Enjoyed this

I do like to add details to locomotives and to lesser degree freight cars. However, Joe is spot on about ops. When I participate in an ops session at our club or a couple other home layouts, I rarely notice detail on cars or locomotives. What I am looking for is car type, color and reporting marks to properly spot or pick up cars.

However, if one has a smaller shelf switching layout then maybe details are nice and can add to the fun, especially if the fleet is not large. 

Remember this is a hobby for fun and all approaches to this topic are correct for the layout owner.

Bill Michael

Another reason not to detail....

I have kids, I weather and I add enough details to make my SP locos look right

Detail & Weathering

I haven't detailed my power yet, but have a few minor parts & pieces to add to them, as well as some l.e.d.'s when I get that far. I'm not a rivet counter. That includes my weathering as well. I don't try an match rolling stock with photos, I only use photos to give me some ideas. I only use three rules: 1.) it's my railroad. 2.) if you don't like it, you are free to leave, the topic won't be debated. 3.) refer to rule 1

nice article.

nice article.

Ah yes, but....

One of the facets of this hobby is what draws or attracts one to the many facets of Model Railroading. I for one am a model builder. I've been building models since 1957. I got to the point of wiring engines adding brake lines, and cutting open doors & trunks on model cars. But the one thing that was missing is the action. I love to see an eye level view of a detailed locomotive or piece of equipment in a scenic setting. Yes, it's true when running an operating session parts get knocked off. I have runners and display units. The runners are less detailed.

Great Article

It has bugged me for years to super detail a loco or car and then accidently damage it handling it (I always switch out my locos as I get tired of running the same one all the time).  I have observed that a lot of very small detail gets lost in the weathering anyway.  I want smooth operation more than super detailing.  If it looks great but runs like a dog what have you got?

SouthernAlco

I like the details on the

I like the details on the cars and locomotives. I enjoy building them. I also like running them on the layout. If you use the no touching method magnets instead of uncoupling picks and do not have to 050 your equipment it should be just fine. Those detailed cars really look good when spotted at an industry or parked next to the edge of the layout.

So I will take the forward running view instead of the reverse. As always a nice thought inspiring thread. If you think the details don't matter just look at the discussion in a review of one of the new kits on the market which is designed to be just a runner like the ones talked about in the article.

Its all in the details

  I agree with Joes summation and for the most part he is correct. A moving model shows little in details. This is very apparent in the smaller scales HO and under. Where the lack of detail is glaringly apparent is when you get into O scale and larger. Even moving the lack of these details are quite apparent to the trained eye (No pun intended) in the larger scales. That and for rolling stock and motive power that is standing on a siding or main line and is up close and in your face you do see the details or lack of, its glaring. There in lies the cavort to detail or not. Once your eye is trained to see a certain way it will always see that way. If you are used to seeing the detail and its not there it will look off or out of place. There again as Joe eludes too, the locomotives and rolling stock that are being produced today are far more detailed than their older brethren. This is especially so in the world of HO. So detailing is not always necessary to achieve that over all detailed look. Another point I might illuminate is that if you do decide to detail then all of your models should be detailed. Other wise it is glaringly apparent when you have a mix of detailed and not detailed on the same train.  Its an apportion reasoning to the age old problem of this hobby, compromise. It becomes a mater of priorities  and where you place your time, money, and friends. If your heavily into operations as Joe is then accurately detailed livery is not a high probability considering you have close to two hundred cars to move about in a timely manor. A lot depends on scale, size/complexity of layout, druthers, and your disposition to one way or the other. As for me I would rather have one exceptionally well done piece than ten so so pieces. However all this falls back on rule #1 "Its your railroad". Bare these considerations in mind but go with what is most enjoyable for you.

Why not just run...

... painted blocks of wood? That would save a lot of trouble.

But last time I looked, those cars that are moving in a train also spend a lot of time standing still in a yard, or on a customer's siding, and that's where the detail - or lack of detail - really shows up. It also shows up in photos - and given that so many people nowadays have digital cameras (or even camera phones) that can capture extreme close-ups of our layouts, those under-detailed cars are really going to stand out as toys instead of models.

