Bob Cleek

I've also become more aware of the "viewing distance effects" on paint colors. (As I recall, there's an excellent article on the subject in Volume II of Ship Modeler's Shop Notes.) That said, real gold leaf has remarkable reflective qualities which greatly exceed that of paint colors. Back in my classic yacht transom name painting days, I'd mix yellow "One Shot" with a touch of red to get a "gold" colored paint that was a presentable substitute, but it was never possible to duplicate the reflective quality of real gold leaf with paint. (To my eye, "gold" paint containing metal dust or flakes never really looks like real gold leaf.) 
 
Since we don't have any ships covered in real gold leaf these days, I had to go elsewhere to find an example of gold leaf viewed at a distance. After the 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake in the S.F. Bay Area, the San Francisco City Hall was "earthquake retrofitted" with a total rebuild and restoration. My cousins' painting and decorating company won the contract for the painting on the job, which included gold leafing accents throughout the building and on the dome, which is larger than the dome of the U.S. Capitol in Washington, DC. That job is about thirty years old now and the gold leaf they applied appears to still be in excellent condition. Being the most noble metal, gold doesn't weather at all and, so long as the sizing adhering it to the surface remains intact, it is a very long-lasting finish.
 
As can be seen from the below selection of Google images of the dome taken at different viewing distances and light conditions, the gold leaf "jumps out" remarkably, even when in the shade. Its reflective quality really makes it stand out like nothing else. When I gold leafed varnished yacht transom lettering, I'd lay down a few coats of clear varnish over the gold leaf so that the transom could be lightly sanded to key it for later maintenance varnish coats without damaging the gold leaf. This compromise had the effect of slightly reducing the gold's reflective qualities, but not so much that it impaired the intended effect. I think the fact that the color and brightness of gold leaf doesn't doesn't "mute" at the same rate as paint as the viewing distance increases, at model "scale viewing distances" "gold" paint or gold leaf should be muted much less than regular model colors need to be muted to compensate for the same scale viewing distance. Some experimentation is in order, but I'd expect a very light wash of a clear matte finish might tone down the gold's reflective qualities enough to yield the desired realistic scale effect. 
 
Parenthetically, I asked my cousin the cost of the gold leaf they applied on that job and he demurred, explaining that there was a non-disclosure provision in the job contract prohibiting their ever disclosing the price of the gold leaf because the politicians were afraid of the backlash they might get from their constituents who, if they knew the price, might think they should have used faux gold paint instead!  
 
 

 

 
http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3339/3313699165_3f0681016c_z.jpg?zz=1
 

 
 
 
 

Trust me, you don't want to go there. At this stage of the game, I'm a lot less of a porpoise than I am a barnacle-encrusted, battle-scarred, old white whale!
 

I greatly agree with Harvey's observation. My primary interests also focus on post-Nineteenth Century small craft. I have accumulated a large library of books on the subject of all things maritime and, specifically, about ship modeling, but when building a model, I always "build it in my head" the same way I'd build it if I were building it at full scale, while also taking the liberties possible when working in smaller scale. I always find something interesting in any book about ship modeling technique, but I've found many technical books on other subjects as valuable, if not more valuable, than the ship modeling volumes. There is much for the ship modeler to learn from basic woodworking technique books, wood and metal staining and finishing books, jewelry-making books, basic metal machining books, and basic dental and surgical procedure books. I don't think there's any procedure in ship modeling that doesn't come from some other craft, but I've never seen a book on ship modeling which has covered every one of those procedures from all those other crafts between two covers.
 
If you are interested in early to mid 20th century wood fishing craft, you may wish to consider the works of Howard I. Chapelle and the resources of the Smithsonian National Museum of American History which has available an extensive collection of your kind of boat.
 
