Jump to content

Hubac's Historian

NRG Member
  • Posts

    2,950
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Hubac's Historian

  1. Cedric - you are off and running now! I'm so glad to see the project posted here, now, as well as LaRoyal. What you are doing presents really a number of interesting challenges, so I am really looking forward to following along.
  2. And to answer your question: Between the lower wales, these are scupper ports. You can sometimes see, in VDV portraits, these sleave or sock-like attachments on the lowest scupper ports. I'm pretty sure that the Batavia replica, in Lelystad, carries them. My presumption is that these sleaves prevent in-flow of water on the lowest battery, in rough and rolling seas. I have never seen them above the lowest deck. It seems to me that Fimo is an ideal medium for creating these.
  3. Thank you, Cedric! The frieze will be built up. First, I will tack-glue this layout to a sheet of .020 styrene, so that I can cut out the lattice-grid. That grid will then be cut down into manageable segments - perhaps on mitered corners, where one would expect to see joints - and then glued to the upper bulwark pieces that have been scraped free of the stock ribbon strakes and ornaments that would interfere with the new layout. I'm thinking about bending annealed wire to the shapes of the frieze layout, and then glueing a shaped wire segment to the centerline of all of the frieze lattice segments. This will give some shape and dimension to the lattice and crevices for the mild distress wash to collect. the fleur-de-lis, shells, folliate diamonds and lattice scrolls are just big enough that I can carve masters and make uniform resin castings of them. There are so many of each and they must be consistent for the finished effect to look as intended. Each casting will have it's back sanded flat and then glued to the frieze, just as you might decorate a Christmas tree. The lattice scrolls will probably have to be cut into the frieze lattice because they appear half-on and half-off the lattice. Color-wise, lately, I'm thinking that I might go with a lighter blue for the upper bulwark pieces - reserving the deep ultra-marine blue for select sections of the stern and tafferal. Also, I am leaning towards painting the frieze lattice and sheer railings in yellow ochre, and using gold only for the frieze ornaments and figurative reliefs and carvings of the stern and quarters. My thought, there, is that the gold would pop more and be more visually impactfull.
  4. This has been quite a busy and productive holiday weekend. I have completed the ornamental frieze layout. While there are still issues with overlapping elements, generally, I am very happy with the spacing and size of the individual elements. She is starting to look like what I intend for this project. Here are a few pictures: A detail closeup that shows the added octagonal port:
  5. Well, when you consider that my plans are merely a scale layout for the ornamentation - I'm really not that far ahead of you. Someday, I will create a propper lines plan from the main frame, fore and aft. However, because I have no intention of re-molding the plastic hull, frame shapes are not necessary right now. I will say that I am eagerly awaiting the release of the Lemineur/Tusset monographie on Le St. Phillipe. Although this was one of the early ships of the Second Marine, I suspect that the shape of the main frame would not have differed dramatically from that of SR. I believe the main difference would be the development of the hull, aft of the mainframe, as it resolves into the stern framework. An accurate model of SR1, must incorporate the pre-1673 stern framework, just as Michel and Niko have done with their models. Bon Appetite!
  6. I also remember reading, somewhere, that SR was rushed into service before the re-build was complete. Not sure where I saw that either, but may have been Andrew Peters's book Ship Decoration. Cedric, how complete are you going to make your plans? I will certainly draw up to the main tops, with the shrouds in place, because I have to figure out their new positioning. I think I will also draw in the topmasts and spars because, that too will he made from scratch and I want to be sure that I get the scale of it right. Although I will also be building new decks, I don't think I will draw them - the exception will be the new deck railings, which will have some ornamental motif that needs to be worked out to scale. Please let me know if you find that passage about SR's re-fit. I'd like to see it, if possible. Despite the spotty forecast, we also had a nice day, here, in New York. I went to my daughter's school "field day" and we had a great time!
  7. One question I have about the amortissement: your drawing shows the detail starting at the level of those middle deck windows, in line with the open gallery rail and rising up to the sheer line. This is often how I have seen it modeled (Royal Louis 1692, the Tanneron models of L'Agreable and Le Brilliant). However, would it not make design sense - for the sake of continuity - for the amortissement to continue down to the open gallery decking? Even if only as a framework of ornamental rails and stiles?
