Bob Cleek

As said, the answer to "How do I paint my model?" is far too complicated to answer comprehensively in just a single forum post. We haven't even gotten past whether you've chosen wisely in wanting to use water-based acrylics rather than oil-based enamels. (Each has its own pluses and minuses.) Painting is one of the more demanding skills a ship modeler must acquire and in as much as it is one of those things that people think they know all they need to about, it's one which frequently brings one to unexpected grief if not done properly. Perhaps the first thing one must realize is that any paint job on a scale model must itself also be to the same scale as the model. In the scales we encounter in ship modeling, this means that the paint jobs have to be as near to perfect as possible.
 
I would urge you to get a copy of the second volume of the Nautical Research Guild's book, Ship Modeler's Shop Notes, which has a chapter on how to paint ship models that is as good a treatment of the subject as I've ever seen. The rest of the book is full of similarly excellent trick of the trade. While you are at it, you might as well buy Volume I of the same publication. Once you see one of them, you'll want the other for sure.   Used copies can sometimes be found on eBay, but a new copy can easily be obtained for a reasonable price from the NRG directly. See: Ship Modeler's Shop Notes, and Vol. 2 – Nautical Research Guild (thenrgstore.org) and Ship Modeler's Shop Notes, Vol. I – Nautical Research Guild (thenrgstore.org) 

As said, the answer to "How do I paint my model?" is far too complicated to answer comprehensively in just a single forum post. We haven't even gotten past whether you've chosen wisely in wanting to use water-based acrylics rather than oil-based enamels. (Each has its own pluses and minuses.) Painting is one of the more demanding skills a ship modeler must acquire and in as much as it is one of those things that people think they know all they need to about, it's one which frequently brings one to unexpected grief if not done properly. Perhaps the first thing one must realize is that any paint job on a scale model must itself also be to the same scale as the model. In the scales we encounter in ship modeling, this means that the paint jobs have to be as near to perfect as possible.
 
I would urge you to get a copy of the second volume of the Nautical Research Guild's book, Ship Modeler's Shop Notes, which has a chapter on how to paint ship models that is as good a treatment of the subject as I've ever seen. The rest of the book is full of similarly excellent trick of the trade. While you are at it, you might as well buy Volume I of the same publication. Once you see one of them, you'll want the other for sure.   Used copies can sometimes be found on eBay, but a new copy can easily be obtained for a reasonable price from the NRG directly. See: Ship Modeler's Shop Notes, and Vol. 2 – Nautical Research Guild (thenrgstore.org) and Ship Modeler's Shop Notes, Vol. I – Nautical Research Guild (thenrgstore.org) 

Poly line is now being accepted by some museums. I've had poly line strung for over five years with no issue including stretch. If you're adverse to using poly line, I don't wanna see a drop of CA on your model. 

The choices
Linen seems to be lost into the past. 
Cotton - limited lifespan - smaller fibers -smaller fuzz
Poly - seems to be winning the race.   As long as the model itself is plastic, any resistance to using man-made materials is moot.
 
Poly already is what a wax would provide.  Wax seems to me to be pointless.  If it is beeswax on it - I would question it ever case hardening to become NOT a dust magnet.
Paraffin  would change its phase with changes in room temp.  The semi liquid phase would also hold dust.
Renaissance wax will case harden as its organic solvent evaporates.   It is probably more positive than negative for linen and cotton.  It would offer no advantage with poly.

Hi @AmateurModelBuilder, welcome to the forums.
 
Your question is a very broad one and there is no way I can answer it in a post, but what I would suggest is the following:
Start a build log, this is a great way to get help as you go along. Look for build logs of others who have done your kit and read them all. Search in this section of the forum for specific questions regarding painting. Navigate to here and then in the top right corner there is a search function. Search for the topic in question for example you could search "primer" and you will find lots of posts on the subject. A quick summary of what you might want to think about with regard to painting is below:
 
In general when it comes specifically to painting you first need to seal the wood in some way. This can be accomplished through some sort of sanding sealer or by using an acrylic primer. After you prime you need to sand and then add another smooth coat and then sand again and so on. If you want to achieve a look a bit like on the box you will need some masking tape (I use tamiya). As a general rule I use a little bit of acrylic varnish to seal the gap when painting wood as otherwise sometimes it runs down the grain. If you use a sanding sealer this step may not be necessary.
 