See: Ship Plans | National Museum of American History (si.edu)
 
         Historic American Merchant Marine Survey Records | Collection | SOVA (si.edu)

I know her well. She was on S.F. Bay for many decades, known as Wander Bird.  She was a rig-less houseboat in Sausalito when I first met her in the early seventies, thirty years or so after she'd completed her voyage west around Cape Horn to San Francisco before the War. Warwick Tompkins had skippered her around the Horn with his wife, two young children, and a paid hand. Warwick was a well-known local yachtsman, as to this day is his son, Warwick "Commodore" Tompkins, who was four at the time of their voyage.
Warwick M. Tompkins wrote two books about his family's voyage around Cape Horn in Wander Bird: Fifty South to Fifty South, 1938, W.W.Norton & Co., NY and Two Sailors, 1939, The Viking Press, NY, (a story of the voyage written from the perspective of the Tompkins  children.) Both of these books are full of good photographs showing details of the vessel which would likely be very helpful to the modeler. Fifty South by Fifty South,  contains together with the expected narrative of the voyage, an appendix containing many technical details on the vessel . Warwick Tompkins also made a 35mm movie of the voyage entitled In the Wake of the Clippers, which a modeler would probably be interested in watching. I've never seen the movie and I don't know if it is still extant. I'm sure "Commodore Thompkins" would know. I expect he could be reached through the St. Francis Yacht Club in San Francisco.
 
Wander Bird was later acquired by Hal Sommer, a local tug boat skipper and acquaintance of mine, who spent years restoring "the Bird" to mint condition and sailing her on the Bay. Wander Bird was for many years the centerpiece of the classic yacht community on San Francisco Bay. I was fortunate to be able to witness a lot of the work done on her and I learned much about larger wooden shipbuilding by watching Hal, his son Ross, and other "old timers" working on her.  Wander Bird was ultimately sold and moved up to Washington, I believe, and then returned to Germany as a museum ship. 
 
The restored Bird sailing off Yellow Bluff heading home to Sausalito, CA on S.F. Bay. Note the two crew aloft at the mainmast doubling. I have no idea what they are doing up there, other than "skylarking," but I doubt that. Hal ran a tight ship so I doubt they were up there for fun. They wouldn't have been raising setting a topsail in than wind and on that course and there's no evidence of one on deck, 
 

 

 
She carried a rafee topsail earlier in her life:
 

 
I'm looking forward to your build log!

That would certainly be interesting. I expect there would be a wide band of green patina between the two waterline extremes. I'm not expert on the period, and I'm not sure one way or the other, but I wonder if the Admiralty would spend the money to put copper sheathing on a relatively small water lighter.

Sorry, thanks Roger for the clarification.  Sherline also make a follower rest which clamps on the saddle/cross-slide and does exactly what Roger says:
 

Mike,
 
This is not specifically about turning spars as I find shaping them by hand square, octagonal, round to be preferred.
 
The steady rest that you show (I have one too) is a fixed steady.  It is clamped at a fixed location on the lathe bed.  To turn long thin members that deflect from side forces of the cutting tool you need a traveling steady that clamps to the cross slide.  With a traveling steady “upstream” of the cutting tool and some sort of follower rigged up to guide the cutting tool it would be possible to shape masts.  The traveling steady would not work for yards as they taper in two directions.
 
Roger

Bob,
 
The San Francisco City Hall is amazing.  Thanks for posting it.
 
I am considering a model of a sailing water tank vessel built by the Royal Navy in 1806.  The copper color would In my opinion be interesting as this vessel sailed at two different drafts; tanks full an empty.  When empty, I would assume that the exposed copper would weather to a greenish color.  I would not show copper tacks.
 
Roger

I agree, that a gel stain, or just sealer on bare wood. I’m not a fan of gold paint on models, it looks a bit much and unrealistic to me. Without all the analysis, for me it’s just a matter of personal taste. No gilding for me. 
 
I like how these posts can go so far afield from the original question.  

There are figureheads painted gilded varnished unpainted, I prefer boxwood unpainted aged by time.
I would classify color in the column of the personal choices. Some peoples choose paint other just the color of the wood.
They are both right, it just depends of what do you want to represent.

