vossiewulf

Thanks for the Heads Up - This looks to me to be a very attractive alternative for finishing frames to size using it mounted upside down with either a router or sanding drum. I note its made by a Guitar builder and the video appears to show some pretty fine adjustment for the cut. Included a screen shot from the video just need to counter sink the attachment screws for what I need.

 

Welcome to you and everyone else I'm a guitarist also, I started doing my own work when a so-called luthier ruined the neck on my 40th anniversary Strat by stripping the truss rod.

Luthier supply houses are an excellent place to find ship modeling tools. I'm going to post another thread with a few other things I have that people might find of use. You know those $20k custom guitars with inlay up and down the neck? Chances are it was done with this tool. It really does work extremely well for minute adjustments, and with a little time invested in designing and building a table for it, you should have a very flexible precision tool. I need to do the same, I've had it for a while but except for some pretty thorough tests, I haven't used it in a project yet. I have all the supplies and materials and hardware for a really sweet Strat-type guitar with my own body design, it just hasn't made it to the top of the queue yet. Mostly because ship models are interfering.

More places you should spend some time checking out what they have:

LMI

Philadelphia Luthier

Also, if you have the Byrnes table saw or another capable of small scale work, you can get some good prices on wood of most domestic and exotic species by buying fingerboard blanks. They're typically 5/16" x 2.5" - 3" x 21"-25". LMI has good ebony fingerboards in this size for $20-$25, a single one could be resawn (with a nice .03 slittling blade) into quite a lot of ship scale timber.

Here's the carbon-coated precision tweezers that are my favorites for gluing little tiny bits. The coating provides a noticeably better grip than uncoated ones.

The place I start for tweezers is electronics manufacture supply. They have more options for quality tweezers than anyone, plus probes (rigging tools) and cutters - I use my little full-flush end cutter constantly.

Here's the tweezer section. Just about every metal and other material is available in a myriad of styles. Unfortunately their new site design has made it really hard to filter on some of the important factors - the ones I use most are smooth with carbon-coated tips, which provides massively better grip. But I don't see a way to filter on that, and all I'm seeing at the moment are the diamond-coated ones that are the same idea but more expensive.

That said, I like some of the options I'm seeing on the bonsai site, thanks for posting that.

I don't see you mention files. You need both a set of medium sized files, single cut not double cut. You can get these for not much at any hardware store. The other is a set of needle files. If budget is a factor, just get standard hobby store needle files, also pretty much any online hobby store carry them. They should be $10-$15 for a set of 6 or 8. 

Actually that's an important question - are you trying to go with the cheapest options available, or do you want to buy good quality basic tools that will last? I definitely recommend the latter, mostly because in my opinion the cheapest tools generally work so poorly that they cause lots of frustration, the kind of frustration that makes people give up. Good tools used correctly make whatever they're supposed to do easy and efficient.

If you're willing to spend some money, you'll get an order of magnitude better performance by getting real jeweler's needle files.

On the other hand, some good tools aren't expensive - I use a ring holder regularly for holding small parts.

If you haven't noticed a trend, most of the hand tools I have now are professional jeweler's tools from Otto Frei or Contenti. They work so much better than hardware store tools that they make previously difficult jobs very easy.

Being new, not sure this has been mentioned before, I searched and didn't see it.

This is a luthier's tool for doing inlay, which ship modelers don't do much. However, any router base that precisely controls depth can be flipped over and turned into a router table. I haven't gone so far as to make a real table, but I have used it on small pieces while clamped upside down in a vise, and it works great. It operates very smoothly and the depth can be adjusted with really minute accuracy.

Precision router base for Dremel

I too have bought several of the miniature tools and also use them... but in my opinion, cool as they are, the better option for basic small scale planing is their detail palm planes. They are planing an area around the size of their miniature bench plane, have an adjustable-length palm rest that should fit hands big and small, and I find I have more control and can go faster than I can with the straight miniaturized bench and block plane. And they have scrubbing irons for cases of difficult grain.

