--- In [email protected], "Chris Borgmeyer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi All. I'm looking for some opinions on forced perspective.
....
>
> Chris
>
Chris,
There was an article in MR, since reprinted in one of their trackplan books,
where the
author designed a railroad that had one scale of trains in front and another
towards the
rear. He used N and Z, but he offered some mathematical reasoning that pointed
to S and
HO having the same ratio. I think it's in "48 Top Notch Trackplans", but I
can't find my
copy right now. There might be some information you could use there. On a
personal
level, I have visited two club layouts in my area where the members have mixed
different
scales on the same layout. Both were flangentially challenged (or is that us
since our
flanges are smaller), but they illustrate a point. On one there was AF running
in back of
three rail O. The effect was decent considering the level of detail these
hirailers were
trying to achieve. On the other one they had added LGB sized trains behind
their O scale
lines because it was the only way to accommodate the "new" trains into their
existing
layout. This example of forced unperspective was positively disturbing. It
really bothered
my sensibilities to see the larger trains farther back in the layout.
Jamie Bothwell
Bethlehem, PA
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/S-Scale/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/S-Scale/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
