!!

Not Registered?

Welcome!  Please register to view all of the new posts and forum boards - some of which are hidden to guests.  After registering and gaining 10 posts you will be able to sell and buy items on our N'porium.

If you have any problems registering, then please check your spam filter before emailing us.  Hotmail users seem to find their emails in the Junk folder.


Thanks for reading,
The NGF Staff.

Author Topic: NGS Journal 2/20  (Read 3322 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Paddy

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • N Gauge Society Number: 10732
  • 2mm Association Number: N/A
  • Posts: 1654
  • Country: gb
  • Gender: Male
    • Awards
Re: NGS Journal 2/20
« Reply #60 on: March 25, 2020, 04:19:33 PM »
Hi Alan ( @EtchedPixels )

There have been a few occasions in the past where I have seen a layout in a magazine and thought wow - love to see that in real life.  I then turn up at an exhibition where said layout is being shown only to be left with a feeling of ďis that itĒ.

It is not true to say the camera never lies, especially when it is in the hands of an expert and backed up by Photoshop.  ;)

One layout I though better in real life was Hedges Hill Cutting.  No photo could do that wee layout justice IMHO.

Kind regards

Paddy
HOLLERTON JUNCTION (SHED 13C)
London Midland Region
http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?topic=11342.0


BARRIES'S TRAIN SHED - HIGHLY RECOMMENDED
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UChVzVVov7HJOrrZ6HRvV2GA

Offline NGS-PO

  • Trade Count: (+3)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 477
  • Country: 00
    • Awards
Re: NGS Journal 2/20
« Reply #61 on: March 25, 2020, 04:28:02 PM »
We're saying that if I commissioned someone to build a layout for me in my railway room, with no expense spared, regardless of how good it was, articles about it would not be welcome in the NGS Journal?!
Speaking absolutely personally, and not reflecting the NGS or anything else, I'd be happy enough for an article or a cover photo, but would expect the model maker to be credited, not you.

How many layouts which feature in the Journal are built on baseboards bought in or built for the modeller? Is that what we'd describe as"cheque book" modelling?
No, and I think you're being deliberately disingenuous here. Obviously unless we're building our layouts from cardboard and wire, then at some point everything was a kit, RTR, or a packet of ready made scenic materials. If you're saying that buying trains from Hattons is chequebook modelling, then you've misunderstood me.

Similarly, if the modeller built the whole layout themselves, would it then be okay for all of the motive power and rolling stock to be weathered by Mercig?
As editor, I'd make that call depending on whether I thought the layout itself was interesting and well-made. Let's say it was a loop of Kato unitrack on top of a bit of chipboard, with a couple plastic trees. I think we'd both agree that's not interesting, however excellent the weathering of the trains. On the other hand, if the layout showed imagination, style, and clever modelmaking, I'd welcome it with open arms. Where the boundary is between those too extremes is where my editorial decision comes into play.

If it's a great layout, it's a great layout. Who cares where the money came from (short of criminal activity), or whether the owner/operator built it themselves?
For sure, but if the layout isn't interesting beyond the weathered trains, I personally don't care about it.

It's unfortunate that the term "chequebook modelling" appears to be being used in a disapproving manner.  Exactly the same manner as "train set"was being bemoaned for earlier in the thread.
To be clear Scott, as said earlier, my issue isn't with affluent modellers having Mercig-weathered stock. Like Paddy, I've got some professionally weathered bits (Grimy Times, in my case) which I enjoy, and inspired me to learn how to weather locos and rolling stock myself. I think that's fair game. My issue is where the ONLY thing noteworthy about the layout is the expense of the weathering, and everything else is plain, ordinary modelling of no particular merit. Yes, the owner of that layout should enjoy their layout, and yes, I'm as impressed by Mercig's weathering and detailing as anyone else. I'd love to be able to avoid his stuff! But would I welcome a layout like that into the NGS Journal, then honestly, no, not especially.

Cheers, NeMo

Which is what I said. Having the wealth to have a layout built is nothing like passing off Chinese takeaway as your own cooking, as long as we're up front about it. But you didn't make that distinction, you said:

"...I don't see being wealthy enough to afford many thousands of pounds' worth of someone else's skill as being something worth showcasing in the NGS Journal. It's the equivalent of buying in a Chinese takeaway, pulling off the cardboard lids, and telling your family that you not only cooked dinner but want to tell them about your tremendous skills in Chinese cooking."

