thibaultron

I decided to work on the mast. Different materials used. PE parts, plastic rods,, rails and brush hair.
After painting, time for dry fitting 

A heartwarming little project. Must look out the book.

No congratulations on a job well done!!!
Rick

Thanks for this nostalgic build!

Awesome build, thanks for posting this. It's so cool.
Bob M.

Very nicely done!

Greetings!
 
Final paint is still wet, but this fun model is complete!!  Thanks to all of you who provided wonderful anecdotes and comments during the making of this little model.  Now I will find a nice place to display it, maybe with the book, or a map behind it.
 
Peace!
 
Jason
 


 

Thank you @Nirvana that I could help a little :). This is just beginning of my way to modeling and now I am collecting all parts and informations  for my project including 3D printing extra parts. Just need search for someone else who is very good in 3D reisen printing. All parts and tools will cost me trple more than model 😅.

Olaf, thanks for the videos, I would recommend everyone to use the technique from the last video. I have been doing somwthing similar. But this is the way to go.

One evening one piece.
I decided to work on the main mast. While assembling the PE part it came obvious that while it was detailed, the tripod was too thin, more of a 2d shape. And since Ticos have a reinforced mast like Spruance class I decided to work on the original part.
Work begun on SPS Radar. While holding the arm with tweezers and trying to attach the radar, it twisted and bended. I took another  set from my spares, but proved very delicate and broke after a slight bend. Perhaps If i could use 10 sets I could have damaged all. An attempt to glue them failled,  still looked wrecked. 
So basically I took the arm of the plastic piece and add the main radar plate on it. It was the best solution I could think after all other options have failed

CAUTION: esoteric camera nerd stuff!
 
We sometimes obsess about how many pixels our camera sensors have (mine is bigger than yours ...). But are more pixels ever worse than fewer?
 
I have two principal camera bodies, the Nikon D850 and the Nikon D5600. The D850 camera body sensor has almost twice as many pixels as the D5600 sensor. It would seem the D850 should create higher quality images. But I was curious about the difference in actual image sizes for subjects photographed with the D850 FX camera body and the D5600 DX camera body, using the same Nikon Micro Nikkor 105 mm macro FX lens (a "prime" or non-zoom lens).
 
The full frame (FX) D850 image sensor produces images with 8256x5504 pixels, or 45.44 megapixels. The crop frame (DX) D5600 produces images with 6000x4000 pixels, or 24.00 megapixels. So the D850 images have 1.89 times as many pixels as the D5600 images. This seems like an obvious advantage for the D850, producing images that can be cropped smaller to get the same number of pixels as a similar D5600 image that is cropped much less. But this isn’t the end of the story!


 
 
Full frame (FX) lenses can be used on crop frame (DX) camera bodies. Because the DX sensor is smaller, if used with a FX lens only the center 75% of the image produced by the lens is used (for Nikon cameras - other manufacturers have different full/crop fame ratios). This narrows the view angle, and  increases the effective focal length of the FX lens on the DX camera body by about 1.5.
 
 
 
 

 
This means you can take a picture of an object to fill the DX picture area from about 1.5 times the distance as needed to fill the FX picture area. So from the same distance the image of an object will be much smaller in the FX camera picture than in the DX camera picture (using the same FX lens on both camera bodies). Which camera and lens combination actually gives more pixels for the object being photographed? A simple 1.5:1.0 comparison doesn’t work. The calculations are complicated by the fact that the pixel density on the FX and DX image sensors is different (the D5600 sensor has about 1.2 times as many pixels per mm2 as the D850 sensor).
 
To answer this question I took some pictures of a test pattern with the D850 and D5600 camera bodies mounted on a tripod. I used the Nikon Micro Nikkor 105 mm macro FX lens on both camera bodies. On the DX D5600 body the lens is equivalent to a 157 mm lens.


 
 
First I positioned the tripod so the test pattern image filled the D5600/105 mm picture vertically (left). Then I cropped the picture to include only the test pattern image (the outside of the outer black rectangle). The resulting test pattern picture was 5180x3904 pixels, or 20,222,720 pixels (20.22 megapixels).
 
 
 
 
 

 
Then I shot the test pattern with the D850/105 mm setup on the tripod at the same position as for the D5600 shot. As you can see (left), the test pattern image does not fill the picture. After cropping the image to include only the test pattern, the resulting picture was 4632x3496 pixels, or 16,193,472 pixels (16.19 megapixels). This is 0nly 80% (0.800756) as many pixels in the test pattern image as the D5600/105 mm body and lens combination.
 