I think the different aspects of colours and details as a function of viewing distance is an old dilemma for 'realistic' modellers. A modell will be viewed from a wide variety of distances and angles, unless it is set into a diorama-box that fixes these variables. 
 
If you design the model to be viewed from a certain distance, it will look cruede, when oberserved close-up. Have a look at e.g. a painting by Caneletto: paintings are normally designed to be viewed from a distance of about the length of the picture diagonal - from this distance his paintings give a vivid impression of life in 18th century Venice. However, when you put your nose on it (or as close as the security measures in the museums permit), you will only see some pretty shapeless blobs of paint. So, we have to build our models to be viewed from close-up or prevent this by the setting in which a model is to be displayed.
 
Concerning the question of ochre vs. gold, this also depends on what kind of model your a building. If it is going to be a 'realistic' one then you will have to take the above considerations into account and also follow the full-scale practice, where indeed parts may not have been gilded, but painted in ochre or a similar yellow paint. Sometimes, just a few highlights were picked out in gold or certain elements were emphasised by using gold. On the other hand, if you are building a sort of 'artistic' model, replicating e.g. the prestigious display models of old, you may well use gilding, as this is what was used then for models.
 
 

Yes, I think this is an excellent option. Small pieces of silkspan may be too fragile to work well, but a very thin paper laid in wet shellac, and then sealed with thin shellac worked well for me. The thickness of the thin paper should approximate the thickness of the prototype copper sheets and the laps should be quire subtle at scale viewing distance. In scales below a quarter inch to the foot, the tacks are not really barely visible at all at scale viewing distances. A very realistic appearing coppered bottom can then be crafted by airbrushing a basecoat of "tarnished copper penny brown" and adding then patchy accents of varying shades of dirty greens and dark browns to simulate fouling, together with a verdigris band at the waterline where the copper develops a patina as it is exposed to the air. (I've used color photos of coppered bottoms from Googled images for "inspiration.")  It can be a tedious exercise in artistic "weathering," but it's very effective if you are showing the hull as it would appear shortly after it was hauled out. For an "as launched" bottom, I'd just use the "copper brown" and skip the weathering patina. I know there was some variation in the color of individual plates, depending upon how much weathering the plate got before it was hung on the hull, and some photos will show a "shiny copper" finish contrasting with the oxidized plates where a plate has just been replaced during a haul out, but, myself, I'd find attaching a patchwork quilt of separately colored individual plates at those scales truly crazy-making. I think it's fair to fudge a little on a hull below the waterline. It is probably the last part of a model to which the viewer's eyes are drawn and an "artistic impression" there is sufficient.

I've also become more aware of the "viewing distance effects" on paint colors. (As I recall, there's an excellent article on the subject in Volume II of Ship Modeler's Shop Notes.) That said, real gold leaf has remarkable reflective qualities which greatly exceed that of paint colors. Back in my classic yacht transom name painting days, I'd mix yellow "One Shot" with a touch of red to get a "gold" colored paint that was a presentable substitute, but it was never possible to duplicate the reflective quality of real gold leaf with paint. (To my eye, "gold" paint containing metal dust or flakes never really looks like real gold leaf.) 
 
Since we don't have any ships covered in real gold leaf these days, I had to go elsewhere to find an example of gold leaf viewed at a distance. After the 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake in the S.F. Bay Area, the San Francisco City Hall was "earthquake retrofitted" with a total rebuild and restoration. My cousins' painting and decorating company won the contract for the painting on the job, which included gold leafing accents throughout the building and on the dome, which is larger than the dome of the U.S. Capitol in Washington, DC. That job is about thirty years old now and the gold leaf they applied appears to still be in excellent condition. Being the most noble metal, gold doesn't weather at all and, so long as the sizing adhering it to the surface remains intact, it is a very long-lasting finish.
 