For painting use thinned acrylic paint designed for miniature painting or artist grade acrylics (don't use cheap paint). My rule of thumb is two thin coats, though depending on the colour you may need a third. Always make sure you let the previous coat fully dry before adding the next and sand as necessary.
 
Take your time, model making is a marathon not a sprint. Treat each step as its own project, I have never regretted taking more time on something, but have frequently regretted rushing.

But then again, imagine wintering on the coast of Maine.    

But then again, imagine wintering on the coast of Maine.    

But then again, imagine wintering on the coast of Maine.    

I will share your post with some of our NRG members in Maine.  Maybe you will get a bite.

Touche'.  ⛄🙂

But then again, imagine wintering on the coast of Maine.    

But then again, imagine wintering on the coast of Maine.    

But imagine summering on the coast of Maine...☺️
 

There's really no substitute for careful research, and I must admit with chagrin that there's no substitute for carefully double-checking somebody else's research before posting an answer to any question posed, especially when I'm not readily familiar with the vessel in question!  
 
The repeated reference to these two French naval vessels, Turenne and Bayard, as "ironclads" kept niggling at me because it appeared to me that they were built later than the so called "ironclad" period and were of a style similarly advanced beyond the "ironclad" period. So I finally spent a moment to see if I could find anything on line about either of them and, sure enough, there were Wikipedia pages for both vessels and their named "Bayard class." (See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayard- class_ironclad ; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_ironclad_Turenne ; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_ironclad_Bayard )
 
****************************************************************************************************************************************
From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayard- class_ironclad
 
Unlike several of their French predecessors, the Bayard-class ships disposed with iron hulls and reverted to wooden hulls, which were sheathed in copper to reduce fouling on extended voyages overseas, where shipyard facilities were less available. This may have been the result of British reports of hull corrosion with their iron-hulled vessels.
…
The ships were protected with wrought iron armor; their belt was 250 mm (9.8 in) thick amidships, where it protected the ships' propulsion machinery spaces and ammunition magazines. The belt extended for the entire length of the hull, but toward the bow it reduced in thickness to 180 mm (7.1 in), and at the stern, it was reduced to 150 mm (5.9 in). The belt extended from 0.91 m (3 ft) above the waterline to 1.99 m (6 ft 6 in) below.
 
***************************************************************************************************************************************
Note for openers that these wooden-hulled ships "...were sheathed with copper to reduce fouling on extended voyages overseas, where shipyard facilities were less available." We should recognize from the outset then that the converse is also true: they weren't sheathed with copper when not on an extended voyage overseas where shipyard facilities were available. The fact that these French wooden ironclads weren't always copper-sheathed is confirmed by what we know of Atalante, discussed hereafter. Apparently, sometimes they were and sometimes they weren't. If one is modeling a particular such vessel at a particular time in its service life, at least a serious attempt to ascertain whether or not she was copper-sheathed at that time is required. Is there a log, diary, or maintenance report or receipt in a dusty file somewhere? If not, what's the "best estimate" one can make? If depicted when the vessel was on station in French Indochina, there's at least evidence to support your assuming she was not being coppered at that place in time in the absence of contrary evidence. (Just sayin'.  )
 
****************************************************************************************************************************************
These vessels carried a ten inch thick wrought iron armor belt which extended 3 feet above the waterline and 6.5 feet below the waterline. Considering the mechanical and galvanic issues attendant to sheathing wrought iron with copper plate, we can conclude that these vessels were only metal-sheathed to protect the wooden hull exposed below the waterline, i.e., from six and a half feet below the waterline on down. There isn't ever going to be any verdigris color at the waterline of any of these wooden vessels with nine and a half foot wide belts of wrought iron around their waterlines.
 
