Dziadeczek

Hi again,
I just noticed that in the title it says "SCRATCH"!   Wow, double congrats ! Excellent effort and result!
Thomas

Hi Tomek,
What are you complaining of? The model is excellent (IMHO). It reminds me of some wonderful cardboard models built and shown here by Abe Hoving, a Dutch historian and modeler.
I have a million questions, if I may. 😁   Is the model built from a kit or is it your own design? What are the deadeyes and blocks cut with? A laser, perhaps? Your English is very good (I did not notice any mistakes). I have never before encountered these "waistcloths" (okrycie szancowe). Interesting! I think that you reproduced them very well.
I enjoyed reading your historical note on the Battle of Oliwa and the circumstances leading to it. Great!
Congratulations on your built!
 
Another Tomek
 
 

Hi again,
I just noticed that in the title it says "SCRATCH"!   Wow, double congrats ! Excellent effort and result!
Thomas

Hi Tomek,
What are you complaining of? The model is excellent (IMHO). It reminds me of some wonderful cardboard models built and shown here by Abe Hoving, a Dutch historian and modeler.
I have a million questions, if I may. 😁   Is the model built from a kit or is it your own design? What are the deadeyes and blocks cut with? A laser, perhaps? Your English is very good (I did not notice any mistakes). I have never before encountered these "waistcloths" (okrycie szancowe). Interesting! I think that you reproduced them very well.
I enjoyed reading your historical note on the Battle of Oliwa and the circumstances leading to it. Great!
Congratulations on your built!
 
Another Tomek
 
 

Hi everyone
 
Unfortunately, as I was afraid, the waistcloths were a huge problem, took a long time and the effect is poor. I have tried to shape these hanging canvases of various type of silkspan, paper tissue, paper towels, fine fabric, dry or wet and no attempt hes been succsessful. But in the end I had to make up my mind and the choice fell on one of the silkspan. It looks "average", good modelers will make it better than me. I can always declare that it is only a "test model":-)


 
I am still not sure what exactly such solutions looked like, and perhaps an additional difficulty is the fact that there could be just different solutions for different vessels. In the paintings from those years, waistcloths look as if they "lay", but again on some plans and studies you can see frames on which these canvases "hang" rather than "lie".


 
In any case, this stage is over and it is time to put up the masts.
I tried to make standing rigging in a way that is probably typical for small Dutch ships. I used the Heemskerck and Zeehaen plans.
I had a few problems, because I used old cyanoacrylate glue which turned snow white when dry. So all shrouds had to be painted black. A bit of laziness, and a bit "because it is a test model" :-))), fore shrouds and a fore stay are the same thickness as main shrouds and a main stay, which of course caused further problems, because there is "too tight" at the top of the foremast. And I still have to push the other ropes from the running rigging there.

Blocks and deadeyes are made of pressboard.





 
Greetings
Tomek

Thanks to all for  the likes
 
Update
 
Karl
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

As Gaetan has already noticed, it is important to consider the so called, Working Distance, which means the distance between your eyes and the working area, where the detail is in focus. In the case of a surgeon, this distance is typically greater, since the operator is usually standing next to the table/patient. In the case of a shipmodeler, the person is generally sitting at the table, hence this distance is typically shorter (about 250 - 350 mm in my case). For a long time I have been using a common Optivisor and it works for me. Sometimes I just wipe off the lenses from wood dust with a dry rag or a paper towel, nothing else (the frames are from plastic, but the actual lenses are of glass, I think).
Before you buy anything, measure this distance for yourself and make sure you get your magnifier within this working distance, otherwise it will be very uncomfortable for you to use it, or you'll be forced to stand next to your model, while building it.
Also, usually magnification of 2x is sufficient, sometimes a bit more, perhaps 2.5x, when you are working on a VERY minute details, like rigging and such. (we are not talking here neurosurgery and sewing up minute nerve fibres).