As can be seen from the below selection of Google images of the dome taken at different viewing distances and light conditions, the gold leaf "jumps out" remarkably, even when in the shade. Its reflective quality really makes it stand out like nothing else. When I gold leafed varnished yacht transom lettering, I'd lay down a few coats of clear varnish over the gold leaf so that the transom could be lightly sanded to key it for later maintenance varnish coats without damaging the gold leaf. This compromise had the effect of slightly reducing the gold's reflective qualities, but not so much that it impaired the intended effect. I think the fact that the color and brightness of gold leaf doesn't doesn't "mute" at the same rate as paint as the viewing distance increases, at model "scale viewing distances" "gold" paint or gold leaf should be muted much less than regular model colors need to be muted to compensate for the same scale viewing distance. Some experimentation is in order, but I'd expect a very light wash of a clear matte finish might tone down the gold's reflective qualities enough to yield the desired realistic scale effect. 
 
Parenthetically, I asked my cousin the cost of the gold leaf they applied on that job and he demurred, explaining that there was a non-disclosure provision in the job contract prohibiting their ever disclosing the price of the gold leaf because the politicians were afraid of the backlash they might get from their constituents who, if they knew the price, might think they should have used faux gold paint instead!  
 
 

 

 
http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3339/3313699165_3f0681016c_z.jpg?zz=1
 

 
 
 
 

I've also become more aware of the "viewing distance effects" on paint colors. (As I recall, there's an excellent article on the subject in Volume II of Ship Modeler's Shop Notes.) That said, real gold leaf has remarkable reflective qualities which greatly exceed that of paint colors. Back in my classic yacht transom name painting days, I'd mix yellow "One Shot" with a touch of red to get a "gold" colored paint that was a presentable substitute, but it was never possible to duplicate the reflective quality of real gold leaf with paint. (To my eye, "gold" paint containing metal dust or flakes never really looks like real gold leaf.) 
 
Since we don't have any ships covered in real gold leaf these days, I had to go elsewhere to find an example of gold leaf viewed at a distance. After the 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake in the S.F. Bay Area, the San Francisco City Hall was "earthquake retrofitted" with a total rebuild and restoration. My cousins' painting and decorating company won the contract for the painting on the job, which included gold leafing accents throughout the building and on the dome, which is larger than the dome of the U.S. Capitol in Washington, DC. That job is about thirty years old now and the gold leaf they applied appears to still be in excellent condition. Being the most noble metal, gold doesn't weather at all and, so long as the sizing adhering it to the surface remains intact, it is a very long-lasting finish.
 
As can be seen from the below selection of Google images of the dome taken at different viewing distances and light conditions, the gold leaf "jumps out" remarkably, even when in the shade. Its reflective quality really makes it stand out like nothing else. When I gold leafed varnished yacht transom lettering, I'd lay down a few coats of clear varnish over the gold leaf so that the transom could be lightly sanded to key it for later maintenance varnish coats without damaging the gold leaf. This compromise had the effect of slightly reducing the gold's reflective qualities, but not so much that it impaired the intended effect. I think the fact that the color and brightness of gold leaf doesn't doesn't "mute" at the same rate as paint as the viewing distance increases, at model "scale viewing distances" "gold" paint or gold leaf should be muted much less than regular model colors need to be muted to compensate for the same scale viewing distance. Some experimentation is in order, but I'd expect a very light wash of a clear matte finish might tone down the gold's reflective qualities enough to yield the desired realistic scale effect. 
 
Parenthetically, I asked my cousin the cost of the gold leaf they applied on that job and he demurred, explaining that there was a non-disclosure provision in the job contract prohibiting their ever disclosing the price of the gold leaf because the politicians were afraid of the backlash they might get from their constituents who, if they knew the price, might think they should have used faux gold paint instead!  
 
 

 

 
http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3339/3313699165_3f0681016c_z.jpg?zz=1
 

 
 
 
 

When I reach a milestone that I have set for myself I have considered taking a break from my Benjamin Noble Lake Freighter Model to build a simple c1800 vessel that I have found.  As this vessel would have been coppered, I am interested in simulating copper sheathing with thin paper or silkspan, painted to resemble aged copper.  IMHO this would be a vast improvement over kit supplied embossed copper tiles stuck on with pressure sensitive adhesive.
 
