trippwj

Nikon’s Focus Shift Shooting (with mirrorless electronic shutters) and LightRoom /Photoshop functions have improved and are now quicker and easier to do since this thread started. Still a bit of work to get a single image, but short of complex lab equipment it’s the best way to get that one image. That one being one, I can’t image taking the time to create a gallery of them.

And with that, google sees a small spike of "doddle definition" searches from the USA
 
dod·dle noun informal•British noun: doddle a very easy task. "this printer is a doddle to set up and use"    

Focus stacking is a doddle.......if you use Photoshop!

I have some questions/thoughts, Jules.
 
1) Given all the wars that went through Europe over the centuries, is likely that many (most?) records were destroyed?
 
2_ Guilds in many ways were secret societies so if build plans were made, would be realistic to think they were destroyed when the ship was launched?  I do believe that much knowledge in the past was word of mouth and not recorded in an archival form.
 
I'm just curious....  thanks for any thoughts.
 
 

Interesting discussion and a lot of good points. For once in this post there aren't a bunch of so called experts trying to out-expert one another but instead shared ideas and perspectives based on experience and background and nature of photographic work.
 
I shoot creatively, nothing like Justin describes is a part of my detailed, and creative or not, technical process in capturing an image. Digital photography eliminates the need for gray and Color X-rite cards (I had both back in the day) unless you're held to the rules Justin must comply with. I shoot only RAW, with that White Balance is what I want it to be to create a pleasing landscape scene (www.glennbarlow.com if your interested) in post processing. I spend as much time in Lightroom and Photoshop as I do taking the image. Of course all the post processing work and camera white balance setting done won't help if you can't technically take a proper image, you have to know how to manage the camera first and the creative composition second. My only point here is photography is a broad ranging field. Landscape isn't portraits, portraits aren't forensic, forensic isn't scientific, even if the same camera and lens (All Nikon for me) is used. I just converted from DSLRs to Mirrorless, Nikon's Z7ii, Sony, and Canon mirrorless are opening new technical and subsequently creative possibilities for photographers. I did it mostly because it reduced the weight of my backpack by 12 pounds including the lenses I carry, but still.  Bottom line, everyone's opinion and perspective of technical and creative photography stems from the perspective of their photographic experience and work purpose and everyone is right.
 
Back to the topic of White Balance; shooting RAW I can change white balance to whatever works for me in post, including that of a 18% gray card should I choose. I can't be random about it when photographing my grandchildren, those images must be technically correct, more of that is done in camera based and driven by the Profoto B10 flash I normally use or skin tone if no flash is involved. Even with the sophistication and processing power of today's camera it's worth noting that Auto White Balance (my camera has multiple Auto options) is turning over the color decision over to the camera. Since I shoot in RAW it doesn't matter, I can adjust it in post, however if shooting .jpegs there are less capability to correct it.  Auto can result in different white balance results shooting the same image minutes apart or by moving the camera a few degrees since the processor in the camera is judging different things to determine what it deems to be an optimal white balance. And while you can set your own white balance (e.g. 5500) the Daylight, Flash, and Cloudy settings are also fixed settings that don't allow the camera to decide and generally all you need. I used to leave my camera on Cloudy for landscape work on my old cameras (its warmer) but Auto 1 on my newer Nikons is right more than its wrong, so that's what I use now.
 
One last point, inside fluorescent lighting messes with white balance more than anything nature can do, that's where shooting RAW can really come in handy if you're not subjected to rigorous rules for image capture, or you want to be technically correct to capture a creative image of your model.
 
Last, last point. Color is color, it's what our eyes and brain interpret it to be. Arguing over who's method for achieving the best color is like arguing over who has the best looking grandchild, what's the point. Clearly mine are. (again Justin's record rules notwithstanding).

I used to do forensic photography back in the days of film.  Correct color balance was vital and you didn't dial it into the camera.  We used filters to correct for the lighting and it was tricky.  I used to start every roll of film with a shot of an 18% gray card with color chips (of a known value) and the lab used the settings they got when printing the gray card/color chips (standard tools of the trade) to print the rest of the prints so they all matched.  It was so critical that I used only Canon lenses - no Vivitars or other brands - and the guys who shot with Nikons only used Nikon lenses - no other brands.  Just like light meters are hardly used today ask anybody today about a color meter and they will look at you like you are from Mars.
 
Setting a white balance today is a walk in the park in comparison.
 