****************************************************************************************************************************************
From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muntz_metal:
 
(Muntz metal's) original application was as a replacement for copper sheathing on the bottom of boats, as it maintained the anti-fouling abilities of the pure copper at around two thirds of the price. It became the material of choice for this application and Muntz made his fortune. It was found that copper would gradually leach from the alloy in sea water, poisoning any organism that attempted to attach itself to a hull sheathed in the metal.
***************************************************************************************************************************************
 
Muntz metal, was patented in 1832 in England, and England and France were allies at the time of the Bayard class' service. Pending certain confirmation which should be easily accomplished by further research, it is reasonable to presume that the "copper sheathing" on these vessels was actually Muntz metal, rather than pure copper. This would result in a "yellow metal" that would be somewhat "yellower" than pure copper.
 
Below: Newly ("virgin") Muntz metal sheathed hull of Cutty Sark following her recent restoration and isolation from the elements in her new partially covered dry dock display building: 
 

By Cmglee - Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=19898346
 
While metal sheathing provides an effective mechanical barrier to marine borers, it is not as effective at preventing the growth of vegetative fouling which attaches itself to submerged surfaces. Additionally, with the advent of iron-hulled ships which could not be sheathed with copper-based metals due to difficulties with attaching such sheathing and, more significantly, the galvanic dissimilarities between iron and copper which caused severe electrolytic corrosion, a large number of anti-fouling paints and other coatings were developed in the late 19th century and were widely in use by the time of the Bayard class' service. The most successful, and therefore most widely used, of these anti-fouling paints had the now-familiar "bottom paint red" color owing to the copper they contained. Again pending certain confirmation which should be easily accomplished by further research, it is reasonable to presume that at least the nine and a half foot wide wrought iron armor plate armor belt at the waterline of the two Bayard class vessels was painted with anti-fouling paint of a color common at the time. (See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-fouling_paint and https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/1952/july/history-prevention-fouling )
 
A review of related contemporary black and white photographs, colored paintings, colored contemporary postcards, and color photographs of contemporary museum models available online appears to confirm that French iron and wooden warships of the Bayard-class' time, at least to the bottoms of their iron armor belts, were apparently painted with anti-fouling paint and that if they were wooden, were, in some cases when at sea for long periods and away from dry-docking facilities, sheathed in Muntz metal (or possibly zinc plate) which may, or may not have been also painted with anti-fouling coating of a "bottom paint red" (or possibly a light grey color. A copper sulfate anti-fouling coating called "Italian Moravian" was also highly regarded at the time of the Bayard-class. It was reputed to be expensive and difficult to apply. I do not know its color. Here again, more research is required.  Some brief experimentation was also conducted with sheet zinc plating instead of copper or Muntz metal over iron, owing to zinc's greater compatibility with iron on the galvanic scale. Zinc sheet metal would appear as a flat silver-grey ("galvanized") color. Some colored contemporary postcards do clearly show a bottoms of such color. See: https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/1952/july/history-prevention-fouling  
 
For visual data, search Google images: "French Bayard Class ironclads." Some excerpts below. Englarge the photographs to see greater detail:
 
Two photos below: Contemporary hand colored photographs of French ironclads:
 

 

 
Below: Watercolor painting of contemporary iron French naval vessels:

 
Below: From a presumably well-researched modern Eastern European modeling source:
 

 
Below:  Model of Alma-class Jeanne d'Arc on display at the Musee de la Marine in Paris. She was a contemporary of the Bayard-class ships and of identical French ironclad wooden construction as Turenne with a wrought iron armor belt at the waterline. Note armor belt above and below white painted waterline which from other contemporary pictorial documentation appears to be a common feature of French naval livery at that time. Note "Muntz metal" brass-colored metal sheathing below the armor plate and similar "bronze" colored ram edge at the bow. (These bronze rams were not merely a metal covering, but actually an integral structural member of the hull.) Bright sheathing color results from model's "new as built" depiction style. (Alternately identified by other sources as sistership Alma-class ironclad Armide.) (Blue color of possibly dark grey topsides is apparently a photographic lighting artifact.)
 
 
 
Below: Black and white contemporary photograph of similar French ironclad naval vessel showing slightly visible top line of armor belt.
 

 
Below: It appears the white waterline accent line  (AKA: "boot stripe") appears again suggesting it was a regulation livery detail.
 