Disingenuous, no. I'm merely asking you where you draw the line. How much wealth for another person's services is too much wealth, and "chequebook modelling".

A great layout by definition is interesting. It's one of the factors that make it great. The amount of money spent or the amount of sub-contracting employed on it is irrelevant. So why even mention wealth?

It's not helpful.

You and I, it seems, will not see eye to eye on this so let's leave it there.

It's just all very saddening.

Scott.





(PLEASE NOTE: Unless where obviously posting on behalf of the NGS, all posts and views are my own and not connected/endorsed by the Society.)

Anxiety is a lot like a toddler. It never stops talking, tells you youíre wrong about everything, and wakes you up at 3am.

I get nervous about just about everything. Sometimes I literally donít know why Iím anxious. I just am and no-one seems to understand that.

Offline NeMo

  • Trade Count: (+3)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • N Gauge Society Number: 23720
  • Posts: 2726
  • Country: gb
    • Awards
Re: NGS Journal 2/20
« Reply #62 on: March 25, 2020, 05:08:45 PM »
You and I, it seems, will not see eye to eye on this so let's leave it there.
I think we're arguing past each other, and agree on the basic premise. A good layout is worth writing about and sharing with others.

Suppose John Smith comes to me with an article about his amazing layout that cost a million quid. He then explains that five different people did the work, and while it's his layout and the love of his life, his article fairly explains the role each of those people played.

I'd be totally okay with that article.

Someone else comes to me with another million quid layout. It's big, it's got amazing bespoke electronics, and it runs tonnes of beautifully weathered stock. But the author doesn't mention any of the other people who did all of that, or perhaps only name-checks them. His personal contribution was to lay the track, do the scenics, and plonk a few Metcalfe kits here and there. Now, all of those things he's done are fine enough in their way, but nothing obviously better than what's in the other articles I've got in my in-box.

I'd be much less enthusiastic about publishing that article.

Do you see the difference?

I think we both agree that a good layout is a good layout, and as a work of art, worth appreciating. But as an editor, I see more value in articles where the author did the modelmaking over an article about someone who simply paid for that modelmaking.

Let me put it another way: If someone has a lovely layout that would be interesting without any rolling stock on it, but just happens to have some Mercig stuff tootling about, then absolutely, I'd print that article in a heartbeat (or a few months, anyway). But if the only thing interesting about it is the Mercig stuff, then I'm simply not as keen to see it published when I have a stack of articles in the queue already.

Does that clear things up?

Cheers, NeMo
« Last Edit: March 25, 2020, 05:10:37 PM by NeMo »
NGS Journal Editor

Offline NGS-PO

  • Trade Count: (+3)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 477
  • Country: 00
    • Awards
Re: NGS Journal 2/20
« Reply #63 on: March 25, 2020, 05:49:54 PM »
Yes.
(PLEASE NOTE: Unless where obviously posting on behalf of the NGS, all posts and views are my own and not connected/endorsed by the Society.)

Anxiety is a lot like a toddler. It never stops talking, tells you youíre wrong about everything, and wakes you up at 3am.

I get nervous about just about everything. Sometimes I literally donít know why Iím anxious. I just am and no-one seems to understand that.

Online njee20

  • Trade Count: (+4)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • N Gauge Society Number: 22598
  • Posts: 7135
  • Country: gb
    • Awards
Re: NGS Journal 2/20
« Reply #64 on: March 25, 2020, 07:54:00 PM »
Iíve not read the Shirebrook letter, and the Journal appears to have been packed into one of the 16,429 moving boxes presently filling my house. Its builder, Duncan, is a breathtakingly fastidious chap (and I mean that as a glowing complement). Iím reminded of a thread on RMWeb of another lovely layout, I think it may be called Maidís Morton. Its owner had posted a photo of a class 90, beautiful natural daylight, lovely photo.

Duncan, genuinely being helpful, said ďthatís a great photo, but your layout is a WCML one, therefore the loco must be at the non-London end, so the sunlight is in the wrong directionĒ. That, right there, showed me the mindset of someone who creates a masterpiece like Shirebrook.