When digital first appeared on the scene there were all sorts of articles in the pro publications about how the images could be manipulated and the courts would never allow digital to be used in court.  They were wrong, but when the first digital images were finally allowed it was a real challenge to provide everything they might require the photographer to provide to make them certain the image(s) were accurate.  It got to the point where I was happy to get out of the business because of the hassle.  I had to give up a very lucrative business I did on my days off from the FD when I got promoted and put on a 40 hour M-F work week.  It came at the right time for me (getting the gold Chief's badges and pay raise mostly made up for the loss from the business) because it was getting to be a grind. 

Hi Jules,
 
very interesting stuff to read. Thank you for taking the time to write and post.
 
what I was wondering: those drawings did not make it into the archived building contracts (as far as I am told bybothers, never checked myself). Where in the proces between ‘ordering a ship’ and ‘launch’ did they play a role. Was it in the translation of design into a specified contract, or in the proces of building a ship from the measures as stated in the contract? 
 
Jan

There are models, yes.  I do not believe that I said that models could not be built. 
But like every kit of a ship with a famous name and no complete plans from its time ,  that the result actually matches the original is wishful thinking at best.
In the circumstance it is honest to make the label reflect the fact that it is one man's guess and thus a decorator model and not an actual historical representation.
"The ship name if model makers name had built it."
He made those two  models - and as excellent as they may be - he essentially gave them any old name from an historical perspective.

Jules,
 
I am coming at this from a particular bias as far as my attachment of relative values.
That is POF model building.  The English plans are often detailed enough for me to develop frame timber patterns with almost no traditional lofting (i.e.  using XZ and YZ points to get the XY data that I need.)
 
The Dutch plans would essentially be following the directions for a design that are in Deane's Doctrine.   That is a lot of hands on lofting and the result is a best guess because of the number of choices that need to be made along the way.  One minor advantage with the Dutch hull is that there seems to be s long section on either side of the deadflat that are a replication - sort of barge-like.  The English started a slope change almost immediately on either side. 
Because Deane used arcs - a compass - something that I have taken as the core of whole moulding - there is a sameness with any design that follows the method. 
You are describing something similar. 
What Deane did using 5 data points per WL and a flexible batten on paper,  the Dutch appeared to do in the yard using the actual planking. 
 
I think that the Dutch used too much "you just gotta know" in their decisions for me to even think about building a hull using what data that they have left us.
I do concede that my long ago ambition to build Deane's Royal Charles 1672 - the one that came after the one that the Dutch stole - would be a fantasy rather than what the ship actually looked like.  There are no plans, jut the data that Deane started with. 
 

... those found so far. The condition of some of these ships is just amazing.
 
 
 

Best quote of the day!!

I hope you do not mind a disagreement on this as I think  it is good to have a discussion like this. 😁.  I have no idea what you mean by "normal" ship model drawings.  Many of us use contemporary drawings, contracts when available and scantlings from the Establishments and elsewhere when appropriate.   There are many small boat drawings showing the thwarts and tholes properly located including several below.   

Cheers
 
Allan

 
 
 

I just popped into the Hanthorn Cannery Museum (Astoria Oregon's other Maritime Museum), and found this title in their gift shop.  The gift shop is unstaffed with an honor system of payment, but for once someone was actually working there that day, so I had to pay actual money for it. The book is extensively illustrated, and not with the usual images one sees of these ships-- Marsh had access to the Oregonian's maritime columnist's personal images from his work during the war years, and the photos are outstanding and reproduced in the highest quality.  Despite the title, the book also covers Victory Ships, Casablanca Class flat-tops, and T-2 Tankers, also built by Kaiser yards in the area; a large section even includes other local companies supporting the effort such as Gunderson (Landing craft, etc.), Albina Engine and Machine Works (PCs, etc.), Commercial Iron Works (outfitting C-2s, etc.), Willamette Iron & Steel Co. (steam locomotives for Russia and misc. maritime work/outfitting), and Astoria Marine Construction Co. (YMSs [minesweepers]).   Hardbound at 256 pages; $50.00USD.      
 
Having just scratch built a variety of ships from this era with Portland connections (C-1, C-2, C-3, T-2, EC-2, VC-2), this book is a delight to have, though I might have to build a YMS and PC now . . .    It may not be the handiest resource for the modeler, but there are gems in the photographs, and the history is rich and compelling-- particularly for any interested in Pacific Northwest Maritime history.
 
Oh. . . the chap actually manning the gift shop that day?  The Author himself.   If you're local, pop by for the chance of a signed copy.

Chariot of Fame was a sister ship to the Star of Empire.  Lot's of description about the Chariot of Fame in Howe, Octavius T. & F. T. Matthews, but no description of the figurehead.  A little bit about some of the features (stanchions, knees, bottom color) in William l. Crothers The American Built Clipper Ship but no good drawings.  David MacGregor doees have a picture of Chariot of Fame and copy of part of the plans for both in his British & American Clippers (pages 122-124).
 
