Soleil Royal by Hubac's Historian - Heller - An Extensive Modification and Partial Scratch-Build

[Hubac's Historian]

Hello Everyone!

 

Life has continued to keep me busy, so there hasn't been much build progress (expected, by now, I know ), but I did manage to finish the port framing.  While it isn't as clear in these pictures as it is in person, there is some nice graduation in frame thickness from the lower to middle deck.

 

 

 

As far as added detail goes, this is just the tip of the iceberg for what I'm going to do.  I've been spending quite a lot of time at my father's house, lately, and I dug up a souvenir from my time at the Batavia Werf shipyard, back in 2003.  As I mentioned in an earlier post, Mr. Herbert Tomesan had a profound influence on my perspective of plastic, scratch-build modeling.  Below is a defective cast-off that Mr. Tomesan sent me home with.  I forget which Dutch ship this represents; I'm not even sure whether it is a model of a specific vessel, or more generally, a type he was using to fill-out the scenery of his Texel Roads diorama.

 

All of the detail that eventually becomes a resin-casting like this, starts out as various strip and extrusion styrene that he applies to a vacuum-formed hull shell, in order to produce a mould master.

 

These are some of the missing details that I will be applying, in the same fashion, to SR.  It's really easy to do, and as I think you can see, the execution - although rendered to excellent effect, here - doesn't have to be flawless to be really really convincing, even in the absence of paint and weathering:

 

 

I'll be adding this protective sweep of timbers that nestles between and around the wales, in order to protect them from raising anchor.  While examining this model, I was reminded of the clever tricks Mr. Tomesan had devised for simulating certain details.  The tree-nailing in these protective timbers is actually the impression of a hypodermic syringe needle.  Most of the simulated tree-nailing, on the rest of the model, is a simple pin prick.

 

 

I'll need to add chesstrees, scuppers (which, here, are simply very light gauge styrene strip that he's cut into rectangles and then Exacto'd out the centers), the washer and through-bolting to the sides of the gunports for the carriage tackles, and the bolted fasteners at the wale scarfs.  I will, incidentally, be filling in the Heller butt-joints on the wales and scribing in scarfs at appropriate intervals.  His grain detail is simply course sand paper scratches that follow the run of the planking.  While this type of grain simulation won't perfectly match the moulded grain detail in the Heller kit, I suspect that experimenting with various grits and adding just the slightest bit of variation in the run of scratches should blend in well enough to not be glaring.

 

On the research end, I am happy to say that I now have what I feel is an arguable, or reasonably debatable context for the model that I am building.  While a number of my prior assumptions about the Heller kit, and the Tanneron model upon which it is based, have been demonstrated to me to be false, I have at least come to understand what the specific errors in kit architecture are, and how those errors create a false impression of a ship from the First Marine of Louis XIV.  Some of these errors will be corrected, or at least mitigated with my build (i.e., the beam, draft and sheer), others relating to the number and arrangement of guns (particularly, the spacing between gunports), and the specific architecture of the post-1673 stern are not possible to kit-bash away on a pre-moulded hull.  I am, however, at peace with this reality as I view the entire project as an effort to create a reasonable impression of what Soleil Royal may have looked like, on the whole, following her refit in 1689.

 

My correspondence with Mr. Lemineur (Les Vaisseaux Du Roi Soleil), and Andrew Peters (Ship Decoration 1630-1780) has been in-valuable in coming to understand the origin and context of much of the imagery I have been posting here.  I have asked each of them permission to share with the forum what they have so graciously endeavored to explain to me, and I will wait to hear from them before doing so.

 

I feel for the sake of Mr. Lemineur, in particular, who has spent so much of his life researching the archives in an effort to discern truth from fiction, that I must be very clear about what I am doing, so as not to mislead anyone into believing that this project is in any way a definitive representation of the ship's known appearance.  It is largely a work of conjecture, on my part, but one that at least draws reasonable inferences from better understood, contemporary sources.  I respect Mr. Lemineur's dislike for the Heller kit's in-accurate architecture and will take some time, in my next post, to discuss what those issues are.

 

If, after a reasonable time, I do not hear from either of these men, I will at least post my opinion of why Berain's stern drawing reasonably corresponds with the color drafts of SR's quarter gallery and bow.  These three views, it seems to me, may very likely have represented her post-refit appearance.

Edited February 12, 2017 by Hubac's Historian

[Beef Wellington]

A very interesting project indeed, definitely want to follow your progress.

[EJ_L]

I am thinking that the book Les Vaisseaux Du Roi Soleil is quickly moving up my list of books to buy soon. The more I have been reading your log the more I am thinking it may be an invaluable resource for my own S.R. build. I did see that Ancre does have an English copy of it too!

[Hubac's Historian]

Welcome, Jason!  Thank you for coming to check out the project.  Build progress will, admittedly, be slow.  I'm not in a rush to finish.  I promise you, though, that the more substantive elements of the modification will be worth sticking around for.

