Perfection is the enemy of good. In my past attempts at modeling, I allowed my desire for perfection to prevent the completion of what I was working on. It wasn't 100% realistic so I got frustrated and stopped working on it. As I start down the path of modeling again I need to keep this forefront in my mind. One nice thing about modeling a train layout versus say, a ship, is that you can incrementally rework on individual components as your skills improve.

In "N" you are doing better than most! Nobody needs to measure chain link fence wire or squares. What I see is that if I'm 2-4 ft from the scene and it looks good and it represents life it is better than it needs to be for 90% of modelers. Keep up the wonderful work and keep your explanations coming. A model railroad is a picture book of a story that is being told. Some of the best books that I have read had no pictures other than what the author put in my mind.

This is a really great conversation. I come from the theater world, and we used to have the 30' rule. No audience member will ever be closer than 30' from the scenery, so build it for that viewing distance. My layout is for operations, so I am building the layout to focus on the operations, not on the scenery. The plan for the scenery is that everything will be slightly out of focus as to not pull your view. You need to decide what your viewing angles are and what you goals are.

Fascinating, I too believe the overall picture is more important than the absolute accuracy of any part. Some incredibly accurate models as well as paintings are dull as ditchwater though impressive in their quality. I like a layout to bring you in by it’s interest and/or as a place to run trains , not just be life like as, of course it can never truly be. Great video and great layout 👍

Ahh, Seurat and Satie on a Sunday. Love it, and the pixelism is very representative of the point you were making in this video. I often struggle with what is representative of the scene I’m creating, and what I can be reasonably pleased with. A scene that I recently finished near and about a turntable and engine house, was a good example where I took a close look at just how crazy I wanted to get with various sundry details. Oil barrels and crates, litter and grease and workers looking not all that busy with repairing the loco that’s languishing in front of them; all considerations. Stepping back, as you have so interestingly pointed out here, allows one to take in the scene rather than the minuscule. Thanks for another great video.

Your layout is the perfect blend of realism and Impressionism. It definitely gets the job done of allowing me get lost in the scenery. Thanks for sharing!

You hit the nail on the head! More of this please… as much as I enjoy watching video of model construction, this shines a refreshing light on the thought process of building something to scale. Thank you! Dave

Excellent video, as usual, CCMR. I had an experience in HO scale a couple of years ago that was right in line with this topic. I was modeling a small "hidden joke" area behind my enginehouse where local wayward teens would gather at night. I carefully researched the dimensions of cheap single bed mattresses and successfully modeled an abandoned looking one using styrene. Then I decided to add a few empty beer cans. Again I researched the dimensions and cut a few cylinders from brass rod. As I sprinkled the tiny beer can models over the ground cover of dirt they essentially disappeared! The enginehouse has been replaced with open air engine servicing and the mattress has been removed, but those invisible beer cars are still down in that ground cover somewhere. Cheers from Wisconsin!

I've been doing this hobby for a little over a year now and just love learning and doing. KZfaq videos have walked me through everything that I've learned and I can't thank content providers like you and so many others enough for all of the great help. You mentioned about being concerned about poking yourself with the "fence" wire. I use the high "E" string for my chain link fence posts and rails along with silver ribbon that mimics chain link fence (also, learned on KZfaq) I was at my work bench and evidently my index finger had picked up a small length of the "E" string. When I pushed my glasses up I noticed a one inch piece had impaled my nose! No harm done but...ouch!

I think you hit the nail on the head when you described your layout as a "representation". Precisely, its a model; not a replica. It is easy to forget that, something I've been guilty of myself.