I do not have the book, but a snippet on Google Books of Donald McKay and His Famous Sailing Ships (page 103) states that as a figurehead, the Star of Empire had as a figurehead
 
"...the Goddess of Fame with outspread wings.  A trumpet was raised in the right hand, and her left hand, which was also raised, held a garland.  her girdle was emblazoned with miniatures of our distinguished statesmen.  The figure wasa robed in vestments of white, fringed with gold, its pedestal was ornamented with carved floral work."

That, unfortunately, is not in the narrative! 
 
I did stumble across a painting of the ship which can be viewed at http://blueworldwebmuseum.org/item.php?category=Maritime_Portraits&title=Captain_Oliver_Lane_With_Neptune%27s_Favorite&id=351&catid=76
 
From http://www.bruzelius.info/Nautica/News/BDA/BDA%281854-06-21%29.html we have the following:
 
Her bow rakes gently as it rises, and it is ornamented with a full female figure, blended with the cutwater, for the ship has neither head nor trail-boards, but is finished like a clipper.
 
 

Carl - I love the challenge of finding stuff!  Helps that I have a lot of good books to refer to...

According to the description in Howe & Matthews, the Santa Claus did, indeed, have the old elf as the figure head.  They also include a couple of pages about Neptune's Favorite, mainly about her various trips.  She seems to have been a fairly fast medium clipper. 
 
Howe, Octavius T. & F. T. Matthews American Clipper Ships 1833-1858 Vol 2.

I'm surprised she didn't sail on April the first or December 25!

Ho! Ho! Ho!
 
Just found a picture of her sailing card from 1854
 
Wawona59

Affirmative. The difference between the early folios in Fragments and the later folios is dramatic. Early folios (including the folio 19 image) are elaborate and watercolored. The later folios are much more technical. See Adams (2013) page 145 as a quick summary, references Barker (1986). Barker has perhaps the most in depth information available on the manuscript that has been published. I have a copy of the full Barker "Fragments" including the footnotes and drawings, but unfortunately neglected to note where I found it!  As I recall, I had to take snapshots of each page and paste into a Word document in order to obtain a digital version.
In Appendix 2, Adams provides both the transcription from Folio 35 (the midship mould)  as well as a somewhat easier to understand modern elaboration. If you are working from Folio 19 (the three moulds superimposed on the sheer draught) the narrative there is greatly simplified.
 
Adams, J. R. 2013. A Maritime Archaeology of Ships: Innovation and Social Change in Late Medieval and Early Modern Europe. 2nd Revised ed. edition. Oxford, UK ; Oakville, CT: Oxbow Books. Barker, Richard. 1986. “Fragments From The Pepysian Library.” Revista Da Universidade de Coimbra XXXII: 161–78. http://home.clara.net/rabarker/Fragments83txt.htm   Also see: McGowan, Alan Patrick. 1981. Tiller and Whipstaff: The Development of the Sailing Ship, 1400-1700. H.M. Stationery Office.   The figure below is excerpted from Barker.    

Here is an interesting figure from Olaberria, Juan Pablo. 2018. “Ship Design-Knowledge in Early Modern Europe: Royal Yachts and the Shared Knowledge of Ship-Designers and Common Shipwrights.” Doctor of Philosophy, University of Southampton. https://www.academia.edu/36363637/Ship_design-knowledge_in_early_modern_Europe_Royal_yachts_and_the_shared_knowledge_of_ship-designers_and_common_shipwrights
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
One of Barker's analyses can be found here - also extensive discussion of Sutherland.
 
Barker, Richard. 2001. “Whole-Moulding: A Preliminary Study of Early English and Other Sources.” In Shipbuilding Practice and Ship Design Methods from the Renaissance to the 18th Century: A Workshop Report, edited by H Nowacki and Matteo Valleriani, Preprint 245, 33–65. [Berlin]: Max-Planck-Institut für Wissenschaftsgeschichte. https://www.mpiwg-berlin.mpg.de/Preprints/P245.PDF.   Also see   Barker, Richard. 1988. “‘Many May Peruse Us’: Ribbands, Moulds and Models in the Dockyards.” Revista Da Universidade de Coimbra XXXIV: 539–59.  
Sergio Bellabarba offers an interesting theory concerning early ship design.
 
Bellabarba, Sergio. 1996. “The Origins of the Ancient Methods of Designing Hulls: A Hypothesis.” The Mariner’s Mirror 82 (3): 259–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/00253359.1996.10656602.  
There are also works by Steffy, Hock, Reith, and Castro that you may find useful.
 
