Which comes first, the rail or the landscape?
- Thread starter Kamidan
- Start date
I think there are as many answers to this one as route builders (OK I exaggerate). Personally I've used two different approaches. One is to use a pre-build DEM landscape (like those by fishlipsatwork on the DLS), and build the line through the landscape (usually ignoring the pre-maked TIGER lines). The other is to work a board at a time, laying track and sculpting the terrain to suit as I go.
Paul
Paul
jadebullet
might be back?
It depends on your style. Alot of people who don't use DEMs (which pre load elevations) will work one baseboard to a few baseboards at a time. Another technique is to lay all of your track and trackside, then place all of your elevations, and finally texture it. This last technique is a double edged sword. You can then run the track just for fun, but it may end up seeming overwhelming, and can be a pitfall of an early route builder's route. Trust me, my first route was like this.
Like Paul I use both DEMS and the flat board and build method. When I am doing the former, I get down to eye level in Surveyor to look around at the most efficient route for the rail line. Sometimes I use the original as laid out by the TIGER lines, and sometimes I'll add to that and connect my own line to the original.
When I do the latter, I will sketch out on paper how I want the track plan and landscape to be and then use that as a quick guide as I build the route. This helps me envision what I want rather than looking at a flat grey and yellow grid that goes on for miles into the distance.
I tried the lay all the tracks then go back and landscape approach, but I felt overwhelmed by the amount of land that needed to be filled. It became a chore rather than a pleasure to build. I ended up deleting a good portion of that section in the end because it looked too trainboard like rather than a realistic landscape.
i've also used displacement maps with great success. These are great for filling up a landscape with hills and valleys quickly. When I've done this, I will get down to eyelevel like with the DEMs and use my instincts on where the rail line should run based on rivers, valleys, hills, etc.
All in all there's no right or wrong way to build a route. Choose the method that works for you.
John
When I do the latter, I will sketch out on paper how I want the track plan and landscape to be and then use that as a quick guide as I build the route. This helps me envision what I want rather than looking at a flat grey and yellow grid that goes on for miles into the distance.
I tried the lay all the tracks then go back and landscape approach, but I felt overwhelmed by the amount of land that needed to be filled. It became a chore rather than a pleasure to build. I ended up deleting a good portion of that section in the end because it looked too trainboard like rather than a realistic landscape.
i've also used displacement maps with great success. These are great for filling up a landscape with hills and valleys quickly. When I've done this, I will get down to eyelevel like with the DEMs and use my instincts on where the rail line should run based on rivers, valleys, hills, etc.
All in all there's no right or wrong way to build a route. Choose the method that works for you.
John
Personally I work in little section. usually about half a baseboard at a time. Each section is slightly different depending on what it'll contain, what I was doing last in the other section, etc. As a loose rule of thumb; when building high-track areas (stations, yards, diamonds, wyes, etc) track first, then scenery and terrain, for basic thru running I generally do the terrain first then the track finally the scenery. The textures almost always come in last, as well as water.
Oh Iced; you are not one of the FEW route builders out there. there are still quite a lot left.
peter
Oh Iced; you are not one of the FEW route builders out there. there are still quite a lot left.
peter
steamdrivre
Narrow gauge or nothing
I do it all at the same time in small sections. Sometimes I lay a little track then mold the terrain up around it. Sometimes I mold a little terrain then lay the track. Sometimes I'll build a whole scene then lay the track.
It all depends on the idea I'm working on at that time.
Whatever you do, don't do it all at once, meaning, work on small sections or areas at a time, throw in an idea or two, test it then move on.
You'll burn out if you try to build everything all at once.
Just move slowly and try out new ideas as you go.
Rick
It all depends on the idea I'm working on at that time.
Whatever you do, don't do it all at once, meaning, work on small sections or areas at a time, throw in an idea or two, test it then move on.
You'll burn out if you try to build everything all at once.
Just move slowly and try out new ideas as you go.
Rick
Last edited:
Yes I do.
Mostly, when building a freelance route I start by laying the rail and raising the rails to make all the grades, then build the landscape around it. Setting the circle to it's max diameter and adjusting the sensitivity to match the ruggedness I'm after makes the job fairly quick. My freelance routes are usually small, so that part of the job goes quickly.
Prototype routes were easier when I still had DEM/HOG capability, before I erased a virus by reformatting the hard drive. I have two routes where I had to hand draw the rail line and try to find the original roadbed by eyeball after the terrain was made.
Another fun game is to download a blank terrain by Fishlipsatwork and try to figure out where a rail line might go.
ClaudeThere was a thread just like this a few weeks ago:
http://forums.auran.com/trainz/showthread.php?t=32877
http://forums.auran.com/trainz/showthread.php?t=32877
In my view, it depends upon several factors. If one wishes to re-create some particular existing line, then it might be best to start with the track. On the other hand, if one wants to create a railroad which realistically might exist, then one might do well to start with the large scenery features, such as mountains, rivers, streams, mineral deposits &c, and use these to figure out the track in a specific area. After the track is laid out, then go back and add smaller details: loading facilities for livestock, factories, &c. To some extent, this reflects how the real railroads were built. I can usually tell the order in which a route was created from a finished route. The ones that interest me most almost always seem to have had the scenery done first.
ns
In my not so humble opinion, if you are making a layout, such as a model railroad, you will do the track first. If a route, scenery first may well be the way to go.
Coming at this as a model railroader, I usualy find routes a bit boring. Layout, when done right, are much more interesting in that they are not hampered by prototype track plans. The "best" of the real world came be merged with the best of one's imagination.
Coming at this as a model railroader, I usualy find routes a bit boring. Layout, when done right, are much more interesting in that they are not hampered by prototype track plans. The "best" of the real world came be merged with the best of one's imagination.
Last edited:
greywolfretired
New member
Normally I usually do the mountains ,valleys ect at random first,then i look at it and figure out where I can build a railroad. All my routes are fictitious but am going to tackle an abandoned railway that I used to ride on and watch go by when I was much younger,steam and oil fired . A very rugged and mountainous route. Also the most expensive to build at 5 times the cost of any other railway in north america at the time.
So scenery has to come first on this one.Waiting for trs 09 to do this one. I have many photos of old railbed as well I have walked many miles along it as well . Should be an interesting project.
So scenery has to come first on this one.Waiting for trs 09 to do this one. I have many photos of old railbed as well I have walked many miles along it as well . Should be an interesting project.
Another method is to build a few stations based on existing plans and all on separate baseboards. You need to decide what elevation/s beforehand. Start off with a terminus at a certain height and then climb/descend a few baseboards to merge in the next station and so on. It works for me.
bigboy4010
Hardcore Steam Breather
Personally I build the track first, making some terrain changes next to the track as I go, and when the basic layout is done I make the terrain. I then add any track that will go well with the railroad, based on the terrain. The new track added after the terrain is finished usually looks better in my opinion, but the basic track plan acts as skeleton for the terrain to form around.
I think there are probably about as many ways to do it as there are Trainzers. I generally lay my track first on about 3-4 baseboards and then work in my stations, industries and basic scenery. I also install my signalling before I move on to the next 3-4 baseboards. It can get overwhelming if you try to work on too many baseboards at one time.
Similar threads
