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

[donrobinson]

Beautiful work, I can only imagine how easy those would be to find on the floor!!

[Hubac's Historian]

Well, that is at least one advantage of our awful vinyl composition tile flooring that I have stubbornly refused to sheeth with somewhat nicer laminate flooring.  Often, but not always, I can find them!

[Hubac's Historian]

It was important to me that the shells come out something like the way I drew them.  I am happy with the masters:

 

 

 

Edited September 28, 2018 by Hubac's Historian

[amateur]

Hi,

 

are you sure over your shell-design?

almost all shell like decorations I know from that period do not show the outside of the shell, but the inside, so, the outer rim is curved outward, and not inward.

 

Jan

[Hubac's Historian]

Well, Jan, you raise an interesting question, and it is one that I have considered.  In my view, it is a matter of interpretation, in part, that is bolstered by certain practical considerations, at this scale.

 

In the black and white Berain drawing, I think one can argue an interpretation for either a concave or convex shell.  There do, however, appear to be subtle shadows around the perimeter of some of the shells, that suggest a rounded form:

 

 

The color, Compardel portrait that is based upon this original Berain portrait is, itself, an artistic interpretation with a number of subtle differences, and a marked contrast in the quality of the rendered details (Berain’s drawing is just crisper).

 

All that aside, Compardel definitely argues for a convex form.  In addition to the shadows, Compardel even represents the striated surface texture that runs across the crenelated ridges of the shell.  It is, perhaps, not readily apparent in this image, but it is very clear on the dust jacket for Lemineur’s Les Vaisseaux du Roi Soleil:

 

 

While I agree, Jan, that much ornamental architecture and furniture embellishment, from this period in the latter 17th C., employs concave shell forms, that does not appear to be the intent, here.

 

Even if that were the case, though, I would still have chosen the convex shell form because it is much easier to carve that particular edge treatment (ridge/scallop/ridge) into a convex form, at such a small scale.  This particular edge treatment is an artistic variance from the drawings that I prefer over the rolling, fluffy cloud edge.

 

As ever, I appreciate the question and the debate.  That is, in large part, what I am hoping to encourage with this model, as most of the choices I am making are debatable, either historically or artistically.

Edited September 28, 2018 by Hubac's Historian

[amateur]

When typing the question, I knew youhad thought of the answer before starting the work.

thanks for the explanation

 

Jan

[Hubac's Historian]

Well, this is going to work out beyond my expectations, but it is going to take some doing!

 

Naively, I really thought a few passes, re-tracing my lines, would free the lattice.  No biggie!

 

Not so.  The styrene is thicker than I thought, and one really does have to work up to the line very carefully.

 

I did, in fact, lever off one of my scrolls by pressing up too hard against it with my gouge.

 

Added to that, the lines are near-impossible to see with my diffuse kitchen lighting.  The flourescent overheads, at work, give me better raking light, so I may have to do a lot of this on my breaks.  Or, pencil in my scribe lines.

 

We’ll get there, eventually, and the effort will be worthwhile 😅.

Edited September 29, 2018 by Hubac's Historian

[EJ_L]

Wow!! That scroll work is really going to be fantastic!! Still not sure how I will approach mine but, I'm sure I will get an inspiration eventually.

 

Without a doubt Marc, your build continues to be a very educational build. Be it historical accuracy or artistic interpretations, you have well thought through plans and better still, excellent reasoning that you are always willing to share with us. Thanks!

[Hubac's Historian]

I appreciate the kind words, EJ.

[Hubac's Historian]

The lattice is coming, but it is incredibly tedious work to free it.

 

I’ve cut across the lattice, at times, and had to fit in graving pieces.  That is the beauty of plastic, though; repairs like that are easy and will be seamless on the finished model. The scrolls are fiddly and often come loose.  I’ve taken to brushing the edges of the scrolls with cyano, as a preventative measure, as they come free of the ground.

 

With all the ornaments made, now, I couldn’t resist placing them in a small section to see the spacing:

 

I’m very happy with this, and it gives me the motivation I need to continue chipping away at the lattice.

 

Finally, I’ve begun experimenting with acrylics.  Grumbacher’s Academy line produces a Raw Sienna that perfectly captures my interpretation of the “Ventre de Biche” color that will span the lower and middle batteries, between jet black boot topping and wales:

 

 

I’m glad, now, that Marc Yeu prevailed upon me to consider more period-correct, painted appearance for the so called “dead works,” which are iron fastened.

 

I have some ideas about how to lightly weather the painted finish, so that it makes for a more realistic diorama.  I’ll discuss that more, in detail, as I work through paint tests on my scrap hull.

[yancovitch]

oh my gosh...you're a glutton for punishment 😁

[Hubac's Historian]

You could say that, yes!

[EJ_L]

Very nice! 

 

I am looking forward to seeing what you do with the paint colors.

[Baker]

Impressive what you do with plastic.

