Rockwork

[Hauk]

Lately I have been trying my hands on some scenery. Or more precisely, some rock cuttings on a 0-scale diorama.

For some reason, rubber moulds have fallen a bit out of fashion among my modelling friends, and plaster carving is all the rage at the moment.
I can see that carving your rocks is more flexible, gives more original (perhaps too original...)results and avoids the problem of fitting cast rocks together. So I have decided to try this route.

The process goes like this:
First, I make standard hardshell on cardboard webbing. Where there is going to be rocks I recess the hardshell a couple of centimeters.

The basic shape of the rocks are then formed with artist paint knives in wet, but fairly firm plaster. I use a builders plaster  called "Repa Quick". This is not a pure plaster, but contains cellulose or some other filler that keeps it from getting too hard for carving. It is also workable for "wetforming" for around 30 minutes.

When I am happy with the basic shapes, I take a break for an hour or two. Then I start to chisel away on the plaster with all sort of sharp objects.

This is really not an exact science, I think you can compare it to modelling trees. It is impossible to reproduce every single crack and shape in the prototype rocks. Just as you can not model every single leave on a tree.

After some carving:




Here I have added some more plaster and done some more carving:







After the carving I sealed the plaster with clear laquerfrom a spray can.
When the laquer had dried for a couple of days I changed to acrylics.

Started with a pale grey interior acrylic paint. Brushed on, sprayed with water and sponged everything around to get a thin layer with some variations.

After this dried for about a week I came back with different shades of grey and brown mixed from artists acrylics. Burnt umber, bone black, titanium white. Some raw sienna for the sulphur yellow.

More layers are needed, and I am still not happy with the general shape of the rocks. I can see an overall pattern that bugs me. I should have aimed for more variety. Maybe I will redo the cutting above the road. Or all of it. Time will show!











I think it is hard to make an objective judgment of the results.
So gentlemen, the question is:
Does this look like blasted rock?

[finescalerr]

I really hate to write this but, to my eye, no, it looks artificial despite your nice color treatment, maybe because of the "studied" pattern of the rock "columns". I already know I'm crazy so you can factor that into the equation when you consider my question:

Now that the plaster is dry, what if you were to use a hammer and other weapons of mass destruction to knock a lot of material from the surface? Broken plaster would look like blasted rock and the random and unpredictable result might be all it needs. At least, if you agree that it really doesn't look quite right.

By the way, I couldn't have carved the rocks as well as you did.

Russ

[Hydrostat]

Hauk,

it's hard to say. The coloring looks very good so far. Do you have a prototype picture for us? I agree with Russ that there's an artificialness in the columns. And at some areas the tool traces are recognizable as what they are. But I don't know if solely a hammer will help. At least it would breake up the somewhat artfificial column impression. The choice of tools and process depends on the stone surface. Is it rather smooth or rough and so on. Depending on that try to carve the dry plaster, maybe using some steel wire brush or rough sandpaper. Russ is right that broken plaster looks very realistic as stone surface. But it's nearly impossible to control that so this is rather the way for little stones for walls and so on.

Volker

[1-32]

hi hauk
not bad is it a rock cut that has been worked by mechanical equipment.if so they would have  blasted it or used air drills.they both have there individual signiture.maybe you need to decide what process they used study it and model it
regards kim

[Hauk]

Thanks a lot for all the constructive comments!

Russ is right, the basic forms are not quite right. I have to practice more. Scenery is a lot like drawing and painting, it is something that you learn by practicing.

I left out the prototype pictures on purpose, I think that a model should look convincing even if you have not seen the real thing.

Hope to post pictures of a new version soon!

[Hydrostat]

I left out the prototype pictures on purpose, I think that a model should look convincing even if you have not seen the real thing.

Hauk,

you're right, but I didn't mean a photo of the prototype situation but of the kind of rock.

Volker

[nk]

This forum is awesome. Its so great that honest feedback is used to improve upon.