As Gaetan has already noticed, it is important to consider the so called, Working Distance, which means the distance between your eyes and the working area, where the detail is in focus. In the case of a surgeon, this distance is typically greater, since the operator is usually standing next to the table/patient. In the case of a shipmodeler, the person is generally sitting at the table, hence this distance is typically shorter (about 250 - 350 mm in my case). For a long time I have been using a common Optivisor and it works for me. Sometimes I just wipe off the lenses from wood dust with a dry rag or a paper towel, nothing else (the frames are from plastic, but the actual lenses are of glass, I think).
Before you buy anything, measure this distance for yourself and make sure you get your magnifier within this working distance, otherwise it will be very uncomfortable for you to use it, or you'll be forced to stand next to your model, while building it.
Also, usually magnification of 2x is sufficient, sometimes a bit more, perhaps 2.5x, when you are working on a VERY minute details, like rigging and such. (we are not talking here neurosurgery and sewing up minute nerve fibres).

As Gaetan has already noticed, it is important to consider the so called, Working Distance, which means the distance between your eyes and the working area, where the detail is in focus. In the case of a surgeon, this distance is typically greater, since the operator is usually standing next to the table/patient. In the case of a shipmodeler, the person is generally sitting at the table, hence this distance is typically shorter (about 250 - 350 mm in my case). For a long time I have been using a common Optivisor and it works for me. Sometimes I just wipe off the lenses from wood dust with a dry rag or a paper towel, nothing else (the frames are from plastic, but the actual lenses are of glass, I think).
Before you buy anything, measure this distance for yourself and make sure you get your magnifier within this working distance, otherwise it will be very uncomfortable for you to use it, or you'll be forced to stand next to your model, while building it.
Also, usually magnification of 2x is sufficient, sometimes a bit more, perhaps 2.5x, when you are working on a VERY minute details, like rigging and such. (we are not talking here neurosurgery and sewing up minute nerve fibres).

Update
 
Mounting the gun barrels on/in the carriages.
 
Karl
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In addition to the paint quality, very important is the application method. Early Renessance artists used to grind their own pigments by hand - resulting in various sizes granules, hence excellent paint quality, unlike the modern electric mills, which grind everything in the same size powders, resulting in 'boring' look of the paint. Grounding (the way of priming the surface) was also critical. The best was priming using gypsum media - lean, white and uniform, suitable for tempera, egg tempera or oil paints!
One of the great earlier Flemish artists, Johannes van Eyck, devised and popularized egg tempera - a tempera pigment mixed in yolk of an egg - this resulted in one of the most permanent paints, that after half of a millennium still look like they were painted yestarday. (Google "The Portrait of Arnolfini" to see it yourselves in a large resolution).
These artists painted with the technique of "laserunek" (Polish term) - the so called "glazing" - multiple layers, one on top of the others, of exceedingly thinly applied paint, heavily diluted in oil in such a way, that earlier layers were visible through the later ones, coming through. It could be more than 10 layers of a detail in a painting, like various shades of skin, jewelry pieces, fabrics, lace...! The end result was a middle color comprised of all intermediate ones. A painting like this was very intense in color and light - you could see it even in near darkness, it had its own light!
 
Also, in those times, there was a separate profession - people preparing wooden panels for artists - they were made from boards of hardwood attached together (tongue and groove usually) into a required size and grounded with that primer - gypsum powder mixed with rabbit skin glue together to form a thin paste similar to watery cream. Those people produced the best panels for artists (I am talking about the era before artists used canvases, which were used later).
I encourage you to watch the movie mentioned earlier in this thread - "A Girl with a Pearl Earring" - it shows you, among other things, the steps of preparation of the pigments, grounding them and mixing with linen oil, with all the attention to detail. Also, the technique of painting itself is shown. Vermeer Van Delft was one of the most preeminent artist of his times, known for the quality of his works, which can be appreciated and admired today...
One of the mistakes Leonardo made with his "Last Supper", was that he painted it on a dry stucco, instead of fresh, wet one (hence the name al fresco). This resulted in very unstable painting, which quickly started to deteriorate and even today is still deteriorating.
 