I have been building plastic military kits for more than 30 years myself (kits, semi scratch and scratch).
This is great work and really worth following. 

[Hubac's Historian]

Thank you very much, Backer!

 

I hadn’t built a model in such a long time - not since a never completed Airfix Vasa that was coming along nicely until I learned that the upper works were actually red and not blue.  I then lost interest, continued to carry it around with me through several moves, and finally shipped it to the great beyond, down the compactor chute, after so many parts had broken off.  I regret it, now, because the paint work was really good, but it was pretty much a stock build.

 

Fast-forward to now, and I have learned to enjoy the experimental possibilities and to try and push the craft to my limits.  That keeps the challenge fresh and my interest stoked.  It also gives me something productive to do at lunch and in the time before work.  Little by little, day by day.  It won’t be long before all of these modifications begin to take shape as an assembled thing.

 

Thank you, again, and thank you to everyone who has stuck around.  It is greatly appreciated!

Edited October 6, 2018 by Hubac's Historian

[Hubac's Historian]

Interesting find on Pinterest, the other day:

I have no idea whom the artist is, or when this was done, but it shows an interesting interpretation of SR's stern balconies; at all three levels, there appear to be only central projecting galleries, spanning the middle four windows at each level.  This arrangement is very similar to this Puget drawing of the Monarch's stern:

 

Here's the Monarch from starboard, quarter view:

Perhaps these contemporary drawings were the inspiration for this drawing of SR.  The reason that I don't think this interpretation is correct is that Berain's drawing, from the starboard quarter view, shows that the figure of "Fall" is  supporting a projecting stern balcony of the middle tier, or main deck level.

 

As "Fall" is positioned at the outer edge of the stern, at the juncture of the quarter gallery, this strongly suggests that the middle stern balcony projects at least to this juncture, and more likely wraps around and connects to the quarter gallery.  As previously stated, I don't believe that the lower, stern counter projects into an open balcony at all.

 

I do, however, believe that the upper stern balcony only projects across the middle two stern windows.

 

Anyway, I like posting these artistic interpretations, as I find them.  I suspect that they are often riddled with evidence of ship-building practice, at the time of the artwork's creation.  There is nothing that I have found in authentic contemporary portraiture to suggest that the first SR would have had a mizzen t'gallent mast and sail.  Later in the 18th Century, though, this would have been standard practice; perhaps this is a clue as to when the portrait was done.  If nothing else, it is evidence of other people puzzling over the same problems of how to represent the ship.

 

Whatever the case may be, it is a well-executed artwork, with nothing seeming grossly out of proportion.  I like the use of red on the stern, as it is similar to what I intend for my model.  The artist appears to have included Le Pheonix, to port of SR.

Edited October 8, 2018 by Hubac's Historian

[mtaylor]

The sail/mast may have been an experiment of sorts or a proposed method.   At least on French ships, they did try certain things that may or may not have been used later.  For example, Licorne's masting at the time of capture wasn't the "as built", nor the same as the 12 pounder frigates.  It was the same (or darn close) to that of Le Venus.   

[Hubac's Historian]

You may well be right, there, Mark.   One thing is certain - the French were innovators in naval architecture, as a discipline; with innovation comes much experimentation!

[Hubac's Historian]

Alright, so after all of that tedious cutting out, I can begin placing the frieze lattice.

 

Please bear in mind that this seeming, non-sensical gap will eventually be bridged by the upper finishing of the quarter gallery.  In the meantime, I have left the ends overlong to allow for cutting in.  Also, the edges of the frieze lattice may look a little ragged, but that’s just squeeze-out from the styrene cement, which will later be scraped away.  These pieces are really welded on, now; I degreased the upper bulwarks and I give the backs of the frieze segments a light sanding before glue.

 

I must have spent an hour checking and re-checking my starting point in order to be sure I allowed the propper space for the quarter gallery, but also in an effort to optimize my ornamental layout, so that I didn’t have too many oddly cut away shells or fleur-de-lis.  There will be the odd one, here and there, but not many.

 

Until now, I wasn’t really sure just how accurately I had measured and drawn the upper bulwarks and all of their piercings; I did pretty well, I think, to come +/- a light sixteenth.  There was enough latitude to shift the whole layout left or right, in order to make the best of these discrepancies.

 

So, more to come later. Thanks for looking in 😀

Edited October 17, 2018 by Hubac's Historian

[shipmodel]

Hi Marc - 

 

Looking really good.  I don't envy you painting the edges of the frieze pieces after priming.

 

Dan

 

[yancovitch]

yea...i thought you would paint all the pieces before attaching, but i'm sure you have some special technique of painting such delicate creations  😁

[Hubac's Historian]

Hey Guys!  The reason I didn’t paint the frieze lattice first is that I was primarily concerned with establishing a strong bond;  I would hate, after all of that work, for elements of the frieze to just flake off, easily.

 

In my view, this is no different than if the detail had been moulded into the kit, in the first place.  In my twenties, I had a really steady hand for this.  In my forties, I guess we’ll just have to see.