 

EJ, interestingly, Les Vaisseaux Du Roi Soleil is now available in English.  I've done a passable job of translating most of it, but it is tempting to get the English version, although I don't feel like paying full price for a second copy.  The benefit has been that my French recognition and vocabulary have improved tremendously!

 

Andrew Peter's book, Ship Decoration 1630 - 1780, is one that I also highly recommend.  He is, himself, an English ship carver, who at the time of the research for this book, was under contract to design and execute the carved work for the Swedish East Indiaman, Gotheborg.  The book is a really fascinating study of the primary European nations' development of their commercial interests and a navy to protect them.  His focus is primarily on the artistic development of styles that are specific to each of the reigning powers, but his study draws upon the contemporary commercial and architectural influences that shaped tastes in art and eventually found their way down to the shipyards.  For anyone who is generally interested in the life of a 17th Century ship carver, the book paints a fairly vivid picture of what it was like to be subject to the crown, often at odds with the natives of a foreign shipyard (if your talent warranted importing), and in arrears (depending upon the state of the coffers during war times) for payment of your work.

 

My next book to read is Vasa, A Swedish Warship by Fred Hocker.  I've only skimmed through it, so far, but it looks like an amazingly photographed and insightful examination of the iconography of the ship and the particulars of her construction.  EJ, you may like this book, as well, because both Vasa and La Couronne were considered ground-breaking vessels, for their respective countries, because of their two continuous gun decks.  Given the cross-pollination that was common in shipyards of the day, with Dutch shipbuilders building for the Swedish and French navies at various times, this should be a very useful resource for period construction details - many of which would probably still be in evidence much later into the 17th century.

[EJ_L]

I may look into getting that one as well. I have leaned heavily on the Vasa and it's research in building La Couronne. The French did use a lot of Dutch influence in the early 17th and from hat I have been seeing, there are many very similar practices common in the two ships. Plus I am sure that one day I will get around to build the Vasa as it is a must have for the time period.

[Hubac's Historian]

So, my excitement over Adobe Illustrator 7 was short-lived.  Once I tried to install it on my Mac - on which I had recently updated the operating system to El Capitan - I discovered that the Old Salt no longer supports the "classic environment" of this older software, with a copyright dating back to 1997.

 

In lieu of that, I have downloaded a 7-day trial of Adobe's current software from their Creative Cloud suite.  I had been cautioned on a separate thread (What To Do About Poorly Drawn Plans), by Chuck Passaro, not to get my hopes up with regard to the Autotrace function.  He (and others) certainly proved to be right, as the resulting scans of my pencil drawing - no matter the format or level of saturation (?, image density?) - proved to be full of nubby nodes and missing detail and generally useless.

 

As Chuck explained to me, the only remedy to this problem is to learn how to manually trace over the imported image using the pen tool; one small line segment at a time.  He gave solid advice on how to effectively go about doing this, and as I always find in situations like this, YouTube is your best friend for figuring out the small stuff.

 

Like anything else, though, manual tracing is a skill that takes practice to acquire.  At the moment, I can hand-draw somewhat faster than I can trace, but tracing affords you many advantages, such as the abilities to rescale and work in layers.  The daunting aspect of all of this is that Jean Berain's stylings are replete with complex, interlacing bandwork that is remarkably tedious to trace digitally, but even more-so to capture by hand; by capture, I mean to approximate the artistry of the thing, which usually means drawing and erasing one small line over and over again.  At the moment, I'm not sure what the best approach is.  I'm going to keep at it, though, and see how it goes.  At the very least, I'm acquiring a new skill. 

 

During "arts and crafts time" with my daughter, recently, I decided to start laying out the quarter galleries, in pencil, onto a printed copy of my drawing.  It seemed to me that the reasonable place to start this task was with laying out the tree tiers of lights; five middle deck windows, two main deck windows, and one quarter deck window.  The windows of the quarter galleries must, within reason, align with the windows of the stern;  I say "within reason" because the Heller kit as it is moulded and intended to be assembled does not have "windows in the middle and main deck levels, but rather, relief panels that do not have to neatly correspond with the stern - with the single exception, of course, of the quarter deck window.  My choice to add a 1/4" extension piece to the hull, above the stern counter, only complicates this alignment issue - however, not so much that I don't think the problem can't be overcome with some judicious use of space management.

 

Ergo, this drafting exercise yielded the first of several stumbling blocks to re-scaling an artist's rendering to the established architecture of the plastic hull and upper bulwark pressings.  The available space between gallery levels for those five middle deck windows is significantly taller, and consequently more narrow seeming, than rendered in the color portrait.

 

 

My instinct, at the moment, is to maintain a window opening that is closer to square than rectangular and then design an appropriate ornamental detail to bracket the top and bottom edges of each window.  Alternating shells and fleur-de-lis, for example, could be one approach to balancing the available space in a way that seems deliberate, and helps to unify the composition - even if this, in fact, amounts to an artistic deviation born of necessity.  Another possibility would be some form of tracery banding that takes its design cues from the walks between galleries.  Here are two slightly different examples of a light, filagree addition to the top and and bottom edges of two of the middle deck windows:

 

 

This design is actually a horizontal bisection of a detail that is expressed in the center of the shield of each antler escutcheon carving, on the main deck level.  To the right of these two windows are two more window spaces that illustrate how tall and narrow the openings would appear if they weren't shortened.  I believe that maintaining something closer tothe appropriately sized window opening, as seen in the color rendering, is more conducive to replicating the feeling of the original decor, than any small artistic liberties taken, will detract from the effect.

