Bob Cleek

I thought the Rockler digital model was cute, too, so I threw it in for grins and giggles, but the Luddite in me thinks its overkill. Some of the "analog" gauges have a scale on the shaft for setting measurements, but the Fine Woodworking article on marking gauges panned the scaled shaft marking gauges. Setting the center of a strip narrow enough to accommodate the length of the gauge's shaft makes eyeballing the centerline as I described a piece of cake. If the piece to be marked is too wide to permit that technique and the gauge must be set by measurement from a single side of the workpiece, it's easily set by a rule, a dimension bar, or a "fit piece" of the proper width. Alternately, if one has a caliper, the calipers can be set to indicate a "inside" diameter equivalent to the desired width of the marking gauge's mark and then the marking gauge can be set by physically comparing the outside jaw faces of the calipers to the fence and marking point (or "wheel") of the analog marking gauge. If one already has a digital caliper, the result will be every bit as accurate as the digital marking gauge at a lower price and without the issues attendant to the batteries and electronics of the digital model. An analog marking gauge promises to be a tool that will endure rough use for several lifetimes. The digital stuff... not so much. Everybody's mileage differs, of course. 
 
Yes, I agree that the larger marking gauges will be more cumbersome in use on small stuff. The smaller marking gauges I listed were chosen with that in mind. 
 
Without manually setting to the desired placement of the marked line using a rule or comparison "fit stick," none of the marking gauges I've ever seen will automatically center the resulting marked line.
 
 The "EZ Center Finder" you linked is a plastic version of the age-old method of finding a center boatbuilders make with a stick with a hole in it and a couple of nails driven equidistant from the center of the hole. They work fine on larger pieces of stock, but the results are dependent upon the user's ability to simultaneously hold the pencil in the hole, keep both guide posts firmly against the sides of the plank, and slide it down the workpiece, which is akin to patting your head, rubbing your stomach, and chewing gum at the same time. Both sides of the workpiece must be straight and equidistant from each other at any point on the line or the line won't be straight. They're great for working with round stock like full-size spars when boatbuilding because the "guide posts" can be extended down to run on the widest part of the rounded spar and even if the spar is tapered, as they often are, you will still get a straight midline mark, which is when the gadget really comes into its own.  If one were to try to turn quarter-inch wide strip wood into eighth-inch wide strip wood, these widgets work a lot better in theory than in practice! Been there, done that, got the tee shirt.  
 
A set of proportional dividers would be great for determining the center point as well.  That said, if the reason Stuntflyer wants "to draw center lines down half-inch to quarter-inch strip wood," is to cut strips in half, I think I'd avoid the trouble of marking the workpiece at all and just use the micrometer to set the fence on my Byrnes saw and just "let'er rip!"  

My apologies for not at first seeing Bob Cleek's post above and only those below his. My objective was to find the tool that would pencil mark the center at any width and be able to draw a center line over the length of wood. It appears that the Lee valley one, although not auto centering, would be the type I was looking for. It has the ability to mark and draw a center line even if the wood has a curve to it.

Do you want to 'draw' or will scribing work.   How long is the strip?  Which dimension do you want to draw on?
There are several things to consider if I were trying to do this.
 
What are the shortcomings of the tools you have been shown so far?   I can understand that the larger tools would not work well for small thin strips.
 
Obviously, the rotary type markers will not determine the center automatically.  
 
If it were me, I would use my proportional dividers to mark the center.

Ooooooohh!!  A new tool for the shipyard!  Seems to me like the Rockler one with the digital readout would be better than the Lee Valley ones, as you would have to measure and adjust the setting on the Lee Valley's Veritas gauge using a separate scale/device, whereas the Rockler has the gauge built-in like a digital caliper, correct?  

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
 
 

I have a CHARVOZ cutting base (made in Japan)
size 12" x 18"
Bigger is always better in this case.
I use it to cut my card stock templates for some of my ship model pieces... presently orlop deck knees, otherwise they would never fit properly.
Bought it about a thousand years ago when I was working as a junior draughtsman in an engineering office making small table top cardboard mockups of industrial quench tanks. In this age they would just make a 3D model and maybe even a 3D print!
Now, being retired, it has proven to be quite handy in the home shop

I don't use them.     My ship modeling area is only used for ship modeling.    The counters have kitchen counter type coverings.    In over 20 years they still are clean and without significant cuts. 

A "gun tackle" is any single-purchase tackle. Two single sheave blocks with the top one having a bail at the bottom. The line runs from the bail down to the lower block and back up and through the upper block with the fall coming down from there. So-called because they were commonly attached to each side of gun carriages. 
As the saying goes, "Different ships, different long splices." It's a matter of taste and there are no hard and fast rules. I suppose one could serve and tar the standing part of a topping life, but why would they want to? The tar would get all over the sails, for one thing, and it would just be an unnecessary job to keep up. 
 