I have the flat and the double-concave, don't see enough of a use for other two.

I have not been aware that the dialectric properties have something to do with the reflectance, will have to read up about this, but I gather this has also something to do that metals do not polarise the reflected light, while other surfaces do ... without going into the deeper physics of this, one important point is where on, or rather in, a surface the incoming light is reflected. Many real life 'surfaces' are actually three dimensional structures, albeit thin. Somewhere in this structure the light is reflected and may be bouncing around before leaving again. So, on a microscopic level, not the whole surface may be reflecting, while for metals it is essentially the whole (at least above the atomic level).

The buzz in the 3d world over the last several years has been about the development of PBR (Physically-Based Rendering) and metal/roughness shaders, because artists finally have access to rendering models that closely match reality. Metal vs. non-metal controls the reflectance model, and roughness takes the place of many unrealistic settings in previous rendering systems for "glosiness" and "specularity" etc. So much simpler and more realistic.

If you want to see this really in action, check out Substance Painter 2, which is a super-spiffy texture creation and editing application that allows you to paint in real time on the 3d model. I've used it quite a bit on a battletech game I was working on:

To be somewhat technical, borrowing from my 3d modeling/animation experience, the categorization of how things reflect light starts with non-dialectric vs. dialectric materials, basically conductive vs. insulator. All metals reflect light one way, everything that isn't conductive has a different refelective appearance, specifically conductors have specular reflections in the color of the conductor, while dialectric materials reflect the colors of the light that strikes them.

Simple explanation of conductive vs. dialectric reflectance 

More detailed explanation (click on Dialectric and Metal Materials in the list on the left)

So if you are going to simulate a metal finish properly and have it look correct, the material you're using to simulate that surface also needs to be conductive. That's why these really good powder finishes look so accurate- they're made of metal powders. No plain non-conductive paint will ever really look like metal.

Dito, the crew were kept busy keeping things 'ship-shape and Bristol-fashion' ... of course they would have to be painted according to the materials that were used on the prototype.

 

BTW, I am strong believer in the statement that nothing looks more like metal - than real metal ... where bare or 'patinated' metal was used, it may be a good idea to use the same metal, if possible (keeping in mind that iron and lead are being frowned upon by museum conservators).

How about this? It's balsa wood glider I made 

Setting being a smartass aside for the moment , you're correct in most cases. But if you haven't seen what can be done with metal powders these days, you may need to reassess that idea.

Mercedes D.IIIa WWI aircraft engine:

Thanks for the likes and the comments.    I'm getting close to an update.

 

Vossiewulf,

...

 

As for color selection.. I look to the masters of the art and see what they've done, what looks good to my eye and meets my needs.  Here's the post where I made my choices...   http://modelshipworld.com/index.php/topic/5339-licorne-by-mtaylor-pof-316-french-frigate-hahn-version-20/?p=269711 In Licorne's case.. my only real mental battle was whether to plank her in cherry or swiss pear.  The pear won out as the cherry just gets too dark with age.

 

BTW, I thought model shipbuilding in general was a "disorder"...  ???

Actually I might have to ask some advice sooner rather than later. After thinking about it, I went and purchased the boxwood replacement package from Crown Timber for the Lady Nelson kit that I have, and I certainly won't want to paint over that. I have quite a lot of wood of all sorts of species floating around my workshop already for other reasons, probably won't have to buy anything else. And I'm pretty good with aniline dye stains.

I intend to start it after I wrap up what I'm working on now, which hopefully won't be too long. When I do I'll try some color combinations in Photoshop and bounce them off you.

FYI folks, I've been going back and forth in mail with Mikhail, the maker of those tools Alexander has that we all want to steal from him, and I have some more info for those interested.

He's making these tools from high quality taps made with R6M5 steel and although he didn't say, that should put the Rc hardness at 63 or maybe 64, so these will be like Japanese tools, very sharp but you definitely don't want to twist the tool in the wood as the cutting edges will be fragile.

