shipmodel

Hi Mike - 
 
Just found and read your build log.  You have done a very creditable job on the model.  Your stove and belowdecks details are top notch.  You should be justly proud of your work.
 
I did have one question, though.  I looked at the plans and read the monograph by Jeff Stoudt and am confused by the number of gunports.  The contemporary watercolor by Charles Randle seems to show only 5 open gunports in the waist, rather than the 9 along the length of the ship as shown on the plans.
 

 

 
This agrees with the known armament of the Washington, which included only 10 long guns, which would have 5 mounted in each broadside.  Since the ship was purpose built during the prior few months, wouldn't gunports match the available cannon?  Why add gunports that weaken the structure and don't add anything to her fighting qualities?  If all of the long guns are put on one broadside surely their weight would tip the ship down and make the guns unusable.
 
I know that the Stoudt plans match those of Howard Chapelle (History of the American Sailing Navy, p. 108), but he is silent on his sources.  There is a reference to the lines of the Washington being taken off after her capture, but I have never seen them reproduced.  
 
Do you, or does anyone reading this, have any thoughts about this question?
 
Thanks
 
Dan
 
 
 
 

Impressive research, Marc.  Your thoughts are fascinating and your conclusions fully supported.
I always look forward to your next post.
If you ever collect and collate them into a book I will be one of the first on the purchase list.
 
Thanks for sharing.
 
Dan

Impressive research, Marc.  Your thoughts are fascinating and your conclusions fully supported.
I always look forward to your next post.
If you ever collect and collate them into a book I will be one of the first on the purchase list.
 
Thanks for sharing.
 
Dan

Hi Mark -
 
Glad you got the warping problem under control.
Looking forward to seeing the solution.
 
Have you considered buying small photoetched cleats?
I know they are out there, but can't remember who makes them.
If they are painted brown, at that size I don't think anyone will be able to tell that they are not wood.
Just a thought.
 
Dan

Impressive research, Marc.  Your thoughts are fascinating and your conclusions fully supported.
I always look forward to your next post.
If you ever collect and collate them into a book I will be one of the first on the purchase list.
 
Thanks for sharing.
 
Dan

Hi Mark -
 
Just read through the log.
You are making excellent progress and the results are inspiring.
Now I'm off to read the Sphinx log.
Thanks for giving me some happy hours of reading.
 
Dan
 

Impressive research, Marc.  Your thoughts are fascinating and your conclusions fully supported.
I always look forward to your next post.
If you ever collect and collate them into a book I will be one of the first on the purchase list.
 
Thanks for sharing.
 
Dan

Hi Mark -
 
Glad you got the warping problem under control.
Looking forward to seeing the solution.
 
Have you considered buying small photoetched cleats?
I know they are out there, but can't remember who makes them.
If they are painted brown, at that size I don't think anyone will be able to tell that they are not wood.
Just a thought.
 
Dan

Hi Mark -
 
Glad you got the warping problem under control.
Looking forward to seeing the solution.
 
Have you considered buying small photoetched cleats?
I know they are out there, but can't remember who makes them.
If they are painted brown, at that size I don't think anyone will be able to tell that they are not wood.
Just a thought.
 
Dan

Hi Mark -
 
Just read through the log.
You are making excellent progress and the results are inspiring.
Now I'm off to read the Sphinx log.
Thanks for giving me some happy hours of reading.
 
Dan
 

Impressive research, Marc.  Your thoughts are fascinating and your conclusions fully supported.
I always look forward to your next post.
If you ever collect and collate them into a book I will be one of the first on the purchase list.
 
Thanks for sharing.
 
Dan

Impressive research, Marc.  Your thoughts are fascinating and your conclusions fully supported.
I always look forward to your next post.
If you ever collect and collate them into a book I will be one of the first on the purchase list.
 
Thanks for sharing.
 
Dan

Hi Mark -
 
Glad you got the warping problem under control.
Looking forward to seeing the solution.
 