The lines pictured in my post are definitely topping lifts. Lines are sometimes spliced into topping lifts, the line running down and around the boom and back up to the topping lift on the other side, allowing the topping lifts to serve double duty as support for lazy jacks. However, at least on the western side of the Pond, lazy jacks are rarely seen on gaff-headed sails because the gaff boom, being lowered between a pair of topping lifts, keeps the sail under control when being lowered. Lazy jacks are more often seen on jib-headed sails for this reason. On smaller jib-headed sails, the topping lift is often just one line run from the masthead to the end of the boom, in which case lazy jacks made up of lighter cordage are more commonly seen. I would expect that lazy jacks were less common on large naval vessels where there were "many hands to make light work" of handing the sail. The conventional wisdom favors less weight and windage aloft and, certainly, less chafe on the sails.

Hi OC 
I am returning after a long time away and I stumbled across this thread.  This a fantastic project. 
Now a wee little story:
About 10yrs ago, whilst I was still serving, I started a Military Hobbies and Bookstore as a side project.  One of the things I would do between deployments was commission miniatures painting and I was contracted to paint a few Napoleonic figures for a gamer who also wanted display them whilst not using them on some custom made boards.  As I said it was only a few.....THOUSAND!!!  Ended up being 2800 figures, OH did I mention they were 15mm and I had NEVER painted 15mm before that.  He must have thought I did a good enough job as I then had to paint something like 4000 Romans for him and about the same number of Persians and Greeks.  Varnishing was the worst part, so I can understand the "joy" you are having.
 
Keep up the great work.
 
Pete

I have been using Vallejo acrylics for years. Their shine depends on how they are applied, with a brush or with an airbrush. Airbrush application gives matt or satin surfaces. For a high gloss of varnish it needs to be applied by brush or very wet by airbrush - with the risk of 'runners'.
 
Acrylic paints are a mixture of emulsion and suspension (while oil paints are suspensions). Emulsions are very delicate and the wrong thinner or mixing them with other brands can lead to a break-down of the emulsion, i.e. coagulation or clotting.
 
Pure acrylic emulsions are glossy when cured. Matt or satin varnishes or paints are achieved by adding various quantities of finely dispersed pumice or diamtomee earth. Adding pigment to give a paint in itself acts like a matting agent, which is one reason, why most acrylic paints are satin at most.
 
Acrylic paints and varnishes cross-link quickly, which is why they dry fast. However, this process traps some water in the structure, which then can take days or weeks to diffuse out and evaporate. At the same time the cross-linking continues to intensify. For this reason, acrylics stay sort of rubbery for a long time. Depending on the formulation, they never will be as hard as fully oxidised paint based on lineseed-oil.
For this reason, the classical method discussed above, of rubbing down oil-paint with pumice and then re-buff it to the desired sheen does not really work, at least not with the Vallejo-paints. There acrylic paint formulations for industrial applications, such as painting machine tools, that will be as hard as oil paints.
 
Rather than mixing something into your black paint, I would experiment with different mixing ratios of gloss and satin Vallejo acrylic varnish (I would use the pre-diluted Model Air range for this) until you get the sheen you want with your chosen application methods, i.e. brush or airbrush.

As you've asked for "any thoughts or tips," here are just a few: 
 
I am sure "Vallejo gloss" is simply more paint carrier (liquid) added to the "flattened" Vallejo paint to reduce the proportion of flattening agent added to their flat paint. It should work fine, although it will correspondingly reduce the proportion of pigment in the paint, as well, so the paint may not cover as well as without the gloss additive. As with all painting and varnishing exercises, experimentation is essential for every different type of coating (oil or water-based types) and every different brand of coating, because they all have their own chemistries, and they often don't play well together.   
 
When using the small quantities involved in testing various finish-adjusting recipes and in mixing modeling coatings themselves, measurements are extremely critical. I would recommend that you invest in a variously sized selection of disposable hypodermic syringes for use in mixing paint and conditioners so you can accurately measure and record the various proportions used when you do your test runs. I've found index cards useful for record keeping. The mixed coating is applied to the index card along with the "recipe" indicating how many "cc's" or whatever of each ingredient. This is also very handy for mixing paint colors, as well. Like a lot of modelers who've "gone over to the dark side" and scratch build, I use basic heavily-pigmented quality artists' oil paints packaged in a "toothpaste tube," so I measure basic paint and pigment mixture out of the tube by the length of oil paint extruded from the tube, and use the syringes for adding thinners and conditioners, but if you are working with bottled pre-mixed paint, the syringes will work best for measuring the amount of paint as well. Aside from the other advantages of oil-based paints over water-based paints, I particularly prefer the artists' oils because I mix my own colors, which I find easier to do with a pallet knife on a piece of glass.   
 
