layout has to have
> > buildings/secenry around the track.Watching a train go past a
> > building/through is pretty cool.
>
> Agreed.
>
> -John
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
17 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