So, the paint quality was one variable, but there were other as well...

In addition to the paint quality, very important is the application method. Early Renessance artists used to grind their own pigments by hand - resulting in various sizes granules, hence excellent paint quality, unlike the modern electric mills, which grind everything in the same size powders, resulting in 'boring' look of the paint. Grounding (the way of priming the surface) was also critical. The best was priming using gypsum media - lean, white and uniform, suitable for tempera, egg tempera or oil paints!
One of the great earlier Flemish artists, Johannes van Eyck, devised and popularized egg tempera - a tempera pigment mixed in yolk of an egg - this resulted in one of the most permanent paints, that after half of a millennium still look like they were painted yestarday. (Google "The Portrait of Arnolfini" to see it yourselves in a large resolution).
These artists painted with the technique of "laserunek" (Polish term) - the so called "glazing" - multiple layers, one on top of the others, of exceedingly thinly applied paint, heavily diluted in oil in such a way, that earlier layers were visible through the later ones, coming through. It could be more than 10 layers of a detail in a painting, like various shades of skin, jewelry pieces, fabrics, lace...! The end result was a middle color comprised of all intermediate ones. A painting like this was very intense in color and light - you could see it even in near darkness, it had its own light!
 
Also, in those times, there was a separate profession - people preparing wooden panels for artists - they were made from boards of hardwood attached together (tongue and groove usually) into a required size and grounded with that primer - gypsum powder mixed with rabbit skin glue together to form a thin paste similar to watery cream. Those people produced the best panels for artists (I am talking about the era before artists used canvases, which were used later).
I encourage you to watch the movie mentioned earlier in this thread - "A Girl with a Pearl Earring" - it shows you, among other things, the steps of preparation of the pigments, grounding them and mixing with linen oil, with all the attention to detail. Also, the technique of painting itself is shown. Vermeer Van Delft was one of the most preeminent artist of his times, known for the quality of his works, which can be appreciated and admired today...
One of the mistakes Leonardo made with his "Last Supper", was that he painted it on a dry stucco, instead of fresh, wet one (hence the name al fresco). This resulted in very unstable painting, which quickly started to deteriorate and even today is still deteriorating.
 
So, the paint quality was one variable, but there were other as well...

In addition to the paint quality, very important is the application method. Early Renessance artists used to grind their own pigments by hand - resulting in various sizes granules, hence excellent paint quality, unlike the modern electric mills, which grind everything in the same size powders, resulting in 'boring' look of the paint. Grounding (the way of priming the surface) was also critical. The best was priming using gypsum media - lean, white and uniform, suitable for tempera, egg tempera or oil paints!
One of the great earlier Flemish artists, Johannes van Eyck, devised and popularized egg tempera - a tempera pigment mixed in yolk of an egg - this resulted in one of the most permanent paints, that after half of a millennium still look like they were painted yestarday. (Google "The Portrait of Arnolfini" to see it yourselves in a large resolution).
These artists painted with the technique of "laserunek" (Polish term) - the so called "glazing" - multiple layers, one on top of the others, of exceedingly thinly applied paint, heavily diluted in oil in such a way, that earlier layers were visible through the later ones, coming through. It could be more than 10 layers of a detail in a painting, like various shades of skin, jewelry pieces, fabrics, lace...! The end result was a middle color comprised of all intermediate ones. A painting like this was very intense in color and light - you could see it even in near darkness, it had its own light!
 
