I took Paul's advice and tried placing the layout up high and shooting up into the sky. I had some backlighting issues, but things are looking better. Clearly more practice is needed.
You've got really tall trees in your yard! Maybe find another location? The sky color is great but those real trees compete with your model trees. Good news is: Your module is really portable, right?
Now that I'm a little more awake, I should add this about the tall tree thing: one lesson this little layout taught me about was how big and tall trees actually are, even 'small' ones. A contradiction I know, but trees, trees that are scaled properly and aren't selectively compressed, or just plain compressed because of not knowing better, are big, space (length, breadth, and height) filling things. Frankly, this project has changed the way I look at model trees and real ones too.
"Changes the way you look at the world" should be on an NMRA list of reasons for why a person builds models (and joins their organization). I live in a town with many beautiful Queen Anne cottages that I've never noticed before until I built one in HO scale. Now I can't stop seeing them, studying their features, color palates, etc. Ditto palms.
I completely agree. The potential for having one's viewpoint changed regarding somethings is especially true for model railroading since its scope is so broad. Although I'm not hopefully that any related organization would promote that aspect.
Now that my shoulder isn't giving me trouble and I'm more awake, I'll add 2 points. 1) I think if a tree making tutorial doesn't begin with some photos of real trees or some discussion about real trees, it isn't worthwhile paying attention. My guess is that maybe 90% of the instructional material I've seen on trees jumps right into construction - often with a 'easy to make' bent. 2) Tree construction tutorials usually fall into a) highly detailed centrepiece tree, or b) not so detailed background tree. I think there might be a third category: c) forest tree that has the right size, shape, and colour, but the detail isn't as detailed as a centrepiece tree. These trees are meant to be grouped, and although they are readily visible - like a centrepiece tree - their strength is being in a group and viewed from a normal layout viewing distance. Ok, maybe I'll add a third point: 3) when building a tree, think about how light will go through its foliage and change the colours of its surroundings - tree foliage isn't a solid mass, and even centrepiece trees might need foliage that is more see-through than first thought. Ok, back to coffee :-)
Prototype-height trees can often look out of place on our layouts because we don't have enough on our backdrops to see the tops. If we see the tops, we're staring at ceiling fixtures and all realism is lost. If we take pictures outdoors, we've got infinite sky. Even then, your model trees are lost amongst the over-scale real trees. I wish you could find that right piece of sky to photograph. Drive around? It can be difficult; lots of power wires and all crisscross our neighborhoods. I once took mine to an open field with distant trees.
On my last photographic adventure, I used a painted background with a autumn-blue sky (which is very strong- actually the blue of the foamboard I bought). At least the true outdoor lighting made things look right.
I forget if I shared this before. When my parents' neighbors cut down the adjacent woods to build their home, I felt it was a shame the trees were lost. Couldn't they keep even a wall of trees? No. When trees grow wild and close together, they're fragile and find support only among other trees around them. (I'm not even going to try to make some social analogy from that.) Those centerpiece trees are usually the ones who grew up with no nearby trees, allowing them to fully branch out into a rounded, perfect tree. Those are important on our layouts, but so are those skinny forest trees. And since dried weeds are often too skinny for centerpiece trees, group them tight in forest-like groups and it's a very natural setting.
I'm finding the dried weeds approach to tree construction odd these days, although I agree with your comment that they should be grouped together in a forest-like setting for best affect. I think I'll need to come up with a better backdrop in order to get what I'm looking for.
You've got really tall trees in your yard! Maybe find another location? The sky color is great but those real trees compete with your model trees. Good news is: Your module is really portable, right?
ReplyDeleteAs far as photos go, there are tall trees everywhere here, so I probably need to crank up the car and look for a suitable spot.
DeleteNow that I'm a little more awake, I should add this about the tall tree thing: one lesson this little layout taught me about was how big and tall trees actually are, even 'small' ones. A contradiction I know, but trees, trees that are scaled properly and aren't selectively compressed, or just plain compressed because of not knowing better, are big, space (length, breadth, and height) filling things. Frankly, this project has changed the way I look at model trees and real ones too.
Delete"Changes the way you look at the world" should be on an NMRA list of reasons for why a person builds models (and joins their organization). I live in a town with many beautiful Queen Anne cottages that I've never noticed before until I built one in HO scale. Now I can't stop seeing them, studying their features, color palates, etc. Ditto palms.
DeleteI completely agree. The potential for having one's viewpoint changed regarding somethings is especially true for model railroading since its scope is so broad. Although I'm not hopefully that any related organization would promote that aspect.
DeleteNow that my shoulder isn't giving me trouble and I'm more awake, I'll add 2 points. 1) I think if a tree making tutorial doesn't begin with some photos of real trees or some discussion about real trees, it isn't worthwhile paying attention. My guess is that maybe 90% of the instructional material I've seen on trees jumps right into construction - often with a 'easy to make' bent. 2) Tree construction tutorials usually fall into a) highly detailed centrepiece tree, or b) not so detailed background tree. I think there might be a third category: c) forest tree that has the right size, shape, and colour, but the detail isn't as detailed as a centrepiece tree. These trees are meant to be grouped, and although they are readily visible - like a centrepiece tree - their strength is being in a group and viewed from a normal layout viewing distance. Ok, maybe I'll add a third point: 3) when building a tree, think about how light will go through its foliage and change the colours of its surroundings - tree foliage isn't a solid mass, and even centrepiece trees might need foliage that is more see-through than first thought. Ok, back to coffee :-)
DeletePrototype-height trees can often look out of place on our layouts because we don't have enough on our backdrops to see the tops. If we see the tops, we're staring at ceiling fixtures and all realism is lost. If we take pictures outdoors, we've got infinite sky. Even then, your model trees are lost amongst the over-scale real trees. I wish you could find that right piece of sky to photograph. Drive around? It can be difficult; lots of power wires and all crisscross our neighborhoods. I once took mine to an open field with distant trees.
ReplyDeleteOn my last photographic adventure, I used a painted background with a autumn-blue sky (which is very strong- actually the blue of the foamboard I bought). At least the true outdoor lighting made things look right.
I forget if I shared this before. When my parents' neighbors cut down the adjacent woods to build their home, I felt it was a shame the trees were lost. Couldn't they keep even a wall of trees? No. When trees grow wild and close together, they're fragile and find support only among other trees around them. (I'm not even going to try to make some social analogy from that.) Those centerpiece trees are usually the ones who grew up with no nearby trees, allowing them to fully branch out into a rounded, perfect tree. Those are important on our layouts, but so are those skinny forest trees. And since dried weeds are often too skinny for centerpiece trees, group them tight in forest-like groups and it's a very natural setting.
I'm finding the dried weeds approach to tree construction odd these days, although I agree with your comment that they should be grouped together in a forest-like setting for best affect. I think I'll need to come up with a better backdrop in order to get what I'm looking for.
Delete