I used the fabric to make my (HO) chain link fence. All the posts and rails were styrene and the fabric easily glued to them. Trying to glue the fabric to metal is a nightmare. When everything was in place I sprayed it with a silverish paint and if the paint filled in the holes of the fabric I blew it out with a can of compressed air. Your concerns in the video were very well expressed. As I am watching this video (April 2) my beloved White Sox got their first win of the season 🎉

The problem you discuss of the thickness posted bills is a perfect example of the challenges of realism - it seems as though it's a minor issue and yet it's a major one because it creates the "something overall isn't quite right here" that's impossible to overcome. The thickness of the paint on buildings and how it catches light, the streets lack of realistic pavement, it's the the lacking of the next level of superfine detail that the viewer expects that destroys the illusion. Then the viewer starts looking for flaws. Very tiny things start to look "glumpy." It always brings to mind how models of battleships - even as long as five or six feet - they look great until you put them in the water. I've found the most rewarding and most complimented style is the "impressionistic" approach where the object is to share an impression rather than an approximation of realism. It's difficult to achieve, but n scale is a great place to try.

Hey Eric. Your observations are correct. This is a common dilemma across all scales. I model in 3-rail 0, and while It may appear that we have more leeway you'ld be surprised the challenges we face, especially when scratch building, because of the degree of selective compression that has been used with this scale. One can rack his brain if they try to make everything exactly to scale. Engines are produced in 1/48th, 1/64th, and in-between. While the track scales to 1/43rd. Putting a 1/43rd vehicle next to a Lionel 1/64th semi really sticks out like a sore thumb but thats the vehicle's they make for this scale, aparently because of the track. Try putting a 1/43rd or 1/48th vehicle in a 1/64th scale autorack. Just like a two dimensional painting is an illusion so is our three dimensional layouts. I view it from an artistic perspective and build it to look in scale or selectively compressed regardless of scale. I briefly look at those dimensions on a ruler and estimate the size of the overall scale where it will be placed on the layout and adjust from there. I've seen some convincing chain link fencing made from the materil I think you referred to. I belive it's used for wedding veils. Check your closets. Your wife might have some😊.

YT recommended this video, glad I checked it out, your video and commentary are superb! Subbed.

Interesting video. I started in the movie industry during the 70s as a model builder and matte painter and moved to computer-aided modelling and computer graphics in the early 80s. There is absolutely NOTHING we can do, both practical and digital, back then and now, to recreate reality consistently and convincingly over larger scales. It holds up briefly, under the right light or from a distance, but it all falls apart (even today) upon closer scrutiny.

Not sure why KZfaq presented me with your channel but absolutely loving your work. Looking at some other channels, very often it's just small trains running (too fast) through a clearly manufactured landscape, but not with yours. The story-telling you are doing on such a small plot is just amazing. It look amazing, and there are interesting things to see, looking at the full set, down to the smallest corners. If this is you "in your early stages of being a builder" I'm scared for what you will come up with when you gain more experience.

Consistency of finish and no gaps, like between a building and the ground. also no glossy colours especially on road vehicles. In the end just model what you think looks good and forget what other people think or whether it is 100% prototypically correct. After all there is a massive compression of scale on most layouts so you are behind the eight ball to start with. Your layout is very impressive and is hard to tell what gauge it is which means you are an excellent modeller.

Well said! I've noticed that I can only go so low in terms of thinness on my resin prints. My seagulls wings had to be made from paper as the equivalent in resin simply disintegrated when I touched it. And I'm finding most details can't be seen without a magnifier, so why even bother modelling it? But I think all of us modellers want to push the boundaries of what we can model. I know with my current harbour scene at some point I need to say good enough and move onto other projects. But the itch is there to add just one more detail!

This is the thing I love about N scale, you can get away with less detail relative to larger scales but it's insanely impressive and satisfying when you pull something off. There's more technical challenge if you're up for it. But yes, appropriate materials can be very hard to find. I would also say that on youtube in particular, everyone has been one upping each other in terms of detail for years now and it's hard not to join the brinkmanship if you're competing for views. It's why I love your content, you capture that detail so well. It's very aspirational. Most importantly though, your enjoyment of your hobby comes first. You've certainly added to my enjoyment of the hobby. We'll be here wherever you choose to draw that line.

