Templot

[Serjt-Dave]

At the risk of being beaten up at Scalefourm this weekend and then thrown out of the society. Is there anyone that provides a Templot track plan service?

I set aside time to learn how to use Templot, play around with it for a few hours and not get anywhere, then get bored go off and do something else then weeks or months later I then go back to Templot and I have to go through what I have learnt before {which is not a lot} and once I've done that I'm bored with it again and e go round in a ever decreasing circle.

So I was wondering is there anyone {a company or individual} that can provide a track plan service using Templot?

Thanks

Dave

P.S. Please feel free to point and laugh at me at Scaleforum as I'll be there as one of the stewards.

[Albert Hall]

Dave

Perhaps me and you will end up being put in the stocks and have wet sponges thrown at us. I have sat through two demonstrations on the basics of Templot and still can't get my head around it. Like you I dabble but never seem to make any progress with what I would like it to do for me before I forget what all the basic tools and icons do. I confess I am a bit of an IT Luddite but this programme is just beyond me.

Might bump into you tomorrow if I am well enough to make the journey.

Roy

[nigelcliffe]

I can understand the frustrations in getting started in Templot, because it behaves like no other software I've ever met. So, it takes ages to learn as few skills picked up from other experiences can be used. (This has been debated many times in the past, and I don't see the situation changing).

The best suggestion I have is to join the Templot forums and ask there for someone to produce your drawings. There seems to be a number of active Templot users who are looking for things to draw having mastered the operation of the software. So, I imagine that someone there will offer to do the work needed.


- Nigel

[Martin Wynne]

I can understand the frustrations in getting started in Templot, because it behaves like no other software I've ever met. So, it takes ages to learn as few skills picked up from other experiences can be used. (This has been debated many times in the past, and I don't see the situation changing)

Hi Nigel,

Which skills from where? If I can change it I will, provided it doesn't mean losing any existing functionality.

But the bottom line is that I'm not the only person capable of writing software. Others are much more capable than me, especially those not lumbered with a brain like mine which was made far too soon. The situation will change when someone else has a go.

In the meantime, I have started a "Templot Explained" introduction to Templot from the beginning. It has not got very far yet, in fact it is barely started. I would have progressed it a bit more by now if I had had some constructive feedback, but so far almost silence. You can find it at:

http://templot.com/companion/templot_explained.html

For established users I have made another video this week. This time I have tried a voice commentary instead of written notes, in the hope that it might be more accessible to those for whom it all goes over their head. See:

http://85a.co.uk/forum/view_topic.php?i ... forum_id=1

regards,

Martin.

[steamraiser]

Serjit,
Unfortunately I do not know where you live. There may be a Templot user in your area that is prepared to give you some basic instruction to get you going.
If you live in the Bristol area I am prepared to help you or any one else who is having beginners problems.

Gordon A

[nigelcliffe]

I can understand the frustrations in getting started in Templot, because it behaves like no other software I've ever met. So, it takes ages to learn as few skills picked up from other experiences can be used. (This has been debated many times in the past, and I don't see the situation changing)

Hi Nigel,

Which skills from where? If I can change it I will, provided it doesn't mean losing any existing functionality.

But the bottom line is that I'm not the only person capable of writing software. Others are much more capable than me, especially those not lumbered with a brain like mine which was made far too soon. The situation will change when someone else has a go.
......

Hi Martin,
this has been discussed many times going back at least 15 if not 20 years. At one point, an awfully long time back, I offered to go through the entire UI with a view to making it consistent with application conventions and standards. You didn't want to make changes of that depth at the time, and sorry, my offer is not on the table at the moment.
The problems are not the wording in a few dialogue boxes, its in how the entire package presents itself. Templot doesn't follow user interface conventions that other packages adopt. Consequently, anyone new has to face two learning hurdles - how to construct track elements from a prototype perspective (this is a necessary step) and how to drive a UI which doesn't follow conventions found in other software (this could, in principle, be fixed). The new user struggles through some tutorial material trying to learn enough to draw part of their track diagram. They make limited progress. Then they put the software aside for a time, and when they come back they find they have no idea how to drive the UI to even repeat what they did last time, and consequently have to start at the bottom again.

- Nigel

[David Thorpe]

If you live in the Bristol area I am prepared to help you or any one else who is having beginners problems.