Have you considered buying small photoetched cleats?
I know they are out there, but can't remember who makes them.
If they are painted brown, at that size I don't think anyone will be able to tell that they are not wood.
Just a thought.
 
Dan

Thanks for the comments and advice.   As I've said, this is a test and a re-learning project.  So far, I think I"m doing ok inspite of things.  I probably should move up to 1:48 if for no other reason than the parts are larger.  
 
All "damage" is repairable.  I removed the deck planking and good look at things.  The beams don't need replacing but do need re-setting.  Somewhere in all this, a couple came loose, probably while I was gluing the deck into position.  I'll dig out the isopropyl and fresh glue and reset the loose ones then probably run my small belt sander at very low speed or do it by hand to ensure all is proper.  I think, at this point, the only thing I'll have to remake or buy is a new rear deck.  But, I want to get the beams in order first.
 
Thanks E.Z.  No basement in my apartment.  It's a strange set up.  First floor are one bedrooms.  Above them are the two bedroom ones with the bedrooms up top.   Dry hose is secure. 
 
Thanks Glen.  The wood came with the kit.  It could be the drying since it came from England.  Weird (?) funny (?) that the only warped wood is the maple.
 
Thanks Bruce.   Wood does seem to have a mind of it's own. As for filing... I didn't file anything "over" the model.  I do at the workbench where it sits though and vacuum up all the dust, etc. when done.  
 
Even the blank maple stock used instead of the lasered one for planking with strips is warped.  

Time for an update and a question or two.   The gangways have been assembled and installed.  I'm pretty happy with the way they came together.   
 
Now for the questions....  the quarterdeck giving me fits.  It's warping and popping loose in many places and started about a week ago as near as I can tell.  And it's also developed black spots but darned if I know why.  I haven't dripped water, coffee or anything else on it.  Any thoughts or ideas on how to fix this or even if it can be fixed at all?  I did try some light sanding on the spots but no joy... they go deep into the wood.
 
BTW, here's the photo of the gangways installed.
 

And here's a photo of the quarterdeck and what's going on...  I just noticed that it's warping my framing on the port side also.
 

 

Finally got some shop time and got all the cannons mounted.  She has her teeth.  Part of the delay was one cannon disappeared.  I found it but the carriage was heavily damaged.  Repaired and replaced some wooden bits and all is well. 
 

 

Update time.   Been assembling cannon inspite of outside distractions.  All 20 are ready to be installed and have quions inserted if needed (probably) for making all the barrels agree externally.  I douibt I'll be rigging them as given the space and size of things (eyebolts and rope) and the fact they're all under "cover" it'll be more than I want or can do at this point.  Working with the guns was in "spurts" of about 10-15 minutes with long breaks between sessions..  On the bright side, I found I can do it even though some eyebolts disappeared with a "ping" of the tweeers.
 
Here's the photo of her teeth ready for installation.

Brief update.   I'm still planking (rather slowly it seems) but with the Sphinx coming in tomorrow, I've put the Hen away for now and spent the day cleaning up the shop and rest of the place.   I'll continue to work on her while doing the Sphinx.  So here's where the build is... I have about 6 more strakes to do on the hull then I can turn to the stern.  She's not sanded or filled below the wale but I'm happy with her.

 
 

I agree with you on this point Mark; the VB portrait is merely a snapshot in time, stripped of any context relating to whether the portrait memorializes any particular scene in history, or whether the ship had been modified in any way to serve that present reality.
 
Dan Pariser had shared an article with me from the Mariners’ Mirror, which discusses this very difficulty of bestowing too much credibility into any one artists’ work, when trying to determine what a vessel may have looked like.  Not only do we lack a thorough accounting of small repairs and refurbishments, but we have no way of knowing to what degree an artist such as VB may have simplified his gestures so as not to bog the portrait down in the minutia.
 