I don't have hundreds of pieces of rolling stock to maintain on my layout - but I do have several dozen pieces. And I don't spend very much time repairing them. Maybe it's because I've spent a lot of time tuning my layout so I don't have derailments. But I use manual uncoupling tools and I do have an active staging area with storage drawers so my rolling stock receives a fair bit of handling as a result.

I guess me and my guests are careful when we handle the rolling stock, so we don't break the details. Your mileage may vary...

- Trevor

---

"If you use the no touching

     I build my cars to be handled by using metal/wire details and pinning them into the plastic so they bend instead of fall off. I don't over detail them since that often looks worse than under detailing( due to over size and exaggerated features of many detail parts). I've found the best compromise is to find a trackside shot of the prototype car or loco and then detail it to the extent that things show up in the photo( era should be considered as cars and locos look different as they age)......DaveB

What you have said is even

What you have said is even more true in N scale.

Works for Me

Here's an example from my layout.  The car at center is a Athearn blue box model of a PFE R-70-20, offered as part of a multi-kit set with different numbers, heralds, and other lettering (which was mostly accurate).  I painted the roof white (it came incorrectly in silver), and added an exhaust stack, plus decals for ACI labels, consolidated stencils, U-1 inspection symbols, thermostat dials, and the fuel tank lettering.  It was also weathered based on prototype photos, with attention paid to the refrigeration unit screens so they didn't look so cast-on.  It's certainly not perfect, as Athearn put the color separation for the roof too low (which I had to cover up when I repainted it), and the roof contour is off - something noticeable when comparing to an Intermountain model of the same car.

At left is a car that received extensive work - an old Lima model of a PFE R-70-10.  I swapped the B end for the correct improved dreadnaught type (including all new brake details), added an etched running board, installed A Line sill steps plus scratchbuilt steps below the doors, wire grabs, different trucks, and some new fuel tanks, then gave it a full paint and decal treatment based on prototype photos.

At right is a Red Caboose R-70-16, a model with all kinds of separate details (ladders, grabs, running board brackets, door operating rods, underbody components and more).

In an operating session environment, all of these deliver an era-appropriate look for PFE traffic.  I didn't mind doing the work to recreate the R-70-10, or spending extra for the R-70-16.  Since better models of the R-70-20 through 25 classes are now available, I could replace the Athearn car (and several others like it) with something a lot more detailed.  However, I'm not sure the additional expense would deliver a markedly better impression on the viewer or operator.  The main thing for me is having a realistic variety, and it's often necessary to kitbash and/or use higher-end models to add cars that aren't available from lower cost sources.  For cars available in reasonable form at reduced cost, I'm often willing to go with them, and to not feel any guilt about it

Where I will differ from the column is the concern for damage.  I usually end up with a car or two on the RIP track at the end of a session, but the reason is almost always a missing coupler spring.  Rarely does a model suffer damage that requires repair, and when that does occur it's normally due to a glue joint failing and something falling off, rather than an actual break.

Sure, why not?

It sure would save a lot of trouble - but then the case I'm making is that today's out-of-the-box detail plus weathering looks just as good using the 3 foot rule as something more detailed.

Don't think the painted blocks of wood pass the three foot test ...

Also, remember Reverse Running is a column that's always done with an exaggerated wink-wink and an ornery grin.

Why not just run painted

I'm with Trevor on this one and I think this discussion illustrates one of the major advantages of the "achievable layout" idea he advocates - if you have a layout small and/or simple enough to only require a more modest amount of rolling stock, you have (more than likely) more time available for detailing and perhaps an operations tempo which allows for very slow and careful handling of your well-detailed equipment.  This also results in a layout that photographs well with less careful staging of shots.

Of course, for many people, satisfying operation requires "big time railroading" with long trains and/or many trains, and that's perfectly fine.  But I think such layouts are less likely to look their best in close-up photography unless care is taken to photograph only the best-detailed equipment.  On the other hand, though, it could be argued that in wider angle photography they look better (i.e., a model of a yard or industry that is plausibly large with many less-detailed cars could well be more believable than a yard or industry that is unrealistically compressed with a handful of highly-detailed cars).