 

The other issue was that applying the lattice has to happen in segments and controlling the squeeze-out is really difficult.  With an already painted ground, you would be messing up the paint, anyway, to scrape the squeeze-out.

 

Lastly, I couldn’t make the shallow relief cuts where the Xs cross until the lattice pieces are firmly mounted on the bulwark plates.

Edited October 17, 2018 by Hubac's Historian

[yancovitch]

i'm sure you'll even be better.....i'll be 78 soon, and i'm better than i ever was 😁

[EJ_L]

That lattice work is really going to look sharp once it is all in place and painted up! I don't envy all the cut in edge painting you have to do but, I'm certain it will look great! 

[Hubac's Historian]

So, this is kind of a big day in my build-log!

 

After much waiting, Ancre publications has finally released the monographie of Le Saint Philippe of 1693.  This is a collaborative effort between Jean Claude Lemineur, and the modeler Jose Tusset.

 

Here is the link:

 

https://ancre.fr/en/monograph/93-le-saint-philippe-1693.html

 

The reason this work is so significant to me, and particularly for this project, is that Le Saint Philippe was one of the new ships of the “Second Marine,” which was the major rebuilding program, following the losses at La Hogue.  This rebuilding program marks the beginning of the long pushed-for standardization of French naval architecture into a codified rate system.

 

Because SR’s rebuild in 1688/89 is so close to the re-construction reforms of the second marine - it is plausible that the re-built, first SR would have incorporated much of the design elements that would be incorporated into the new navy.

 

My approach to modeling SR has always been a sort of forensic exploration, using contemporary sources to fill in the numerous blanks of the Heller kit.  From the instant I saw early photographs of the Tusset model, I recognized many of the more prominent features of the model I was proposing to build.

 

I expect that this new monographie will be an invaluable resource, and a much-needed one for the details of hull form/design, ship furniture, arrangement of armament, masting, rigging, etc.

 

Oh, and did I mention that it’s available in English?!  I know what I want for Christmas!

Edited October 20, 2018 by Hubac's Historian

[yancovitch]

ok...i'll talk to my friend santa, and see what he can do....😊

[fnick]

I'd order it now. Just to make sure you get it in time for Xmas...

 

Nick

[Hubac's Historian]

Yeah, I won’t be waiting too long on this one!

 

In build news, the starboard frieze is going up nice and methodically. It’s a lot like wallpaper, with the cutting in and around ornaments and openings.

 

I’ll post pics when I have a nice progression.  In the meantime, here’s a nice rendering of a typical French second rate, of the period:

 

This drawing provides a good sense for the convolutions of the quarter galleries.

Edited October 20, 2018 by Hubac's Historian

[amateur]

Landstrom did great drawings. Without his book I was probably collecting stamps or something.....

 

Jan

[Hubac's Historian]

Applying the frieze is a lot like cutting-in wallpaper; you have to work your way into and around projections, without distorting the repeat of the pattern, and the only way to do that, really, is just to take your time.

 

On the starboard quarter, the frieze is almost fully in place.  There is one last small segment that bridges the two upper bulwark halves, but I will wait to glue this in, until after I have installed the upper bulwarks.  I want this joint to be as seamless as possible.  When you build the kit, as stock, much of the joint is covered over by the main channel.  Now that I have lowered the channels, though, it will be imperative to do a good fill job on the joint.

 

The stern quarter bulwark is scraped clean of any squeeze out, and the X’s have been lightly relieved to give a more three-dimensional effect.  This piece is now ready to be adorned with foliate diamonds, shells and fleur-de-lis.  I can’t write that without thinking of Lucky Charms cereal ☘️

 

This closeup gives a better sense for some of the difficulty of breaking the frieze up into smaller and smaller segments for the cutting in.  Foliate diamonds will cover the joints in the center of the Xs, and will be let between the pointy joints where the upper and lower tiers of the frieze meet.  I shortened the ears of the crowning ornament, above the window.  This will make a more sensible layout for letting-in the foliate diamond, just forward of the window.

 

On the other hand, the forward bulwark pieces were much more straight-forward, and placing them was much easier and faster.

 

The difficulty with the forward bulwarks was fitting the fleurs.  I still had to do a bit of shortening and re-shaping of the central petals to get them to fit within the allowable space.  I still think they’re a little too large, but the effect is pleasing enough that I don’t feel motivated to make new, smaller masters; this is especially so, after seeing the now completed model of the Saint Philippe, with it’s diamond-hatch frieze of significantly smaller fleurs.  Granted, the St. Philippe’s frieze is more dense.  Nevertheless, smaller is better in both cases.

 

Anyhow, this would be one of my hard limits on this particular model.  It is close to what I drew, in the first place, and in scale with the black and white Berain drawing, where the fleurs are quite large.  In wood, though, I would go the extra few miles to get it absolutely right. 

Edited October 30, 2018 by Hubac's Historian