  8. Oh, and concerning the main deck ports and their lack of verticality. I agree with both you and Michel about this. Dan noticed the error as well. This is one of those things that I'm not willing to correct on this plastic model because it would necessitate re-cutting and re-framing the ports, and completely re-creating the acanthus escutcheon carvings between ports. When I eventually do a full scratch-build, I will address that issue then.
  9. Hi Cedric, Thank you for the excellent advice. Co-incidentally, I had been thinking about adding that second port on the poop. The issue will be shortening the secondary poop deck (poop royal deck?), but this was a necessary accomodation, anyway, as a result of lowering the sheer line. So, last night I drew in the port. Rather than a circular port to match, though, I chose the octagonal profile, seen in the Berain/Compardel portraits. Perhaps they should match, but for now, I think it still looks good. I will post a picture update after I place all of the ornaments on the frieze. Your plan for the quarter gallery looks right on-point to me. A four foot projection from the hull scales out to just a hare less than 1/2", which matches the width of the stern windows. I think you are right about the degree of bulwark ornamentation in 1669. In addition to the examples you cited, there are several others that show only a simple field of fleur-de-lis. However, what I think I am trying to re-create is the re-fit ornament of 1689, which would represent the full development and expression of the French baroque style. Afterwards, the crown would become increasingly interested in paring down these excesses. Cedric, are you using GIMP for your drafting, or some other program?
  10. Drawing continues. The frieze lattice is now in place, and I can now draft and scale the shells, fleur-de-lis and folliate diamonds that will ornament the frieze. This was remarkably tedious to draw. I designed the frieze lattice to be a repeating pattern, every 3/4", like wallpaper. I had thought I could simply draft one vertical section from main gun-deck to sheer strake, then copy, paste and position it every 3/4". Then, I figured I'd just erase whatever sections were not necessary. Well, that wasn't going to work. As the sheer of the bulwarks rises, towards the stern, the height between ribbon strakes tapers wider; so it could not simply be a matter of re-scaling. Everything had to be drawn to fit. There is yet to be done some clean-up and tying off of loose ends, but I think this gives me a good, open framework for the rest of the ornament.
  11. What a shame that these remarkable vessels lived such a sheltered life - away from the eyes of those who could accurately record their magnificence! And so, we are left to scratch our heads and wonder at it all. That is why SR is so captivating for me. She's like a puzzle that is missing so many pieces; and yet, we can see a shadow of truth, a glimmer of what she once was. You make a great point, Cedric, about the state of diplomatic relations between France and the Netherlands. I will definitely be PM'ing you when I get stumped - which is to say, often.
  12. Hey Dan - that is certainly an intriguing thought. Much as fhe superficial interior bulkheads would be struck as the crew beat to quarters, it would make sense to have removable quarter panels to both preserve these expensive decorative works and reduce the carnage causing splinter potential of wood flying through the air, during battle. But, I don't know whether that was a thing or not. All the best source material is written in French, and I could very likely have skimmed past that detail in deciding what passages to translate more thoroughly.
  13. Why couldn't the marine "photographers" of that time, the Van de Veldes, have drawn more of the important French ships? When it comes to stern architecture, little is more confusing than French practice. Ships of a similar size to SR, but still slightly smaller across the main beam, nevertheless, often had more than SR's six stern windows; as shown, the Monarch had seven and I believe La Reyne carried eight (not including the quarter galleries). This seems to have been a matter of scale and builder's preference, although certainly in many cases, the number of stern windows would be inextricably tied to the layout of the proposed decoration. When it comes to the question of open or closed, or partially open quarter galleries - generally speaking, the quarters before the Reglement of 1671 (or is it 1673?) are largely open. Thereafter, increasingly, there is a shift toward closing the quarter galleries, as the English had long been doing, by this point. Yet, there was little enforcement of any of these early regulations, which were early attempts to standardize construction practices, so there remained a great deal of variation on the subject right up to and into the construction of the Second Marine, following the La Hogue disaster in 1692. That is why, in the absence of credible drawings from the period, it really is anyone's educated guess as to the actual or intended arrangement of the stern for any of these great ships. In the case of La Reyne, though, the arrangement is really pretty clear. All of the important information is laid out in those two VDV drawings.