Even if i had the skill, Iíll never think like that! Iíll be content with not gluing my fingers together as I slap down some track on a board and call it a layout. Iím also awaiting my first Mercig commission to be ready  :-[

Online Bealman

  • Moderator
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • N Gauge Society Number: 23151
  • Posts: 20082
  • Country: au
  • Gender: Male
  • Promotion remains in the future
    • Awards
Re: NGS Journal 2/20
« Reply #65 on: March 25, 2020, 09:26:25 PM »
I'd like to see Poppingham in the NGSJ, said Bealman, innocently  :uneasy:
Vision over visibility. Bono, U2.

Offline NeMo

  • Trade Count: (+3)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • N Gauge Society Number: 23720
  • Posts: 2726
  • Country: gb
    • Awards
Re: NGS Journal 2/20
« Reply #66 on: March 25, 2020, 09:27:49 PM »
I'd like to see Poppingham in the NGSJ, said Bealman, innocently  :uneasy:
Only way that'll happen is if someone writes an article and sends it along... so...

NeMo
NGS Journal Editor

Online Bealman

  • Moderator
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • N Gauge Society Number: 23151
  • Posts: 20082
  • Country: au
  • Gender: Male
  • Promotion remains in the future
    • Awards
Re: NGS Journal 2/20
« Reply #67 on: March 25, 2020, 09:34:36 PM »
You listening, @Train Waiting;)
Vision over visibility. Bono, U2.

Offline exmouthcraig

  • Larger Gallery
  • Trade Count: (+7)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1798
    • Awards
Re: NGS Journal 2/20
« Reply #68 on: March 25, 2020, 09:36:42 PM »
Looks like dad and I are right to be having a conversation about whether we continue with our monster layout.

The ultimate aim of it was to get a full on feature in the journal

BUT

As it weighs in at 48ft long, is as close to exact location as we can make it 60yrs after it disappeared and has cost us huge amounts,  we currently guess if we were to sell the stock it would reach £25k at current Ebay prices.

We run quite a bit of TMC weathered stock and our 3 Z class locos were built by the great Dr Al.

I dont think, even if it was worthy, Clifton Wood would be accepted either as it's only got 3 sidings, 2 locos and 1 of those is currently at Mercig.

Seems like we tick all the boxes that the NGSJ editors dont want  :'(

Offline EtchedPixels

  • Advertiser
  • Trade Count: (+44)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • N Gauge Society Number: 16353
  • 2mm Association Number: 4412
  • Posts: 8339
  • Country: wales
  • Gender: Male
    • Ebay
    • Google+
    • Twitter
    • YouTube
    • Etched Pixels
    • Awards
Re: NGS Journal 2/20
« Reply #69 on: March 25, 2020, 10:20:10 PM »
Why only aim for the Journal 8-)
"Knowledge has no value or use for the solitary owner: to be enjoyed it must be communicated" -- Charles Pratt, 1st Earl Camden

Online emjaybee

  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • N Gauge Society Number: Yes
  • 2mm Association Number: No
  • Posts: 2868
  • Country: england
  • Gender: Male
  • Grumpy, and proud.
    • Awards
Re: NGS Journal 2/20
« Reply #70 on: March 25, 2020, 11:53:02 PM »
Looks like dad and I are right to be having a conversation about whether we continue with our monster layout.

The ultimate aim of it was to get a full on feature in the journal

BUT

As it weighs in at 48ft long, is as close to exact location as we can make it 60yrs after it disappeared and has cost us huge amounts,  we currently guess if we were to sell the stock it would reach £25k at current Ebay prices.

We run quite a bit of TMC weathered stock and our 3 Z class locos were built by the great Dr Al.

I dont think, even if it was worthy, Clifton Wood would be accepted either as it's only got 3 sidings, 2 locos and 1 of those is currently at Mercig.

Seems like we tick all the boxes that the NGSJ editors dont want  :'(

Don't do yourselves down. I think it's just the sort of thing Neale would consider suitable for the journal. The last two pages of this thread is, to all intents and purposes, superfluous to your aims.

And besides, we want to see it, I want to see a layout that required a new bay on a barn! That's worthy of note if nothing else.
Brookline build thread:

https://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?topic=50207.msg652736#msg652736

Sometimes you bite the dog...

...sometimes the dog bites you!

