shipmodel

Really nice, Nils - It is taking on the unmistakable compelling appearance of the ship. All of those little details add up to much more than the sum of the parts. Excellent work. Thanks, as always, for letting us accompany you on your journey. Dan

Hi Dick - Glad you have it licked. Looking forward to seeing the results. I was just agreeing with Druxey that acrylic matte medium is a good stiffener and has worked for me. Dan

Hi Woodrat - I have had good success, like Druxey, with acrylic matte medium. I lay up the sail with all its details - bolt ropes, cringles, reinforcements, etc. Then I lace it to the spar and suspend it horizontally from the corners of the spar and the lower corners of the sail. The matte medium is painted on and allowed to dry completely. The simple weight of the liquid medium pulls the sail into a nice billow. This can be encouraged with a small bag of rice. Once dry, it hangs quite nicely, I think. You can read more about the method, and some mistakes, in my build log of the Queen Anne's Revenge. Best of success. Dan

EJ's post got me thinking about what the artist sees and what he draws and, specifically, about the Berain stern painting. I think that there is an obvious artistic distortion that has been perpetuated as an engineering distortion. Maybe this is well known, but I haven't seen it discussed. Here is the painting. To improve clarity and detail I cropped and enlarged the QG section, then converted to black/white and adjusted the contrast. To me it looks like it was painted from an angle off the starboard stern. The way the size and angles of the lower lights diminishes towards the bow edge of the QG, the different perspectives of the dolphin pairs that flank the upper windows, and, most of all, the way the forward edge of the QG seems to overlap the two middle gunport openings. No shipwright would have built such an unworkable port once, much less twice. But it is exactly what an artist would see as the bulge of the QG obscured the ports. So, with the starboard aft corner of the ship being closest to the artist, it's size, and especially its height, would be increased by the optical effects of parallax. This artificially raises the rail and increases the sheer. It also increases the angle of the QG windows. Of course they do not necessarily match the sheer of the interior decks, as indicated by the lines of the gunports, but would the decks of the galleries really be so steep for the admiral and captain? The problem is that the painting is presented as though it was seen from directly athwartships. As though it is an engineering drawing without perspective. Unfortinately, the parallax issues were not adjusted and therefore any plans drawn over the painting will incorporate them. I suspect that the Heller kit does, too. To get an idea of what adjustments could be made, I did a little fooling around with the image. I put the picture into Photoshop and used the 'distort' function to put in about a 10 degree angle to a vanishing point at the horizon line. Here is how it came out Immediately the sheer dropped, the galleries leveled, and even the hull decorations took on a squarer, more regular appearance. This may not be the precise amount of parallax to correct, but it is a start. To see what this might look like with a larger area of the ship, I went to Marc's plans. Here they are without adjustment And here after putting in a similar distortion angle Finally, to see what effect this might have, I cropped out the QG from the adjusted drawing And dropped it onto Marc's distorted plans. Although this is just some doodling around, and without adjusting the designs and angles of the QG, I think it sits pretty well. Marc - I know that you are kit bashing the Heller, so you may be locked into its design, but this may be a consideration when you go to scratch-building your own. Or I could be completely wrong. LOL ! Dan

Hi Marc - Those plans are getting better all the time. Tracing the Berain drawing is a good idea, but the sheer looks to be exaggerated, especially at the upper rail. Maybe the artist did this as an attempt to show perspective, because there seems to be a progressive tilt from deck to deck. If so, maybe your GIMP program has a "free transform" or similar function that would allow you to pull down just that corner to make it match your space a bit closer. Also, I just ran across this discussion of the Heller SR kit when I went to renew my subscription to FineScale Modeler. Don't know if you have seen it. http://cs.finescale.com/fsm/modeling_subjects/f/7/t/68138.aspx The discussion ran from 2006 to 2011 and was dominated by Dr. John Tilley, professor at East Carolina University and former curator at the Mariner's Museum. He hated the kit, though he built one. Lots of links in the discussion to some pretty well built examples. Judging from those, it can be turned into a very nice looking model. But the effort to do so is tremendous. One link I read said that it had taken the builder 14 years to finish, mostly in research and correcting kit problems. Whew! I don't have that kind of dedication. With all the research and work you are putting in, yours has all the makings of being one of the best, despite any non-correctable kit issues. Dan

