Ed has a point. Also, unless my eyesight has gotton even worse than I think it
has. ballast is larger than it was 50 years ago.
Chuck Porter
----- Original Message -----
From: Ed
To: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 1:26 PM
Subject: {S-Scale List} Ballast Size
Gents...
Just for the sake of being different, I would argue that true S scale sized
ballast is not necessarily the ideal choice. Most of us see real ballast while
standing trackside and the invidual stones are readily apparent. Most of us
look at model railroad track from a distance of two feet or more -- except for
the rivet counters and/or the ballast grain counters. Now two real feet away
from an S scale ballasted track is like 128 feet away from real railroad track.
Remember 1:64.....
Now comes the artistic point, if you use true scale sized ballast (1-1/2" to
2" rocks), it will appear to be a sort of boring gray surface without a lot of
detail. If a larger-than-true-S-sized ballast is used, then you can distinguish
the individual grains of ballast from a normal viewing distance. This
appearance, to many, is much improved over the monotony of homogeneous.
Take from this what you will and the choice might well be different for each
of us. Is scale accuracy the prime objective above all else? Or is a visual
experience that simulates real world views more important? The choice is
yours...... Sometimes it is hard to get both simultaneously.
"S"miles....Ed L.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------------
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:
[email protected]
[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/