To that point, if one considers the interior descriptions of the ship, alone, it quickly becomes clear that every surface was adorned with carving, gilt, paint and sculpture.  She must have been a riot of color and truly a load for the senses.  Hyatt’s monograph describes the interior bulkheads and surfaces at great length, as he walks the “viewer” up from the aft lower gun deck, up through the higher decks and officers chambers:
___
 
THE SCULPTURE AND PAINTING
 
It may be said that never has a ship been so richly adorned with painting, sculpture and carving as this one, built to the designs of M. Le Brun, who, in the service of His Majesty, is one of the most eminent exponents of his art in Europe is. The general color of the ship is gold and white,278 both on the outside of the beams 1401 as well as at the stern, all covered with golden Bourbon lilies279.
 
ON THE FIRST DECK One sees the wall of Saint Barbara,280 richly decorated with Bourbon lilies and gilded mouldings. One then finds a stairway with two risers and their banisters, all richly painted, di leading to the second deck.281
 
SECOND DECK Three cabins are seen on each side, decorated with richly beautiful paintings.282 - 26 ini? ashisblad siul tim THE GROSS CHAMBER In the aft part one finds the large chamber,283 which is commonly referred to as the chamber of the volunteers, the wall of which can be divided into four sections and can be opened and, in the event of a battle, allows a view over the entire deck from the stern to the forecastle, with a door to starboard for entering said chamber. This wall is decorated on the outside with several small painted panels surrounded by gilded mouldings, and on the inside bears a large painting showing the king's gilded coat of arms supported by painted sea gods in fine grisaille 284, with the coat of arms of His Eminence Duke de Vendôme on the right and that of His Eminence the Duke of Beaufort on the left, enriched with trophies of captured weapons, in a very beautifully gilded frame. and Next to said picture are further paintings of two allegories of renown bearing the king's gilded monograms in an azure oval and a DF Cupid 285 carrying their trumpets. In the background is a balustrade with distant terrain on the horizon. On the port side, in a frame that occupies almost the entire length of the said chamber, is the painted representation of Apollo's encounter with Cupid, who, seated on a cloud, draws his bow after defeating the python.2
 
To starboard is a painting of the same size, showing Apollo in pursuit of Daphne who has been transformed into a laurel tree,287 with a nymph in each corner of both frames shedding a blue curtain. In the back of this chamber, extending from the gallery wall to the stern, there is a door on each side with three windows, decorated with very fine foliage and gilded mouldings; in the lower area there are pictures of buildings and marble slabs. The ceiling of the chamber is painted azure blue and is supported by six deck beams with rounded borders decorated with wickerwork 288 as gold as said deck beams with their sea gods, rich foliage, intertwined suns and deck beams with sea gods, of which the one bears Bourbon lilies and the others bear the king's initials.
 
Upon exiting this chamber, one step or visette leads to two opposing oval flights of stairs,289 that lead to the third deck lead, adorned by its supports and a railing decorated with a painting by foliage is richly decorated. Its entrances and exits are surrounded by an arcade supported by two columns with their capitals painted in the color of jasper 290 in the most artistic way. The parquet of the said chamber seems to want to compete with the rest of the ornaments, even to surpass them, as generously as olive wood, ebony and ivory have been used for it.
 
THIRD DECK During the ascent, when one arrives at the intermediate landing where the two flights of stairs meet, one finds at the foot of the mizzen mast a plaque bearing, in golden letters on an azure background, the following unique and true inscription: »JE SUIS L'UNIQUE DESSUS L'ONDE. ET MON ROY L'EST DEDANS LE MONDE<< >>I AM UNIQUE ON THE SEA LIKE MY KING IN THE WORLD.« The whole wall, along which runs the flight of stairs leading to the upper decks, is adorned with balustrades and marble-colored ovals with ubiquitous foliage and gold braid.
 
- 27 - BELOW THE AFTER DECK (Corps de Guard)291 Attached to the eaves 292 above the entrance is a cornice with a parapet 293 dividing the jambs into four foot sections and decorated with moldings and a king's monogram. On each of said four pillars is a gilded globe or sphere.
 