That knife is looking good! Maybe you can go on "Forged In Fire - The Miniature Show". I experimented with your pencil grip and found that even using a generic hobby handle armed with a #11 blade I could get clean, well-controlled cuts through thin sheetwoods of several species. Thanks for showing it. Dan

What an excellent discussion of your process. I may never make a knife, or its handle, but the story of your perseverence is inspiring, whatever the subject. Hope your wound is recovering nicely. Dan

Keith - What great metalwork ! I would be proud to own a yacht with fitting half so nice. Dan

Doris - What a great artistic eye you have ! Thanks for sharing your techniques and photos. Dan

Marc - It seems that my little seed has turned into quite the thicket. Sorry if I have caused you a bunch of extra work, but it seems that public opinion favors insanity. Don't worry, I am sure that I have a spare straight jacket in my closet for you, and I can tell you from personal experience that the rubber room and the shock therapy are not as bad as they seem. Ad astra per lunacy. Dan

Maybe you could try the easier method of straightening the gunport sides on one or two ports. If you don't like the look, you can either backfill to the original configuration, or go with the insane amount of work needed to replace all of the surrounds. If you have truly lost your mind and decide to go the replacement route, you could consider 3-D printing for the surrounds. You could make up one in the computer, then copy it multiple times and attach them to each other with sprues to form a sheet which can be printed by Shapeways or other inexpensive service. In either case, I will be watching with interest. Dan

Hi Marc - I think the fact that several of us have noticed the tipped gunports on the Heller casting means that they are eye-catching elements and should be adjusted if it can be done without too much work. Looking at your drawing carefully it seems that the tipping is more apparent than real. Here is how I would go about changing the model and the drawings: For the model, not much work is needed. Even the sides of the aftmost gunport need to be shifted only about 2 degrees. All of the others are closer to vertical and need less adjustment. The insides of the port can be modified with a needle file. It may be that only doing the verticals would be enough to change the look of the piece. Doing something physical on the model might make a nice change from all the drafting. As for the drawing, I do not know the program that you are using, but check to see if there is some 'rotate' or 'skew' function that you can apply to a selected portion of your drawing. The Photoshop Elements program that I use has several. Here I have simply taken a square outline of the gunport and rotated it to vertical. The second has the gunport skewed, which leaves the sill tipped. The program also lets me more carefully select just the gunport by using the 'lasso' function, but that is a much more time consuming process. If your program does not allow you to do this, I could do it for you if you send me a JPEG file of your entire hull. Dan

Hi Marc, E.J. - I am highly enjoying your discussions about the interpretations of these artworks as research tools. I am learning a great deal from your thoughts and M. Saunier's as well. Thinking about the question of open or closed galleries, it occurred to me that perhaps there could have been removable shutters to protect against sun, wind and elements. Then when the 'photographs' were taken, sometimes they were on, and sometimes not. It makes sense from a practical point of view, but is that something that has ever come up in your readings? Dan

Beautiful work, Chuck. A faithful honoring of the historical details and shipbuilding methods, without ever losing sight of the artistic whole. Such elegant solutions to so many construction challenges along the way. And such ingenious business sense to turn your efforts into your mini-kits so we can all benefit. Thanks for leading the journey. Dan

Hi Frank - What a lot of great work has been done since I looked in. Very precise and clean. This promises to be an excellent model. One small suggestion. For the ceiling planks it does not matter so much, but when you go to show treenails or bolts in the hull or deck planking, you should stagger the two for each plank diagonally left and right along the beam or frame. Putting them in a straight line puts the line of weakness from the holes and the line of strain from the bolts all along the same grain line in the wood. This would increase the danger of splitting along that line. I've never seen it done that way except in ships with wooden decks over a steel framework. Of course, if your excellent and thorough research and photos shows otherwise, I am fully prepared to be wrong. Be well Dan