Also, in those times, there was a separate profession - people preparing wooden panels for artists - they were made from boards of hardwood attached together (tongue and groove usually) into a required size and grounded with that primer - gypsum powder mixed with rabbit skin glue together to form a thin paste similar to watery cream. Those people produced the best panels for artists (I am talking about the era before artists used canvases, which were used later).
I encourage you to watch the movie mentioned earlier in this thread - "A Girl with a Pearl Earring" - it shows you, among other things, the steps of preparation of the pigments, grounding them and mixing with linen oil, with all the attention to detail. Also, the technique of painting itself is shown. Vermeer Van Delft was one of the most preeminent artist of his times, known for the quality of his works, which can be appreciated and admired today...
One of the mistakes Leonardo made with his "Last Supper", was that he painted it on a dry stucco, instead of fresh, wet one (hence the name al fresco). This resulted in very unstable painting, which quickly started to deteriorate and even today is still deteriorating.
 
So, the paint quality was one variable, but there were other as well...

In addition to the paint quality, very important is the application method. Early Renessance artists used to grind their own pigments by hand - resulting in various sizes granules, hence excellent paint quality, unlike the modern electric mills, which grind everything in the same size powders, resulting in 'boring' look of the paint. Grounding (the way of priming the surface) was also critical. The best was priming using gypsum media - lean, white and uniform, suitable for tempera, egg tempera or oil paints!
One of the great earlier Flemish artists, Johannes van Eyck, devised and popularized egg tempera - a tempera pigment mixed in yolk of an egg - this resulted in one of the most permanent paints, that after half of a millennium still look like they were painted yestarday. (Google "The Portrait of Arnolfini" to see it yourselves in a large resolution).
These artists painted with the technique of "laserunek" (Polish term) - the so called "glazing" - multiple layers, one on top of the others, of exceedingly thinly applied paint, heavily diluted in oil in such a way, that earlier layers were visible through the later ones, coming through. It could be more than 10 layers of a detail in a painting, like various shades of skin, jewelry pieces, fabrics, lace...! The end result was a middle color comprised of all intermediate ones. A painting like this was very intense in color and light - you could see it even in near darkness, it had its own light!
 
Also, in those times, there was a separate profession - people preparing wooden panels for artists - they were made from boards of hardwood attached together (tongue and groove usually) into a required size and grounded with that primer - gypsum powder mixed with rabbit skin glue together to form a thin paste similar to watery cream. Those people produced the best panels for artists (I am talking about the era before artists used canvases, which were used later).
I encourage you to watch the movie mentioned earlier in this thread - "A Girl with a Pearl Earring" - it shows you, among other things, the steps of preparation of the pigments, grounding them and mixing with linen oil, with all the attention to detail. Also, the technique of painting itself is shown. Vermeer Van Delft was one of the most preeminent artist of his times, known for the quality of his works, which can be appreciated and admired today...
One of the mistakes Leonardo made with his "Last Supper", was that he painted it on a dry stucco, instead of fresh, wet one (hence the name al fresco). This resulted in very unstable painting, which quickly started to deteriorate and even today is still deteriorating.
 
So, the paint quality was one variable, but there were other as well...

In addition to the paint quality, very important is the application method. Early Renessance artists used to grind their own pigments by hand - resulting in various sizes granules, hence excellent paint quality, unlike the modern electric mills, which grind everything in the same size powders, resulting in 'boring' look of the paint. Grounding (the way of priming the surface) was also critical. The best was priming using gypsum media - lean, white and uniform, suitable for tempera, egg tempera or oil paints!
One of the great earlier Flemish artists, Johannes van Eyck, devised and popularized egg tempera - a tempera pigment mixed in yolk of an egg - this resulted in one of the most permanent paints, that after half of a millennium still look like they were painted yestarday. (Google "The Portrait of Arnolfini" to see it yourselves in a large resolution).
These artists painted with the technique of "laserunek" (Polish term) - the so called "glazing" - multiple layers, one on top of the others, of exceedingly thinly applied paint, heavily diluted in oil in such a way, that earlier layers were visible through the later ones, coming through. It could be more than 10 layers of a detail in a painting, like various shades of skin, jewelry pieces, fabrics, lace...! The end result was a middle color comprised of all intermediate ones. A painting like this was very intense in color and light - you could see it even in near darkness, it had its own light!
 
