Tehachapi, BC

[GaryHinshaw]

One follow-up on that: when I first tried this, I was expecting the wire to lift out of the throw rod because it wants to rotate about the fulcrum.  The reason it doesn't is because the hole in the throw rod is pretty snug, but you may find this not to be the case.  The brass sleeve - when mounted - will prevent this.

-gfh

[robert3985]

Love the benchwork/electrical photos    Very instructional and interesting

[GaryHinshaw]

Things are proceeding at a somewhat glacial pace, but they are proceeding.  I need to build and install one more turnout to complete the upper deck mainline and tie in the shoo-fly: that will make the upper deck a (temporary) continuous loop.  In parallel, I've been messing around with photo back-drops and thinking through the configuration of the cement plant at Summit/Monolith.  Here's a quick look at some of the latter work.

One of the hallmarks of the Pass is how quickly the scenery changes from the west side (golden grass, live oaks and rolling hills) to the east side (sagebrush, Joshua trees, and basin & range terrain), literally in a span of a few miles.  This is an important element for the layout scenery to capture.  The back-drop concept for the east slope from Summit down towards Mojave, is wide open desert, and when I was down visiting last summer I took a bunch of exploratory shots.  Today I put together a quick test of the desert backdrop: the scene below was taken from the site being depicted, but it encompasses a ~120 degree panorama that extends far wider than you would normally see train-watching from this spot.  The print itself is about 7" by 100" and was just quickly pasted together from letter-size paper, so excuse the quality - I'm just looking to see if the scene hangs together at all, before committing.

Here is a wide shot for context, taken from quite a bit above eye level (of course the 3-d scenery would eventually cover the white bit along the bottom):



The left end of this backdrop is where the east slope tracks enter hidden track on the main Loop shelf and head to staging.  There will be some kind of a scene divider there to finesse that transition.  At right, the scene transitions to the Monolith cement plant at summit but I think the backdrop there will transition nicely from the current scene.  Here are a few shots from closer to eye level:





The color and resolution of the backdrop are intentionally somewhat subdued so as not to draw too much attention to it.  For the permanent installation, I plan to get this printed in large format and would cut the sky out and mount the photo on stiff board set away from the ~sky blue walls by 3/4 of an inch.

I solicit comments and suggestions about any aspect of this.  FWIW, the scene looks better in person than the photos convey.  One question in particular is whether or not the size of the mountains seems about right; I think they look perfect (size-wise) in the first eye-levl shot, but maybe a bit too small in the second more distant shot.

Thanks for looking,
-gfh

[GaryHinshaw]

And the second installment on Monolith.  Here is a panorama of the facility I took last summer (the actual summit and the town of Tehachapi are just off to the left):




(click it for a larger version on Picasa, if you wish).  I've numbered some of the key buildings to help identify the bits in the upcoming mock-up shots.  Here is a wide shot of the corner that will house the facility on the layout:



For orientation, the east slope (and the edge of its backdrop) is just to the left, and summit (and the doorway) are just to the right.  For various reasons, I had to flip the sense of the mainline relative to the prototype, as my summit is off to the right.  I also had to curve the plant around the corner of the room to accommodate a plausibly-sized facility.  The numbered scraps in the mock-up are keyed to the numbered buildings in the panorama: these are the major foreground buildings I am thinking I'll try to replicate in 3d.  The remainder will be handled with a photo backdrop, taken from the above image and/or some retakes.  You'll notice that the model buildings are out of order: I'm winging it a bit to come up with an arrangement that seems plausible in the space available.

Here are a pair of closer shots looking from summit and the east slope, respectively:





For now, you'll just have to use your imagination to replace the paint cans and caulking tubes with believable structures.... One of the reasons for mocking this up now is to see if I might need to make any revisions to the roadbed before I start laying industrial trackage. 

-gfh

[C855B]

Ah! Home! I'll spare you the detail I had all wound up for you about the flora of the north Antelope Valley.

