No Worries

We all have to use whatever curvature fits our available space.  If you're wondering if the curve in your photo is unrealistically sharp for what you're trying to depict, well - it is.  Someone will probably bring up a prototype for such a truly sharp curve, but such things are truly rare.

However, the construction is neatly done, everything's nicely weathered, the photography is executed well, etc.  In other words, it still looks just fine for what it is.  At some point you need to resign yourself to the fact that you're dealing with a model and there are compromises inherent in any exercise short of copying the prototype in literal fashion.

Knowing the curve isn't prototypical, you then have to make the decision if that fact actually bothers you.

Here's a photo I've shared before of a branchline on my layout curving behind an industry.  This curve is about 26", so not much broader than the one you're wondering about.  In addition, it;s right at the entrance to the room where it's easily visible.  This track provides access to a branchline switching job that keeps somebody occupied for most of an operating session, and I'm willing to live with it since it's necessary to make the layout operate as I want it. 

Right next to this location is a mainline curve of 30" radius, just as unrealistic for what I'm modeling, and it's one of a few such curves needed to fit the layout into the room.  The appearance of those is just as much of a visual compromise but I decided to accept them too.  I scenic around these less than desirable parts of the layout design and don't worry about them.

If you can, there are ways to make it better

If you can, there are ways to make sharper curves look better.

Design the curve to be viewed from inside the curve instead of outside the curve
When viewed from inside the curve, sharp curves look better. Where possible design your layout to put the sharpest curves in these locations.

Break up the sharp curve with a view block
Put the curve into a cut, or have it go under a bridge overpass (highway or railroad track). Or run the curve behind some buildings, trees, or some other view block like a billboard. Anything to break up the curve will make it look less sharp.

Use an easement transition at the ends
If the curve is fairly short, using an easement transition at the ends can make the curve look less sharp. It will also help equipment run better because it isn't "jerked" from straight to sharp curve quite so abruptly.

Use a Belina Drop
A Belina drop has the backdrop on the outside of the curve to force you to only view the curve from the inside where it looks less sharp, and may be combined with a view-blocking ridge, structures, or trees. This works primarily with curves at the end of a peninsula blob and it generally covers 50-70% of the curve with an endcap backdrop.

I think...

Its a little sharp,but you're

Its a little sharp,but you're scenery is outstanding ! Don't worry about it you have to do the best with the space available.  Now you could come to the Dark Side......I mean N Scale....Mike

I'm with John.

Is the curve unprototypical? yes.

How does it look? Fantastic!

radius

Angelo, In the background it looks like you have a couple of smaller locos. Just for fun set the scene exactly the same way but with your switcher in place of your F units(?) Compare the two photos. Try shorter freight cars too.

john

Radius-tight

Sometimes you have to make compromises.  I'm going to be pushing it to get 18" radii in places, but it's a compromise I have to make, because continual running is, for me, a requirement.  What I can hide, I will, but some tight turns will be out in the open.  Running smaller locos will help, and shorter 1920's/30's and earlier cars, makes it more manageable.  (And 9-12" for the narrow gauge, and possibly 6" for the streetcars--that last is actually a bit broad for traction.)

Radius Tight!

Radius

Angelo,  if you shoot pictures from down low (at "track" level more or less,)  the sharp curve is not as apparent in photos.

Skip

Chose locations to shoot.

We must make compromises on our layouts.  You can use the tricks that Joe mentioned to minimize those compromises, but sometimes you just can't fool the camera.  The answer is to make sure you have nicely detailed scenes where you don't have unrealistic curves or other compromises, and then do your photography in those places, or photograph in close before the tight curve.  Just because you must have a 24 inch radius curve to fit an area does not mean that it has to be featured in a photograph. 

"Chose locations to shoot."

or choose prototypes that fit the space. The Harlem transfer's 90 foot radius would look expanded if it had 24 inch radius curves :>) The main thing that makes layout curves look unrealistic to me is that they often don't look like the railroad had any reason for the curve. If the curve follows a river or a hillside it looks a lot more plausible than a flat curve around the end of a flat yard or flat town scene. I also find that sidings and spurs following the curvature of the main look better than straight spurs ending as the curve cuts them off. Generally if the railroad had reason to turn the main line then there wouldn't be a nice flat spot inside the curve for an industry or a roundhouse, there would probably be a cliff or river there otherwise the railroad would have broadened the curve and went thru the nice flat spot. .Dave Branum

All model curves are too small!

Unless you have unlimited space, you will always have curves that are not prototypical. I think Pennsylvania's Horseshoe curve comes out to about 85" average radius in HO scale. Maybe 84" at it's tightest. So unless you can manage that...

Since almost all model curves are not going to be prototypical, all we can do is disguise them like Joe and others have stated. Although it doesn't seem like you employed any of the normal "tricks", your tremendous scenery skill has more than made up for the tight curve. The scene looks fantastic! Complimenti!