2mm Agm 2012

That is exactly the same argument I use when doing 2mm demos at shows. It can be very frustrating sometimes when people seem to dismiss 2mm straight away as "being too small and fiddly". My reply is sometimes "I feel sorry for people who model in the larger scales because then you have to think about things like rivets and pipe runs".

I quite agree, 't is the same for me, Julia. A common 'original' observation heard from many onlookers when I do 2mm demos (mostly 2mmNG/Nn3 these days) is "I have difficulty with my 4mm models, so I don't know how you manage in 2mm scale". Oh how this brightens my day, harr harr! :p

My repost is usually that, although the finished 2mm scale models MAY be small when compared to other scales, the physical size of the details that one applies is probably about the same in all scales (or should be). For instance, in 4mm scale you may be messing about applying the correct number of rivets, but in 2mm scale you are more concerned with roof ventilators and door handles: all about the same physical size. There is a limit to the size of component human hands can manipulate, or the eye can see at normal viewing distances.

This all sounds very philosophical, I know. But simply put, 2mm scale is no more 'fiddly' than any other scale, I humbly submit. I find the same with my current S scale modelling, it's no more difficult than any other scale provided you make the effort and have the right mental approach. :thumbs:

Phil
 

28ten

Guv'nor
I quite agree, 't is the same for me, Julia. A common 'original' observation heard from many onlookers when I do 2mm demos (mostly 2mmNG/Nn3 these days) is "I have difficulty with my 4mm models, so I don't know how you manage in 2mm scale". Oh how this brightens my day, harr harr! :p

My repost is usually that, although the finished 2mm scale models MAY be small when compared to other scales, the physical size of the details that one applies is probably about the same in all scales (or should be). For instance, in 4mm scale you may be messing about applying the correct number of rivets, but in 2mm scale you are more concerned with roof ventilators and door handles: all about the same physical size. There is a limit to the size of component human hands can manipulate, or the eye can see at normal viewing distances.

This all sounds very philosophical, I know. But simply put, 2mm scale is no more 'fiddly' than any other scale, I humbly submit. I find the same with my current S scale modelling, it's no more difficult than any other scale provided you make the effort and have the right mental approach. :thumbs:

Phil
When you go up in scale the big bits get bigger but the small bits are still small:) But I do think that as the scale gets smaller you have to be able to work to consistently fine tollerence, whereas in bigger scales, there is a little more leeway. In my teens, inspired by MRJ, an 08, and a matchstick I dabbled with S4, what a disaster:)) at that time I was unable (ie did not have the skill) to work to fine tolerances, but I could do it now.
 
S

Simon Dunkley

Guest
The 16tonner is indeed a Stephen Harris kit - more info here
http://www.2mm.org.uk/small_suppliers/stephenharris/index.htm

I have built a few of these over the last few months for my c.1970 Highbury stockbox and I have to say they are a joy. They have to be some of the best designed kits I have come across and as Julia says are a breeze to build - small certainly, but everything fits as it should.
Not only that, but some of the construction methods would not be possible in larger scales.

In my mind, the smaller the scale, the larger the layout needs to appear to be, to be effective. I used to think that the layout needed to be larger, but no longer think that way.

Here are some 2mm layouts that I have liked and not liked, and why - no criticism of their builders/owners, just my personal reactions.
  • Luton Hoo: I have stood at the northern end of this, and the view down the tracks was terrific. The addition of the GNR branchline added considerably to the impact of the mainline when viewed from the front, as there was a bit more distance and the eye could take more in.
  • Copenhagen Fields in its initial form didn't do a lot for me, but the expanded version will when complete. At York this year, I was able to get a bird's eye view from the mezzanine floor above, and this looked so like a real railway, and trains moved at the right speeds - they appeared to be slow. (When I was younger, I used to watch trains from my grandfather's flat: they were about a mile away and took what seemed like ages to climb out of Northampton Castle up to Hunsbury Hill, but actually they were about a mile away and consider the speed restriction of 40 mph even on through trains, they were actually making good progress. And what's more, it was mid 70s corporate image. ;) )
  • Chee Tor. The photos were great, but frequently showed views it was difficult to see at an exhibition. I was disappointed, to be honest - I felt that maybe the layout wasn't big enough?
  • Clive Road Sidings: superb modelling, but to me it felt like a small layout on a shelf, rather than part of anything else.
  • Chapel Wharf: self contained, but with hints of the larger world outside.
  • Ashburton and Totnes: both extremely lovely and redolent of a favourite part of the world.
  • Highbury Colliery. I hope this isn't seen as too much like sucking up to the OP, but although this is a small layout, the curved background which blends into the scenery - as on Ashburton and Totnes - hides this, and it is part of a bigger scene. Personally, I would love to have a bit more scenery out front, to further separate the viewer from the trains (Petherick Style) but this is me being really picky.
The consistent thread is that each of the layouts which do something for me suggest that they are part of the world at large. I used to think that lots of scenery was required for this. Now, I realise that suggestion (the warehouses at the back of Chapel Wharf are a very effective "stop" to the eye) of more is what works - Clive Road "fails", if that is the correct word, because although it fulfils an intention to show that 2mm finescale can start off small, the illusion is broken by the hard edge of the baseboard cutting through the goods yard.