It's practically impossible to have a paint finish that is "too flat" (matte finish) on a scale model in scales smaller than 1:48. At that scale and larger, the "toy-ish-ness" of the model's appearance increases proportionate to the increase of the height of the finish's gloss. "Taste" is a certainly subjective both as to the artist and to their audience, but "good taste" is generally easy to distinguish from "bad taste" and the good is usually the safer standard if one has any interest in pleasing an audience. If you wish to maintain the illusion of reality from a scale viewing distance, glossy finishes must be avoided. 
 
One of the disadvantages of water-based acrylic paints is that when cured they remain somewhat soft and so are difficult to abrade. Oil based paints and varnishes "dry" (polymerize) to a harder finish which is much easier to rub or sand. Classically, oil-based paint was applied and allowed to dry to its natural gloss finish and was then rubbed with pumice and/or rottenstone to produce the level of finish desired. In this fashion, the entire spectrum from gloss to flat is available in any color one wishes to apply. Unfortunately, however, water-based paints may not respond to fine abrasives for flattening as easily as oil-based coatings do, I've never tried to hand rub a water-based finish, so you may wish to experiment and see if hand rubbing your acrylic paint finish will work for you. (On a test piece, of course. Never experiment on the model itself. The whole point of experimenting is to have your failures occur anywhere other than on the finished work!  )
 
Alternately, "flattening agents" can be added to both oil and water-based coatings to produce a flat effect. These are basically just "dirt," mixed in a liquid carrier, oil or water respectively. (Diatomaceous earth, to be exact.) The carriers in these flattening agents are often specific to the chemistries of individual paint brands, so not only is using a flattening agent for water-based paints inadvisable for use in oil-based paints, and vice-versa, but using a different brand of flattening agent from the brand of the paint used, or even the type of paint used when made by the same manufacturer inadvisable. Additionally, if one wishes to determine the degree of flattening effect achieved, test "chips" must be made, and the flattened paint allowed to dry completely. From these, if very careful records are kept, recipes can be followed to replicate the same degree of flattening from batch to batch. The use of flattening agents requires very careful measurements to ensure uniformity in different batches and, as the quantities of the batches mixed tend to be small in modeling, the tolerances of fluctuations in the measurements becomes increasingly more critical. Professional painters generally agree that if anything other than a dead flat result is desired, using flattening agents to replicate various degrees of gloss should be avoided if anything more than a single batch is required. (Where architectural specifications demand a specific level of gloss, professionals will generally order a specified custom production run from the manufacturer to insure uniformity.) You can try the flattening agent from the manufacturer of your paint and see if you can work with it to your satisfaction. It may be helpful to understand how flattening agents work. Basically, the create a rougher surface on the dried paint surface from which light does not reflect as readily as from a smooth surface. When the flattening "dust" is added to the paint, when the paint dries, the flattening "dust" particles stand proud above the surface of the paint film. So, the amount of dust particles determines how "rough" the paint surface will be and how much reflection will come off of it. On balance, it is far, far easier on smaller pieces, of work, like models, to hand rub the surface to the level of gloss (or no gloss) desired than to mix flattened paint, because the flattening effect can be seen as the rubbing is being done.

Exactly so, and especially for the relatively limited amount of this sort of work that we see modeling ships. I use the Artesania Latina scrapers and they work fine. I clamp them in a jeweler's hand vise as close to the edge as possible to make them rigid.  Amazon.com: Artesania Latina #27300 Micro Shapers, Set A, 3 Plates : Arts, Crafts & Sewing
 

Exactly so, and especially for the relatively limited amount of this sort of work that we see modeling ships. I use the Artesania Latina scrapers and they work fine. I clamp them in a jeweler's hand vise as close to the edge as possible to make them rigid.  Amazon.com: Artesania Latina #27300 Micro Shapers, Set A, 3 Plates : Arts, Crafts & Sewing
 

Now that does look handy. It's like a miniature router table. It took me a while to find on line: Wolf Tools - WolfTools  About $130.00, plus, you have to but a separate Foredom attachment to mount it to your workbench or other solid holding surface so you can use it with both hands free to handle the workpiece. 
 