I appreciate the deep thought on this topic. Let me first say, whenever I see your videos and layout updates, I automatically get a feeling about growing up in the midwest and the many times the railroad touched my heart. I say to you and what you are doing A+, great representation achieved. I model in O scale and I can't begin to tell you how critical people can be, of course starting with that 3rd rail. At this point I pretty much have a method. If I want to model something I research it. Sometimes someone else has done it and sometimes not. If it's been done, I will steal the idea and adopt it to my situation. If not, I will do the research and come up with a respectable and convincing replication. I might add, a convincing replication TO ME! This or any hobby is meant to take us from the stresses of everyday life. If we dwell on the one rivet that is missing or the out of scale insulator on the utility pole then it becomes work and not as fun IMO. Lastly, I believe it comes down to time. Each and everyone one of us could spend an excess amount of time researching, learning, and creating the most prototypical model. If that's where one gets their joy go for it. However, the average person has so much more to do in life. Have fun and enjoy the hobby in a way that makes you happy. I could go on and on but will stop with the dissertation.

Bravo Eric! Well said! I totally agree with everything you said.. We all have to embrace and live by Allen McClelland’s “good enough” philosophy. Otherwise, we would never do anything on our layouts unless it was “perfect “ which is impossible. All the parts should work equally to meet the overall goal of a well balanced presentation of what is being modeled. You are certainly doing that with CCMR!! Have a great week! Scott

I always look forward to your posts. Absolutely wonderful.

The hours we Fine Scalers and Rivet Counters spend trying to achieve visual perfection can often drive us crazy. We might consider that a visitor to our layout will usually view a scene for but a few brief moments. Watching my layout visitors, I realized that perception was far more important than finite accuracy. I shifted from spending countless hours trying to replicate a challenging man-made object to an emphasis of recreating mostly items found in Mother Nature that have no consistency...trees, grasses, bushes, rocks, etc. In the meantime, the other stuff seems to have taken care of itself. Yee Haw--!!!

I share your frustration and agree with your thoughts completely. I chose N scale to get back into model railroading because I had decided to build a replica of the Chicago neighborhood where I grew up (Rogers Park, with L trains, the North Shore interurban, and the CNW mainline running through) and I wanted to do it as close to correct scale as I could, which takes a LOT of room (thank you Google Earth for actual street widths and angles, old buildings still there, etc.). I quickly found out that it is really difficult to get, as you say, the resolution, on small and even some large details. My original (naive) idea was to commission the major actual buildings with 3D printing from measurements I took on Google, but it turns out that resolution is 3D's biggest weakness, at least for now (good luck trying to 3D a really smooth surface or N scale bricks); so I ended up finding kits and materials that I could kit-bash myself to achieve the best representation I could. And sometimes I find that strict adherence to scale doesn't work either, for example true-to scale street curbs (6-8") almost disappear visually; I ended up using a 9-10" height which actually looks better. One of my pet peeves is the descriptions of kits and raw materials in catalogs and on line. Many of them will just say "N scale" and give you an overall measurement and one blurry photo, and then when you get it it is clumsy and out of scale. You don't want to know how may items I have bought and then had to re-sell on eBay at a loss because I was not satisfied with the size or the details. One thing I did was establish ground level at 50" instead of normal table height; this puts the observer closer to eye level rather then viewing as if from a drone 500' in the air. Anyway, great topic and great modeling, Eric - keep on keepin' on!

I sometimes scratchbuild warships in 1/600 scale, but there's a limit to the level of detail that I'm prepared to go to. If I can't do it neatly, I think it's better to omit it than to try clumsily ... after all, only a rivet-counter will probably spot that I've omitted something.

Happy Easter Eric and family! I'm interested in making a reasonable representation of objects that others will recognize, not an exact copy of that item. I feel that N scale is like taking a photo from a distance, when compared to HO or O. The scale is so fine that we don't have to try to model every single detail.

Large things also present problems. As an example a typical mature deciduous tree is 60 - 80 feet tall, yet trees on layouts are rarely more than half that scale size. A tree a bit taller than a locomotive is more typical. We routinely layout curves that would never occur on the prototype. It is not possible to avoid compromise. The real questions are where, when, and how much.