Talking of Petherick, this 4mm layout was up to 5' wide. One would only need 30" width in 2mm scale to get the same effect. (And no, this would not be enough to tempt me. S and One32 are quite enough as it is.)

That's more than enough verbiage from me!
 

mickoo

Western Thunderer
No, not that one - something rather smaller... I've had a trawl and found it:-
FRANKLAND !!! Sounds an implausible name, but it is simply awesome.
The link starts at Page 1, but follow it through and :bowdown::bowdown::bowdown::bowdown: accordingly.... unfortunately the thread hasn't been updated since July. :(
Ooh that was an interesting and inspirational diversion, about half way through my mind drifted off to a Waterloo East/ Market Harboro Jct layout scenario, or Charing cross/ Cannon Street and river crossing. I noted your Jeeves - Wooster comments, but I though more Hercule Poirot :), both classical 30's Art Deco ambiance.

It's fair to say I have too many interests and not enough focus LOL and after musing the possibilities of 2mm viz 1:32/ gauge 3 this evening whilst researching LNER Pacifics, I've come to the conclusion that 2mm is all about the scenery and the trains are icing where as in the larger scales it's the trains that are the focus and the scenery the icing.
 
In my mind, the smaller the scale, the larger the layout needs to appear to be, to be effective. I used to think that the layout needed to be larger, but no longer think that way.

I quite agree, Simon. The smaller the scale, the greater the 'landscape' potential of that scale is realised by utilising it to depict a decent chunk of real scenery - tiny trains moving through a big landscape. Also, the eye can better take in a large swathe of modelled landscape if the scale is relatively small. Conversely, large modelling scales work best for small focussed 'studies' of an area of operation, often referred to as 'micro-layouts' (although they might be physically quite large). Here, the actual rolling stock almost becomes items of moving scenery. Large layouts in a large scale can be visually overwhelming and the eye can't take in the whole scene.

None of these are new ideas, of course, but worth repeating here in the context of this discussion. A common assumption I often hear at shows - perhaps by the less enlightened - is that the smaller the scale, the smaller the layout which can be built. While this is undoubtedly true, it suggests the hapless speaker has rather missed the potential of very small scale modelling. I'd say if you've got the space for a 4mm or HO scale layout, use the same footprint to build a 2mm or N scale layout - and consequently, the effect will be much more realistic.

Yes, 2mm or N scale is the obvious size in which to contemplate a large landscape/townscape layout (there is currently insufficient support for Z scale): Jerry's evolving 2mm scale 'Bath Queensquare' being a good example. But having recently played around with T-gauge 1:450, and once operation becomes more controllable, I can see that the landscape modelling potential of this minute model railway scale is truly mind-expanding! :thumbs:
 
When you go up in scale the big bits get bigger but the small bits are still small:) But I do think that as the scale gets smaller you have to be able to work to consistently fine tollerence, whereas in bigger scales, there is a little more leeway.

Quite so. Some years ago, while still active in 2mm modelling, I scratchbuilt some British prototype wagons in Z scale. This scale is about a 2/3 the size of 2mm, and I found that any errors in marking and cutting out components were effectively magnified by 50% in Z scale (if I've got my maths right, but no matter). Thus a 10 thou error either way in 2mm might be acceptable, this widened to the equivalent of a chasm-like gap in Z scale, making the 'squareness' of wagon and van bodies more rhomboid in plan. Definitely not good!

While this may sound like a rather negative experience, what it taught me was to tighten up my marking and cutting abilities through a bit of Z scale modelling, so when I returned to 2mm scale my modelling skills had improved. The lesson being here being that dabbling in scales smaller than the one you normally use can be very useful - if only as a skill-building exercise. The other benefit was that after focusing on Z scale models for a few days, my 2mm models looked ENORMOUS by comparison and felt soooo much easier to work on!! :D
 

queensquare

Western Thunderer
I quite agree, Simon. The smaller the scale, the greater the 'landscape' potential of that scale is realised by utilising it to depict a decent chunk of real scenery - tiny trains moving through a big landscape. Also, the eye can better take in a large swathe of modelled landscape if the scale is relatively small. Conversely, large modelling scales work best for small focussed 'studies' of an area of operation, often referred to as 'micro-layouts' (although they might be physically quite large). Here, the actual rolling stock almost becomes items of moving scenery. Large layouts in a large scale can be visually overwhelming and the eye can't take in the whole scene.