 
Below: Additional French ironclads of the Bayard-class era from a modern Eastern European modeling source indicating standard French navy livery:
 

 
 
Below: 1860's Alma-class wooden ironclad Atalante, sister to Jeanne d'Arc, a contemporary "as built" model of which is pictured above.  This class' service period overlapped the wooden Bayard-class', particularly given that the latter was an intentional nearly identical "throwback" to the Alma-class' wooden ironclad construction details.
 
Atalante is here photographed in the Fitzroy Dock, Sidney Harbor in 1873. She spent a large portion of her service life on the French Indo-China Station. She bombarded Vietnamese forts during the Battle of Thuan in 1884 and participated in the Sino-French Indo-China War of 1884–1885. She was reduced to reserve in Saigon, French Indochina, in 1885 and sank there two years later after having been condemned. 
 
Note top of her armor belt at the level of the heads of the workmen standing on the staging platform with approximately the two top feet of the armor belt painted black as are the topsides (i.e., down to the workers' waists) with anti-fouling bottom paint being applied below that line, resulting in bottom paint beginning approximately a foot or two above the waterline and continuing down to cover the the lower part of the armor belt and the rest of the underwater hull below the staging platform. (Enlarge photo for greater detail.) 
 

 
Below: Contemporary colored drawing of Alma-class wooden ironclad Atalante from the glass plate negative above, but depicting the appearance of the hull after the bottom painting was done and she was ready for launching! (Quite a lot to discover from these two views on account of that difference!) Note the "bottom paint red" anti-fouling paint being applied from approximately a couple of feet below the top of the armor belt on downwards to cover the submerged part of the armor belt and on down to include the wooden bottom. Note also the white "bootstripe" accent line at the top of the armor belt and the (subtle) lining above and below the armor belt depicting the wooden planking of the topsides and unsheathed bottom of the wooden hull, contrasted with the smooth wrought plates of the armor belt. As this picture confirms, it appears that the not-inconsiderable expense of metal sheathing of her wooden bottom was deemed unnecessary as she had adequate dry-docking facilities available in her station area. 
 

 
 
 
I didn't reach the same conclusion as you when examining the photos you posted. You'll find a clearer version of your photo of Turenne at her Wikipedia entry: See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayard-class_ironclad#/media/File:French_ironclad_Turenne_NH_66099.jpg  This photo will enlarge a lot without losing definition. ("Left mouse click once." Love these old glass plate negatives!) For some reason, the French Navy of the period seems to have frequently photographed their ships while they were getting painted. I have no idea why, but it's uncanny when you look at so many of them that have painting details at work. If you enlarge this photo from the Wiki page, and examine the stern quarter, you'll see painters on staging painting the topsides white. If you then examine  the bow area, you'll see that they've just painted the bow area, (including the anchors and chain rodes!) and what you apparently took to be "...what looks like verdigris on copper plating on bows..." and "...a clear patina there on a ship that's made a voyage from Toulon to somewhere in China station." Look again. What you're seeing there is the aftermath of a rather sloppy recent paint job. If you had spent time around shipyards, you'd probably have recognized it for what it was as soon as you saw it. Sailors are notoriously sloppy painters. They're painting to protect the metal first and foremost. They really don't care a whole lot what the job looks like from 100 yards, which is as much as most people will ever see. 
 
As for the second picture, we know that's not "shiny copper" because that's where the wrought iron armor belt is and there's no way they're going to copper-sheath wrought iron armor plate. It certainly was tried unsuccessfully at the time iron ships first came into use, trying to separate the dissimilar metals with felt or wooden furring strips, but that was long before the time of the vessel pictured. I believe what we see in that photo is simply an over-exposure "flash" that could sometimes occur with reflected light off the water and onto the white surfaces given the limitations of the photographic technology of those times. 
 