In my experience that is far and away the best way to get into Templot. Like Dave, I really struggled with it (or at least the UI) on my own, but then at Scalefour North in 2013 someone (Richard Spratt?) was demonstrating Templot and thanks to him I at last managed to get into the programme and eventually ended up designing my layout with it. Once you know how to work it it's a marvellous programme, but it is a very steep learning curve and, as Nigel indicates, if I was to go back to it now I'd probably have to learn it all over again.

DT

[Martin Wynne]

Templot doesn't follow user interface conventions that other packages adopt.

Hi Nigel,

I often see these words, but I don't know what these "interface conventions that other packages adopt" are? No-one ever gives me a concrete "fer-instance" that I can actually work on.

Well that's not quite true, see this recent topic on RMweb from Dave:

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index. ... try2418539

in which I was able to point out that the method of working he wanted is already available in Templot.

The snag is that almost no-one who has tried it likes it, including me.

There are lots of other track-planning programs, but when I try them I don't see anything which leaps out at me as a better way of doing things, and of course most of them are not much use for prototype-based handbuilt track.

My feeling nowadays is that Templot is what it is, it's too late for me to make wholesale changes. But everyone else is entirely free to write their own program for the design of handbuilt track, and I hope someone does. Jeff Geary made a good start with his Trax program, but he has since diverted away from track into electrical control and signal interlocking.

regards,

Martin.

[junctionmad]

My feeling nowadays is that Templot is what it is, it's too late for me to make wholesale changes. But everyone else is entirely free to write their own program for the design of handbuilt track, and I hope someone does. Jeff Geary made a good start with his Trax program, but he has since diverted away from track into electrical control and signal interlocking.

I think Martin, this is the reality of the situation, Templot is where it's at and the effort in changing it, would not add any functionality in itself. If I was to suggest more effort, it would be to address some remaining functionality around symmetrical Y points , "Wizards " to help implement more complex situations , particularly the task of timber shoving , which rapidly gets huge as you use Templot to create larger layout plans.

I can easily see why beginners find it counter intitutive , Nigel is correct , in that many of its actionss are not common compared to other " design " software, but then again neither is Autocad. Even if there are many options that can be accessed are available in other ways , the " control template paradigm " is very confusing.

I think many of the issues around Templot is that beginners think it can be used to create layout sized plans , with a " modicum " of effort. Approach Autocad with a similar intent ( try designing a model railway gearbox for example ) and you will find an equally steep and arduous learning process

The best we can say , is neither of these packages are for the " dabbler " , there are in essence " professional " style tools aimed at the dedicated.

I continue to progress through my journey of discovery with Templot and we are lucky to have it ( and you)

Dave

[junctionmad]

At the risk of being beaten up at Scalefourm this weekend and then thrown out of the society. Is there anyone that provides a Templot track plan service?

I set aside time to learn how to use Templot, play around with it for a few hours and not get anywhere, then get bored go off and do something else then weeks or months later I then go back to Templot and I have to go through what I have learnt before {which is not a lot} and once I've done that I'm bored with it again and e go round in a ever decreasing circle.

So I was wondering is there anyone {a company or individual} that can provide a track plan service using Templot?

Thanks

Dave

P.S. Please feel free to point and laugh at me at Scaleforum as I'll be there as one of the stewards.

What specifically do you want. Is it your intention to hand built all subsequent track ? , what is the typical size of the layout, ( number of simple turnouts , number and type of complex turnouts etc )

Dave

[Martin Wynne]

the "control template paradigm" is very confusing.

Hi Dave,

It was intended to be simple and obvious to modellers who have actually built track on layouts and have a knowledge of prototype track. This was the original intended user base for Templot, i.e. people who already knew what they were doing, and I expected there would be no more than 100 or so users.

The trackpad screen is the baseboard.

Background templates are templates which you have already stuck down on the baseboard. There is a photocopy of each one in your storage box in case you need it again.

The control template is the next one you are working on, cutting and carving to make it fit. When it does, you make a couple of photocopies of it. One you stick down on the baseboard, and the other one you keep to hand in the storage box.

Then you start again modifying the working template to make the next one.

There are a couple of snags with that. The first is that the user base has changed over the years. I suspect that a great many beginners have not actually yet built any track, and fewer and fewer seem to have the prototype track knowledge which was common among my modelling friends when I was first developing Templot.