You have struck a chord with me regarding this topic… I am a trained artist and see my layout as a piece of art created by me to (hopefully) represent my version of reality in miniature. I love detailed models but in all reality, like a painting, we never look at the minutiae in the same way as the overall experience the piece represents. Yes, details are important but it’s way too easy to overdo them and end up with something that almost becomes a parody of itself. Your use of the work of Seurat is spot on in this way.

The original of the Seurat is actually in Chicago. You really can see the individual brush strokes, because that painting almost fills a wall. It's really BIG, and you can enjoy it up close, or at a distance. Just like our model empires!

Yeah I've been struggling with this too. The big thing of course is knowing when to a cut the losses and do. I ended up a weird paralysis over the last week because I needed custom lettering for a post office on my layout. The 3D printer couldn't render them right directly on the face of the building. Trying to hand cut was a fools errand. No product got close. But my brain said "I NEED THEM TO STICK OUT LIKE THE PROTOTYPE" But after so much tinkering, I gave up. I got a sheet of decal paper. Printed Arial font lettering, cut it. Slid it on. Put it on the layout. Realized there is no reasonable way to discern from even close up photos of rolling stock that there is anything "incorrect" with the sign. Kicked myself a little over it.

I built an oil refinery from scratch for our club in HO scale and that took months to do I find that in my N scale I do not intend to build another from scratch but so far have not found a kit I live in New Zealand and the hobby shops here do not have a lot in N scale.

The rivet counting comment brings to mind a saying I created for my signature on a model making forum, "Screw the rivets, I build for atmosphere".

Great thoughts. I don't model below 1:25 (model car), but believe that much of the challenge is due to the fact that 1:1 particles are interacting with our models. If we could scale down light and the receptors in our eyes, things might be easier. Our models lack the natural shadows of 1:1. Our highlights and reflections are too large and clumsy looking. To compensate for this, muted colors, duller surfaces, and painted-in shadows can help to compensate. Undersize and under-detail, giving the 1:1 eye less 'errors' to gravitate to. Not easy, of course... if you haven't already, look into miniature paintings. These works have the same goal, and the masters at this art accomplish what you're discussing, an impressionist approach, but somehow working in reverse.

Just discovered your channel and like what I see ! My faves to date are Chandwell and Everard Junction. (because I am English). Realism and authenticity are the key for convincing modelling.

I do N scale. I do agree with you. With me, I like the challenge at times. Sometimes I get stressed out I step away and look at it a different way. And the main thing is to have fun messing with trains

Your representations are certainly some of the finest I have ever seen, which is why I watch you. This was a great video and confirms what I have often thought of as shortcuts on my own layout. Nobody who looks at mine ever gets as close as I do when building it. By the way the U in tulle is pronounced as you would "you". Sounds more like when you say you'll. Forgive my impertinence.

I work in HO and find meny of the same challenges. An other huge challenge for me are physicle limitations such as poor vision and lack of dexterity. I have come to the mindset, that if something looks convincing I'll run with it.

Hi CCMR, As you get older you'll run into another issue, failing eyesight and hands that are not as steady as they once were. I use to go all out super detailing my N scale diesels, but that is no longer a priority for me. I'm loosing both the eyesight even with opti-visors and the manual dexterity to accomplish those tasks. So I had a serious conversation with myself and decided what I liked best with the hobby was switching ops. So even though my MP15DC does not have all the bells and whistles of it's prototype, it still preforms that basic function of moving a car from one location to another and over all it looks like a MP15DC. Also 20 years ago, code 40 rail was what I wanted to use for sidings and spurs. But today, Code 80 and Code 55 work just fine. So yes I understand challenging yourself but as you age, you may find you change the location of your modeling bar as your interests change. In my life time it has occurred to me, that model railroaders fall into two broad categorizes, modelers and operators. With some modelers becoming 3D artists and capturing exact locations with every bit of detail in place. I've also seen operators with plywood pacifics, but the locomotives and rolling stock all operate flawlessly and the movement of cars and trains on their layouts is 100% true to prototype. Now I'd say many of us fall someplace in between, I tend to lean more toward operations, but my layout is sceniced. Anyway CCMR, hope you had a great Easter and this was a great topic and very nice video. I look forward to future videos from your layout. Cheers, Rich S.