 

By Unknown, Farenholt collection - history.navy.mil, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=142143958
 
I don't think today's younger modelers who began building ship models in the "Internet Age" can begin to appreciate the value of digital research to the hobby. Before the internet, I doubt there was anything more than possibly a book or three, long out of print and near impossible to obtain, written in French, that would have any information whatsoever about these ships. Obtaining the information posted here would have likely required a trip to France and days of searching museum archives, if they'd allow you to do so and, in the days before digital photography, copying a photograph would be a major undertaking and copying a construction drawing would require days of tedious tracing at a drafting table by a skilled draftsman, again if they'd allow you to touch the original. Now, modeling research is often only "a few clicks away!" On the other hand, such a resource has made it all the more important to conduct meticulous research because errors nobody would ever notice before are so much more easily noticed with the so much more accurate information available today. 
 

"Drowning it in paint" isn't a solution. As Jaager explained, "use filler and then paint." There is a variety of fillers on the market. You want one that is "fine grained." Something less coarse than just dry-wall mud. I use epoxy resin and sanding additive ("micro-balloons") for filling heavy imperfections like you have at present. The epoxy is a strong adhesive that adds structural strength to the assembled parts, as well.  The epoxy with the sanding additive works very well but takes an overnight to cure sufficiently to sand. At that point, it sands like butter. Follow the manufacturer's instructions and mix the additive to yield a texture like soft peanut butter. Apply sparingly to minimize the work of sanding fair. More can be added to the first coat to fill missed divots if need be. Sand carefully using a flexible batten with sandpaper attached to achieve the fairness of the hull shape. Start with 220 grit sandpaper and work it down to 320 grit. The hull must be perfectly fair and "smooth as a baby's bottom."
 
Epoxy resin is an expensive material, although there is a range of prices which reflect the old adage that you get what you pay for.  (I don't recommend using any polyester fairing compounds, such as Bondo. I realize many modelers do, but Bondo is intended for application on sheet metal, not wood, and Bondo is hygroscopic which may promote deterioration in the wood.) WEST System is the "industry standard" and probably the most expensive epoxy brand on the market, but like Jello-brand "jello," it's the original and still the best. I use WEST epoxy because I've used it for fifty years and I'm used to how it reacts. Epoxy resin is a very handy and adaptable modeling material, useful as both an adhesive and a casting resin, although its archival qualities are as yet not entirely proven. Notwithstanding the cost of a "kit" of resin and hardener, it has a very long shelf life and you may wish to add it to your stock of modeling materials. Buying a small "kit" of resin and hardener is, in any event, vastly more economical than buying small tubes of epoxy and hardener off the blister pack rack at the hardware store. WEST System has written the "Bible" on epoxy applications, and it is available in PDF format at: WS-User-Manual-2020.pdf (westsystem.com)      (WEST's well-known book, The Gougeon Brothers on Boat Consturction is also available for free in PDF format at;  Form (hsforms.com)  
 
Amazon.com: FILLER MICROLIGHT 2 OZ : Automotive


 
If you want to avoid taking the leap to epoxy technology, you can also attempt to achieve the same result using other surfacing putty alternatives.  If small imperfections remain you can also use a fine-grained surfacing putty. This putty uses acetone as its solvent and dries very quickly as long as it isn't applied to thickly. (Store can tightly closed and lid-side down. If it thickens in the can, add a tablespoon or two of acetone, close the can and turn over. After sitting overnight, the putty should have absorbed the acetone and thinned. Don't try to stir the acetone into the thickened putty as this will only create lumps in the putty. There's no substitute for leaving the acetone in the closed can overnight to reconstitute the consistency of the putty.) Surfacing putty can be "built up," but applications of more than around 1/16" thick should be allowed to dry well before adding more to avoid shrinkage and cracking of the material. This stuff also sands very easily, as it is intended to do. I use Interlux Surfacing Putty because I'm familiar with it from years of using it in full-size yacht restorations and it's a staple that's always at hand in my paint locker. Unfortunately, like any material "with a boat on the label," it's costly. I'm sure similar surfacing putties can be sourced in any well-stocked paint store.  (Here again, I'd steer clear of the polyester resin based automotive body and fender repair putties intended for application to sheet metal.)
 