 

Yeah, I feel kind of silly now - I see it listed in the References of your MM article. oops! 
 
 

Druxey -
 
I confess up front to not have the breadth of familiarity that you do concerning the designing of hulls. I noted your comment about Pett and, as I sometimes do, I wandered down a rabbett hole (see what I did there??Rabbett???) and came across a small piece, originally dated 1662, entitled Cono-Cuneus, or, The Shipwright’s Circular Wedge in a letter to the honourable Sir Robert Moray.  Since included in Wallis' 1685 A treatise of algebra, both historical and practical
 
The transcribed text of Cono-cuneus may be found here (without figures)
Wallis, John. Letter. 1662. “Cono-Cuneus, or, The Shipwright’s Circular Wedge That Is, a Body Resembling in Part a Conus, in Part a Cuneus, Geometrically Considered,” April 7, 1662. http://name.umdl.umich.edu/A67375.0001.001.  
European Cultural Heritage Online (ECHO) has an on-line version of Treatise of Algebra, including cono-cuneus (with figures) which can be found here (cono-cuneus begins on page 402):
 
Wallis, John. 1685. A Treatise of Algebra, Both Historical and Practical : Shewing the Original, Progress, and Advancement Thereof, from Time to Time, and by What Steps It Hath Attained to the Heighth at Which Now It Is ; with Some Additional Treatises. https://echo.mpiwg-berlin.mpg.de/ECHOdocuView?url=/permanent/library/H3GRV5AU/pageimg&start=421&viewMode=index&pn=430&mode=imagepath.
 
If you desire PDF (I know I do - makes the search and selective printing much easier) then that can be found here (note cono-cuneus starts on page 414, with the figures preceding the text. .
  Wallis, John. 1685. A Proposal about Printing a Treatise of Algebra, Historical and Practical: Written by Dr. John Wallis. Richard Davis. https://books.google.com/books?id=TXpmAAAAcAAJ.   I am not sure if there is direct applicability to the lower form of the hull, but his figures would seem to indicate tha is true.                

Ok, that has always been turned off by default, but I've now activated it so you should see signatures. 
 
The key reason for them originally being turned off was to reduce page download times over a mobile connection. We generally have fast mobile connections these days.
 
See how that goes.

Hello Greenstone,
 
What a great find! And many thanks for posting this here.
 
I think the book you found in the archives contains copies of the flags Allard published in his 'Nieuwe Hollandse Scheeps-Bouw' (New Dutch Shipbuilding) of 1695. This book was, of course, printed in black on white paper, but the wealthy could have these flags painted by artists. A couple of these 'painted' books can still be found in Dutch libraries and archives.
Tsar Peter probably saw Allard's book while he visited the Dutch Republic in 1697, and must have had these copies made. The book of Allard does not contain the first flag in 'your' book though, the flag of Tsar Peter I. This flag must have been made on a special order from the Tsar. 
This 'special' flag can also be found on the paintings that were made of the visit of the Tsar. For example on some works of Storck.
 
The flag you want to know more about is in Allard's book of 1695. In his book it is number 5. Here it is:
 

 
Allard gave the following description for this flag on page 13 of his book (my translation): 
 
"5. Unions Flag, as flown by the respective Admirals, and most important Captains in the expedition mentioned above. Being red, on which is written in white. For the Protestant Religion And The Liberty Of England."
 
The expedition Allard mentions in his discription of flag number 5, is described in the description of flag number 4. That is this flag.
 

Part of Allard's description of this flag number 4 (my translation again):
 
"4. The Great Standard as flown by H. R. H. of Great Britain, when he still was Prince of Orange, City-Holder and Captain-General of the United Netherlands etc. when he sailed to England with the Assistance-Fleet, on the 11th of November 1688. Being a white flag, with the weapon, as he carried ...".
 
Since the wrong spelling of the English words 'protestant' and 'liberty' does not occur in the book of Allard, the copyist who was hired by the Tsar must have made some mistakes.
 
 
On a different note: I am sure there must be more remnants in your archives of all the papers the Tsar gathered during his stay in the Dutch Republic in 1697. With any luck there would also be the ship design drawings he made under the supervision of master-shipbuilder of the VOC (Dutch East India Company) Gerrit Claesz Pool, or the ones he made under the supervision of Adam Silo. If you manage to find these, I will be forever in your debt... But, any find from 1697 written in Dutch will be highly appreciated too. I promise to translate anything you find to English.
 
I wish you a very good evening, and happy hunting in the archives,
 
Jules