I would broadly agree with this. Although I have a couple of small layouts on the exhibition at the moment I do think that 2mm is really at its best when done on a grand scale - Chee Tor, Copenhagen Fields etc.
For me, 7mm is at its best with a small, intimate subject where the ability for a high level of detail can really be exploited. An excellent example of this, albeit in 1/32, is Steve Harrod's beautiful diesel depot complete with hydraulics, which I got the chance to study at Wells this year.

Jerry
 
S

Simon Dunkley

Guest
I would broadly agree with this. Although I have a couple of small layouts on the exhibition at the moment I do think that 2mm is really at its best when done on a grand scale - Chee Tor, Copenhagen Fields etc.
For me, 7mm is at its best with a small, intimate subject where the ability for a high level of detail can really be exploited. An excellent example of this, albeit in 1/32, is Steve Harrod's beautiful diesel depot complete with hydraulics, which I got the chance to study at Wells this year.
The key word in my post was "appear". Although train-lost-in-grand-landscape is an ideal, it is the appearance of being part of something larger which is needed.
With larger scales, you can be drawn into the scene, so truncating the cartage are in a goods yard at a baseboard edge is not an issue, as if the layout is set up reasonably high, the aim is to make you feel that you are standing there. Quite possibly, no backscene is required, either - buildings will do.
Conversely, a 2mm layout needs soft edges.
That's my opinion, anyway!
 

queensquare

Western Thunderer
Nice to see more and more peeps on this thread...thanks for kicking it off Jerry...;)

Yes we have a steady trickle of 2mm modellers coming over - soon be time for some workshop threads.

I'm in the middle of fitting a new kitchen so it could be a week or so before I get a chance - what are the rest of you up to, busily finishing bits to show off in Bedford hopefully!

Jerry
 

2mm Andy

Member
what are the rest of you up to, busily finishing bits to show off in Bedford hopefully!

Jerry

Erm - not quite! I won't have anything ready for the competitions this year, but will try and take a few bits for the 'show and tell' table. If I get my act together, it may include a couple of the 2mm wagon kits that have arrived recently from mid-Wales...

Talking of which, they might be a good subject for a workbench thread.

Andy
 

2mm Andy

Member
Well, the AGM is over for another year. I thoroughly enjoyed the day, especially after the formal business was out of the way and I could relax a bit!:confused: Nice to see lots of friends and familiar faces and oodles of inspirational modelling, but I have to confess that my camera didn't even leave my bag. Did anyone else take any photos? I know at least one member on here came away with another pot for his trophy cabinet...;)

Andy
 

28ten

Guv'nor
Any photos?
Erm - not quite! I won't have anything ready for the competitions this year, but will try and take a few bits for the 'show and tell' table. If I get my act together, it may include a couple of the 2mm wagon kits that have arrived recently from mid-Wales...

Talking of which, they might be a good subject for a workbench thread.

Andy
Good idea ;)
 
Do you need directions to the 2mm Lounge?

Looks like he found it already. ;)

By all accounts, the 2-mil AGM was a good one this year. Would have liked to have been there in Bedford, and also at the SSMRS Autumn meeting in Burton on the same day. But both still too far from me - sigh. :oops: Let me know when either comes to Exeter - hah! :D
 

Suddaby

Western Thunderer
Simon said "Chee Tor. The photos were great, but frequently showed views it was difficult to see at an exhibition. I was disappointed, to be honest - I felt that maybe the layout wasn't big enough?"

As one of those who helped hump this round the exhibition circuit, trust me it was well big, and heavy enough!:)
When we went to Dortmund with it, we had to know the weight, and the layout and all it's paraphenalia actually weighed 1 Ton.

Makes my back twinge just thinking about it- thank goodness it's in Canada!!

Kevin
 

Steve Cook

Flying Squad
Evening :)
Its mainly Jerry's fault - I'd not really been exposed to 2mm finescale before, but Highbury Colliery at Camrail about five years ago changed all that. I was, and still am, amazed at the size of the locos and the stock and how well they can be made to run, I just find it fascinating. In true scattergun modelling fashion I've done nothing about it since then (bar asking Jerry about stuff at most of the subsequent Camrail shows). Anyway, this year I've made a forward step and joined the 2mm Scale Association and have pestered John Greenwood with loads of questions about Wenford Bridge Goods Depot whilst at Camrail this year (hmm, maybe I should be blaming Simon C and Camrail too :D ). Unfortunately I didn't manage to make the AGM last weekend as I'd already commited to both Shepshed and the S Scale Society meet, but thanks to a bit of steering I'm here, interested and have built nothing in this scale before :) Any suggestions on the best place/thing to start with will be gratefully received, and I thought I best ought to say hello to all those whose joining I missed as well.
Steve
 
Top