Amazon.com: Interlux Y257/PT Surfacing Putty - White, Pint : Interlux/AkzoNobel: Tools & Home Improvement
 

 
Once you've completely filled every surface imperfection on your hull, you can then clean it well, brushing off the sanding dust well and then using a tack cloth (from any paint store) to get all the dust specs off the surface. It is very important to achieve a dust-free surface as much as is possible before painting. You must apply a base coat over surfacing putty to yield a uniform colored surface that will not "print through" your finish coats.  Enamel "sanding base coats" (sometimes called "sanding primer coats,") are available which permit a final fine sanding before finish coats are applied. When your base (primer) coat is done and sanded perfectly and all dust tacked off, then you can go ahead and apply your finish coats as per the manufacturer's instructions. An airbrush is the easiest method for obtaining a perfect result. It can be done with a brush, but that requires a bit of experience and skill. It won't hurt to try. If you mess up with a brush, you can always sand the surface fair and try again!  

"Drowning it in paint" isn't a solution. As Jaager explained, "use filler and then paint." There is a variety of fillers on the market. You want one that is "fine grained." Something less coarse than just dry-wall mud. I use epoxy resin and sanding additive ("micro-balloons") for filling heavy imperfections like you have at present. The epoxy is a strong adhesive that adds structural strength to the assembled parts, as well.  The epoxy with the sanding additive works very well but takes an overnight to cure sufficiently to sand. At that point, it sands like butter. Follow the manufacturer's instructions and mix the additive to yield a texture like soft peanut butter. Apply sparingly to minimize the work of sanding fair. More can be added to the first coat to fill missed divots if need be. Sand carefully using a flexible batten with sandpaper attached to achieve the fairness of the hull shape. Start with 220 grit sandpaper and work it down to 320 grit. The hull must be perfectly fair and "smooth as a baby's bottom."
 
Epoxy resin is an expensive material, although there is a range of prices which reflect the old adage that you get what you pay for.  (I don't recommend using any polyester fairing compounds, such as Bondo. I realize many modelers do, but Bondo is intended for application on sheet metal, not wood, and Bondo is hygroscopic which may promote deterioration in the wood.) WEST System is the "industry standard" and probably the most expensive epoxy brand on the market, but like Jello-brand "jello," it's the original and still the best. I use WEST epoxy because I've used it for fifty years and I'm used to how it reacts. Epoxy resin is a very handy and adaptable modeling material, useful as both an adhesive and a casting resin, although its archival qualities are as yet not entirely proven. Notwithstanding the cost of a "kit" of resin and hardener, it has a very long shelf life and you may wish to add it to your stock of modeling materials. Buying a small "kit" of resin and hardener is, in any event, vastly more economical than buying small tubes of epoxy and hardener off the blister pack rack at the hardware store. WEST System has written the "Bible" on epoxy applications, and it is available in PDF format at: WS-User-Manual-2020.pdf (westsystem.com)      (WEST's well-known book, The Gougeon Brothers on Boat Consturction is also available for free in PDF format at;  Form (hsforms.com)  
 
Amazon.com: FILLER MICROLIGHT 2 OZ : Automotive


 
If you want to avoid taking the leap to epoxy technology, you can also attempt to achieve the same result using other surfacing putty alternatives.  If small imperfections remain you can also use a fine-grained surfacing putty. This putty uses acetone as its solvent and dries very quickly as long as it isn't applied to thickly. (Store can tightly closed and lid-side down. If it thickens in the can, add a tablespoon or two of acetone, close the can and turn over. After sitting overnight, the putty should have absorbed the acetone and thinned. Don't try to stir the acetone into the thickened putty as this will only create lumps in the putty. There's no substitute for leaving the acetone in the closed can overnight to reconstitute the consistency of the putty.) Surfacing putty can be "built up," but applications of more than around 1/16" thick should be allowed to dry well before adding more to avoid shrinkage and cracking of the material. This stuff also sands very easily, as it is intended to do. I use Interlux Surfacing Putty because I'm familiar with it from years of using it in full-size yacht restorations and it's a staple that's always at hand in my paint locker. Unfortunately, like any material "with a boat on the label," it's costly. I'm sure similar surfacing putties can be sourced in any well-stocked paint store.  (Here again, I'd steer clear of the polyester resin based automotive body and fender repair putties intended for application to sheet metal.)
 