Very interesting video. Good luck with the rest of your modelling journey.

Another trick which I'm learning is forced perspective. I learned that from the armour modellers. The other I think is incorporating different scales for backrounds, foregrounds, that goes back to forced perspective. I'm trying to think of it as a movie set and how they are made. I will be building an HO layout into a wall length cabinet soon and will have to do this. Hi from Winnipeg, the Chicago of the north.

Illustrators like myself deal with this issue a lot too, as you no doubt could guess from the Seurat painting in your intro. We try to go for the *effect* of detail vs. actual detail a lot in part because focusing on every single little detail will burn you out fast and it might not look as good or consistent with the rest of the piece as just the effect of it.

Looks nice. Good job creating the appearance.

Dear CCMR, excellent point! Can we indeed achieve a level of realism? Does the resolution matter, whether scale res or material res, or does it add to the representation? Have been experimenting with certain types of teabag mesh, which aren’t very biodegradable. Their mesh is super fine. Disadvantage is that they very easily clog up when painted. And paint they do need. Hence, does it work? Well, sometimes it does. There’s a lot of trial and error involved. Nevertheless, I don’t strive for perfection. Whether it is my hands, or my patience, the main objective for me is to make it look good (for my eyes). Does that mean things will or can be out of scale? Well, that can only be answered with a full on ‘yes.’ Where sometimes realism seems important, resolution can/could ‘kill’ the effect, representation therefore is my leading goal. Plus, it leaves room for improvement in a very humble manner. Cheerio

The key is to know what you consider to be good enough using what's available. Also, how well does it look from three feet away or your normal viewing distance? Obviously, in photo or video, it will be enhanced either good or not so well. With what you have done so far, looks great.

Thanks for the thoughtful video.

Great detail work!

Congratulations man, fine scale is in ho are already hard to handle, as an artist, I can say I agree 💯% on your point when comparing modelling to painting or arts. Great work 👍⚡⚡

Very interesting video...And gorgeous layout, Georges Seurat would hava like it! 😊😊👍👍

My dad was a ship modeler. For very very fine “wire”, he found horse hair (mane and tail hair) worked great, and was very strong

Great video. Where was that reference picture by torrence ave taken? I ask because I am in the Chicagoland area and am modeling a Moasic plant, so pictures of MOCX covered hoppers are helpful.

A question that is a quandary to a lot of people .I dont know if you have ever watched my scratch builds , but I always use the term " To have the flavor of " I love fine scale type work , But it is not what I strive for !!

I have always said that the camera is not the friend of N scale close ups. Any N scale builder at some point has to satisfy a level of detail knowing that it will not be on par with other scales. Do what you can with your skills and materials. In the movie business if we want an actor to look better we pull the camera back as far as we can. Great topic.

I switched to HO from N mainly for two reasons, one was DCC and sound, another was the availability of models. I think the smaller the scale you are in the less details you can include and maybe the less you should include. Even if you consider a photograph, the larger the area the less details you see, just like the more restricted you go the more detail you see. The importance of the size and focus is important I think. Also it depends on what you want to do. If you are trying to put feather strokes on the plumage of a dove in N scale I think you might end up in a mental hospital. That might be the case also in HO. I don't know if it can be done in O scale! But at some point it gets ridiculous because we are modeling trains ultimately not a bird. So it is a challenge to strike that balance and maintain the focus I think.

Hope you and yours had a fun Easter! Eric it looks like you and I are on the same page. Making a scene as a supporting cast on the stage. When things seem out of scale I make the scene to move your eye down the track sorta speak. I also like to use color lines to move the eyes, to not, zero in on one area. My hat is off to you, the king of clutter. FYI Preiser makes a n scale industrial workers #79009you have to paint them but you get 70 folks some made with posable heads. Been painting them like Boomer showed great results.