Right now it’s just a mental exercise.
 
Roger
 
 

I don't think they are "disciples of a single historical grand master" at all. At the time they were writing, the "average Joe" had a much higher level of education and experience in the manual arts. Boys grew up learning how to drive a nail, shape wood with saws, planes, and knives, and how to keep their tools sharp. Paint and adhesives were easily understood. Perhaps most importantly, many who built ship models in the days before Davis and Underhill (which brings us up to the middle of the 20th Century) came from nautical backgrounds in which they learned the nomenclature and became familiar, often on a first hand basis, with the ships that they modeled. To a boatbuilder, there was little new about setting up, framing, or planking in Davis or Underhill's books. That said, Davis and Underhill introduced amateur hobby modelers to structural construction methods which were previously not widely practiced in the amateur modeling community, to wit: the "built up" or "plank on frame" ship model, rather than the solid carved block hull ship model. 
 
The value of these two early authors was in their publishing works that synthesized between two covers the many diverse crafts that must be practiced in the course of building a high-quality ship model. Davis and Underhill, of course, were also pioneers in publishing and thereby making available accurate plans of particular ships drawn for the modeler's use, without which truly accurate models are not possible. 
 
The rather limited ship modeling literature prior to Davisi and Underhill, and for a while thereafter, suggests that the average amateur ship modeler in the twenties, thirties and forties was turning out what to our eyes were some pretty primitive models. Today, eighty to a hundred years later, some of these models have "matured" to where they are beginning to become noticed as valuable folk art. Obviously, there were extremely detailed and accurate "professionally built" ship models long before the 20th Century, but they were built by highly skilled miniaturists of their time, often working in teams, each with their own trade specialty; not hobbyists working singlehandedly, and the recognizable quality of their execution is what has contributed to their conservation and preservation over centuries. The contemporary models from the Age of Sail we see in museums today are only what we have left of the creme de la creme of models built at their time. 
 
Davis and Underhill were writing during a period in which there was a veritable explosion of "how to do it" literature, Following the First World War, Middle Class folks found themselves with greater leisure time. Modern technology eliminated much of the daily drudgery that previously attended simply living. (Imagine! Store-bought butter and sliced bread!) That leisure time, before radio, and particularly television, proliferated, was filled with hobby pursuits and this created a strong market for instructional literature on related subjects. Before the "DIY" era, craftspeople kept their skills close to the vest. They did not share their "trade secrets" because their trade skills were their "rice bowl." That knowledge is what they sold to make a living. When the general public sought limited trade skill information for use in the pursuit of their hobbies, enterprising authors like Davis and Underhill started writing books containing specialized information that otherwise would have taken their readers a tradesman's long apprenticeship to acquire. What Davis and Underhill, and many others on other subjects, were providing in written form were not the secrets of some single "grand master," but rather, in the main, rather basic instruction in a variety of existing trade skills of the time.  Since then, the technology of ship modeling, as with so much else, has complexified exponentially, as would be immediately apparent from comparing the technological sophistication of the modeling discussed in this forum and the modeling technology discussed in Davis and Underhill.

I greatly agree with Harvey's observation. My primary interests also focus on post-Nineteenth Century small craft. I have accumulated a large library of books on the subject of all things maritime and, specifically, about ship modeling, but when building a model, I always "build it in my head" the same way I'd build it if I were building it at full scale, while also taking the liberties possible when working in smaller scale. I always find something interesting in any book about ship modeling technique, but I've found many technical books on other subjects as valuable, if not more valuable, than the ship modeling volumes. There is much for the ship modeler to learn from basic woodworking technique books, wood and metal staining and finishing books, jewelry-making books, basic metal machining books, and basic dental and surgical procedure books. I don't think there's any procedure in ship modeling that doesn't come from some other craft, but I've never seen a book on ship modeling which has covered every one of those procedures from all those other crafts between two covers.
 