 

I should mention that I have not bothered (at this early stage) to draw in the overlay of the lower finishing to the quarter gallery, where it crosses the edge of the transom, on the lower deck level.  If I had, the sense of balance of the quarter gallery would be much improved.  One might also notice that it was necessary to scallop, aftwards, the lower finishing so that I could clear the aft-most, lower deck gun.  I'm not entirely happy with this, but I don't find it terribly jarring either.  The line can be improved - as could all of these hand sketch lines with the curve-smoothing capabilities of Illustrator.

 

One last thing, though:  I sometimes find it useful to crosscheck a design by looking at it upside down:

 

 

The perspective of this picture doesn't perfectly capture the effect, however, viewing something upside down often reveals glaring dissimilarities, when what you are after is reasonable agreement.  Again, what is shown here is not an exact replica of the portrait, but I think, a reasonable facsimile that takes into account certain immovable features of the kit architecture.  In the end, I think I will probably have to draw the quarter galleries entirely by hand.  while I could import a scan into illustrator, trace it and corner-drag it to fit the three levels of the stern approximately well, my gut tells me that I will run too far afoul of the aft-most guns of her broadside.

[EJ_L]

You may have already answered this but are you modeling her with the quarter galleys having open balconies or closed? I have been leaning towards open as that is how I am seeing her when looking at renderings viewed from the rear but when seen from the side, harder to tell. If you are building with open balconies then your window alignment would be easier to accomplish as the bottom edge of the window would most likely be below the top edge of the balcony rail. This would allow the windows to line up on both the stern and side but you would not necessarily be able to see this due to the balcony rail. 

 

If you are modeling them closed then it may be the rounded shape of the galleys that is making things look off in the drawings. Curves are hard to get a proper perspective when drawing and viewing in 2 dimensional space. When I look at architectural drawings at work and they have curved features, the various items on that feature always look distorted and not right due to the flattening of the curve or the perspective from where it is drawn. This can easily distort layout and size.

 

To double check what you are doing will look good to you when modeled, I would suggest making a simplistic paper model of your drawing. This would be inexpensive and might put things into better perspective while allowing you to make easy changes when needed or wanted. If you are going to go through all this work and effort may as well go a step further!

[Hubac's Historian]

Hi EJ,

 

Your points are well taken, and certainly, the subject of SR's quarter galleries is one of much confusion and debate.  I will definitely be making simple card templates, when the time comes, that show both the outline of the galleries against the hull, as well as their projection from the hull at the middle, main and quarter deck levels.

 

At the moment, I am in correspondence with Mr. Michel Saunier concerning his spectacularly complete scratch-build of Soleil Royal.  His approach to the quarter galleries is decidedly different from what I am attempting, but he has reams and reams of documentation to support his theory of the ship, and his research is really quite fascinating.

 

I had been waiting to see whether Mr. Lemineur and Mr. Peters would explicitly grant me permission to share their insights, but I have not heard back from them, and I think Mr. Lemineur has grown tired of this project, anyway.  To each his own, of course.

 

So, EJ, in answer to your question about whether I will portray the quarters as open or closed, the answer is: both.  Following is my detailed analysis of Berain's stern drawing of 1689, as I believe it relates to the color (and more directly - the black and white rendering that I use as my avatar) draft of the stern.  I am really just cutting and pasting this from one of my mails to Mr. Lemineur, which is why the text sometimes addresses him.

 

--

 

After an even closer examination of Berain's known stern drawing, in combination with the color renderings of the stern and bow, I maintain that there is, indeed, enough correlation between the arrangement and style of these two views to argue that they represent Soleil Royal's post-refit appearance in 1689.

 

My examination of the stern and quarter views, will proceed from the arched tafferal, upon which sit the figures of Europe and Asia, down through the three galleries, toward the waterline.

 

 

 

To begin with, one assumption of my analysis is that the glaring absence of Asia, astride her camel, owes to it's obstruction by the starboard stern lantern;  it is presumed to be there, but is not seen.  Why, on the other hand, there is no representation of the great, central stern lantern, I can not say.  Certainly, owing to it's size and placement upon the top of the scrolled pediments, it would be visible in this starboard quarter view.

 

The acanthus carved quarter pieces that are shown supporting the smaller side lanterns correspond directly with Berain's drawing of the stern.

 

Now, the allegorical figure of Africa - which you contend differs in head dress from the stern to quarter view - is shown, in both drawings, to have the same posture and positioning of her torso and limbs.  Her vestments are almost identical, even showing a similar swaging of fabric across her crossed knee.  The differences seem to lay in the attitude of the cape tassel around her neck, and whether the quarter view  shows her wearing the same elephantine head dress, or simply that the figure's hair is shown in an "up" style.  The color draft is not clear enough for me to say, absolutely, that the two do or do not correspond in this small detail.