Have you seen the similar rig from Vanda-Lay Industries? ROUTER TABLE (vanda-layindustries.com) It's all CNC'd aluminum and has a much larger table for about three quarters the price. The Vanda-Lay router table doesn't appear to permit swinging the bit, but if one wanted a beveled edge, all they'd have to do is use a cone-shaped burr.
 
These two sort of compare in the same way Proxxon compares to Byrnes!  
 

 
It's advertised with a Dremel as the power source, but I spoke with them some time ago and they said they could supply a 1" Foredom handpiece holder instead of the Dremel holder on special order. 
 
 

@Bob Cleek 
Probably unintentionally glib above - I mean a thanks response
With your contribution we have three apparatus that will potentially do the same job,  two with a Dremel and two and maybe three with the Foredom -  StewMac has a Foredom collet hand piece with threads that match the Dremel - if the Vanda-Lay is a tread mount - no custom fit is needed. 
 
The sobering factor is that a bevel of significant length is a rare function in my experience.
My take home lesson from using the StewMac as a router - with a 220 drill bit tip as a cutter - to cut a keel rabbet  - a hand chisel is the better way.
 
 
Run-on thinking:
Something like these could work to shape the "OG" type pattern on rails if there was an easy way to fix a flat cutter blade to a central shaft. 
But for all of the work to develop and shape and balance the tool, , hand scraping may be just as efficient.

No, I have not.  I wasn't looking for the Wolf fixture either.  I just thought that it might offer a possibility for someone.
It is mostly to have it on the record and see what discussion came from it.
 
I have a StewMac version that is a router - it becomes sorta like the above if rotated - but I would have to fake a fence. There are holes to mount one.
Routers certainly take up a lot of pages in tool catalogs.  I just have not found a need.  They seem to be very fast, violent, and eager to eat more wood than is intended.
I tried to use an under the table setup as an edger for my 8x4 rough,  but failed to get a smooth face.  My 10" tablesaw did a better job - burned a bit - but the result rides my bandsaw fence better than the sawmill face.

Now that does look handy. It's like a miniature router table. It took me a while to find on line: Wolf Tools - WolfTools  About $130.00, plus, you have to but a separate Foredom attachment to mount it to your workbench or other solid holding surface so you can use it with both hands free to handle the workpiece. 
 
Have you seen the similar rig from Vanda-Lay Industries? ROUTER TABLE (vanda-layindustries.com) It's all CNC'd aluminum and has a much larger table for about three quarters the price. The Vanda-Lay router table doesn't appear to permit swinging the bit, but if one wanted a beveled edge, all they'd have to do is use a cone-shaped burr.
 
These two sort of compare in the same way Proxxon compares to Byrnes!  
 

 
It's advertised with a Dremel as the power source, but I spoke with them some time ago and they said they could supply a 1" Foredom handpiece holder instead of the Dremel holder on special order. 
 
 

You can make your own black paint with the exact amount of gloss that you want.  Buy a tube of artist’s acrylic black and a bottle of acrylic gloss medium.  A tube of white would also be useful for adding a “scale effect” to the black. Here in the US any craft store will stock these items.  Start by squeezing out some black on a palette; a piece of glass is perfect.  Mix in a little white to get the right scale color.  Add a little gloss medium. When you’re happy with the result, mix up a larger batch, thin with water, and paint.
 
Roger

A different path - shellac.
Half strength is an excellent primer - easy to wipe on - quick to dry - an excellent undercoat for just about anything.  Scotch Brite (fine), tack, and then paint.
 
As a finish coat - it does not have build up.   The more coats, the more glossy.  If a touch of linseed oil is added, it is what was French polish. Substituting Tung oil (pure - not something hinky like Homer's) worked for me.
 
My suggestion is that you can get where you wish - with significant control and a reverse gear - if you use your present flat black and follow on with shellac - you can sneak up on your desired degree of gloss - by using multiple layers of shellac - Scotch Brite when each layer is dry - tack and wipe on another layer. 
Alcohol removes it if you dislike or go too glossy.

Jonathan, I have using Vallejo paint for almost 15 years.
I am very pleased with their paint both regular but specially AV (for airbrushing)
And they do have two different gloss black, if you use a black primer the glossy with really come out.
Best is to apply a surface preparation before applying primer. 
Has buscado gloss black - Acrylicos Vallejo.
Go to Vallejos' website for more information.
And I wish you the best with your painting.

What's a little thread drift among friends?  

Don't kid yourself. He'll hock the family jewels the first chance he gets and use the money to buy more models to support his habit. Those kit junkies are all the same!  