Hi Eddie - I am following along as well and looking forward to your progress. The two woods that you have chosen are pretty dark. You may not like the boat that color. You can always stain a wood darker, but not lighter. For comparison, here are two boats that I did, and the lighter one is always the more popular. They are in the same scale as your build, 1:36. The lighter one is stained basswood, the darker is cherry. Whatever you choose, best of success. Dan

Hi Doris - I found the drawing that I was thinking of. It turned out to be the Royal Katherine herself as drawn by VdV the Elder in 1673 and reproduced in Frank Fox's book "Great Ships - The Battlefleet of King Charles II". As he shows, the half gangway goes up only to the entry port, which is much closer to the forward gunport than I would have expected. This may have been forced on the builder by the forward location of the main channel, which would have been much more difficult to move. Please be assured that none of this nit-picking detracts in any way from the beautiful work that you are doing. Be well Dan

Hi Doris - Thanks for pointing me to the models. I think I see how it works. The steps only go up to the level of the entry port, which is offset aft. This is the officers' entry. For the rest, a rope ladder, probably with wooden steps, would have been lowered from the rail and over the closed gunport. In combat it would have been pulled up, of course. I saw this feature in some Van de Velde sketches, but thought that the incomplete ladder was just an artistic shortcut. I should never doubt the master. Dan

Beautiful. Absolutely realistic. Dan

Hi Doris - Beautiful work, as always. Your build logs have elevated my own work, even on such different subjects as the ocean liners that I have built. I have one small question - do you think that your entry port is too far aft? Is there enough room for the crew to secure the train and breeching tackle for the gun immediately aft of the port? How will the steps for the gangway run up to the top rail? I have seen the painting of the ship with this feature placed as you have it, but I can't figure out how it would work. Thanks Dan

Hi Marc - I see the same issues as M. Saunier. The detailed drawing that he provided should give you a lot of information. It certainly looks better than some of the other drawings of the head structures. Perhaps you can develop a drawing of the bow from above (plan view) which will give you a better feel for the relative positions and sizes of the catheads, headrails, and carvings. The two-dimensional drawings distort the look and placement of the catheads. The placement and size of the carvings as drawn may set the catheads so far forward that it would be impossible to work the anchors without damaging the headrails. Another question is about the number of gun decks at the bow. i do not recall seeing a plan or drawing of the bow which shows 4 decks of cannon as you have them. Rather, the Berain painting that you included seems to show only 3. How are you resolving this conflict? Lots to think about, but you are up to it, I know. Dan

Hi Doris - Great to see you back in the shipyard. What you do with cardboard is truly spectacular. I will be following along with great interest. Be well Dan

Hi Marc - Love the way this is coming along. You are certainly doing everything you can to make her accurate, according to the information you have. I don't envy your huge task in making all of the decorations and carved work. The horse-headed catheads are particularly complicated, and I imagine that they will be difficult to work out how to add the decorations and still have a working anchor davit. One quick question - the surrounds for the third deck gunports, the ones with the antler/acanthus decorations, are slanted at the fore and aft ends of the line. They are the only gunports that are tipped this way. Is this how they are on the ship or is this an artifact of the drawing process? Looking forward to seeing her in person. Dan

Hi Nils - Yes, it was the unavailability of cylindrical ones that small that clinched the decision. Dan