R6M5 is a high speed steel with the normal chrome/moly of HSS, but also high in tungsten and vanadium, the edges should hold for a really long time. On the down side, not at all an easy steel to sharpen with hand methods, but that shouldn't be a problem with these small tools - you really don't need to remove much metal. I'm not sure I would like a 1" straight chisel made out of this steel, but seems to me a very good choice for a micro carving tool. Also many say HSS simply can't take and edge as sharp as A1/O1 simple steels, but the difference is going to be really minimal with these tiny cutting edges, offset by the high quality and consistency of steel from a well made tap, and he says the supply he has is very good. And remember Alexander is all excited about them and that's good enough for me.

Any thoughts on Model shipways Bluenose? Doesn't say if it''s intermediate or advanced, but doesn't look like it should be too bad.

Bluenose or Bluenose II are traditional starting places, with relatively easy hulls to plank, little fancy deck furniture, and simple fore and aft sails with much less rigging than you get with square sails. So yes, that's a very good place to start.

Rudolf, just read the last paragraph ...

 

*************

 

People can get quite dogmatic in certain fields of modell-building and I know that e.g. in military modelling there is this 'matt overall'-fraternity. The logic is that at small scales glossy surfaces may look out of scale.

 

However, personally I prefer the visual interest that arises from the different material-specific sheens. It is true though that something that has been painted in glossy paint on the prototype may not look right, if painted in glossy paint on the model - sheens have to be toned down (sometimes).

 

...

Agree with all of this, just didn't want to make it sound too complicated ;-) I've used a series of leather pieces and cloths also in specific cases, but the fact is the Mk.I Index Finger seems to handle about 80% of the cases.

I do not know of another paint you can do this with besides Tamiya, all the other paints I've tested are rock hard both gloss and flat, only Tamiya has this oddly soft flat finish that can be easily manipulated to whatever gloss you want, and fairly easily. And you're right that it's never one solution fits all, you walk around an aircraft or ship and you see a thousand different textures, each with its own base sheen that has been modified over time by exposure to sun and wind and rain, a truly real finish would have everything from straight flat to straight gloss surfaces and everything in between, frequently on the same item.

Anyway, I recommend folks give the Tamiya flats a spin and see what you can do, I will be willing to bet that this technique finds a spot in your modeling deck.

Thanks Mark.

Hi Mark!

I'm late to your log, but I'm happy I took the time to read the whole build log from the start. This has been a masterclass for me, since I had no idea of the complexity of a plank on frame model. I wish I could do something like this... I really enjoy your detail-oriented spirit. She's just beautiful, no other words suffice. Congrats!!! I'll keep following in the back of the room, just taking notes to myself...

...figuring out how to do the same thing in styrene and carbon fiber

I have to agree on your assessment of the planking job, it appears to be flawless, except for that one spot only Mark can see that still irritates him. But it has to be extremely close to the ideal curves in both axes with a finish that's just as good.

Mark, one question since unfortunately I don't have the time Martin needed to read >119< pages of build log, but what are you doing the black finish with? I'm new of course, and knowledgeable in woodworking and wood finishes but not ship modeling. Are you doing the black with a thinned paint, a pigment-based stain, or dye? 

This might be too big a question, but when it comes to the semi-natural wood finish category like this, how do you decide what is painted, what isn't, and what you want to do with different species of wood, and how do you choose which species and what bits are dark and what are light? In short, are there some basic rules about designing this kind of finish you could quickly explain? If there aren't some simple rules that would be a really lengthy answer and I'll do some reading. I am still much more likely to do full painted finishes, but I'd like to know how to approach the problem if I decide to do a finish like this.