The entire ceiling is painted with Bourbon lilies, crowns and gilded monograms with intertwined foliage in fine grisaille. All the beams are bordered by rounded, gilded fringes and are decorated on all sides with beautiful multi-colored friezes. In the middle is a platform with eight columns and capitals supporting them, painted in the color of jasper; in addition, four gun ports on each side, adorned with cartouches294 that adorn children; all painted in very fine grisaille. In the middle of one of the said cartouches you can see painted false windowpanes.
 
Between the gun ports there are large paintings depicting swamps, seascapes and landscapes. Between them are knee beams that support the quarterdeck and whose rounded edges are decorated all over with golden braiding. The sides bear paintings of masked children accompanied by lots of beautiful foliage. The back of the staircase is more richly decorated than its other parts.
 
The 295 mizzen mast is up to the quarterdeck with a gold fluting on azure reason adorned. Nearby is the wall of Council Chamber 296 with some other chambers for the officers. It is divided into four gilded cassettes on the outside, on which members of the guards are depicted in a naïve manner, some smoking, others playing dice or cards - all beautifully painted. The chambers are divided into three. Those of the Council and one on each side, between them a hallway297 in which Turks have been painted, who raise curtains and appear to salute those entering.
 
The doors and windows are very nicely worked. Their shutters are painted with Bourbon lilies, suns, and the king's monograms, adorned with gilded braid and very fine foliage. In the starboard compartment there are two panels on the outside wall. The one closer to the stern bears the depictions of Midas, Pan and Apollo in a round gilded ornament, the latter playing his violin. The table is supported by beautiful nymphs, who draw back curtains. In the chamber on the port side, also on the outer wall, Apollo is depicted flaying the satyr Martias,298 with the same decoration as on the starboard side.
 
On the inner wall, in addition to the azure panels, the beautiful golden ornaments, braiding and similar cornices, there is a beautiful round panel containing a very rare portrait of our indomitable monarch by the hand of M. Fauchier299 and one of his Eminence the heir apparent. On the other side are a portrait of the queen and an effigy of the king's only brother. These four panels are of the same size and have the same gilded ornaments. Each is supported by two children and rests on large marble colored capitals
 
___
 
The monograph goes on, in this fashion, but you get the idea;  The exterior of the ship must have been just as spectacularly detailed, but that would be a very difficult thing to convey in oils, so the artist must make interpretive choices.
 
While portraits like these are sometimes quite difficult to locate, I believe in sharing this information because my present inability to freely visit the French archives, in-person, limits my ability to understand and interpret what I am looking at.
 
By re-introducing these works in the public domain (for which my licensing of the image permits, as long as I am not selling it), I hope to spark interest and conversation, among the community, and perhaps those individuals who really know what we are looking at might contribute some of their insight, as well.  For this early time period, though, artists’ works are the only visual reference we have for these ships, as no formal plan-sets exist for these vessels.
 
My whole effort, here, is to establish some degree of a contextual framework so that these ships can be better understood in the evolution from the First to the Second Marine.  Paintings, such as this, do nobody any good if they remain buried in a crate, somewhere.  Just consider it - this is one of only a very few coherent, color representations of a French First-Rate from the early First Marine; as the inscription upon her mizzen mast makes clear - this portrait like the ship she represents is unique!

Okay, so, here are my thoughts.
 
One point I was hoping to illustrate with the above exercise is that, sometimes, two portraits of the same subject (the Vienna portraits) don’t always perfectly agree with each other in all details.  Given that Puget was such a scrupulous draftsman, it is interesting that the fleurs are missing from the lower stern counter on the port Vienna portrait.  Perhaps, with the vantage point of the light being what it was, he chose to simplify this area in shadow.
 
More to the point, though, Hyatt’s monograph is a highly scrupulous first-hand account and quite a lot of what he describes corresponds with Van Beecq and not Vienna, or visa-versa.
 