 
 
 
From the same position, with the same lens on the two different camera bodies, the DX/FX D5600/105 mm setup produced 1.25 times as many pixels for the same object as the FX/FX D850/105 mm combination! So for more distant objects the DX body and FX lens gives greater magnification and more pixels for the objects being photographed.
 
****
 
But what about close-up and macro photography? This is normally of more interest for model photography. For these situations you can position the camera close to the subject and fill the picture area with the subject. How much closer does the D850/105 mm combination need to be to fill the entire picture area with the test pattern?
 
For this test I measured the distance from the initial tripod position where the test pattern filled the D5600/105 mm image picture. The distance from the test pattern to the focal plane was 146 cm (57.5 inches). Then I moved the tripod closer until the test pattern filled the frame on the D850/105 mm setup. The distance was 108 cm (42.5 inches). The DX body/FX lens combination fills the image with the subject at 1.35 times the distance for the FX body/FX lens combination.
 
To fill the picture with the subject the FX/FX body/lens has to be only 0.74 times as far from the subject as the DX/FX combination. The D850/105 mm cropped test pattern had 7344x5499 pixels, or 40,384,656 pixels (40.38 megapixels).
 
At this closer distance the 40.38 megapixel test pattern image in the D850/105 mm has twice (1.99699) as many pixels as the 20.22 megapixel picture on the D5600/105 mm at the longer distance when photographing the same object. So the D850 and 105 mm lens combination is much better for macro photography than the D5600 and 105 mm lens setup.
 
****
 
I normally carry the MUCH lighter D5600 camera body (and FX telephoto lenses) when I am hiking and photographing distant subjects like birds and animals. The D850 is used in the "studio" (my kitchen) when I am doing macro photography of ship models, wildflowers and such. However, on special wildflower expeditions I will carry the D850 and the 105 mm macro lens into the field.
 
Hope this is of interest to someone.

Really great job!!
Brings back a lot of memories!!
Rick

Lovely project.
I will search out a copy of this book to read it.
Very clever idea.

Hi Everyone,  Almost done!  Painted the blue trim/triangles on his sleeves, and some more colors on the hull...... now only the final black paint on the hull and the white feather in his hair remains.
 

 

Really well done!!!
 
I got the book for our 6 yr old granddaughter for Christmas this year!!
Pne of my favorite books growing up!
Rick

i think this is pickeling the metal since wine is acidic? using vinigar probably will have the same effect and that allows you to drink the wine and when that wears off in 20 hours everything will have darkened.

I gather such parts are not (die-cast) zinc, but rather white-metal ... However, they shouldn't be black anyway, but painted in whatever the colour the ship would have been painted in, often white or green for instance.
 
Railway or figure modellers have a lot of experience with white-metal parts and there is a lot of information on the Web, how to work with such parts.

I am curious what this rig is called:
 

 
Looking through Harold Underhill's Sailing Ship Rigs & Rigging (Brown, Son and Ferguson, Glasgow, 1969) it looks like a "cat boat" with an extra shorter mizzen mast (ketch). He shows a "sailing lifeboat" with a similar ketch rig, but it has a fore staysail, the fore sail is loose footed and the mizzen sail is four-sides and has a spar like the fore sail. He also has a drawing of a "sailing canoe" with a similar rig except the mizzen sail is four-sided like the fore sail. A "fishing lugger" has sails similar to the sailing canoe.

great info in here. i always thought those pendants were part of a code system. 
 
thanks for all the research guys. 

Definitive answer from a flag company. Double sided not recommended for outdoor use.
 
https://auroraflags.com/2019/02/singlevsdouble/

kind of funny. I just saw this question and this very evening I stumbled across this painting: 
 Michiel Loos merchant ship
 
The name on that pennant, indeed the vessel's name, is also reversed... and the pennant colors in exactly the same style as yours.
 
And yes, I know, funny, the flags are pointing aft while under sail...

Originally published 1857.  Higher-res image here: https://www.eldreds.com/auction-lot/print-private-signals-of-the-whaling-vessels-c._EFE4B748D8  My wife's family's flag is on it-- one of the Howlands. 

It's just a short drive from Mystic Seaport in the town of New Bedford a couple of blocks from the waterfront. It's not in a real "touristy" area, or wasn't when I was last there years ago. New Bedford is, or was, still a working waterfront back then. If whaling is your thing and you're in the area, take the ferry from Hyannis to Nantucket and check out the whaling museum there. It's a very good one as well. 

Question is raised via e-mail... I´ll let you know whenever I get an answer!
I marked the most important statement 😀 - and whenever I will be in New England: this for sure is one of the oh-so-many places I will visit!

Bob,
 
Thanks for the information on the pig stick!