 

Where there is very clear agreement between the stern and quarter views is in the style and profile of the three different types of gallery window; main deck, quarter deck and poop deck.  The two quarter windows of the middle deck, beneath which, a cartouche bearing the ship's name is displayed, are enlarged, but similar in shape to the six lights, corresponding with the same level of the stern.  It is my belief that at least one of these two middle deck, quarter windows (most likely the aft most of the two) actually represent a doorway to an open walkway, although this walkway does not pass beneath the grotesque masked archway supporting Africa, and thus it does not wrap to an open walkway on the stern.  The archway exists, as it often does on French sterns, but it ends abruptly just before the corner of the stern.

 

The oval cartouches, bearing the ship's name, are almost identical from stern to quarter, with very nearly the same fretwork banding displayed to the immediate left and right of the cartouche.  Likewise, the fretwork of the upper stern walk wraps to the quarter gallery top finishing, just below the oval window.

 

There are some small discrepancies between the lower finishing of the quarter gallery, as seen from the side and stern views;  the stern view, for example, does not show the acanthus carved waste pipe of the officers' toilet.  Perhaps this is because its presence, in the stern drawing, would obscure the understanding of the ornamental lower finishing of the quarter galleries.  On the other hand, it is possible that the waste pipe is represented in the stern drawing, but it is difficult to decipher because this area of the stern drawing seems foreshortened in a way that does not fully account for the lower finishing of the quarter galleries.

 

(I should note, here, EJ, that this lower middle-deck tier of the quarter gallery is completely closed in, in my opinion.  On Mr. Saunier's model site, there is quite a remarkable amount of debate as to why Berain's stern schematic of the rear-facing quarter gallery window, on this level, is not show to be glazed.  Is it a solid panel, as suggested by shadow lines?; was it glazed?; was the decision left to the shipwright to work out at the time of construction?  It is my opinion that privacy in the officers' toilet, on the high seas, would probably not have been a high priority.  They were enclosed and protected from the elements, so that was probably sufficient.  I believe this pane should be glazed.)

 

The upper finishing of the quarter galleries appears to me to be the sort of shallow application to the hull that is often represented to great affect on modern models of L'Ambiteaux.

 

While the bare-breasted mermaid figures, that flank the upper finishing, don't seem to correspond directly with the subjects of Berain's stern design, they are, at least, concretely connected to the acanthus quarter pieces by the foliate garland - and ultimately to the angel figure, poised just aft of the head timber finishing of the bow, by the same garland.

 

Considering, though, the dominant theme of Berain's stern - total dominion of the Sun King over the four corners of the world and all four seasons - it may be plausible to think of the quarter gallery sirens as beings that are both earthly and ethereal servants and/or playthings of the King.

 

Another small correlation can be found in the short, coved arch above the topmost, oval gallery window, with it's scrolled volute ends.  The very same arch appears in the tafferal frieze, directly above Apollo's head.  It should be noted, also, that this same stylized arch appears in other Berain designs of the Second Marine, as seen in the upper quarter gallery finishing of Le Brilliant of 1690.

 

Lastly, the particular shaping and style of scrolled volute that bookends the middle stern walk, repeats itself in the widening of the stern gallery profile at the middle, or quarter deck level.

 

It is my opinion that the differences in design vocabulary and expression, between the stern and quarter views are minimal, and may be the result of someone other than Berain, but nonetheless selected by Berain, to complete the ship's decor in a manner that is consistent with the pre-established stern schematic.  I say this because the relative proportions of the color drafts do not appear as balanced as the stern drawing of Berain;  in his style, I believe, but expressed by a different hand.  It is interesting to note that a black and white draft of the quarter gallery exists, which closely mirrors the color draft, but exhibits a somewhat clearer refinement of line, and must be the product of yet another draftsman's hand.  This sort of "passing off" of artistic assignments from the master to his apprentices and/or a coterie of established artists would be consistent with the art salons of the day.  Ultimately, the master reserves final say.

 

 

 

It bears mentioning that these black and white renderings agree very much with each other in both layout and style.  These drawings, I believe, are the primary source work of Jean Berain (who's influence on Soleil Royal would not have come to bear before 1689, when he became the primary overseer of ornamentation to the King's ships).  This is why I believe the elaborate quarter galleries and upper bulwark frieze that I have chosen to re-create on this model, represent the post re-fit ornamentation of 1689.  Mr. Saunier's insight and analysis may, yet, change my opinion; he certainly seems to make compelling arguments for a different approach.  For now, though, this is my operating theory of the ship, and the model I am going to build with this Heller kit.  My full frame-up model of the future may take a different approach.