The second snag is that there is a limit to the number of words that can be fitted on a menu, so I had to invent shorthand terms.

For example:

"store & background" means "make 2 photocopies of this working template. Stick one in position on the baseboard, and save the other one in your storage box".

"wipe" means "unstick this template from the baseboard, but don't throw it away -- keep a copy of it unused in your storage box in case you need it again later".

"delete to the control" means "throw the working template away, then unstick this one from the baseboard and start using it as the working template instead".

It all makes perfect sense to modellers who regard Templot as a workshop tool to help them with what they were already doing. When using Templot the keyboard should be sticky with traces of PVA and off-cuts of paper, with empty ink cartridges underfoot.

And it's all utterly confusing to users who regard it as computer software, and start talking about AutoCad, design conventions and graphical user interfaces. It was never actually intended for them. I recommend Randy Pfeiffer's 3rd PlanIt instead: http://www.trackplanning.com

regards,

Martin.

[nigelcliffe]

Templot doesn't follow user interface conventions that other packages adopt.

Hi Nigel,

I often see these words, but I don't know what these "interface conventions that other packages adopt" are? No-one ever gives me a concrete "fer-instance" that I can actually work on.
.

Hi Martin,
I have provided these in conversations with you in the past, starting from places such as the IBM Common User Access document (which pre-dates Microsoft Windows by several years), and earlier publications from Apple and Xerox which underpin most graphical user interfaces. Or more recent publications, and more specific guides. But, its all water under the bridge: when I've discussed such changes in the UI in Templot in the past, the magnitude of the potential changes was something you did not wish to undertake (this is far more than altering a few menu labels or altering the wording in help boxes). I acknowledge that you've put countless hours over many decades into developing a package which clearly works for those able to learn the unique operational methods. But, many potential users will get frustrated because the user interface doesn't follow conventions they have learned from other software.


I know that you place emphasis on Templot being a tool which generates track elements from input parameters, and its not a graphical drawing or CAD drawing package. Though even there, your current explanations are starting to drift into graphical drawing packages in terms of "putting down templates on a baseboard" is not significantly different to putting down a shape from a graphical drawing package onto a page (eg. Microsoft Visio, and numerous others). Carving a template to shape is not significantly different to modifying a selected shape in a graphical drawing package, etc.. So, I think there are many activities which have a lot in more common with even drawing packages, let alone general UI conventions.



- Nigel

[Alan Turner]

I've been using Templot for over 10 years now and I get on fine with it. So no I do not want the UI altered thanks - it works just fine. That's not to say some aspects could not be improved but in general I can live with those.

The mistake many people make is to think that they should use it like AnyRail and join templates together. That is not how to get the best out of the programme. You start by laying out the principal line (plain line) of track. You then insert the turnouts into that and build the rest of the layout out from that.

regards

Alan

[kelly]

By 'UI conventions' I guess you mean the MS Word type with File, Edit, View, etc and Help last. It is no longer the UI for a lot of programs however, being replaced by the newer MS Word style (ribbon I think it is called). This isn't necessarily the best UI anyway.

Templot takes a bit of a steeper learning curve perhaps as there are concepts often overlooked or simplified in model railways to learn and grasp. With time I've found I can find my way around it mostly. I still have a few problems with some items (slips etc usually), but I can create a basic plan, and a more complicated one with help from the Templot forum. I'll keep plugging away at it.

I am usually far more used to a Unix/Linux style of UI anyway to some extent, but even then some software just doesn't fit into conventions nicely to be workable. It is also a case that the UI is down to what the developer likes usually. GIMP and Blender manage very well with a unique interface for instance.

Keep up the good work with Templot Martin, it has proven invaluable so far, even if atm it has been mainly a visualisation tool.

[kelly]

Oh, forgot to mention, the Templot Explained is a good start I think. Keep going

[junctionmad]

the "control template paradigm" is very confusing.

Hi Dave,

It was intended to be simple and obvious to modellers who have actually built track on layouts and have a knowledge of prototype track. This was the original intended user base for Templot, i.e. people who already knew what they were doing, and I expected there would be no more than 100 or so users.

The trackpad screen is the baseboard.