In the end, though, it's just a matter of personal preference.

"Why not just run painted

   Painted blocks of wood can look as good as painted blocks of plastic or brass. In the old days wood and cardboard were common forms of construction and Rob recently built a nice wooden caboose from a kit.  I don't think detailing is wasting time if one enjoys it but if they are doing it only because they think it's necessary to meet standards set by some far off expert or group then it's wasting their time. Conversely  someone who enjoys detailing might actually be wasting time building a layout if they don't enjoy running their stuff as much as building it? ...DaveB 

Blue Box+ I like that

That's a good title for decent operating cars. I was inspired back in the 80's by MRing and RMJ to pay closer attention to the mundane Athearn and MDC cars and to bring them closer to the looks of craftsman kit cars. Taking a blue box AAR box car and cutting off the door claws, adding wire stirrups and replacing the roof walk helped a lot, as did making new door tracks. I wouldn't buy a car to do this but I had plenty of oldies on the layout, a sunk cost anyway. Less than a dollar's worth of plastic and wood strips and a bit of wire works wonders. Adding wire grabs and uncoupling levers adds little expense and you've got a pretty good layout car with a bit of paint touch up. It's hard to damage these cars in normal operation too.

Barry P.

Blue Box +

When I decided to get serious about building rather than planning a layout, I spent a lot of time thinking about the compromises I would have to make.

Compromises?

i live on an island, a $50 RT ferry ride from the mainland, $165 RT if I take the car. I don't know any other model railroaders, so everything I do is done by me, with the exception of some infrastructure improvements hidden in the household repair budget.

Everything on the layout has to be simple, and being bulletproof and being available are more important than being perfect or the latest thing.  I had time to reflect on this as I completed the recent MRH Annual Survey.  I am at that stage of model railroading where I am a complete bust for most of the suppliers.  It will be a cold day in hell when I buy one of the highly detailed RTR cars that are popular now, and I can't imagine myself buying most craftsman kits either because I have a wonderful scrap box that can become all sorts of things.

Why? I love turning sow's ears into nylon -- if not silk -- purses, and much of my pleasure is kit bashing.  My freight car standard is Accurail, upgraded Athearn Blue Box (+) and Branchline/Atlas Yardmaster level kits.  When I want a challenge, there are Red Caboose and similar cars and Jordan vehicles and scratch built structures.

i am relentlessly experimental, I have an eye for terrain, and I am constantly learing more about the look of the New England coast over time  and how to represent it.

But except for occasional jewels, I'll be dead before my layout passes any more than the three foot test.  And I am pretty happy about that.

i am doing some experimentation now with one and two-turnout layouts, so things may get simple enough on the construction end that I want to take the time to reproduce a specific structure on the day that Phillip Hastings photographed it,   If only operation -- lone wolf or with my granddaughters in the summer -- didn't keep getting in the way, who knows what I could get done!

It all depends what your final goal is...

If your goal is to have models that look great in photos, then yes, you should super detail them. 

If your goal is to have an operating layout, I don't care HOW careful you are, and how perfect your track is, CRAP HAPPENS and details do get broken off.  I can think of a few model railroads that are owned by the more famous modelers, and their trackwork is flawless, and yet details still get accidently broken off.  Manually uncoupling cars does not always go without issues.  Equipment can jump off the track even without any issues with the track.  So if your final goal is simulating prototype operations, super details are going to become deformed at some point.

As my mentor has said to me many times, in this hobby you do not have time to have more than one final goal for your layout, or you will never get to a level of completion you will be satisfied with and eventually you will get frustrated and quit the hobby.  You way want to have more than one goal, but unless you're a Donald Trump, Mark Cuban, or the like with tons and tons of money to hire a bunch of expert modelers to build and maintain a layout (that is if it's of large size...if you are doing what Jim Six is doing, then sure, you will have time to maintain equipment details, but if it's the size of say Joe Fugate's SP, then no there isn't enough time in a week to do it).  You may disagree, but I believe if you ask around the more experienced modelers, the majority of them will agree with this.  And from my 30+ years experience in the hobby, I have to agree with him.