 

I think there tends to be so much disagreement on the issue, because as EJ points out - interpreting a two-dimensional rendering into a three-dimensional object is a trick of perspective.  Berain's stern schematic would seem to indicate that the quarter galleries project away from the hull at considerable depth, at all three levels.  If that were the case, some have posited, wouldn't the Angel/Siren figures that flank the upper finishing be visible on the stern drawing?  They should be, but I believe the quarter deck and upper finishing are much more shallow projections that are applied to the hull.  Perhaps for the sake of simplicity, Berain decided not to represent the shallow projection from the ship's side of the dolphin and siren figures, as they might be viewed through the open archway that supports Africa.  The key for me, is in trying to interpret the shadow clues that are more apparent in the black and white rendering of the quarter gallery.

 

Anyway, a close examination of the Black and white quarter with the color quarter will reveal a number of small discrepancies that seem to indicate, as I mention above, that there were two different individuals creating these very similar representations of the ship.  I don't think I am overstepping by saying that Mr. Peters expressed the possibility that the painter of Mr. Lemineur's color book art might be the work of Etienne Compardel.  For example, he cited Mr. Compardel's painting of Konung Karl, for which Jean Berain initially supplied him with very detailed drawings for what the ship's ornamentation should be in 1694.  This is known.

 

 

Although it doesn't seem so in this particular image capture of the painting, I have seen other views of the same painting that show a very similar color palate - particularly of the sea and sky - to the SR artwork.  The styling of these natural elements is quite similar, indeed.  One could even argue that the relative proportioning of Konung Karl, in this painting, is similarly just a tad "off," as is apparent in the stern painting of SR.  Personally, I agree with Mr. Peters on this possibility.

 

If Mr. Saunier is amenable to sharing of information, which he certainly has been forthcoming with me, so far, then I will share what I learn from him on this thread.

Edited February 20, 2017 by Hubac's Historian

[shipmodel]

Hi Marc -

 

Fascinating discussion.  You are clearly doing your homework, and then some.

 

Have you drawn an expansion of the layout from the top (plan view) for the three decks where you have balconies?  Figuring out a reasonable interior layout may help you with the exterior decisions - the locations of doors to the balconies, for example.  You might also get an idea of how wide (deep) the balconies are.  Obviously, they need to be wide enough to permit a man to walk along them between the windows and the rails.

 

One thing you have not mentioned, probably because it has not come up yet, is that it seems to me that the central sections of the balconies are extended aft to make a larger area for sitting. and that is what is shown on the side view.  Is this how you see it?

 

I really like the added depth of the sills for the gunports and your attention to the small detail that the lower ports have deeper sills than the upper ones.

 

Be well

 

Dan

[Hubac's Historian]

Hi Dan!  Thanks for that.

 

No, I haven't yet drawn a top plan view, but I was thinking about doing that because I will need to layout some form of ladder between the quarter and poop decks, and certainly, that view would help resolve the depth of the galleries at the main and middle deck levels.

 

I think what you are referring to is the hash line that runs vertically and parallel with the hard line of the stern.  This is intended to represent the round-up of the stern, above the stern counter.  It may be a little bit exaggerated, but the detail seems consistent with all the good models of French ships that I've seen, from the period.

 

Over the weekend, I've been fiddling with my sketch-in of the quarter galleries.  I went ahead and filled in the aft-edge of the lower finishing, as well as an outline for the officers' waste pipe.  In the drawing from the post above, I had been trying to cheat the lower finishing a little further aft, so that I could clear the last gun port on the lower deck.  I realized, when I sketched in the lower finishing, that the sense of balance of the lower finishing was totally distorted because the carved detail of the lower finishing must be centered on the axis that runs the length of the quarter gallery.

 

So, in this next revision, I centered the LF on this axis and redrew the forward edge of the LF, which will necessitate filling and moving this gun port 1/4" forward.  I wasn't too enthusiastic about this, at first, but then I measured the distance of the middle deck port, just forward and above it, to the next port on that middle deck level.  The distance between those ports is 25/32".  If I move the lower deck port forward that 1/4", the new distance to the next port will be...

 

25/32"

 

 

This is an alteration, that isn't a perfect solution, but one that I can live with.  I think when this whole thing is layed out in the digital realm, the layout will not be jarring.  Moving the port, however, very much improves the sense of balance to the quarter gallery, and that - in my opinion - is the larger issue.

 

I've also settled upon the size of the five lower gallery windows and the extra ornamental details to fill in the extra space above and below.  The top detail, is taken directly from the upper bulwark frieze, where the frieze becomes most narrow, on the quarter deck level.  Again, I expect purists to take issue with all of this, but that is the nature of this build; additions, subtractions - filling in the gaps.

Edited February 20, 2017 by Hubac's Historian

[Hubac's Historian]

In my on-going conversations with Mr. Saunier, it was brought to my attention how unlikely it would be that a short open walkway would exist on the main deck level of the quarter gallery without there being any connection to an open walk on the stern.  Having taken a closer look, I can now see that the figure of Autumn is visibly supporting a projecting gallery on the main deck level.  Given Autumn's position at the far, starboard edge of the stern, he must be supporting a gallery that extends to the edge, and in all likelihood wraps beneath the arch supporting the figure of Africa, and connects with the short open walk of the quarter gallery.  Access to the walk would, then, naturally be from the stern.  I am amending my theory to include this wrapping walk, on the main deck level.  For the time being, I am not sure whether I am going to change my opinion of the quarter deck stern walk above it, which I currently believe to be a very abbreviated walk that only spans the central two windows of the stern.  Perhaps, it too, extends at least to the quarter figures, but I am inclined to read the shadows of Berain's black and white image of the stern as flat.  I have no doubt, though, that the lowest tier of lights is not a projecting gallery at all.