  14. Hi Cedric, Yes, at best, I think these images are vaguely impressionistic; somewhere, in there, is some truth about SR's appearance. If anyone does know, it is likely to be Michel. As always, I welcome anyone to come forward with their insight and opinions. I believe Michel had mentioned, once, that the Puget drawings for SR's ornamentation exist somewhere in the Louvre. My understanding is that Berain re-interpreted these drawings (and presumably, elements of the ships first ornamentation) to create a new decor, at the time of her refit. Has anyone out there ever seen these first Puget drawings?
  15. Not because it particularly informs this build, but simply because I happened upon these images in my recent internet searches - I would like to point out a few things regarding the early appearance of SR. It would be difficult to argue that the following two images are of any significant value as historical references, other than as folk-art, but nevertheless they seem to be the only two images that represent the very first incarnation of Soleil Royal, before her re-fit: While these two images seem to differ more than they agree (the presence of a middle-deck entry port on one, the relative profussion of upper bulwark ornamentation on the first image, the location of the main and fore channels), it is interesting to note where there is agreement. In particular, the arrangement of the headrails and the figurehead are very similar. And while the depiction of these details is crude, I will say that they seem to mimic what we can see of La Reyne's headrail arrangement. This is the main reason why I believe these images to be representative of SR, after her launching. What's really interesting to me is what little we can see of the stern ornamentation. It is known that Peter Puget designed the original ornamentation and he is well known, and often maligned, for his large figurative works. What I find interesting about the first drawing is the large nereid figure between the middle and quarter deck levels of the stern. A similar figure appears in the more realistic second drawing. Likewise, at the lower deck level, where the stern evolves into the counter timber, the first drawing shows a horse figure, which may also exist in the second drawing. It seems to me that, in actuality, these figures probably looked very much like the proposed and actual ornament for The Monarch of 1668 - another of the vessels that Puget designed ornamentation for. I don't think it is too far a leap of faith to say that, in her original appearance, Soleil Royal was probably architecturally and ornamentally a very similar ship to the Monarch. The particular motifs would have been different, but the probable arrangement of her quarter galleries - all open walks - would probably have been very similar. Also, the Monarch being a heavily decorated ship, was probably almost on a par with SR's level of ornamentation. I don't think there are any hard conclusions to be drawn here; just interesting possibilities of what might have been. Interestingly, both drawings of SR only show 15 gun pory opennings on the first deck.
  16. Yes, Michel's ship is indeed a masterpiece - a timber for timber re-construction of the real thing. I can relate to the end-of-year shool shuffle, as we are all quite busy with the same. Progress continues, albeit at an even slower pace. I am so looking forward to your contributions, Cedric, as I continue to watch Michel's ship rise from the stocks.
  17. And by all means, please continue! Cedric will soon be posting on MSW with his La Reine conversion project, and this is becoming a very fertile conversation about SR and her contemporaries.
  18. Your translations are perfectly clear and well understood. Although, I can empathize with the feeling that one loses the subtlety of their intended meaning when they rely on things like Google Translate to express their thoughts. I have to say, though, that GT does a pretty good job. Mostly, it is the differences in ship nomenclature that cause most of the problems; precients/wales - comme-ci, comme-ca! When it comes to new subjects, particularly French first and second marine, there are almost too many beautiful and interesting vessels to choose from. There is a modeler on the Arsenal site who has done a model of La Belle that is so extraordinary, he has opened my eyes to the possibilities of this pretty little ship.
  19. Your cannons look incredible! As for completing your SR, I think you will certainly get there, and that there's another ship in you, yet.
  20. The interior structure is quite spectacular, Michel. The framing is done in pear? Is your plan to eventually do a full masting and rigging, or will she be an admiralty style model?
  21. Stunning ship Michel! You should post some pics of the framing and interior bulkheads, so that everyone can get a sense for the amount of research and effort that have gone into her, so far.
  22. Welcome Cedric! I am sure that you will find that the knowledge and eagerness to share, here at MSW, goes quite beyond expectations. In the short time that I have been a member, here, I have learned so much from so many. It never ceases to amaze me the particular talents of others.
  23. Hey Dan, Sometimes I take for granted that I can just see the Michelangelo at our meetings, but I've really enjoyed reading through this log, so far. There have been a number of ingenious solutions to vexing problems. I'll be following along. She's really shaping up beautifully, Dan!
  24. You seem to work at a steady pace with tremendous progress in a short timeframe. How long did it take you to research and develop plans for Katherine?
×
×
  • Create New...