If you are interested in early to mid 20th century wood fishing craft, you may wish to consider the works of Howard I. Chapelle and the resources of the Smithsonian National Museum of American History which has available an extensive collection of your kind of boat.
 
See: Ship Plans | National Museum of American History (si.edu)
 
         Historic American Merchant Marine Survey Records | Collection | SOVA (si.edu)

I greatly agree with Harvey's observation. My primary interests also focus on post-Nineteenth Century small craft. I have accumulated a large library of books on the subject of all things maritime and, specifically, about ship modeling, but when building a model, I always "build it in my head" the same way I'd build it if I were building it at full scale, while also taking the liberties possible when working in smaller scale. I always find something interesting in any book about ship modeling technique, but I've found many technical books on other subjects as valuable, if not more valuable, than the ship modeling volumes. There is much for the ship modeler to learn from basic woodworking technique books, wood and metal staining and finishing books, jewelry-making books, basic metal machining books, and basic dental and surgical procedure books. I don't think there's any procedure in ship modeling that doesn't come from some other craft, but I've never seen a book on ship modeling which has covered every one of those procedures from all those other crafts between two covers.
 
If you are interested in early to mid 20th century wood fishing craft, you may wish to consider the works of Howard I. Chapelle and the resources of the Smithsonian National Museum of American History which has available an extensive collection of your kind of boat.
 
See: Ship Plans | National Museum of American History (si.edu)
 
         Historic American Merchant Marine Survey Records | Collection | SOVA (si.edu)

Certainly not! In every era, there were high quality models being turned out by master miniaturists who could produce an accurate model worthy of the term "fine art." I didn't intend the term, "folk art" to be a pejorative at all. (The top price paid for a Grandma Moses painting so far is $1,360,000.00!) "Trench art," for example, is an appreciating category of folk art at the present time and naval trench art is particularly desirable. In the case of trench art, its "folk art" aesthetic value is enhanced greatly by any historical provenance it may have. As we know, these shipboard-built naval curios have been collectable from at least the time of Nelson, the most well-known of which are the Napoleonic prisoner-of-war models most all of which are definitely in the "folk art" category artistically.
 
Other than those meticulously researched and executed models which serve as significant contributions to the historical record and qualify as "fine art" (a classification of model which doesn't get near the respect it deserves in the fine arts marketplace,) I'd consider most all scratch-built ship models to qualify as "folk art" of one sort or another, although spanning a wide range of quality and value. 
 
Not to invite thread drift, but I'll mention in passing that a discussion of what the ship modeling community might be able to accomplish in terms of elevating the general public's appreciation of finely crafted ship models, and thereby the price such models command, might be a worthy endeavor. 
 


 

 

 
 
 
 
 

I greatly agree with Harvey's observation. My primary interests also focus on post-Nineteenth Century small craft. I have accumulated a large library of books on the subject of all things maritime and, specifically, about ship modeling, but when building a model, I always "build it in my head" the same way I'd build it if I were building it at full scale, while also taking the liberties possible when working in smaller scale. I always find something interesting in any book about ship modeling technique, but I've found many technical books on other subjects as valuable, if not more valuable, than the ship modeling volumes. There is much for the ship modeler to learn from basic woodworking technique books, wood and metal staining and finishing books, jewelry-making books, basic metal machining books, and basic dental and surgical procedure books. I don't think there's any procedure in ship modeling that doesn't come from some other craft, but I've never seen a book on ship modeling which has covered every one of those procedures from all those other crafts between two covers.
 
If you are interested in early to mid 20th century wood fishing craft, you may wish to consider the works of Howard I. Chapelle and the resources of the Smithsonian National Museum of American History which has available an extensive collection of your kind of boat.
 