What a wonderful channel. Superb beginning, and of course the rest of the intelligent dialogue. I'm of the thought that scale exactness isn't of necessity. Not even effective representation of the subject either. For me, it's the perspective of an expectation. By this, I mean the rubbish pile. You'd mentioned the larger than scale, same as the chain link. Now, the expectation of the rubbish pile is I expect to see old cans, newspapers, flotsam. I expect to see a chain link fence where there is a chain link fence. A typical catenary wire is 1/2" (13mm) in section. Even in H0 scale this equates to a 10th of a mm, or something like 5 thou thickness. In effect, it would be so thin as to be nigh translucent. A chain link fence in N would, for all intensive purposes, be invisible: the wires being literally microscopic. But again, we expect to see a chain link fence where there is supposed to be one, so we aren't perturbed by the overscale. In saying that though, there is also the reverse that can come into play, where for instance scale static grass can end up looking like a hay field. This can also be brought even into colours, where sudden contrasts with hues and even shadows can come across as quite visually jarring. However above all else; it has to remain an enjoyable pastime. creating little rubbish piles because we enjoy creating the little pieces, not because it's another job that I'm not looking forward to and don't want to do. Great channel :)

I struggle with this constantly. The thing about N scale is that there's (1) a perpetual conflict between what the eye can resolve and the limitations of the materials we're working with (this is why N scale telephone wire never looks realistic), and (2) a tricky relationship between what the brain is willing to accept as 'realistic' and what is actually to scale. As you note, signs are a good example of the former -- they almost have to be thicker than is accurate, but they generally end up looking fine. Chain link fence is an interesting instance of the latter -- it would be possible to use a fabric that would approximate the 2" spacing of actual chain link, but it would read as a solid sheet, not as a mesh. I find tulle to be a great compromise for this: the individual threads are much finer than the metal "chain link" sold in kits, so it doesn't have that chunky look, but the brain doesn't seem to be bothered by the fact that the gaps are much larger than two scale inches -- it 'looks like' chain link. (It's also not that finicky to work with if you tape down the ends of a strip of mesh over a non-stick surface like parchment paper, put glue on your wire posts and rails, and press them down on top of the fabric.)

This all resonates with me. I’d love to hear you discuss the challenges of perspective, perhaps you already have? I find it frustrating to the point of giving up, to see from a distance, a lovely N scale mountain side, but the engine and ore cars coming out of the tunnel while in N scale are vastly oversized for the distant “vista”. I’ve rationalized the impossibility of having it both ways.

Good analogy. You're details in n scale are fantastic! But other than your videos, how often is the layout scrutinized under bright lights and magnification? Keep up the good work, it looks fantastic from afar as well as up close!

Always great video

This is why I hate it when people start putting “nail holes” in a craftsmen kit.

One major aspect of model scaling is the difference in view perspectives. A model is allways viewed from birds eye perspective and not pov. In addition there are optical effects like vanishing of colors in far distances in real but not on scale.

Eric , Happy Easter . TKS so much for your video . I don't have your talent or patience . But I am trying hard to put a town , houses , farm with Corn field and silo's with cattle / horse pasture and feed lot . Also a train yard And more on a 28" X 66" layout . HEHEHEH . I have finally realized that I can have a town with a few industries without 10 houses . As I've told you with my physical limitations it's hard to build the small stuff . But I keep at it and am having a great time . Get flustered , Take a break . Come back later . Tried building roads out of 800 grit black sandpaper with 1/16" pin striping . Not bad , 🤣but really not good . Take care , I take a lot from your video's .

"It looks good and that's OK." Wise words.

Interesting thoughts. You are doing pretty amazing work for being in N scale. Your beer can thought is interesting. So in HO that is about 1/16, O scale would be about 1/8, G scale if you use 1/2" equals a foot well then you have finally reached the point where you can actually make the can and it will be around a 1/4" long. Big enough to see, but can you decorate it? So N scale would be about a 1/32". At that size N and HO become indecipherable bits of trash.