Also, in those times, there was a separate profession - people preparing wooden panels for artists - they were made from boards of hardwood attached together (tongue and groove usually) into a required size and grounded with that primer - gypsum powder mixed with rabbit skin glue together to form a thin paste similar to watery cream. Those people produced the best panels for artists (I am talking about the era before artists used canvases, which were used later).
I encourage you to watch the movie mentioned earlier in this thread - "A Girl with a Pearl Earring" - it shows you, among other things, the steps of preparation of the pigments, grounding them and mixing with linen oil, with all the attention to detail. Also, the technique of painting itself is shown. Vermeer Van Delft was one of the most preeminent artist of his times, known for the quality of his works, which can be appreciated and admired today...
One of the mistakes Leonardo made with his "Last Supper", was that he painted it on a dry stucco, instead of fresh, wet one (hence the name al fresco). This resulted in very unstable painting, which quickly started to deteriorate and even today is still deteriorating.
 
So, the paint quality was one variable, but there were other as well...

Hi,
This is a validation model for kit development, and the work of hull part will begin soon. About 70% of the design has been completed. My partners will make 1:36, 1:48 and bow section respectively. All the photos from their buildlog are authorized for me to release in MSW.
 
This project started from NMM's original draught, True Image Model, a ship model studio from UK, which obtained a commercial kit license from NMM.
 


 

 
 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Now there are three modelers involved in the model validation. We will complete the bow section kit first, because it is relatively simple.
 
The wood used in kit is boxwood / pear wood.
 
Welcome to pay attention to our follow-up progress.
 
Jack

Manufacture  of the cannon cariages.
 
Karl
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In addition to the paint quality, very important is the application method. Early Renessance artists used to grind their own pigments by hand - resulting in various sizes granules, hence excellent paint quality, unlike the modern electric mills, which grind everything in the same size powders, resulting in 'boring' look of the paint. Grounding (the way of priming the surface) was also critical. The best was priming using gypsum media - lean, white and uniform, suitable for tempera, egg tempera or oil paints!
One of the great earlier Flemish artists, Johannes van Eyck, devised and popularized egg tempera - a tempera pigment mixed in yolk of an egg - this resulted in one of the most permanent paints, that after half of a millennium still look like they were painted yestarday. (Google "The Portrait of Arnolfini" to see it yourselves in a large resolution).
These artists painted with the technique of "laserunek" (Polish term) - the so called "glazing" - multiple layers, one on top of the others, of exceedingly thinly applied paint, heavily diluted in oil in such a way, that earlier layers were visible through the later ones, coming through. It could be more than 10 layers of a detail in a painting, like various shades of skin, jewelry pieces, fabrics, lace...! The end result was a middle color comprised of all intermediate ones. A painting like this was very intense in color and light - you could see it even in near darkness, it had its own light!
 
Also, in those times, there was a separate profession - people preparing wooden panels for artists - they were made from boards of hardwood attached together (tongue and groove usually) into a required size and grounded with that primer - gypsum powder mixed with rabbit skin glue together to form a thin paste similar to watery cream. Those people produced the best panels for artists (I am talking about the era before artists used canvases, which were used later).
I encourage you to watch the movie mentioned earlier in this thread - "A Girl with a Pearl Earring" - it shows you, among other things, the steps of preparation of the pigments, grounding them and mixing with linen oil, with all the attention to detail. Also, the technique of painting itself is shown. Vermeer Van Delft was one of the most preeminent artist of his times, known for the quality of his works, which can be appreciated and admired today...
One of the mistakes Leonardo made with his "Last Supper", was that he painted it on a dry stucco, instead of fresh, wet one (hence the name al fresco). This resulted in very unstable painting, which quickly started to deteriorate and even today is still deteriorating.
 