 

 

Given this new realization, my new conception of SR's stern now more closely matches the arrangement of La Reyne's stern, on the middle and main deck levels.  For the record, while Mr. Saunier has been extremely helpful to me, and generous in sharing his research, he does not share my theory of the ship.  Like Mr. Lemineur, he sees too many inconsistencies between my choice of quarter gallery and Berain's stern.  He, too, is bothered by the use of the Heller kit for the basis of a more serious exploration of what the ship may have been.  I respect his scholarship and his opinion.

 

I have also said, previously, that I did not think the officers' waste pipe was present in Berain's stern drawing.  After really examining this black and white image, however, it now seems that the waste pipe is the primary element of the lower finishing that can be seen here.  One thing that I cannot reconcile, between the stern and quarter views, is why the stern doesn't also show the rest of the lower finishing which should appear to drop down to the level of the lower main wale.  It is not there, though.  In it's place there only appears to be a fuzzy detail of indeterminable form.

 

For my part, though, I maintain that these portraits were produced for a reason.  They must correspond with a specific period in the ship's history, and I believe that there is much evidence of Berain's hand in the design of these quarter galleries.  Therefore, it seems reasonable to me that this appearance of the ship would originate around the time of her re-fit.

 

The other thing that occurred to me is that the particular triple-tiered arrangement of the headrails, in the Compardel portrait of the bow is significantly different from the headrail arrangement of La Reyne in the VDV portrait of her port bow.  The figurehead is the same, but the headrails are different.  To my thinking it seems reasonable that two first rank ships built by the same man, in the same yard, within a year of each other would - upon launching - quite reasonably share the same headrail arrangement.  Yet, the Compardel headrails are distinctly different.  While this is not signed and dated hard proof, this does, for me, signify the strong possibility that the Compardel headrails are also the work of Berain - thus this seems to re-enforce the notion that these bow, quarter and stern views are one continuous tableau.

 

This is my reasoned opinion.  It may, in fact, be historically inaccurate.  However, I have yet to find any signed and dated proof to absolutely say that it is not, at least, plausible.  I welcome anyone in possession of that kind of evidence to come forward and change my mind.

[Hubac's Historian]

After frittering away a few weeks trying to find Adobe disc software that is compatible with my operating system, and failing miserably, I have conceded that I will have to subscribe to the creative cloud on a monthly basis, which should provide ample incentive to get the drawing done.

 

In the meantime, though, I was playing around with layouts for the upper bulwark frieze and have settled for spacing that I think works really well, with the existing architecture.  Bear in mind, of course, that I haven't yet drawn in the other quarter deck ports, the railings, or the ribbon strakes in their entirety.  This is just a line drawing to see how a pattern repeating every 3/4" spaced out.  I haven't extended the pattern further aft, just yet, because much of this space is filled with mermaids, the figure of Africa and the quarter piece supporting the side lantern.

 

 

I think this arrangement gives me reasonable space for all of the alternating shells, fleur-de-lis, scrolls and diamonds that accent the frieze to co-exist without seeming too cluttered.  I had hoped that I wouldn't have to entirely scrape away the ribbon strakes that delineate each level, but with the exception of where they frame a railing - I will have to scrape away the rest and use their ghost footprint as my guide for laying down the new pattern.  The frieze will be made up from fairly thin sheet styrene that I can cut easily with an Exacto blade, and build up a little bit with fine styrene rod, or half-round running the center line of each lattice segment.

 

One thing that is apparent to me now, is that I will have to simplify my quarter deck window embelishments; excising the side details, but perhaps leaving the coved arch and the fid beneath the sill.  At the aft end of each railing, I am experimenting with a small scallop cut-out into the planking which does not match the placement of the detail, beneath the sea serpent rail cap, but nonetheless echos the detail and might add something of value to the design.  Maybe not, though.

 

That's the thing about this sort of interpretation; out of necessity, I will not be able to copy exactly what is pictured in the Compardel portrait, but I should come pretty close and create a pretty strong impression of the original idea.

[Hubac's Historian]

Given the crowded and complicated nature of the ornament surounding the quarter galleries, I wanted to sketch in the various elements (the mermaids, the figure if Africa sitting on her caryatid archway, the quarter piece supporting the side lantern, and the crown and flames), in order to get a sense for their relative proportions and whether I could make it all work in the space available to me.

 

 

What I found was that the 1/4" extension I was adding to the stern was not going to be sufficient, however, if I added an extra 1/8" (the dotted, parallel line that previously represented the round-up of the upper stern) - then I had enough room to make it work.