I go larger than scale ( ho ) occasionally for some details. If you can't see it what's the point.

Once again Eric, great work. Like you said, what's the point if it's not fun.

This is truly a great video and the subject is vital to N Scale.

Can't help but wonder if this video wasn't inspired by my latest FB group rant! Printed out and been painting some figures for N scale, and not too happy with the results under extreme magnification, but, when viewed with the naked eye, at any distance, they look pretty damn good. I need to learn to ease up on myself, and perfection isn't a reality!

And Satie as well! Lovely.

Ive never tried micron pens. I believe il give that a try. Traditionally i use masking tape, and draw the outline of the graffiti piece, cut it with a sharp hobby knife, affix the tape to the car, mask everything else off, and airbrush the basecoat color of the artwork im going to apply. Afterwards i use a very small brush and hand draw the details a spec of paint at a time. Those pens would make my process much easier

In at least some cases, the use of fixturing may make closer-to-scale materials (fencing, for example) easier to handle and achieve a good result.

Great Insight...

Great video, it's one thing to get fiddely with HO and bigger scales, which is where I was at, now I'm switching to N just so I can do some justice to a Conrail layout in a 15x10 basement, I'm not striving for a spot on depiction of buildings, people or other various details, I will concentrate on track, some buildings and a operating scheme, I've spent hours detailing freight cars and locomotives in HO and N is too small to waste that time adding details to a loco that nobody will see other than snow plows!!!😂😂😂 I'll watch Norms Trains who builds in O scale when he's detailing buildings and railroad equipment, besides when I finish the layout in 5 years hopefully it will be a few friends and grandkids running it, Tulle I think would make some decent looking fence in N scale to get the close enough look of the real thing!! Great video on this subject because I think most of us are building a slice of our favorite railroads in a an area we grew up in and not something we're sweating over for a cover of Model Railroader, I do love what you have done in N scale and seeing your work has really helped me make the choice to go to that scale, keep up the awesome work and hopefully as mine comes along I can get a few scenes close to yours!!!👍👍👍👍👍

Tulle is almost 1:1 perfect for HO scale fences. Sadly it's too big for N, even though it looks pretty good. It's enough to drive me crazy though, I've been trying to search for a fabric closer to N scale chain link but haven't had luck yet.

Couldn't agree more. Will it scale down and is it worth it? Terry

Well it is N scale! Very small and IMHO you have broke it down my friend. Make it to suit you and what you like. Your layout is a work of art.

Agree whole heartedly with the other comment saying great topic. All your vids provide inspiration and knowledge for me. I do look forward to your Train Talk vids 😉. Thank you Eric/k.

going back to the start, some 25 years ago, n scale was very toy-like because the technology to produce the fine-scale parts wasn't there or was too expensive. But as the technology and materials improved, better details were possible to the point where we have ScaleTrains and the like doing yeoman's work in detail perfection. but even here - we're limited to what can be seen and what can be made to fit and still be reliable. that's where the beauty in n scale is for me. very small details can be omitted due to size but cost nothing to the realism of the model or scene. so your example of a glass of water is an unnecessary detail the likely couldn't be made convincing in n scale. But, at a larger scale, an outdoor cafe might look odd with nothing on the tables.

When you worry about perfection, you miss the important part of the hobby. You forget to have fun.

In N scale, illusion is reality, unless you literally want to start using microscopes and tweezers for every detail. There is a finite limit to doing everything in N, simply because to scale everything would make it unlikely to survive use or handling. As a former N scaler who did a few detail projects, like painting the headlights and tail lights of vehicle on the layout, and modifying a couple of Bachman pre-built buildings, I found it frustrating to work to that level of detail in items that small. Your pizza slice is relatively huge, as are the couplers on the tank car. But couplers actually have to work, so you have a strength concern. The yellow handrails on the petrochem site are too thick, but again, to scale down standard materials creates the headache you identified--what the heck do you use to make the model parts?? And as you point out, it's like the whole printer resolution issue. Beyond a certain point, the eye doesn't even see the difference/detail any way, so why bother? If I ever get my HO switching shelf built, even that won't be hyper-detailed to fine-scale standards, but it will be easier to do than in N (or Z!) for those details I choose to fuss over.