Ken L.

"If your goal is to have

Even then it's not always necessary. If we take photo that resemble prototype photos the cars are often far enough away that the small details don't show up. and many models get detailed with oversize or otherwise too blatant features that look worse than leaving them off......DaveB 

I like both aproaches.

I'm in a modular club where I thought I would like detail.  I discovered the hard way that if the details are plastic, they will break off when rolling stock is transported to a meet.  There may be a way to protect the details for transport when models are transported to all meets and are not run unless they are transported, but I have not found it. 

My first highly detailed rolling stock were P2k boxcar kits.  It is frustrating to build something that takes time to do it right and then find all of the details laying in the bottom of the box when I get to a show.  From now on any new kits I get for use on the modular club will be "shake the box" kits with grabs carved off and wire grabs added.

I also hate the plastic hand rails that manufacturers use on locomotives.  The models look like they have been in a wreck when they come out of the box brand new.  Therefore I'm in the process of replacing all hand rails on my various locomotives.

On the  other hand, my home layout is a 7' x 9' switching layout, and for that layout the era is changed from 1950's to 2000,  I will not be taking equipment on and off that layout.  Also I'm only running 1 locomotive and maybe a dozen or so freight cars on the layout, so I have some of the late model highly detailed freight cars to run on that layout.

The max. speed allowed on the prototype is 10 mph, so my equipment will be running slow with plenty of time to enjoy the detail as I operate.

Taking a Queue From Hollywood

Hollywood ran into the same problem decades ago. You have a fleet of ships, and they have to look real on film. What do you do?

In the case of Hollywood, they created what they call "Heroes". These are the models (ships, buildings, spacecraft, whatever) that will either be closest to camera, or be focused on. They get all the details, and everything required to pull off the illusion of being real.

The non-heroes are the models in the background, or where it moves through frame fast enough that no detail can be made out. These just have to be good enough to pass cursory inspection.

So, the idea I have, is to make a fleet of "good enough" models to run, with enough "Heroes" sprinkled in, to pull off the illusion. So, a car or locomotive that won't move much, will be a Hero. It needs to look right when seen up close, and not moving. Lead locomotives in a consist will be either Heroes, or at least more detailed than the locos behind.

Most of the freight cars will not be heroes. They just have to be good enough, but passenger cars will tend to be detailed. Why? Because out here in the West, we see freight trains all the time. No one really pays them any attention, but passenger trains are unusual, and will catch the viewer's eye.

So, the idea is to make everything run well, then start to create Heroes where needed. If I finish all the Heroes I need, I can then start detailing other cars and locos up to Hero standards if I want.

Hollywood cur

A great point, greyhart, and even Mr. Good Enough, Allen McLelland, eventually had "heroes"  for foreground shots.

My younger granddaughter, age 7, pointed out something to me that all of us in the illusion business have to think about:  too much detail ican be as bad as not enough.  

We were watching the commercial for a new movie about the Coast Guard, and she announced, "That's too fake!"  

"What do you mean?" I asked.

""Look at that fire!  Look at those waves!  They're all fake!"  

All CGI, all fake, all grossly unreal to a 7 year old.  For those who grew up with Harry Holthausen and stop motion Sinbad, it looks terrific.  But not necessarily to the younger generation.  

Detailing

I`m a rivet counter.......when it comes to my models.

I`m a builder.......I only run trains when I finish a model I just built as a way to test it............and also when I have visitors.

If someone wants to superdetail their models........then that`s what they want.....it`s THEIR models.

What is "good enough" ?

All great points of view.    All true.   Some super detailers regard the high standard as an end in itself and that is a high bar I respect and admire.   Those models shine at eye level or display shelf.

On the other hand, I like Accurail and Blue Box kits and weather them.  I don't shave off the ladders and grabs to replace with metal ones but I do build more detailed kits, too. 

I just don't see that much difference between those kits and an undecorated fifty dollar resin boxcar with no trucks, or wheels included.  

Go Accurail and Scaletrains!