I think these finishes are gorgeous when well done and also makes the result cross over much more as a pure objet d/art,  but I will have a hard time spending all that time on making the physical object as realistic as humanly possible only to not continue with the finish in the same mode. Which is more or less saying "my disorder is more severe than yours, pray for me" but hey ;-)

One more on the flat Tamiya "dry rubbing" technique in terms of the range of possible resulting surfaces - the cowling of the aircraft below was painted Tamiya flat black, and I rubbed it down with bare finger to this level of gloss - no additional processing, no clear gloss coat, just flat black rubbed down for about five minutes. 

And you can see cery clearly the seam of where the center flat section is riveted to the outer curved section, because it's still dead flat. This is a detail of Dr.I cowlings you don't often see in kits, I used a small scraper to create it in this case.

So - you don't need to buy semi-gloss or gloss Tamiya paints, you get a better finish this way. And it does what was my original intent, which is making details clearly visible in the same way they are in the real-life versions.

In case you're wondering, yes the Axial prop is seven layers of elm and walnut like the original and hand carved. The Axial logo decals I made in Photoshop and printed on clear decal film with my printer.

Thanks Alexander. Since I use basswood, if nothing else it teaches you to sharpen an edge. A couple of those very thin parts in the middle are cross grain, so the edge has to be seriously sharp to do that and leave a good surface with all fibers cleanly cut. When I'm doing this I strop the knife every 5-10 minutes and resharpen it every 45 minutes at most. And that's using a knife with excellent steel at Rc62, I don't suggest trying it with anything less.

In case anyone wondered about Ron Hock's tools, 95% of the carving above was done with the detail carver knife at the top of this page (I don't use a big fat knife like most chip carvers do). Except that I modified the handle and the shape of the blade a bit. I sharpen it for basswood at a very fine angle so there's basically no separate bevel, the two sides of the blade converge on the edge. That fine an edge won't hold for long no matter the steel, hence the requirement for constant resharpening.

Geometrical carving is a good phrase for it, another would be "stupid tricks you can do with a compass" The outer decoration in that carving is divided into 14 sections of exactly 25.7183 degrees, and I most surely didn't do that with a protractor.

Alexander, yet another thanks for the clear explanation of how you work. I'm hitting myself in the forehead, I have many diamond points for rotary tools, but I never thought of using them in a pin vise.

Also, now I have to get a set of those carving tools too. Sigh.

I'm just starting with ships, haven't yet carved a figurehead, but I have considerable experience with chip carving.

I also have made some of my own tools, this is my general-use knife, it has a blade Ron Hock of Hock Tools made for me, wenge wood handle, and a brass balance piece that I turned on my little lathe.

And this is my X-acto replacement. I have a clear design in my head for a v2 that I want to try to talk Ron Hock into making and selling, basically a quick-change knife like an X-acto but with much heavier blades in various shapes made by Ron Hock, intended to be sharpened and should last for years.

Make it totally clear, here's the top view of the same piece, in some ways you can see the effect better in this image.

And here's one of the Model Expo 3 inch Ordnance Rifles, except that I basically scratchbuilt the carriage since I didn't like theirs. Why they use horrible-surface white metal on a complex shape like a field gun carriage wheel is anyone's guess. Anyway, this was painted flat Tamiya black, left for a week or so to dry, then rubbed down to this appearance, again I'm please with it.

Tamiya flat black is very different from most flats in that it leaves a very soft (comparatively speaking) surface. But that's ok, we can use that - this is a technique I call dry rubbing, as opposed to dry brushing.

Anyway, once it's dry, take your Mk.1 Index Finger and start rubbing, you can rub it up near a high gloss. This is perfect for surfaces like cannons with the various reinforces and muzzle swell and cascabel, because all of those high points will get glossier and reflective while the recessed areas stay flat. Which is exactly how things work in real life.

Below is a 1:12 scratchbuilt Spandau I made (additional cocking mechanism goes where you see the white T), and used this technique and was extremely pleased with the results, edges and high points get specular reflections like they should, making all the detail very visible the correct way, rather than from the fake hammer of dry brushing.

vossiewulf,

 

I'm basically looking for a masted sailing ship that's somewhat different than the one I just finished. I'll take a look at the Revenge. 