Tulle fabric is great, just take care to cut it straight, so the grids are consistently even across the length of the fencing.

As someone who is getting older, eye sight plays a part as well. N scale would not be something I would consider now. I model in OO9 and even that is getting too small and fiddly. The next scale for me will probably be On30 or O 16.5.

Great points. Your modeling looks great! By the way, "tulle" is pronounced like "tool"😊

Even in abstract, the pizza slice is still visible! 😮

Your model, your rules, your enjoyment.🤣👍💕

With building LEGO MOC's is the same dilemma. You want the details, but the sheer size of the bricks seriously gets in the way. You'll end up with 3mm handle bars in 1:40 scale MOC's that are way off, but actually do help to transmit the image you want. In the scenery depicted the railings also are way oversized, but to leave them out will completely ruin the essence of the modeled building.

woodland Scenic N scale is 2mm per foot so its a little bigger then you measure.

I think no matter what scale you work at one will always try to add more and more detail. I work in Gauge 1 and you would think that would eliminate a lot of issues with fine detail, except you always look for new things to do. For example, It is a great temptation to add individual rivets and bolts to a model but no one tells you about the amount of time and dexterity required to do this. And for what? It looks great but most of the people who look at the models dont notice anyway. Stand back from your models…if it looks like a solid representation of the prototype then stop. You can then move onto something else on the layout. IMHO 😎

The biggest problem and challenge to fine scale in N scale is the available track. Most N scale track is so far out of scale it's a visual problem, imo. Tie spacing is too far apart and rail size is too large in most cases.

I agree that N scale has come a long way in the recent years, BUT I strongly disagree that the old stuff look like toys. Fleischmann has some products from the 70' at N scale (especially the class 01 and class 80- tank locos) that give class in terms of appearance to some of the locos produced by other N scale manufacturers by modern means. On your topic about realism vs resolution, the general line that many Europeean manufacturers use is based on the true to scale observatory phenomenon and stepping feet illusion. You want to maximize (macro) realism until the stepping feet illusion threshold is 0. The resolution at which you achieve this threshold is your optimum resolution for that scale. That is why some of the details on some models are completely missing in smaller scales.

Realism 😊

To your point--those handrails are wildly out of scale and should probably be replaced with photo etch.

You need to be practical and realistic about actually achieving realism and draw the line (pun #2) at what is reasonable.

In this scale, your realism is top notch. You’ve never injured yourself constructing this railroad?!! I injure myself once week! You’re not trying hard enough.

See i believe that a model railroad is never done. So i start at the big and then go smaller and smaller. I think that looking at things through the lens of amusement parks where you have a central focal point and thats the most detailed thing, and things that compliment it that are a little less detailed in a given area are important because it lets people focus on the important stuff. If everything looks amazing it’s hard for the audience to understand what to look at, and it actually works against the effort and time put into that hard work

And this is N scale, I'm trying to find details on HO and that is almost twice the size. I wouldn't even get close to this in HO.

Piano wire for fine fence poles.

i am a community dialog all by myself!

Very interesting topic! The real dilemma that I see is putting all the details in the same order of precision to each other. While you strove to find a material to replicate the thinness of chain link fencing, the handrails on the platform for the tank farm appear to be four inches thick! I’m not suggesting that you need to replace the railing, although photo etch brass railing does exist, but we all face the “good enough” compromise somewhere in our modeling pursuits. There’s the issue of how much time one should devote to a particular project. You’ve already accomplished quite an impressive layout with what you have to work with, I commend your efforts and thoughtfulness. By the way, you should keep up on your tetanus shot boosters, I believe it’s every ten years or so! Keep up the great work!

!? N scale ! These days with me eyesight it’s Christmas if I can recognize a steam 141R mikado from a cat turd at the other end of the layout…