Justin P.

We use IR photography at work in our technical documentation.   We use a converted digital Nikon D800, which has had its its internal filtering removed and is thus made "full spectrum."  We also MUST use older glass lenses without the modern treatment layers found on newer lenses.   Halogen lighting sources and an IR filter over the lens.  All images are B/W.   There is such a thing as false-color infrared photography, in which spectral wavelengths are mapped across RGB values.   As such, you can achieve a "color" IR photograph.  Whether or not that is being used in the photo above, I dont know.

Very sorry to hear about your wife Steve.   Hopefully the work on Syren can be a small comfort, you're doing a wonderful job.

Hey Matt,

Ive been away for the last few weeks only sparing a minute to pop in, here and there but your build is looking great!   Those guns look well done. The extra care in the finish will pay off in the end I think!  

13 hours ago, Overworked724 said:

I almost changed my mind to go with the Amati plates when I saw how beautiful your hull came out.

You know what, I think you did such a nice job that the Amati plates would have been a mistake.   If I thought could have done it this well with that material and a stamp I might have stuck with that method myself.   The Amati plates I think were a bit of a cheat.   Yours turned out really fantastic. 

What a beautiful result!   So clean and uniform...   you must be proud of that job!

Looks fantastic though...  slow and steady, thats the way.

I think we confusing things, or I am at least.   The annual meeting is this Saturday - I received a notification as recently as Sunday about this.   I assumed this was the virtual alternative to the conference where an annual meeting would have otherwise been held.   I have received nothing since that says this meeting is cancelled.   
 

To be clear I’ve known the in-person conference has been cancelled for some time.

1 hour ago, Chuck said:

The 2021 conference was cancelled.  Nobody will be attending this year.  Looking forward to 2022 however.

Did this get announced?  The only notice I’ve received was the email about the meeting this Saturday (11/20) - and that was only a week or so ago I think.

12 hours ago, glbarlow said:

Try 15 pound black fishing line, I found it on Amazon. It’s what I’m using on Winchelsea. 

I have used this too.   Sometimes referred to simply as "black monofilament."   Not always associated with fishing...   

I actually quite enjoy the needless overthinking that happens within the hobby - and in particular, the granularity that can be achieved when that overthinking becomes a communal endeavor.  Certainly a something that happens often here at MSW.   🙂

6 hours ago, Dr PR said:

You are correct about the brain "fixing" the color differences between the two eyes. I actually see three colors - left eye only (cool or bluish shades), right eye only (warm or reddish shades), and the color blend my brain creates when both eyes are open. The differences are very subtle and I don't normally notice unless I deliberately try. Like looking at outdoor clear sky shaded scenes with my right eye to see what a skylight filter would do on my film cameras.

This is very interesting.   Im suprised that after a lifetime you can still notice.   A relative of mine is colorblind and never knew it until he was told by optometrist - lived a full 45 years without a clue.   He still doesnt really believe it - until he got his hands on those glasses that are meant to reveal what the rest of the world see's.   Which now seem a bit dubious having read some of the comments here about color and subjectivity.    

Not wanting to get off-topic but your situation reminds me of those people with certain eye deficiencies where they are given only one corrective lens, with which the brain can use to correct for both eyes - or some such thing.  

17 minutes ago, glbarlow said:

I shoot all my build log photos with my iPhone 12 Pro

I do too.   Quite frankly, if I had to use a regular camera, the process of transfer and all that would likely lead to far less content in my build logs.   What helps motivate me to post, is the ease with which I can quickly shoot as Im working and move to my computer and already have the images waiting for me on the laptop.   I don't have to do anything but quickly review them and choose which I will use. 

I use a mirrorless DSLR for Gallery images though, set my white balance to auto on my Fuji XT-2 using a 35mm lens, set up a cheapo DIY studio in the garage and shoot.   The results are better than an Iphone as they convey depth a bit better.   Not research worthy images at all, but nice to look at on an internet forum - which to me is the main goal. 

Welcome from Hood Canal. 

16 hours ago, bartley said:

I tried to make a comment similar to this on another thread but was misunderstood and received comments about all photography being "technical" so I thought that perhaps it was a term used only in the antipodes.

I assure you "technical photography" is very real.  Reams of literature on the subject and many, many practicing technicians in the world.   However the term is used rather loosely when compared to things like "creative photography."   One can be both a technical and creative photographer.      In an effort to express themselves artistically, many photographers utilize highly technical skills and knowledge with their chosen equipment.   

With "technical photography" as I use the term, the goal is to capture and record information - as accurately as possible.   Much like "forensic photography" described by Kurt, there are rules - lots of them.   Much of the creativity employed in this arena surrounds sometimes very challenging scenarios.   The technical photographer uses a sort of creative engineering to capture the images at the required standard even when studio conditions are not available.  

https://chsopensource.org/1-technical-photography-tp/

I also agree the much of what @Dr PR has said.   Color rendition and perception is a fickle beast.  In my particular field the main goal of "chasing our tails," is to have as accurate a record as possible of a given objects state of condition.  It is not a perfect science to be sure - but every effort is made.   The information we collect is only part of a larger set of data used to make decisions about what is happening in an objects life and what effects its environment and/or preservation are having over time.   So even if the color of something is not perfectly captured, if the same exact parameters are employed a year later, we should have a reliable record that we can use for comparison.    This is just one piece.   We might have also employed a color-densitometer - which is a harder tool to fool than the human eye.    I suppose the main difference here is that you are creating a record not a work of art.  