Background templates are templates which you have already stuck down on the baseboard. There is a photocopy of each one in your storage box in case you need it again.

The control template is the next one you are working on, cutting and carving to make it fit. When it does, you make a couple of photocopies of it. One you stick down on the baseboard, and the other one you keep to hand in the storage box.

Then you start again modifying the working template to make the next one.

There are a couple of snags with that. The first is that the user base has changed over the years. I suspect that a great many beginners have not actually yet built any track, and fewer and fewer seem to have the prototype track knowledge which was common among my modelling friends when I was first developing Templot.

The second snag is that there is a limit to the number of words that can be fitted on a menu, so I had to invent shorthand terms.

For example:

"store & background" means "make 2 photocopies of this working template. Stick one in position on the baseboard, and save the other one in your storage box".

"wipe" means "unstick this template from the baseboard, but don't throw it away -- keep a copy of it unused in your storage box in case you need it again later".

"delete to the control" means "throw the working template away, then unstick this one from the baseboard and start using it as the working template instead".

It all makes perfect sense to modellers who regard Templot as a workshop tool to help them with what they were already doing. When using Templot the keyboard should be sticky with traces of PVA and off-cuts of paper, with empty ink cartridges underfoot.

And it's all utterly confusing to users who regard it as computer software, and start talking about AutoCad, design conventions and graphical user interfaces. It was never actually intended for them. I recommend Randy Pfeiffer's 3rd PlanIt instead: http://www.trackplanning.com

regards,

Martin.

Martin. For the beginner it remains confusing , for people me , that have invested the time , I can quite easily understand the concept behind the process.

The issue is the standard way many graphical design packages now work. Typically you pick and place block elements which you then modify , your select and act , rather then act and then select , you drag graphical elements by the conventions of drag and drop and extended selection conventions etc. Templot mixes up these elements and conventions in its own unique way. Similar to Autocad or many pcb design packages , that equally require a considerable learning curve to master.

BUT , as I said , all that is water under the bridge and we are where we are. You quite rightly say that it's not worth the effort modifying it.

Dave

[junctionmad]

The mistake many people make is to think that they should use it like AnyRail and join templates together. That is not how to get the best out of the programme. You start by laying out the principal line (plain line) of track. You then insert the turnouts into that and build the rest of the layout out from that.

I don't think the average beginner thinks it is Anyrail. I think the difference is the average user today , unlike the earlier users, is likely to be more computer literate and have developed a sense of how modern software designed for modern GUIs is supposed to react to certain common actions. In general Templot does not do that.

For example , as a Mac user , in general , there is a series of conventions that apply to well written Mac apps ( and Apple provided extensive documentation for that purpose) I will expect menus to be in a certain order , I will expect a select first and act paradigm , I will expect right click contextual menus etc. I will expect drag and drop and so forth. This allows a beginner to do basic things easily. Complex software will always require considerable learning and experience to get the most out of it. But for example modern Word is a very complex package with significant abilities that very few users master , yet most beginners can use it easily to produce a simple letter.

I suspect this is what bedevils beginners , that it requires considerable dedication to get basic designs out of Templot. And as the OP said , when you leave it and return you have to relearn it all again. This is known as counter intuitive design. That doesn't mean it's bad software , just that it's hard to master.

I like many , realising the unique capabilities of Templot, invested the time and am pleased with the result. Even though I had to read through considerable fora traffic and Martins tutorials to go up the learning curve and I still make mistakes , particularly when I leave of using the program for some time.

We are fortunate to have this software in the first place

Dave

[Martin Wynne]

Typically you pick and place block elements which you then modify

Hi Dave,

In Templot there aren't any elements to pick. There is just one element -- a track template -- and when you switch on you have already got one of those.

If you want to change that situation, it really would mean re-writing the entire program. And in what way I haven't the faintest idea.

drag and drop

Drag and drop is very tiring of the wrist. After an hour or two of that in other programs my wrist aches.

Having said that, Templot does have pick-and-place, and drag-and-drop -- on the Sketchboard functions where as far as I can see it does work very like other drawing software.

What I can't see, and never have been able to see, is how to apply it to the track design functions. And despite 17 years of asking no-one has ever been able to show me a concrete example of how it would work.