Which brings me to my next point: I have no way of determining, as of now, the date of this VB portrait, so it probably falls somewhere within the first 9 years of the RL’s existence.  I make this assertion on the basis of my belief that this represents the post 1677 appearance of the RL:
 

While I don’t know this for fact, my inference is that while this later version of the RL still displays a profusion of figures, even on the QGs, the sheer is appropriately lower and the QGs, themselves, represent the beginnings of the evolution from terraced galleries to fully closed bottles.  The head structure also represents an evolution in style.
 
Lastly, and related to this broad 9-year time-frame, ornament is the most ephemeral aspect of the entire construction.  While it certainly would seem a monumental effort for any of us to carve even one figure, in our modern times, the artists of this time churned these works out with surprising efficiency.  What Van Beecq may have been looking at, at any one time, could be vastly different from the way the ship actually appeared in 1668 or 1677.
 
Also, I might add that the LeBrun drawing probably represents more of a proposal than an as-built and decorated representation.
 
In the end - for me - it comes down to the guns, and the allegory, and the specific domed shape of the taffrail (which, it seems to me, is also a characteristic of the Monarque):  there is just no way the Monarque carried that many guns, let alone guns on the poop.  Unfortunately, VB’s forecastle is too damaged to interpret.
 
My other curiosity with this portrait is the flag carried on the Mizzen; the “L” with a crown.  I do not know whether this flag only alludes to Louis, or whether it specifically represents the Levant, or Mediterranean fleet, that the RL was the primary representative of. 
 
Very lastly - I really wonder whether it is VB’s portrait that Bakhuizen referenced for his depiction of Soleil Royal:
 

I have previously discussed the many anomalies of this portrait in earlier posts, but there is no mistaking that this is the RL’s tafferal allegory and domed cornice.  Even the figures reclining on the tafferal are very similar.  Also, there appears to be an allusion to the swagged garland, beneath the stern chase ports.
 
And, so, that is what I have to say about that. What say you, friends?

When I first found this thumbnail, over five years ago, I didn’t know what it represented, nor who painted it, however, I had a strong sense that whatever was there was important.

Having finally located the portrait, I decided to treat myself to an early birthday present.  Fifty dollars yielded a super high-resolution (pixelation is 9,528 x 6,489) digital file of this portrait.  I was correct.  There is, indeed, something of great significance, here.
 
To begin with, the portrait was painted by the renown Dutch marine artist Jean Karel Donatus Van Beecq.  His early career spans from 1672 - 1681, when he left France for England, at the invitation of Charles II who wanted to encourage Dutch marine artists to expatriate.  Although the Van de Veldes dominated the patronage scene, during this time, Van Beecq was also highly regarded for his technical mastery and his lively color palate.  He was no slouch:



And, his best-known and most brilliant portrait of the Royal Prince:

Well, it turns out that it is Van Beecq, to whom this mystery portrait is attributed, and despite the horrendous damage to the portrait, you will soon see the many parallels to his other, better known work.
 
I can only guess that this portrait - clearly of a French First-Rate - was done before he left for England.  On the other hand, it may have been done upon his return to France, where he benefited from the patronage of his friend, the Duc de Vendome.
 
And so, without further ado, I present to you Le Royal Louis of 1668, at some point in her early career between 1668 and 1677, as seen through the eyes of Van Beecq:




Of course, my hope was that this portrait would reveal itself to be Soleil Royal.  I am not the least bit disappointed, though!  The reasons for this are several.  From a dimensional standpoint, the RL 1668 and SR 1670 are only nominally different, with SR being slightly longer overall (1.5 French pieds), and with a deeper draft (1 pied).  Their breadth is the same, though, at 44 pieds.
 
Given that, I think there are reasonable grounds to assume that Soleil Royal 1670 would have had a similar “presence” on the water, sheer plan, distribution of armament, and underlying structure for the stern and quarters.
 
The chief differences would be a lesser profusion of monumental figures for SR, and the defining allegory would be very similar to Berain’s re-working of Puget’s original design.
 
Make no mistake - any future attempt I make at representing SR 1670 can only by its very nature be a product of conjecture and artistic interpretation, within the known dimensional parameters of the ship.  I am more confident than ever, though, that I can accomplish this with a high degree of fidelity to the artistic sensibilities of the time.
 