 

once all of those elements were sketched in place, and relatively close to their ideal shape and size, I was able to complete the freize layout around them.  I think that when I digitize this image, I'll be able to shorten Africa a bit, and lengthen the quarter piece just enough to seem right.  Anyway, now that I can see where the frieze falls, in the midst of it all, I am now fully confident that I can pull this project off and produce something good.

 

I can't really continue to fill in detail on this sheet of regular bond paper because the surface integrity of the paper is failing with all of the erasures and re-working of the design.  As tends to happen with this approach - the surface is also becoming too muddy with loose graphite.  I just wanted to make sure that I wasn't going to commit all of this time to learning software, only to discover that there are layout problems that I couldn't overcome.  An astute eye will notice discrepancies between what I am drawing and what is shown in either the black and white stern drawing or the Compardel interpretation of the same, however, there are a few small choices that were necessary for me to either include certain important detail, or omit less critical detail that overly clutters the design.  Again, the proportions of all of this are not yet ideal, but workable now, with the software.

 

here is how the frieze layout translates to the f'ocsle:

 

[mtaylor]

Fascinating research and work, Marc.   I'm looking forward to your progress in the design/reconstruction.

[Hubac's Historian]

Thanks, Mark!  I'm eager to get started, as well, but I feel this is time well spent, as this ship is all about the ornamentation.  I'll get there eventually, and I really appreciate your interest in and support of the project.

[Hubac's Historian]

Alright, so I couldn't stop myself and I sketched in the dolphins to either side of the main deck windows.  Again, it seemed that these were elements that I couldn't simply scan in artwork, trace and scale to fit.  Maybe it really is as easy as that, but I wanted to sketch them to scale.  I also filled in the panel stiles of the middle deck level and settled on a new transitional line from the stern counter, just below the middle deck windows of the stern, and the upper stern; this would be the middle line, which I think strikes a nice balance and makes for a reasonably elegant transition.  But the paper really is starting to disintegrate on the crease.  So, this time I mean it;  digitize or bust!

 

[mtaylor]

Bite the bullet and digitize.  Once it's in the 'puter, it's not that hard to manipulate it.   I use CorelDraw (2D for use on the laser cutter) and once you get the rhythm and workflow, it goes pretty easy.

[EJ_L]

I second Mark on this and say go for it! I would be willing to bet that you will be fine tuning this build until the moment you put her up in the case for display so you might as well get started with the next phase. Seriously, your drawings are looking good and I think having them on the computer will help you make those fine adjustments that is hard to do on paper.

[Hubac's Historian]

I know you guys are 110% right about this.  When I was experimenting with my week-long trial of Illustrstor CC, it took a few nights, but I started getting the hang of fairing a curved line.  It's just that there are so many tiny curved lines that have to be traced over😱!

 

Anyway, at this point, the build won't progress until I digitize.  I just needed to see that the whole thing was actually feasible.

 

Thanks for the support guys - it is very much appreciated!

[EJ_L]

Your welcome for the support and thank you for this wealth of information about S.R.! It has been invaluable to me for my own build and as there are not too many others building this ship right now on MSW, it is good to have another person to bounce ideas off of.

[Hubac's Historian]

You are also welcome, EJ.  What we can know for sure is really limited, but I think we can draw reasonable inferences.  I will ask Michel Saunier whether I can share the list (a much more complete list than I would ever have expected, or have ever found on my own) of the ship's known dimensions and armament.  One might ask - if it is known, then why must I ask him to share?  I think, because he has spent a great deal of time and effort tracking down the answers that it is a matter of respect.  That information is not known by many and he has gone through many archived examples of correspondence between Colbert and many others involved in shaping Louis XIV's navy, to extract those dimensions and many other insightful tidbits of information.  His commitment to the project (his project of re-constructing Soleil Royal) is really astounding; I've made forensics analogies, here before, and Mr. Saunier is really living that.  One could, with that information, construct a reasonable framework for a ship of SR's time period, just as he has done.  So I will ask.

[Hubac's Historian]

Michel Saunier has very graciously agreed to share some of the specific information he has compiled about Soleil Royal, over the years.  In his working life, Mr. Saunier was an engineer, and the following spreadsheet is a sort of mathematical portrait of the ship.  There is more than enough information, here, to make a really sound reconstruction of Soleil Royal, just as Mr. Saunier is doing.  For his part, he combined this dimensional information with the work of Jean Boudriot, who drafted plans for L'Ambiteaux, in order to arrive at his hull form.  Below is the Google Translated version of the letter he sent me, accompanied by the spreadsheet, which is staggering in its completeness.  As he implores me to do at the end of this letter, I hope we will all make good use of this tremendous gift of scholarship.  For so many of us who are lacking the means to go visit the archives for the many weeks it would take to sift through and assemble this information, this truly is a tremendous gift of intellectual effort and demonstrates his absolute commitment to the project of resurrecting Soleil Royal.  Perhaps this information exists, somewhere, on-line.  But, go find it.  I've been searching on-line for years and have only come away with the basic dimensions of the ship.   I will not attempt to translate the XCEL spreadsheet, for fear that I may in-advertently make a mistake that is mis-leading.  Frankly, I have yet to sift through the document in any detailed way, but I can see just how complete it is.  Everything you'll see is in the antiquated French foot, so just multiply by the Battle of Hastings (1.066) to arrive at the modern English foot.