Just a general opinionated observation for what it's worth: 
 
I think that the overwhelming majority of modeling details which are less than optimal are the result of overscale small details which the modeler focuses upon and obsesses over at the expense of the overall impression of reality which is the true objective of the modeling endeavor. Slightly underscale details do not similarly offend the experienced viewer's eyes because our minds, being what they are, unconsciously compensate for details that are smaller than they should be but not for those that are larger and give us a "poke in the eye." It's always better to err on the side of subtlety. When miniaturists undertake to portray a subject with the level of detail found in a ship model, the smaller the scale the more the modeler must be an "impressionist" rather than a "realist." 
 
I've found that scale and historical accuracy should always take precedence over all else. If you do the research on scantlings for your vessel, you'll likely find that the stopping in its deck seams was narrower than a half inch. In most vessels other than naval warships maintained "Bristol fashion" with regularly holy-stoned decks, the decks will be quite dark, discolored by weathering, dirt, and the drips of pine tar and paint falling from aloft and tracked by the sticky bare feet of sailors climbing in tarred rigging softened by the hot sun.) Indeed, the deck of a working whaler would appear uniformly black from the grease spread by the rendering of blubber. The appearance of a ship's deck from a scale distance (i.e. if one were observing the prototype vessel from a full-scale distance) will very often lack the details of plank seams and fastening plugs or trunnels that so many modelers seem so determined to portray in miniature when in real life they'd be invisible or nearly so. Needless to say, carvel-hung hull plank seams wouldn't be discernable when viewed from the usual distant scale viewing distance because they were always finished fair and painted over. They weren't intended to be seen. Hull seams might become more apparent over time as the hull "worked" and became "tired," but even then they were painted over and would not show seams of contrasting paint color. 
 
Of course, there are modeling styles that deviate from what the eye would see of the prototype vessel. The most common of these would be the "as built" framed models whose purpose is to accurately portray timbering details and are finished "bright" (unpainted) as some of the Admiralty Board models seen in the higher quality maritime museum collections. Even in these often-unplanked open-framed models, where plank seams and fastenings may be shown, proper scale may well dictate that such details are nearly invisible or only very subtly suggested. In the finest 1:48 scale museum pieces, unfinished pearwood deck planking is sometimes merely drawn with a pencil line the width of a human hair, omitting plank ends or fastenings of any kind. The viewer's eyes see only the barest suggestion of "planking" with no hint of fastenings or plank butts, but their brain correctly says "planked decks." It is this "tricking the eye" that produces the illusion of reality in fine scale models. Overscale details such as prominent fastenings and plugs, particularly when set where no shipwright ever would have put them, too close to the plank edge or even a single fastening in a plank end, and shiny polished "real copper" plates with tacks having rounded heads two scale inches in diameter giving the overall effect of a terminal case of acne, may demonstrate the modeler's dedication and patience, but to no good effect beyond that.
 
I post this opinion not to criticize any particular modeler's efforts, but rather as an exhortation in the interests of "better modeling." We often see a  less experienced modeler proudly posting work in this forum which exhibits out-of-scale and inaccurate details, often after obviously spending a tremendous amount of time creating them. At that point, it's too late to comment gracefully on such flaws and so nobody mentions them, directly at least. Alternately, when newer modelers ask questions regarding their intentions to pursue such errors, experienced modelers circumspectly express their opinions in suggested alternative courses of action in order to avoid causing offense or hurt feelings. The result of this, together with the marketing gimmicks of some kit manufacturers ("Over 1,000 parts... includes real copper plates!") seems to only perpetuate these mistakes. So I offer these comments only generally to those who may wish to consider them. For those who might ask, "So what makes you an expert?" I can only answer, "Because these are all mistakes I've made myself!"
 
Tom Lauria, a master modeler who has an excellent collection of YouTube videos on ship modeling, has a good video entitled Scale and the Compelling Impression. I highly recommend it!
 
 
 
 
 

That is a truly masterful carving and hard to believe it's machine-reproducible. Just one thing, though. Sailors are a superstitious lot.  An evolution of the oculi even now still painted on the bows of fishing boats the world over, the figurehead represents the "eyes" of the ship and is always posed as intrepidly looking forward, ever scanning the horizon directly ahead, ensuring the ship follows a true and safe course, as with the original example. That new guy there isn't watching where he's going and he's endangering the safety of that ship!
 
(I know. I know. People just hate me because of stuff like this.  )

For some, but by no means all kit manufacturers, the names given to these woods is little more than a marketing opportunity.  Their advertising leads buyers to think that they are getting deluxe materials while in reality as Jaager points out the species offered would not be chosen by experienced scratch builders. As a general rule, the real premium ship building woods are slow growing species with tight, coded grain structure.  Many fruit woods would qualify.
 
Roger