I dunno if you're getting what you're after with the panoramas. The first set would be good for, say, Mojave west to Warren, the second possibly going east of Mojave to North Edwards. Between Cameron and Monolith the RR and highway are squeezed into a pretty tight valley, so the mountains are up close and personal, don't let a windmill blade smack your nose.

Cool shot of Monolith.

BTW, they're not optimistic about the poppy display this year. Apparently they got a hard freeze after expected germination.

[GaryHinshaw]

The panorama in the first post was taken from just north of Mojave, near the signal bridge, looking towards summit (as I'm sure you recognize). This is the area this shelf is supposed to represent.  The valley between here and summit (Warren and Cameron) had to be jettisoned in my plan, so - alas - I transition hard into Monolith.  Fortunately the hills behind the cement plant are quite similar to the hills in the first scene, so I think the transition will work.  (Or rather, it must work...)


-gfh

P.S Sorry to hear about the poppies...

[jagged ben]

The stacktrain against the backdrop looks pretty good to me .... although it does remind me perhaps as much of the Sunset route in parts of Arizona than it does of Tehachapi.   I suppose that's another way of saying that I concur that the mountains should be taller. 

[GaryHinshaw]

Yea, I'm not sure I have the right size yet.   There are so few points of reference in this scene that one could get away with quite a range of sizes.  Proto photos are no guide either; witness these two shots of the same scene taken with very different lenses:

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=212100&nseq=51
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=178055&nseq=52

In my head, I'm thinking something more like this, which is much closer to a naked-eye view:

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=352432&nseq=27

And I want the quality to be good enough to convey a sense of place, but not so good that it draws attention away from the 3d models.  I'm going to live with these cheap paste-ups for a bit and see how they feel over time.  It also occurs to me that the Monolith backdrop may end up dictating things, because there I need to worry about how the backdrop looks compared to the cement plant buildings.

-gfh

[James Costello]

I think it looks hawt mate, well done. I like the subdued look.

[Scottl]

I think you have the proportions just right and it looks very natural.  That being said, I have never been there, but the pictures both straight on and looking down track look good without any of the "flatness" that can happen with photo backdrops.  That is really effective.

I actually worry a bit that the cut out of the mountains might have a negative impact, by sharpening the mountain edge and giving some strange effects looking along the track.  I could imagine how you might be able to see the cut out.  I know you did a mock up for the hidden exit of the east slope, but you might want to do it here as well with the cut out.

[Denver Road Doug]

That looks outstanding!   I think the size is perfect.  Granted I haven't railfanned the area so I don't have a "eye" for it, but generally it looks good and I think you would always want to err on the side of smaller.  Just my opinion.

OK, I just had to do a quick 2-minute photoshop on this...

[Scottl]

On my last layout, I had a photo backdrop and it looked fine from normal angles, but the mountains were too tall and the view along the backdrop was a major problem.



If I were to do it again, I would lower the mountain horizon.  Gary, I think you nailed it with yours.

[ednadolski]

I actually worry a bit that the cut out of the mountains might have a negative impact, by sharpening the mountain edge and giving some strange effects looking along the track.  I could imagine how you might be able to see the cut out.

I've run into this myself.   The cutout mountain edge against the painted sky looks like, well, a cutout.   It's better at a viewing distance of several feet,  but looks more stark the closer I get.   One thing that helped was to touch up the paper edges of the cutout with the same paint that I used for the sky.

If I had it to do over again I would try painting the most distant mountains as part of the sky board and use the paper cutouts for the intermediate hills, so that the differences in media would (hopefully) translate into a more convincing impression of depth.

Ed

[GaryHinshaw]

Ok, here's a quick redo: cut out a portion of the sky, taped the seams better (those were bugging me too DRD!), and reshot with a better crop:



Comments?  [Ok, I admit that the drooping sky is an intentionally biased device introduced to sway the voting.  ]  FWIW, it actually looks pretty cool in person, but I'm more than willing to hear out the contrarians.  I think keeping the edge thin will be key: this means using good paper stock for printing, and cutting the backing board a fraction of an inch shorter.

Great to have a focus group!
-gfh

[C855B]

Uh... that looks great, Gary. Give us shot from a "going away" angle just to see if it works as well.