To return the original post - my only piece of advice, based on my personal understanding of photography of objects is to set your white balance in camera.   The auto features usually do a pretty good job - but sometimes dont - and if you are having trouble, an alternative to expensive software is to just try setting the white balance yourself.  For most cameras this process is straightforward, is well described in your manual, and all you really need is a white sheet of paper to do a better job than "auto."    

4 hours ago, wefalck said:

Most of us non- (or not so) technical people with make-shift photographic set-ups have limitations to do things 'correctly'.

I totally agree.  I wasn't suggesting a right way to do things.    I was simply offering a different perspective - one where post-processing is taboo and color correction, in particular, is avoided at all costs.   There are many standards that stipulate the rules on these things, many of them specific to the types of things you are photographing.  Everything is stipulated ahead of time.  

My own ship modeling photography is not to this standard.  While technical photography can be beautiful, it rarely allows you the freedom to highlight specific details over the whole in creative and beautiful ways.   I have no opinion on what is best...   

2 hours ago, wefalck said:

unless it is done for a specific technical purpose

This is the key point.   Technical Photography is a very different beast.  I preform technical photography at work on institutional collections.   The main rule - no matter how you achieve it - is that colors must be recorded as accurately as possible, whether for facsimile production or documentation purposes.   We mainly use white-balance in the camera, using tunable LED panels set at 5500K, shot tethered to a system with calibrated monitors.   We also use  color checker cards by X-Rite, and do minimal post-processing in Lightroom.   The standards say that if done correctly, you really shouldn't be doing any "correction" after the fact.  

If all goes well and you've got a good color profile and a nice printer you should be able to reproduce those colors in print very accurately.  

On 11/6/2021 at 1:56 PM, mtaylor said:

I have no doubts about your being able to build a display case

1 hour ago, ChadB said:

There's no reason you won't be able to make the display case also.

You both are kind.  Building something when you have plans is fairly straight forward I guess.   Building something - like a case - simple a structure as it may be, is still a mystery with no plans to go by!   The glass, determining how to set and mount the glass, etc.   Im not saying that I cant/wont try - but I am saying that I have no idea where to start.   

Oliver, your updates are quickly becoming my favorites!   The photos, workmanship and precision are wonderful.    Cant wait for more. 

On 11/5/2021 at 8:23 AM, ChadB said:

Awesome work!!!!! Your cross section looks absolutely fantastic!!!

Hey thanks man!   Im following your Triton build pretty closely, referring back often.   A owe you a great deal of thanks for an excellent build log with many salient tips!  I have to say the display case you made is likely well outside of my ability but something I hope to learn how to do one day as well.

On 10/13/2021 at 2:22 PM, Bob Cleek said:

Actually, surgeons don't struggle with rigging ship models much at all because they have learned how to tie knots with instruments. (And they don't tie bowlines, either. There are many easier knots to choose from.) Modelers would find it helpful to learn how to tie rigging knots the way surgeons tie sutures. There are a ton of YouTube instructional videos on the subject, many posted by medical schools. You'd be amazed what can be done with forceps, needle holders, and tweezers.

My step-dad (pediatric surgeon, ret.) used to practice on grapes.    Of course now they do this with robots! New modeling tool anyone?

3 hours ago, allanyed said:

maybe consider continuing your search and check out the Beavers Prize build log here at MSW

For anybody who (like me) immediately went looking for it: 

23 minutes ago, VTHokiEE said:

I’ve been casually researching this option (I say casually because I frequently end up staring at the proxxon MF70

I have both.   The MF70 is a fun tool and does small milling task well.  However for Triton I used my drill press and the DIY spindle options FAR more than the mill.  I think the mill came in handy on one task which is easily replicated with a good home made scraper.    If I were to invest in one or the other ahead of redoing the build I would go with the drill press.   If you are interested I can send a full list of stuff I got for the drill press.   
 

If you have the Byrnes saw, you likely don’t need a mill after some practice for that keel.  
 

I should add that the MF70 won’t have the lateral horse power to do any kind of decent spindle sanding.   You will really want something beefier if you want go the sanding route.   The MF70 relies on high speed and sharp milling bits, it’s not really a workhorse.   The press will go for hours and not complain at all.

2 hours ago, Jaager said:

Admiralty style had a definitive and commonly agreed upon meaning.

Completely agree.  I find the constantly variable definitions a little confusing.   I’d like in the future if I could accurately describe a model I see or made as one or the other such style….  Yet find becoming knowledgeable in this area a little mysterious. 

That looks wonderful Matt, I would be very pleased with that result.   

2 minutes ago, mtaylor said:

Filling the lower decks with details.  

I see.   Well I cant say that Ive been drawn to these sorts of design choices (seen or unseen).   On a POF model though, I had assumed that the lower decks should be framed out properly.   Or is this the level of unnecessary detail we are talking about?   I would think where a modeler may choose to plank above the waterline, half the upper deck and the majority of the details appropriate for the scale on the upper deck (I dont know what style this is) - that they would at least fully-frame the lower decks.   No?