See: Ship Plans | National Museum of American History (si.edu)
 
         Historic American Merchant Marine Survey Records | Collection | SOVA (si.edu)

This is an area of interest of mine, too.  I've sort of backed into model building having come from a few full-size (albeit small) projects; Period books (and historical retrospects) covering full-size boat building may be the best source of information for craft of this period/genre.  Books on models will certainly help with many aspects of scale, approach, fittings, etc., especially if you are building solid-hulls.  
Best,
Harvey

An isue with most of the books quoted is that they combine proposals for resolving technical problems with some historic context. In most cases they dive not deep enough into the historic context to be really useful. Underhill is an exception as he deals specifically with the last half century of commercial deep-water sail and clearly states so. Hence, if you are interested in a specific period, you certainly will need addtional literature in order to understand what was going on. This is a point perhaps not made clear enough in these books.
 
BTW, we didn't mention
Frölich, B. (2002): The Art of Ship Modeling.- 303 p., Nice (A.N.C.R.E.).
yet, which is both useful and aesthetically well done. He doesn't say so in the title, but his subjects clearly span the mid-1700s to early 1800s, a period short enough to provide a reasonable amount of historical detail. Plus the book uses contemporary models from the museum in Paris for illustration.
 
@SaltyNinja, what country/region are you looking at? There are quite a few in-depth books on fishing vessels around.
 

Eberhard
I agree that it seems like the kit makers do indeed follow the old protocols as you describe rather than doing any research into contemporary practices.  Three of the worst offenders to me include the belaying pins on ships that would not have had any or if they do belong are the size of bowling pins , gratings that look like dividers in a card board box, and copper sheathing with giant rivet heads instead of small nails.  
Allan

Certainly not! In every era, there were high quality models being turned out by master miniaturists who could produce an accurate model worthy of the term "fine art." I didn't intend the term, "folk art" to be a pejorative at all. (The top price paid for a Grandma Moses painting so far is $1,360,000.00!) "Trench art," for example, is an appreciating category of folk art at the present time and naval trench art is particularly desirable. In the case of trench art, its "folk art" aesthetic value is enhanced greatly by any historical provenance it may have. As we know, these shipboard-built naval curios have been collectable from at least the time of Nelson, the most well-known of which are the Napoleonic prisoner-of-war models most all of which are definitely in the "folk art" category artistically.
 
Other than those meticulously researched and executed models which serve as significant contributions to the historical record and qualify as "fine art" (a classification of model which doesn't get near the respect it deserves in the fine arts marketplace,) I'd consider most all scratch-built ship models to qualify as "folk art" of one sort or another, although spanning a wide range of quality and value. 
 
Not to invite thread drift, but I'll mention in passing that a discussion of what the ship modeling community might be able to accomplish in terms of elevating the general public's appreciation of finely crafted ship models, and thereby the price such models command, might be a worthy endeavor. 
 


 

 

 
 
 
 
 

Certainly not! In every era, there were high quality models being turned out by master miniaturists who could produce an accurate model worthy of the term "fine art." I didn't intend the term, "folk art" to be a pejorative at all. (The top price paid for a Grandma Moses painting so far is $1,360,000.00!) "Trench art," for example, is an appreciating category of folk art at the present time and naval trench art is particularly desirable. In the case of trench art, its "folk art" aesthetic value is enhanced greatly by any historical provenance it may have. As we know, these shipboard-built naval curios have been collectable from at least the time of Nelson, the most well-known of which are the Napoleonic prisoner-of-war models most all of which are definitely in the "folk art" category artistically.
 
Other than those meticulously researched and executed models which serve as significant contributions to the historical record and qualify as "fine art" (a classification of model which doesn't get near the respect it deserves in the fine arts marketplace,) I'd consider most all scratch-built ship models to qualify as "folk art" of one sort or another, although spanning a wide range of quality and value. 
 
Not to invite thread drift, but I'll mention in passing that a discussion of what the ship modeling community might be able to accomplish in terms of elevating the general public's appreciation of finely crafted ship models, and thereby the price such models command, might be a worthy endeavor.