At what point is what your building good enough for you?

[I_luv_bridges]

Hi all,

I'd like to get some feedback as to what lengths some of you go to, to make what your building as perfect as possible.

I am making a master for a cast-resin mold, and because I will be casting many of the same part I would like to get it as perfect as I can.

I have limited tools at my disposal so most everything is just eyeballed under a 8x magnifier.

Here is a pic of some HO scale bars (for a lattice bridge girder) for a bridge I am building. They are made of .005 styrene and are .030 wide (2 3/4 inches) x .300 long (26 inches).

View attachment 10415

The rivet punching method I am using requires that I punch the rivets before cutting to bar to width and for me it seems almost impossible to get the rivets to line up any better.

I do know that at normal viewing distance the rivets will be barely visible, but am more concerned about close-up photos of the bridge.

So if it were you, would you be satisfied with the item in above pic?

Many thanks,

Gord

 

[IronBeltKen]

They look pretty evenly spaced and lined-up to me!

 

[Future]

There is a product out there that will pretty much mask the shine of metal if you're going to paint it to match the bridge in any way. It's called "Opaquing", and it basically brushes on like nail polish. You let it dry then simply paint. The good part is you can texture it as you apply, by doing the typical things. (dabbing, patting off, etc...)

Myself, I would fabricate a small section, paint it, etc... then take a look at it. If it doesn't meet what you liked then you didn't waste time on the whole project.

 

[UP2CSX]

Gord, even in closeups, bridge parts tend to fade into a whole rather than being seen as individual pieces. As Ken said, the rivets look like they line up well enough for any modeling purpose. I still like the three foot rule. If it looks good at three feet, it's good enough for most of us. A slightly imperfect structure that still looks good to most people is better than a more perfect one laying on your workbench as you try to get that one last ounce of perfection.

 

[DirtyD79]

In addition to the three foot rule I also try to think about functionality when detailing models. For example freight cars and locos are probably going to be handled alot and even the most gentle operators are bound to knock at least one delicate part or two off. So you may want to forgo some really tiny stuff.

 

[vato loco]

I'm finished when the good Lord takes me of this planet and takes me to the great Train Room in the Sky! Then I guess never then!

 

[tlark]

I spent a butt load of time on a central valley bridge that had detailed rivets on my old layout. When I placed the bridge over the river scene ithe detail got lost in the river, ground cover and resin water. Did it help complete the effect I was after, yes.....but I could have prob. gotten the same result with less time. At the end of the day you have to be satisfied with it but could have spent that time elsewhere looking back on it.

 

[Jess Red Horse]

tiny details

Hi all,

I'd like to get some feedback as to what lengths some of you go to, to make what your building as perfect as possible.

I am making a master for a cast-resin mold, and because I will be casting many of the same part I would like to get it as perfect as I can.

I have limited tools at my disposal so most everything is just eyeballed under a 8x magnifier.

Here is a pic of some HO scale bars (for a lattice bridge girder) for a bridge I am building. They are made of .005 styrene and are .030 wide (2 3/4 inches) x .300 long (26 inches).

View attachment 10415

The rivet punching method I am using requires that I punch the rivets before cutting to bar to width and for me it seems almost impossible to get the rivets to line up any better.

I do know that at normal viewing distance the rivets will be barely visible, but am more concerned about close-up photos of the bridge.

So if it were you, would you be satisfied with the item in above pic?

Many thanks,

Gord

Your work looks good, well planed and neat, if it is important too you that you get all your structures looking as real as possible than it is worth every second you spend on it, after all you will know what has gone into the making of your layout.

I guess talent would Also be a factor, lets face it when I started out I spent 8 hours trying to build a scratch built building out of wood in the end it still looked like a pile of crap BUT I spent 8 hours on it, although a lot of my time was wasted on that one it didn't look good in the end.

After months of practise I got better and now could make that same crappy building in 2 hours but it still looks like a pile of crap, why, because of a lack of talent so I'll stick to the plastic model kits this way 8 hours on those and at least they come out as nice or better than the picture on the model box, oh, and after using model glue for 8 hours ....who cares!!!

If you have the talent to make it work GREAT than the time is well spent, if your like me in the scratch building department it is worth it to buy the kits ready made....LOL!

Good luck, make sure to post pics of the finished bridge so we can see the end results.

 

[UP2CSX]

LOL, Jess, that's a good way of explaining why some people do things and others don't. I can't tell you the number of hours I've spent over the years building some craftsman type kit and they always turned out looking like crap. However, after 20 some years of experience, I can now build craftsman wood kits and it only looks like crap if you're up close and I don't pile enough debris around it to hide all the mistakes.

 

[Old 97]

If it looks good at three feet, it's good enough for most of us.

Ditto for me.

 

[OldGettysk]

You know beauty is in the eye of the beholder .And two eyes will see something diffrently !!!