Amazon.com: Interlux Y257/PT Surfacing Putty - White, Pint : Interlux/AkzoNobel: Tools & Home Improvement
 

 
Once you've completely filled every surface imperfection on your hull, you can then clean it well, brushing off the sanding dust well and then using a tack cloth (from any paint store) to get all the dust specs off the surface. It is very important to achieve a dust-free surface as much as is possible before painting. You must apply a base coat over surfacing putty to yield a uniform colored surface that will not "print through" your finish coats.  Enamel "sanding base coats" (sometimes called "sanding primer coats,") are available which permit a final fine sanding before finish coats are applied. When your base (primer) coat is done and sanded perfectly and all dust tacked off, then you can go ahead and apply your finish coats as per the manufacturer's instructions. An airbrush is the easiest method for obtaining a perfect result. It can be done with a brush, but that requires a bit of experience and skill. It won't hurt to try. If you mess up with a brush, you can always sand the surface fair and try again!  

I would use a filler at the stem and paint the hull.
or
remove the planking and buy a replacement from a site vendor or visit your local WoodCraft store and get a veneer that is better - sawn not rotary cut if possible.
Veneer just needs a steel straight edge and a keenly sharp knife.  Strop often.
 
The color of the planking is way darker than any species that I believe was used for an actual ship.
To my eye, it looks brittle, course, open pore. - not even close to a 1:75 scaled down version of real wood that was used.
 
A Wayback machine view of this:
Taper the stem to about half its thickness at the outer char.
Cut a rabbet - a proper rabbet = the correct width in the stem.  Small chisel.  Practice a lot on scrap first.
Start the planking at the rabbet and add bonding as it fits aft.
Apply the same plank P&S - not all one side and then the other.
Planking width 6" -8" in scale with the the garboard maybe a bit wider.
 
 

I missed this thread the first time around, as well. I'm glad to hear of your successful surgical adventure. I thought of you the other day when Stad Amsterdam came into San Francisco. She'll be here in port for two or three weeks. I haven't gotten down to the dock to check her out. Maybe this week. 
 
Your latest model is wonderful and so's the photoshopped photography. What you accomplish working with cardstock is amazing. 
 

 
 

I missed this thread the first time around, as well. I'm glad to hear of your successful surgical adventure. I thought of you the other day when Stad Amsterdam came into San Francisco. She'll be here in port for two or three weeks. I haven't gotten down to the dock to check her out. Maybe this week. 
 
Your latest model is wonderful and so's the photoshopped photography. What you accomplish working with cardstock is amazing. 
 

 
 

someone missed the crew:
 

Thanks @flying_dutchman2 and @Baker.
 
My son just sent his photographic interpretation of my pinas-wreck:

Hope you like it as much as I do...

Fine Woodworking magazine's review and ratings of best marking gauges: Tool Test: Marking Gauges - FineWoodworking
 
Marking gauges are one of those elusive "better mousetrap" sort of tools. They are very simple in concept, but there's a huge range of prices and styles and the fancy polished bronze ones often don't work any better than the hardware store rack specials.  One of these should do the trick for you. You can search for "marking gauges" in your browser "images" setting and pick from a wide variety of marking gauges.
 
If by "to draw a center line" you meant "drawing" with some sort of writing instrument like a pencil, I don't believe that there are marking gauges which are designed to hold common pencils as there compasses which are designed to do that. I once saw a manufactured marking gauge that had a hole and a set-screw to hold a common pencil, but I couldn't find one online now. That would not be a good design because the average pencil lead would not stand up well to being run down the length of a ten foot plank, for example. Most traditional wood marking tools are forms of scribers or knives which actually cut a fine line in the wood, rather than a pencil mark. If you wish, however, you can mount a compass lead (or section of 2mm drafting "lead clutch" mechanical pencil lead) in the scribing point hole of any marking gauge that features a collet-style clutch for holding a similarly sized scribing point, such as, I expect, the "3-in-1" Veritas model below does. 
 
For your purposes, none of these marking gauges will automatically find the exact center of anything for you, although it is a very easy matter to adjust a marking gauge to the dead center of a piece by trial and error, starting by eye and making a small mark, then turning the gauge to set against the opposite side of the workpiece and making another small mark adjacent to the first one. The halfway point between the two small marks is your centerline. It is then easy enough to "creep up on it" in the same fashion until, by progressively "eyeballing" the center between the marks made progressively, you reach a point where there's nothing left to divide, and you know you've reached the center setting on your gauge. 
 