Hauk, I agree with everyone's critique. What I would suggest is that you look at the original and understand how it got to look like that - erosion, blasting, feather and wedge etc. and also understand the strata of the geology. Then try to reproduce the effect in miniature. Plaster is wonderful as it is a mineral in its own right and splits like one giving great looking interfaces where the fractures occur.

Can't wait to see MkII.
N

[Malachi Constant]

More layers are needed, and I am still not happy with the general shape of the rocks. I can see an overall pattern that bugs me. I should have aimed for more variety. Maybe I will redo the cutting above the road. Or all of it. Time will show!

When I saw this shot, I was instantly reminded of some real places in western Maryland ... not far from me ...

There is a "new" highway (less than 30 years ago) built thru western Maryland that goes thru a rather dramatic rock cut in "Sideling Hill" -- the curvature and coloring of the rock layers is rather dramatic -- but your version reminded me of the actual cutting / columnar shapes ...

[Malachi Constant]

Here's a black-and-white version to eliminate the dramatic colors ... (the coloring and curved layers are so dramatic, they actually built a "visitor's center" for a rock cut!) ...

[Malachi Constant]

I really hate to write this but, to my eye, no, it looks artificial despite your nice color treatment, maybe because of the "studied" pattern of the rock "columns" ...

I agree and disagree with Russ!  There is a studied pattern to the columns ... but, as my photos show, I see that in real life when I pass thru that cut and similar cuts made by men and machines!

Looking at your photo again (above) ... I don't think it's the columns that bother me so much as the somewhat random effect of the horizontal lines.  It seems that you're modeling some rock similar to what I've shown -- stratified (layered) rock that breaks with chunky edges when blasted ...

Now that the plaster is dry, what if you were to use a hammer and other weapons of mass destruction to knock a lot of material from the surface? Broken plaster would look like blasted rock and the random and unpredictable result might be all it needs. At least, if you agree that it really doesn't look quite right.

This is getting close to what bothers me ... but not quite it ... I think (and I might be totally wrong here or at least somewhat off) that what bothers me is the random horizontal lines in your rocks ... and I think what's missing is a suggestion of the layering of the stone and the soft layers that produce bits of fine material and "dirt" scattered thru the cut ...

Something similar to what's shown below ... this cut is not far from the much more dramatic one that I showed before (less than 20km away) ... but it's more "typical" with more uniform coloring and just some slight angle to the layers ... but NOTE that "soft" layers in between the hard layers of stone ... and the crumbling material from those soft layers ...

[Malachi Constant]

A couple more notes:

-- This is another closer view of the previous photo ... note that this is a natural rock cut made by a river over many thousands of years ... I'm sure that some additional material was removed for the railway line, but it wasn't excavated in the manner suggested by your cut and the one in the more dramatic cut that I posted earlier ...

-- You can clearly see "patterns" in the (nearly) horizontal layers ... and some different types of layers (hard rock and softer earth) ...

-- And I think your effort may be missing some necessary "patterns" to show the layering of different types of earth ...

Well, I hope this is somewhat helpful ... but if it's not ... don't try to get your money back or anything! 

Cheers,
Dallas

[Malachi Constant]

Short version:  It needs the deliberate suggestion of rock layers ... including both hard and soft layers of varying thickness ... and more of the crumbling material circled in yellow below from your photo ...

You might be able to get that effect by using a wire brush to "carve" soft layers in the stone ... that should crumble the plaster and soften the hard edges ... or maybe it will just make a mess of things! 

Cheers,
Dallas

[Hauk]

One of the mistakes I made was trying to make my rocks from memory. For some reason I could not find any good images of the actual cuttings.

So I just carved away, got  some basic shapes that did not feel right.  After that I did what I should have done in the first place. Got my camera out and went on a little field trip.

This is what the rocks was suppose to look like:









Yep, back to the carving board...

[mabloodhound]

Hauk,

In your pictures above, you can definitely see the air drill holes used for the blasting.   
These are easy to re-create and should also be seen in your final modeling.

[Chuck Doan]

I haven't studied rockwork enough to add useful comment. Impressive start though. I wonder why casting has fallen out of favor?