So, why am I so certain this is the Royal Louis?  Well, the main reason is the profusion of guns, if not their exact number and distribution.  Also, and just as importantly, the known allegory of the RL is very much in attendance, and overall - while their are certain key differences between this portrait and the Hyatt monograph, which do correlate in certain aspects more directly to the Vienna portraits, the important elements agree really very closely to this portrait.
 
I am excerpting a German to English translation of Hyatt’s monograph from the excellent Versailles de Mer.  German to English translates more coherently than French in Google Translate.  Within the text, I have inserted [..], where I attempt to clarify what specific element or area is being referred to.  In a few instances, here, I am guessing a bit, and welcome any insight.  Also interspersed between paragraphs are my notes in italics.
___
 
ABOUT THE SCULPTURES
Presentation of the transom of the ROYAL LOUIS.
 
The large transom is richly decorated on the outside with laurel leaves, garlands and shells underneath, all in perfect gilding [lower transom]. Above are a seahorse on each side and four large brackets supporting the first battery [lower stern balcony].  Underneath there is a very beautiful pendent decorated with foliage [covering the jaumier, or tiller opening].
 
This description corresponds very closely to LeBrun’s drawing, and Van Beecq’s portrait, as well:


 
The first gallery at the level of the support is covered with gilded Bourbon lilies. On it [the gallery] sit four sirens who serve to support the second gallery. On the sides [quarters] are three sea gods and two consoles, as well as an all-encompassing frieze [middle balcony/main deck level].  On it are the coats of arms of His Eminence the Duke of Beaufort, also supported by two sea gods holding an anchor.
 
The arms of Beaufort do not appear to be present on either Van Beecq or the Vienna portraits.  Only on LeBrun are they shown, and in that instance they appear on the lower stern balcony.  The fleur-de-lis do not appear on LeBrun or Van Beecq, yet they are apparent on the starboard quarter portrait of the Monarque:

Any, yet, not on the port quarter of the same:

Next to them sit Neptune on the starboard side and Thetis310 on the left with a Cupid at their feet offering the aforementioned deities the treasures of the sea and the earth. These in turn are offered to the figure of the king seated on the throne of justice above the third gallery.
 
In this aspect Hyatt agrees with the Vienna portraits, while Lebrun and Van Beecq have Neptune and Thetis reversed.
 

The entire stern is in the same gold relief, with a slave on each side and a gilded cornice running the length of the ship. 
Along with trophies, everything adds up to the aforementioned gods. At the top of each corner is an allegory of renown with a trumpet. Above the second ledge on the portico, which gives the same impression as the other, sit two figures holding in their hands a laurel wreath on one side and an olive branch on the king's head on the other.

On these points, everyone agrees.
 
On the third gallery there is a balcony projecting two feet where the king's arms are set in a medallion. On it are four capitals with four gilded half-figures representing the four continents.
 
All gunport covers are decorated with gilded Bourbon lilies, king's monograms, lyres and suns. And at a distance [above] from this arrangement of clasps described above, there is a gilded frieze between the mountain timbers [upper bulwarks?] which runs the entire length of the nave [upper bulwarks from Q-deck aft?] with also gilded intertwined Bourbon lilies.
 
This may, indeed, be what Van Beecq is showing just beneath the timberhead sheer railings.
 
Between the gunports of the second battery are gilded naval trophies, even with fiskers and anchors woven into them.
 
Here is an important variance where Hyatt is in agreement with the Vienna portraits.  Van Beecq places these trophy carvings even above the main deck guns.  I still do not think that negates my distinction between the Royal Louis and the Monarque, which I will explain more fully in a moment.
 
Those of the third battery are decorated with frames of foliage with griffins³11 on the sides, all finished in gilding.
 
It is not possible to discern what ornament Van Beecq has placed here, while on the Vienna portraits, the flanking figures are cherubs with triton tails.
 