Sure you can F7-snap a bog-standard B-6 turnout onto the end of a bog-standard B-8 turnout, just as in other programs, and no doubt I could make that work in exactly the same way as other programs instead of approximately the same. But F7-snapping is just a quick way of getting beginners started. It doesn't get you anywhere when you want to put catch points within a turnout, or create an outside slip. In fact it often gets in the way, and has to be turned off.

You quite rightly say that it's not worth the effort modifying it.

It would be worth at least trying, if I could see what was wanted. But I can't.

It is frustrating that so many users nowadays, far more than the early days, say Templot is too difficult. When at the same time others find it dead easy and rapidly cover the screen in tracks.

Please have a look at the "your first printed template" video, and then tell me what is wrong and what should be changed:

http://templot.com/companion/your_first ... plate.html

I honestly don't know, and somehow I doubt Nigel's suggestion of reading the Microsoft GUI Design Guide from 20 years ago is going to be much help.

regards,

Martin.

[Knuckles]

As a steriotypical baffled Templot n00b I would just like to say that I am getting to grips with the basics but it would not be without Martin's patience and help.

Tandems and slips are currently beyond me but the double junction tutorial video's made sence and I managed to memorise the formula, I've found for me at least if you want a series of joined points in a yard with parallel tracks what works for me is to create yhe branch track off a turnout, transition curve that to the straight (again I needed help with this too!) and once that is joined and neatened insert a turnout into that piece and repeat the process to the next point - seems to work well most the time.

The concept of the control template makes sense to me now - it's the bit of track you are building - nuff said. So any changes (most the time!) apply to that teack piece only.

I can't get on with the 'delete to the control' function though, all to often I lose the track I am working on and I haben't yet found how to find them properly. Instead I have just been using the 'make the control' function repeatedly and this has been much easier to do anything. Pressing back sometimes deletes things so if I make a monumental balls up I end up exiting and reloading the program so saving often helps.

If I want to delete a track piece I often make another track piece the control and then highlight the bit I don't want of another track piece and just select delete. Maybe it is a silly way to do it but seems hastle free.

So this is where I am, got Loooooads to learn but slowly managing bits. Timber shoving is easy jjst time consuming. I like Templot but it is hard to learn and without Martin's mummy cuddling I doubt I would have worked even this much out by now. When I can do slips and such like I guess I could call myself learnt to some degree?

The only thing I could suggest would be a mammoth manual both in written form and video form literally going through everything...but this is asking too much and if you piece everything together in the forums in a particular order it may already effectively be written - the issue is finding it!

I forget things I have learnt sometimes too which does discourage, multiple grouping and dragging for example.

Anyway, I like the program so will press on. No idea if this post helps just wanted to express.

[Terry Bendall]

At the risk of being beaten up at Scalefourm this weekend and then thrown out of the society

Well Scaleforum has now passed but this may also be a bit contentious ...

I have never used Templot, I have never seen the need to use it, and have no intention of doing so. Why? Because I can do all that I need to do in the way of layout planning by starting with a simple sketch of what is needed, laying out paper templates of the turnouts needed on a large sheet of board, along with some lengths of flexible track, which can even be OO ( ) and often putting stock down to see how things fit. It may well be that this works because all the layouts that I have built have tended to have fairly simple track layouts with standard turnouts and nothing fancy, because that is what the prototype is like. That of course dos not mean that Templot is not of value, just that I have never seen a need to use it.

It was intended to be simple and obvious to modellers who have actually built track on layouts and have a knowledge of prototype track.

That of course is absolutely fine as an objective although I have not seen it stated before. However if this is the objective then it seems to me that those who are new to the hobby, who have never built track, or know little or nothing about prototype track are going to be at a disadvantages from the start, regardless of any perceived difficulty in using the software and in consequence some people will be off before they have even started.

The prototype would always try to use simple track layouts and standard turnouts because that would be easier to built and maintain. The same is true of what we build. Complicated formations would only be used where the conditions dictated it. Whilst it may be very nice to built that four way turnout or outside double slip on a curve, such things are best avoided by the beginner.

In my view, for those who are starting in the hobby, the best advice is to start with something simple, learn the basics and then progress to more complex things. If we are new to loco building for example, no sensible person would start by building a 2-10-0 or a Garrett, but probably a simple 0-4-0 or 0-6-0 or even a diesel which may not even have couplings rods to contend with. Why struggle to learn how to use a piece of software when the important thing is to get on with the actual construction of the layout?