 

Thank you Michel Saunier!

 

From M. Saunier via Google Translate:

 

good morning Marc

I recovered in its time a document of the "Havre de Grace" which indicates a survey of the dimensions of a ship in Brest on the shipyards. This vessel is marked "drilled at 16", that is to say with 16 ports on the first battery. At that time only the Royal Sun was pierced at 16 and moreover all the dimensions correspond. It is therefore a document of a survey of the SR in 1688.

On the other hand I have found another document which gives the dimensions of the elements of the mature of the Royal Sun.

I have other documents found elsewhere that supplement this data.

I have gathered this data in an EXCEL file. I join him to this message.

All that is missing are the water lines, but I have reconstituted them to the best for my project.

Make good use of this gift.

Michel

 

 

SR Dimensions.webarchive

Keel, Stem, Sternpost.webarchive

[EJ_L]

Great information Marc! Be sure to thank Michel Saunier for me and all of us in your next correspondence. I do hope that one day all of this research gets published in a book for the benefit of us all. These 17th century ships while famous and admired by all really do lack a lot of information. Even the Vasa being physically present where she can be studied still leaves a lot of blanks to be guessed in. I do hope that more people with the knowledge and expertise to do so, find a way to discover and publish their findings so we can learn more about these great ships. 

[Hubac's Historian]

P.S. I was just trying to open the above links, and was told I couldn't because they were from an "unknown web developer".  Not sure whether that is just a problem for me.  Although, I was able to open them on my computer, directly from the email that Michel sent me.  Let me know whether you have trouble opening the links.

[vossiewulf]

On 3/10/2017 at 7:01 AM, Hubac'sHistorian said:

I know you guys are 110% right about this.  When I was experimenting with my week-long trial of Illustrstor CC, it took a few nights, but I started getting the hang of fairing a curved line.  It's just that there are so many tiny curved lines that have to be traced over😱!

 

Anyway, at this point, the build won't progress until I digitize.  I just needed to see that the whole thing was actually feasible.

 

Thanks for the support guys - it is very much appreciated!

You can do everything you need to do with paths/splines in Photoshop CC plus have a much more logical workflow for the graphics, Illustrator is really for folks specializing in vector graphics for advertising or other graphic design.

 

I recently took Gerard Delacroix's Commerce de Marseille deck plan (with his permission) and did the below in Photoshop. I'm pretty sure this kind of detail is enough for what you need and as you can see you can generate depth without much difficulty - almost all of the shadows here are just painting very low strength black (like 95% translucent) with a soft-edged brush and building up those those strokes where it should be dark and not so much where it shouldn't be, and limiting where they go by working inside selected areas.

 

If 2D isn't good enough you need to go to 3D, CAD programs are the obvious choice there but I prefer 3d modeling programs, I think the workflows are much easier to use for creation of complex 3D objects, you can always export a DXF/DWG/OBJ and import into a CAD program if you need the plan/drawing generation features. However, the learning curve is both steep and long and it takes real commitment to learn enough to be reasonably productive. I've been using 3DS MAX since it was 3DSr4 for DOS in 1994 including off and on professionally, and there are still big sections of it that I have no clue about. So strongly suggest you go as far as you can 2D.

 

 

 

[mtaylor]

3 hours ago, Hubac'sHistorian said:

P.S. I was just trying to open the above links, and was told I couldn't because they were from an "unknown web developer".  Not sure whether that is just a problem for me.  Although, I was able to open them on my computer, directly from the email that Michel sent me.  Let me know whether you have trouble opening the links.

 

Chrome automagically downloaded them but they have an extension of .webarchive  Not sure what that is.  Maybe you need to open and then save them as a PDF or some other file type?

 

And thank Michel Saunier for all of us.  

 

 

[vossiewulf]

Webarchive is an archive type exclusive to Safari, won't be able to read them without installing and using it.

[Hubac's Historian]

I will definitely pass along everyone's thanks and appreciation to Mr. Saunier.  I would totally understand if someone had spent years of their life trying to track down information on a subject - I would totally get it, if they didn't feel like just handing over that information to whomever.  It only reflects brilliantly upon the generosity of Mr. Saunier's spirit and his desire for the subject to be treated with respect.

 

Vossie, I appreciate what you are saying, although I don't fully understand what you are saying yet.  I'll have to consult my old pal YouTube, and then I'll probably private message you wih some specific questions.  Computer-ese is not my first language, unfortunately.  But, thank you for weighing in.

[vossiewulf]

Safari is Apple's browser like Chrome or IE. You can download and install it, and once it's installed, run it and use it to access those webarchive files and you should be able to see what's inside that archive.

[Hubac's Historian]

Well, that's the weird thing; I work on a Mac and the operating system is current.  When I open the files directly from my email, it isn't a problem.  They show up.  However, when I try to click the link from within the MSW site (just to make sure it was a working link), I get that message.  Weird.  As long as everyone else can access the information, then I am happy.