Hi all – Thanks again for the compliments and likes. I have to say that the questions and discussions always stimulate my mental juices. Keep them coming, and please don’t worry about pointing out things that can be improved. It is always better to hear about them during the building process when they can be corrected. The last segment ended with the hull smoothed and primed. Next came the process of detailing it. In the two photos below you can see that the surface was very smooth. Construction was done with welded plates, edge joined rather than having strakes of overlapping in-and-out plates as earlier ocean liners had. This meant that the hull would be simpler, but what was done would have to be more precise. This was especially true for the two lines of portholes. Which are the most obvious features other than the ship name and the green detail stripe. Close examination of these and other photos, as well as the plans, indicated that the lines of portholes followed the curve of the sheer. None of the photographs of the portholes show any detail, no matter how close the photograph was taken or how much I enlarged it. They simply look like holes in the hull. I am sure that there were small lips around them, but I never could see any. The first step was to offer up the plans to the hull and to compare the porthole locations on the paper, one by one, to the portholes that I could see in the photos. It turned out that the plans did not show some 15 portholes on either side of the hull. They were marked on the plans for future use. Then the plans were cut right through the top line of portholes and taped to the hull. As you can see, the line on the plans wanders a bit up and down, so the plans could not be used “out of the box.” Using a compass, the distance from the sheer edge of the hull block to the first line of portholes was set and a light line drawn along the length of the hull. An awl was used to make starter holes along the pencil line at each porthole location. At the bow the flare of the hull pulled the plans up, so the portholes would have ended up too high on the hull. The curves also made it impossible for me to just use the compass to set the line. My solution was to apply 1/16” black striping tapes just below the porthole locations. I could apply them, eyeball them, and adjust them as needed to get two matching sets of straight lines on both sides of the hull. The plans were then used to set the horizontal locations for the portholes, and starter holes were made with the awl. I next had to decide how the portholes were going to be modeled. Since they had no detail, I could have simply made holes in the hull. I tried it on some scrap, but the edges of the holes often came out ragged. This was unacceptable. A sleeve of some sort would solve this. In prior models I had used small brass grommets, but I could not find any which were small enough. They had to be around 18” in scale, or about 0.05” on the model, for the interior diameter. The length was less important, but something around 3/16” would be good for ease of handling. I could have sourced some brass tubing and cut off individual pieces. I even have a powered cutoff saw that uses an abrasive disc rather than a saw blade. But making over 500 of them without burrs or flash which would need additional cleanup was not something I wanted to try. Instead, I found 1mm x 4mm fluted brass beads on the Fire Mountain Gems website. This was a perfect size, but when they came in I saw that they were not perfectly round. The fluting process turned them into rounded pentagons. The difference was only visible under magnification, so I decided to use them. The outside diameter of the beads was 0.060” at its largest, so an 0.062” drill was used to make all of the holes in the hull. A toothpick was the perfect size to pick up a bead and slide it part way into a drilled hole, leaving them proud of the surface. The friction fit between the beads and the holes was probably enough to secure them, but the sides were painted with dilute white glue to be sure. Then a small tack hammer was used to set them down flush with the hull. Before the glue set the line was eyeballed and any beads that were slightly high or low were nudged into proper place. The hull was given another coat of primer to blend in the portholes and fill any small gaps around the beads. When I was satisfied the upper hull was given a final coat of gloss white. The paint was left for 24 hours to dry, then the upper hull was masked at the waterline with tape and paper towels. The lower hull was painted an OSHA red that closely matched my best color photos of the hull. At this point it was only a few days till the Joint Clubs Conference on April 29, so I did a few things a little out of sequence to make a better impression. Photoetched brass doors from Gold Medal Models and Tom’s Modelworks were painted white and applied to the hull following the locations on the plans and photos. Self-adhesive green striping tapes were applied to the hull. The one at the waterline is 1/8” wide, while the upper decorative one is 1/16” wide. These green stripes are only temporary. Although they are the right color, they are a bit too thick and the upper one is a bit too wide. The thinner tapes do not come in the right color, so I may have to take thin white tapes and paint them. More on this later. Similarly, the windows here at the stern are paper place-holders until I can make up the custom decals that ultimately will be used. At the bow I can see that some touch-up work is needed, but nothing that can’t be accomplished with a bit of elbow grease. So here she is at the conference again. The prominent line of windows of the promenade deck have been printed on pieces of paper to test the fit. The paper ones will be replaced with laser-cut ones done in either 0.020" styrene or a thin plastic-impregnated circuitboard material. Unfortunately, she has to be set aside for a bit so I can complete the QAR. I will pick her up again when I can. Until then, be well. Dan