So, the paint quality was one variable, but there were other as well...

"...After some time upon finishing the model, I noticed that those plastic deadeyes started breaking under tension from shrouds, specifically those tiny eyes on top of each deadeye (?).
I would advice you to replace them all with wooden ones and rig them properly..."
 
This is one of the few spare deadeyes from the original kit. Notice the little eye (marked with a red arrow). They want you to attach the chain plates (straps) to this eye, instead of wrapping it around the deadeye. After a while, the strain on the eye breaks it off the deadeye and you'll end up with loosely hanging shroud, which has to be replaced... Hence my recommendation to use wooden deadeyes and have a piece of mind, instead of using these plastic ones.
Also, there are other inaccuracies of the kit - the tops are round, which is a bit archaic for the era the ship was built in. They should rather be rectangular and only rounded up in the forward part, like other ships from the end of XVIII C. Also I have doubts about the stern...
But, overall, the kit makes a nice looking model, especially if you want to bash it a bit...

This was my first kit I built many years ago. I too had difficulties with rigging (had only two sheet of plans printed on both sides of paper). Instruction booklet was not much help...
ZuMondfeld helped me a bit, I remember.
After some time upon finishing the model, I noticed that those plastic deadeyes started breaking under tension from shrouds, specifically those tiny eyes on top of each deadeye (?).
I would advice you to replace them all with wooden ones and rig them properly.

Manufacture of the cannon barrels.
Instead of the tin casting process,
this time I used casting powder.
Advantage ower tin casting , considerably cheaper
and enormus weight reduction at this 1/24 scale.
 
Karl
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

I've been working on a number of things such as the gun port lids, gun carriages, ladders and rudder. Today I finished the two ladders that go below the gun deck. The initial assembly was all about getting things square and locked up, using the two sides and top and bottom steps. Once done, I inserted the remaining steps. Each step needed to be beveled slightly on the bottom in order to fit into the side grooves. To keep things neat, I glued the steps to the sides from underneath the ladder with a tiny drop of slow drying 3 hour epoxy. The epoxy will eventually wick into the joint and not be seen when the ladder is installed. Once dry, I rounded off the top forward edge of each step and sanded the step overhangs flush with the sides of the ladder. After a coat of W-O-P the ladders were ready to install.
 

 
The ladders position was established in such a way that the back and bottom of the sides are sitting flush to the coaming and deck below, respectively. Four layers of the green tape was used to mark the position of the ladders top. The blue tape makes it easy to hold onto the ladder while inserting it. When installing, center the top of the ladder within the coaming and up against the bottom of the green tape. Then lower the bottom of the ladder onto the deck below. Notice where I marked the position of the ladder on the green tape.
 

 

 
Mike

Thank you, Mati.

If you do a lot of serving, it pays to fashion from scraps of brass a small device, that is suspended under the served rope and contains a spool of thread for serving, is moving along the rope while serving it simultaneously. A sort of, small variation on the so called, bow string server, used in archery.
I made one long time ago and it works perfectly every time. I also made a long(er) serving machine - mine is 2.5 ft long and powered with a DC motor, so the entire process of serving is fully automated, hands free, and the serving is very even and tight along the entire length of the rope.
Here is one of the served stays for my model of the French 74 gun ship 1:48.

If you do a lot of serving, it pays to fashion from scraps of brass a small device, that is suspended under the served rope and contains a spool of thread for serving, is moving along the rope while serving it simultaneously. A sort of, small variation on the so called, bow string server, used in archery.
I made one long time ago and it works perfectly every time. I also made a long(er) serving machine - mine is 2.5 ft long and powered with a DC motor, so the entire process of serving is fully automated, hands free, and the serving is very even and tight along the entire length of the rope.
Here is one of the served stays for my model of the French 74 gun ship 1:48.