So how tall is your armpit?

One thing that sprung up out of the Head Druffs last post was the comment "Remember that we are only trying to give the impression of what is there, not a detailed representation." And I've always believed that therein lies the real appeal of modeling in Nz120.

Tied into this is the old chestnut of "Normal Viewing Distance" which, for better or for worse, seems to be the oft quoted "2 feet". I am of the opinion however, that we should be tailoring the detail level on our rolling stock and indeed, our layouts, to layout height, not "Normal Viewing Distance".

Think about it; If I'm going to be mounting a layout at Waist Height (which I think Otaki and Cass was, from memory), then I am more likely to be able to get away with less of a representation of whats under a wagon irrespective of the viewing distance than I would if I was mounting my track at eye level. Even if the viewing distance was at distances greater than 600mm (for our younger readers), the underframe comes into prominence on a higher mounted layout.

So (off on a tangent again, because I have the attention span of a gnat), is there an optimal layout height? Again, conventional wisdom dictates "as close to eye level as possible" because, lets face it, its how we see trains in the real world (unless you hire helicopters for your photoshoots!). The answer? Like all things in this world, its horses for course. An island style layout (think an oval of track on a board) could be mounted high, but due to stability problems with the leg length involved, its more likely to be at waist height. Shelf layouts are more likely to be higher, as the wall mounting allows this to be a viable option.

Above is a diagram I drew in Paint (and lets face it, if you cant draw it in Paint, it ain't worth drawing....) that shows some thoughts from Iain Rice. As he goes for fully staged layouts complete with integral backdrops and lighting rigs, he always mounts the bottom line of the front pelmet with his eye level. I know this sounds weird (it did to me first time I heard it), but if you mock it up it actually works a treat. Secondly, the Rail Level is mounted at the height of his arm pit......note he doesn't say "55" off the floor" or some other exact amount, as he has realized that a layout should be tailored to the user.....and in his experimenting he has found that eye level to armpit height is the perfect sized "window" into his model world.

I've tried these theories out on some test pieces, and it doesn't look to bad....and the viewing angle will allow a basic underframe detailing, without getting hung up on "Normal Viewing Distance". I'm 5' 10", and the viewing window works out at about 300mm (In an imperial/metric mish-mash I seem to rely on). And thanks to the Head Druff, this is how it looks in Nz120. And to my eyes, the viewing angle is pretty much spot on.

Thoughts?