Complicated and fancy or easier than Syren? Revenge is big and complicated and hence expensive. If you're just looking for a warmup, I keep pointing people to the Amati Lady Nelson as I have it and the plans and instructions are good, and if you want to go fancy you can replace all of the (external) wood and masting with boxwood for another $100 courtesy of Crown Timber. Speaking of which I see he has packages for Syren too. If I was going to take the time to do a full-gonzo admiralty model with all framing and timbers and planking exactly like the original, I'd definitely invest the money in the best materials available, that cost is going to be minimal compared to the thousand hours of the build. I don't have any relation to them BTW.

The target I have for said gonzo scratchbuild (several years out) is to use the two-part Euryalus Seawatch series.

Harmstronginga and cathead, thanks so much for your comments. I haven't purchased the kit yet and am seriously reconsidering it now

I'm not exactly sure how a kit can be more of a poor choice if it has bad, difficult wood and crappy instructions, short of pointy wood dowels leaping out of the box and repeatedly stabbing you in the face every time you sat down to work on it. So yeah, I'd say reconsideration is a good plan.

Are you just looking for something galleony or were you interested in that specific kit for some reason? If you're in mood for galleon and race-built is ok, I recently purchased the Victory Revenge and it's excellent.

Hi

 

How about creating a list of bad instruction kits to avoid unless you have masochistic tendencies.  Does the MSW Ship kit DB include this info. I know that it may PO some manufacturers but if they are not prepared to FIX things then perhaps they should be singled out so that potential builders are aware. I keep seeing what is a good first ship or kits with good instructions? forum entries, but there is NOT a Pinned BAD or POOR list

 

Perhaps we could come up with the definitions of what constitutes good instructions for a beginner, intermediate & Advanced ( The Advanced Calder craft Victory has awesome kit build info & plans so there is no excuse for a poorly documented kit no matter the complexity) , and then rate the info per kit!

You don't need a bad list you just need to score all kit plans and have that in the kit DB. It seems pretty obvious, I haven't looked at the DB but I would be surprised if they didn't already have that info since it's a very important parameter defining what kit is like.

If it hasn't been done then yes it should be done and the correct approach is what you are saying, define requirements for excellent instructions for each skill level and then subtract from the maximum possible value for each requirement not fully met or not met at all. And a 1-5 rating range is enough granularity for something like this.

Then we'll need to socialize your plan and identify any asks from external groups, line up initial planning and grooming sessions with the stakeholders, and get the PMO office to designate a TPM to execute against that plan once we have consensus on the action items, milestones, and timeline. Let's have a kickoff call with US, India, and Singapore ASAP.

Yes I do work in Silicon Valley, why do you ask?

Well, theoretically it was the last duty of the captured Rattlesnake.

It was captured by British and after few years sold to French and used by a corsair corvette and renamed "Le Tonnant".

 

That is theoretically the reason of those two twins models.

 

But I cannot demonstrate it, since I have found no real evidences.

 

Keep in mind that the original construction plans of the "Le Tonnant" were made by Vincenzo Lusci, which was the "Backbone" of the pioneer period of the wood kit manufacturers in Italy, more than 50 years ago.

It was their main source of construction plans.

So, since it was a "pioneer period" I cannot be sure of the level of research done for making some of the construction plans.

Some of those model originated by those construction plans are still in their catalogues.

Here's the elevation of Le Tonnant as drawn by Lusci, compare it to Rattlesnake.  No idea whether it's the same or not, just providing reference.

Where would a person find a practicum for the HM Bomb Vessel Granado 1:64 by Victory? I don't want sails to hide the he** I'll go through rigging.

Granado is a brig no less complex rigging wise than Niagara, so just a step sideways. If you insist on a brig, I suggest the Fair American as it has a practicum by the Lauck Street guy. I haven't bought anything from him but it seems his practicums are very thorough.