Terry Bendall

[Jol Wilkinson]

Unlike Terry, I found Templot very useful in laying out this relatively small piece of trackwork. I don't think I would have got it as I wanted so easily with cut and shut templates.

LR 1.jpg

I accepted that it was an "unusual" piece of software that Martin had devised and was willing to put up with its idiosyncrasies to get what I needed, If I found a particular frustration it was with Martin's terminology. For example "store and background" would, for me, have been better titled "use and keep copy" , "wipe" would be "remove and store" while "delete to the control" would become "replace stored working template with this and use".

More wordy, I accept, but probably more intuitive especially for the beginner to Templot. Perhaps I should have created my own Templot dictionary at the time I was using it.

Jol

[Will L]

After a lifetime in the software industry I get very wary about software being "Intuitive". All I know is that nothing is initiative it it doesn't work the way you think it does.

[Martin Wynne]

The only thing I could suggest would be a mammoth manual both in written form and video form literally going through everything...but this is asking too much and if you piece everything together in the forums in a particular order it may already effectively be written - the issue is finding it!

Anyway, I like the program so will press on. No idea if this post helps just wanted to express.

Thanks Knuckles and the kind words from others.

I have in fact started on the "mammoth manual both in written form and video form", it's here:

http://templot.com/companion/

It is slow going for several reasons:

1. it's a massive task. There is a limit nowadays to how many hours I can sit at the computer for health reasons, and I do have other interests.

2. the program is still being developed and will never be finished. I have some new features ready for the next program update which will make some tasks a lot easier. The downside is that when I change things it renders a lot of existing screenshots and videos out of date, and in some cases actually misleading. Nothing is worse than an instruction to "click this" when "this" has been replaced with something different.

3. the frequent suggestions that Templot is all wrong, too difficult, and would be better if it worked differently. Changing things is the easy bit. Re-writing all the web site info and screenshots is a far greater task -- 10 times more work than writing the program in the first place. If I had known that from the start I never would have released Templot.

4. the almost total lack of feedback about

http://templot.com/companion/

Being a normal human I am encouraged to do more when I know someone is actually reading it. It seems that nowadays no-one really wants to read instructions -- it should be obvious how it works just by switching on, and if it isn't clear within the first 30 seconds it is a failure.

I put quite a lot of effort into making that site work on tablets and mobile devices so that it could be used alongside Templot on the main computer. But again, total silence. It works fine on my devices, but I have no idea what others are seeing.

regards,

Martin.

[Rod Cameron]

One man's intuition is another's familiarity after learning and gaining experience, even if it's 'different'. My brain is also unburdened with baggage from more traditional drawing packages like Autocad, but even with something like Inkscape which I use for creating drawings for the Silhouette cutter it's just 'another programme' for a different purpose. Yes it took me a few goes through the tutorials when I first started with Templot, but it eventually stuck and now Templet is 'intuitive' to me when I'm using it.

I appreciate Terry's viewpoint of layout design, but then these are presumably fictitious layouts? I almost exclusively use Templot for designing over OS track plans on real places (Eridge, Lewes etc).

The main principles of Templot that I adopted were to understand pegs and the notch; and I always 'delete to current/control' when working on an existing template in order to avoid having loads of duplicate templates stored (I know the potential dangers but it hasn't bothered me so far). I never knew what 'wipe' actually meant until it was described above! There was another one but I can't remember what it is <brain fade>!

[TonyMont]

Hi All,

Templot has been invaluable to me, I knew what I wanted to do, but had no idea about how much room I would need. It is very easy to sketch out a layout and think that will fit in a length of eight feet, but especially with P4 things and track layouts in particular take far more room than you might think. Please see viewtopic.php?f=9&t=1430, this layout combined with the Ambergate layout takes a space of ten metres by eight, there are several places where tracks cross each other and I could not have made the gradients work without an accurate plan.

There have been many detailed changes and many diamonds have been altered to slips but the overall design was right from the start.

I printed off the old tutorial and worked through it a couple of times, adding my own notes and now as Rod has said, it is intuitive and I can make modifications or print off a couple of templates in minutes.

Keep it up Martin and thank you very much.

Tony.