On the highest mountain wood [poop royal level upper bulwarks] there are consoles, the spaces between which are golden Bridging garlands.
 
Clearly evident on Vienna portraits and not at all on Van Beecq.
 
The sides of the nave are richly decorated on the beams with gilded Bourbon lilies and mouldings. The entire mirror - in other words, the patron saint of this ship - is painted in blue and dotted with golden Bourbon lilies.
 
This is one important detail where Van Beecq stands apart from all the other representations.
 
I am always worried I might lose a really long post, so I am going to post this much, before continuing with a few observations…

This morning, the idea occurred to me to do a reverse-image search for any number of images that I was hoping to find better resolution for.
 
I tried a few different image checkers, but the one that loaded results for the greatest number of search engines was DupliChecker:
 
https://www.duplichecker.com/reverse-image-search.php
 
In particular, the Yandex search engine seemed to pull the broadest range of related images.  Now, while I didn’t hit upon my “Gilded Ghost” portrait nor my Battle of Barfleur VDV portrait, I did have one fascinating hit.  Here is the original fuzzy image I found years ago on some corner of the internet:

And then, via Duplichecker/Yandex:

A fuzzy enlargement of the ship:

A sharper resolution enlargement:

Okay, now that is really interesting!  I still can’t tell whether this is the Royal Louis or Soleil Royal (both pierced for 16, initially, and poop guns are visible, here), but I can at least get a clearer sense for the ornamental tableaux and the structure of the quarter galleries.  I can say this, though, the deadworks are not painted white, as was the case for the RL, according to Hyatt in 1677.
 
What is of particular interest to me are a series of figures that appear to be seated on the main deck-level, gallery and balcony rails.  The foremost figure on the quarter gallery has no corollary on the Vienna portraits of the Monarque.


The aft seated figures, at the turn to the stern balcony, do not resemble the Neptune and Thetis figures that are associated with both the RL and the Monarque.  In fact, the starboard figure appears to have an up-stretched arm that is reminiscent of the “seeking” posture of the Africa figure of Soleil Royal.
 
While that is nothing to draw any firm conclusions from, it must also be noted that the overall structure of the stern and arrangement of statuary has much in common with that of the RL, including what seems to be a swagged-garland ornament beneath the stern chase ports:
 



My hunch, more-so than before, is that these two portraits are directly related:


On a separate note, I churned a pair of low-res VDV drawings from 1672 through the DPI enhancement app.  Although it is very hard to see much appreciable difference, the DPI supposedly increased from 92 to 5000.
 
Before:

After:

Before:
 

After:

The second, clearer VdV sketch is nearly identical in identifiable details to the much less clear portrait, above.  Perhaps the second is simply a more finished portrait of the same subject.
 
‘Nothing earth-shattering, here; just playing with tools at my disposal.
 
Work on the model continues at a moderate pace.  Progress update to follow in the not too distant future.
 
All the best,
 
Marc
 

Marc - 
 
I think that you have perfectly illustrated the many puzzles that we all have to solve to achieve a fully realized ship model.  In your case you are even more limited by the basic structure of the kit.  There is only so much kit-bashing that can be done, and you are doing it extremely well.  I was worried that you would not be able to justify the various levels, heights, and angles of the headrails, but your solutions are elegant and beautiful.
 
Looking forward to seeing more great work.
 
Be well
 
Dan

Marc - 
 
I think that you have perfectly illustrated the many puzzles that we all have to solve to achieve a fully realized ship model.  In your case you are even more limited by the basic structure of the kit.  There is only so much kit-bashing that can be done, and you are doing it extremely well.  I was worried that you would not be able to justify the various levels, heights, and angles of the headrails, but your solutions are elegant and beautiful.
 
Looking forward to seeing more great work.
 
Be well
 
Dan

Just beautiful brass work, Keith.  I am always envious of your work.
 
Can you set up a link directly to this build log in your signature, the way you did for Altair?  My system is a bit clunky and I have to go to your profile before I can access this log.
 
Love following along, as always.
 
Dan