----------------------------------------------------------

I can explain it to you...

...but I can't understand it for you.

Online Bealman

  • Moderator
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • N Gauge Society Number: 23151
  • Posts: 20082
  • Country: au
  • Gender: Male
  • Promotion remains in the future
    • Awards
Re: NGS Journal 2/20
« Reply #71 on: March 26, 2020, 02:03:38 AM »
Just returning briefly to the early discussion, I'll just mention this then drop it. The editorial by  Jerry Clifford in MRJ #274 (the one with the N gauge layout Blueball Summit) is entitled "A pointless activity...."

In his conclusion, he states that:

"At the end of the day we are big boys and girls making and playing with trains."

However the bulk of the editorial is concerned with the links between craft hobbies and mental health, and he cites a number of well-known modellers who have been quite open about their mental health issues.

Basically the earlier discussion in this thread is academic, and for what it is worth, I found the article in the same issue of MRJ about the magnificent miniature engineering of the signalling system on the developing Leeds City Wellington layout truly inspirational and something to aspire to. It is designed for multiple operators, and is certainly impressive, however I could never hope to build such a system (although in the early days of my own layout, I had something similar in mind and managed to achieve it to a small extent).

This did not stop me enjoying the article, and I look forward to enjoying articles on a range of varied topics in the NGSJ in the future.

Here endeth my views on the matter.  ;) :thumbsup:
« Last Edit: March 26, 2020, 09:27:47 AM by Bealman »
Vision over visibility. Bono, U2.

Offline NeMo

  • Trade Count: (+3)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • N Gauge Society Number: 23720
  • Posts: 2726
  • Country: gb
    • Awards
Re: NGS Journal 2/20
« Reply #72 on: March 26, 2020, 07:48:16 AM »
The ultimate aim of it was to get a full on feature in the journal
As @EtchedPixels said, why not aim for more? Why not aim to build something you enjoy building and operating?

Seems like we tick all the boxes that the NGSJ editors dont want  :'(
If you're building the layout yourselves and doing something interesting with it, the fact you have TMC stock is neither here nor there. The point I have been trying to make, repeatedly it seems, is that I personally don't enjoy articles about mediocre layouts that happen to have thousands of pounds' worth of fancy rolling stock.

Hopefully your planned layout won't be mediocre, and the TMC stock will simply add to what is a worthwhile layout that people will enjoy learning about!

Cheers, NeMo
NGS Journal Editor

Offline exmouthcraig

  • Larger Gallery
  • Trade Count: (+7)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1798
    • Awards
Re: NGS Journal 2/20
« Reply #73 on: March 26, 2020, 08:13:37 AM »
Both the monster and Clifton Wood are enjoyable builds and as I said in the Clifton thread, it was born out of frustration with the moster layout taking so long and it gives us something to play with while the long slog continues.

Both layouts are being built solely by me, from the baseboards up, ALL the scenery for the monster is scratchbuilt as nothing exists off the shelf and to put ready built stuff on is a compromise too far.

Clifton Wood is all built by me, a few 3d printed kits are on it but again from the baseboards up built by me, even the rolling stock, some scratch built log wagons and Nick Evan's Drax biomass hoppers. I'm not a modern day modeller but am seriously enjoying building it, it occasionally receives some good comments on the forum so I think I must be doing something right.

I enjoy the building side, very much so, dads more the planner and I'm very much the doer, suppose its inevitable when hes 70mile away from me, it will be nice to play trains at some point.

Maybe once Cliftons finished, if theres wide appeal and people wanting to see more of it I'll send some details in and see what comes of it.

Offline Newportnobby

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+98)
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • N Gauge Society Number: 21962
  • Posts: 35643
  • Country: england
  • Gender: Male
    • Awards
Re: NGS Journal 2/20
« Reply #74 on: March 26, 2020, 10:41:04 AM »
dads more the planner and I'm very much the doer, suppose its inevitable when hes 70mile away from me

Somewhat excessive - the recommendation is only 2 metres :confusedsign:

 

Please Support Us!
September Goal: £60.00
Due Date: Sep 30
Total Receipts: £71.00
Above Goal: £11.00
Site Currency: GBP
118% 
September Donations

SimplePortal 2.3.5 © 2008-2012, SimplePortal