When marking (or cutting) thin wood strips with any marking gauge I can think of off hand, you will have to use a straight edged "riser block" of wood, or the edge of the workbench, to provide clearance for the bottom of the gauge's fence (or "wheel") when scoring your mark. That's a bit of an inconvenience, perhaps, but it goes with the territory. The Lee Valley miniature marking gauges are advertised to work like the full-size tools they represent (besides being "collectables" or "toy's," depending how one feels about such high-priced things,) but I don't see any particular advantage to them in modeling, and certainly not where their tiny size makes setting and use possibly more tedious and likely to slip than a full-sized model.  Perhaps a formumite who has a set of the Veritas miniatures can elaborate on this point. 
 
I thought this first "3-in-1" model below from Lee Valley was the best for modeling purposes because it will also hold a cutting blade!  How cool is that for cutting strip wood to width? I've seen cutters alone that work on the same principle, but never a wheeled-style marking gauge with interchangeable marking scribers and a knife. If you aren't familiar with the wheeled-style marking gauges, they usually have a round shaped cutter with a sloped cutting edge which when in use naturally pulls the tool fence close against the face of the wood piece being marked.  I like them a lot better than the old fashioned "block of wood with a stick through it" models.
 
From Lee Valley. Marking gauge with two different interchangeable scribers and a cutting blade. $35.50
3-in-1 Brass Marking Gauge - Lee Valley Tools

 

 

 
From Lee Valley: Pocket marking gauge. $29.50
Pocket Marking Gauge - Lee Valley Tools

 
 
Veritas miniature marking gauges. (Set of two: single line and double line for tenon marking.) Lee Valley catalogue. $42.50.
Veritas Miniature Marking Gauges - Lee Valley Tools

 

 

 
Rockler digital wheel marking gauge. $39.99
Digital Wheel Marking Gauge - Rockler Woodworking Tools

 
OTHER WHEEL GAUGES:
 
Rockler wheel marking gauge. $19.99.  
Rockler Wheel Marking Gauge | Rockler Woodworking and Hardware
 
Temu wheel marking gauge plus dovetail marker. $11.51
1/2pcs Wheel Marking Gauge Dovetail Jig Guide Marker Aluminium Alloy Scribing Tool - Wood Marking For Woodworking 1:5 1:8 , Bearing Wheel Cutter For Soft Wood ,inch & Mm Scale Ruler,temu
 
 

After several attempts, I took a picture of dust similar to the shape of a block. The size is 1.00 x 0.50 x 0.71 mm. It is impractical to use the 1mm block. The material isn't strong enough.
 

I would say that 2.00mm is the minimum size for average use.
 
Thank you for reading my experiment, and I hope you liked my answer.

Congratulations 👏
 
Soldering requires lots of practice as well as technique and the right equipment. Can’t wait to see your success displayed on your bluenose. 
 
I’m sure we all struggle to get it right and continue relearning as we go. I know I do… 😆
 
John

Hope this post isn't a jinx, but... after trying to learn an efficient way for me to do the little soldering I need for these model ships, and being terrible at many different attempts and methods, I think... I hope.... that I have found a method and combination of materials that have (so far) been working very well for me.
 
Having no previous history in soldering before my venture into model shipbuilding a few years ago, I have been a complete novice at this, and have read through multiple "how-to" websites and videos on recommendations for everything from equipment to technique.  I have tried resistance soldering, silver soldering, purchased various setups and tools, and nothing has really been working well for this old man!
 
Had to share the fact that I think I've finally hit the right combination of equipment and technique.  I am using a Weller WE1010 soldering station with soldering iron.  After some good swipes with some sandpaper at the solder spot to clean and prep it, I am using Nokorode Regular Paste Flux and applying just little dabs on my small brass rods and brass strips (all the materials I've needed to solder so far) and touching just a bit of Alpha Fry 4 oz. 60/40 rosin core solder on the location, and... boom... success!  May be trivial to many, but had to share! 👍