quite well. Unpainted, or “was once painted” structures are easiest to ren- der in wood. Structures that were nev- er painted (trestles, wood bridges, cul- verts, and such), can, with a lot of needless effort, be done in styrene, but, again, why? Wood would seem the logi- cal choice.


Masonry structures, brick, block, and


stone, bring up a whole new set of questions. Patterned styrene sheets seem like the avenue of choice for most projects, but wait. Is this going to be one of those “special” models, close to the edge of the layout, or in need of ex- tra care for some other reason? Consid- er plaster. As I said, time, while worthy of consideration, should take a back seat to the desired end result. A plaster structure may well entail the use of those patterned styrene sheets in the creation of the master wall patterns. The extra time comes into play as we make the molds and plaster castings for the structure. One of these plaster buildings will take longer to construct than would a similar one made from embossed styrene sheets. Coloring that plaster building to look like masonry should be easier than it would be to get that same effect on shiny styrene. We are still talking a heavier time line here, but probably a better looking model, as well. Let’s look at the pros and cons of


each of the four main building materi- als. Whole feature articles have been written on each of the four, and I’ll not bore you with a lot of detail. When I


started this column almost ten years ago (wow) I did a column on each and had no trouble filling the allotted space. We are just going to hit the high spots here.


Styrene is usually my first thought on most projects, in large part because I’m lazy. It cuts easily by the score and snap method. It bonds quickly, some- times seconds, and (gulp) sometimes instantly. It is inexpensive, and comes in a wider variety of shapes, types, and sizes than any other material. In other words, it is in many ways the very easi- est material to work with. Any project that is going to receive a good coat of paint is a good candidate for styrene. That being said, as the saying goes . . . . Above I say that sometimes styrene bonds instantly, but that is not always a good thing. Often, a little time is ap- preciated to get things into the proper position before the adhesive “goes off.” Cutting by the score and snap method is fine for cutting off large pieces for the main walls, but window openings are another matter. Cutting the thicker styrene piecess can be arduous, and piecing together lots of little pieces to avoid this is usually not a good idea. If you measure correctly, it is easier to just cut in those holes in most cases, though factory walls with 40 windows each may well be the exception here. Styrene does not brush paint easily. There are those who can do it, but they are few in number. Styrene construc- tion usually requires an airbrush for finishing. The thicker masonry pattern


stock (mostly from Europe) is gummy and difficult to cut. The results, howev- er, are worth the effort. Wood is the material of choice for a lot of models, and for good reasons. Much like styrene, it is available in a multitude of shapes and sizes, and it is easily worked with simple tools. For those models where a degree of dilapi- dation is required, wood is easily ren- dered to a very prototypical look. It takes all kinds of stains and washes, paints by brush easily, and represents weathered wood better than any other material. Most of the wood we com- monly use in this hobby is fairly soft and easily cut. Window and door open- ings are not all that difficult to cut in as long as you use a good sharp blade. On the con side, wood adhesives usu- ally take longer to set. Yes, we can use cyanoacrylate, but one little mistake, and your paint job will suffer. General- ly, wood is not available in really small and thin sizes. I have never seen .010″×.015″ stripwood. Then, too,


it


When masonry buildings are involved, plaster is one of the best ways to scratchbuild the sides. It is more work but the results are gratifying. Plaster is a material that takes stains and washes readily. However, plaster construction has its own modeling challenges.


RAILROAD MODEL CRAFTSMAN


warps and has fuzz needing sanding. Both cardstock and plaster are so specialized in their usability that the pros and cons are all debatable. Card- stock buildings do not hold up well un- less well sealed (paint) and braced all the way around. Plaster is almost as bad, and is very fragile to boot. Background buildings, where scruti- ny is minimal, go well in cardboard. Cardstock is also the perfect media for sub-walls for individual board con- struction. Brace it well, and seal it all around, and you’re home free. I made the mistake of using cardstock for roof- ing material some time ago (like al- most fifty years!), and paid the price. Not living in the desert, the moisture in Northern Illinois wreaked havoc on that roof. It looked like I had attempt- ed to model a Japanese pagoda. Some models do not deserve the space they occupy, even if it is in the background. Plaster represents most forms of ma- sonry and natural stone construction better than any other material. It takes stains and washes very well as long as you start out very light, and darken the application through many thin coats of stain. On the down side, plaster requires a great deal of natural artistic talent to carve in a believable manner. It also requires the not incon- siderable expense and talent of RTV mold making and casting, not to men- tion the extra time involved. There are a lot of considerations for you to make before messing up your workbench. Most will be straight for- ward and logical, and some will require you to contemplate the end result. Think your project through thoroughly and you’ll be fine.


65


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100