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

[yancovitch]

wow ...you guys!

[Hubac's Historian]

Holy Christ, John - you’re gonna force me into prayer and swear!  Does that last pic represent the actual status of paint and ornamental work you have achieved so far, or is that merely a photoshop proposal for now?  Either way, it is stunning and completely fascinating.  I will respond more fully in a bit.  I spent about three hours composing the previous post, but I don’t have that kind of time, this morning.

[Hubac's Historian]

One other thought, John, which might offer additional clarity and insight into the specific questions you raise: have you read Guy Maher’s research on the development and appearance of SR?  If not, and if it interests you, simply PM me your email address and I will send it along.

 

There are so many things I like about your rendering for 1693, and I am just completely blown away by your treatment of the upper bulwark frieze and your color choices.  I implore you to open a build-log, if only with sporadic updates, because your followers would be legion for this particular rendition, the coloration, of which, would likely be more palatable to SR traditionalists.

 

More questions and commentary to follow.

[mtaylor]

John, I second Marc's request about a build log.  Looks to be an incredible work.

[Hubac's Historian]

On 4/23/2023 at 3:57 AM, John Ott said:

Marc, any reply to an offhand comment like you gifted me with deserves a detailed response of its own.

Although I never meant to go back to it, I've attached a new version of the sketch that incorporates a lot of your suggestions—higher taffrail, upper balcony balustrade and figures in better proportion, windows and decks lining up better, etc.  I left the lower and middle stern lights alone, since the whole point to the exercise was to see how well SR's features would graft onto a drawing of a real Hubac hull. I can very easily see that a seven-light solution would be practical, though, and Tony Devroude's DR framing corresponds nicely with similar diagrams in Peter Goodwin's book.

 

 

Not to be contrary, but the field of fleurs on the upper bulwarks was used on both Hubac ships that I have VDV drawings of (La Reine and Terrible). They also show up, as you pointed out, on Le Monarque and DR. Looks like it was a First Marine thing. So unless somebody can provide an authoritative description of the first SR's bulwarks, I'll stick with the fleurs. It's the lys amount of effort. Same goes for the vestigial QD upper balcony tier. No tiers shed.

Besides, if I work on this Photoshop thingie any more, it'll take time away from my own Heller SR build.

 

There were some other things in your reply that spark conversation. I—uh,—swiped the 1853 D-M-J Henry  description of the SR the first time you posted it. It looks like it was written by someone who saw this version of the stern drawing:

 

As opposed to the version we all know and love, and everybody wants to attribute to Bérain.

 

 

The mention of the ostrich feathers is a dead giveaway. Has anybody come to any conclusions about who did the original artwork and which version came first? The figure of Africa in the Bérain drawing has the same elephant-head headgear that's on Le Brun's Africa at Versailles. This might be a telltale as to who actually designed the SR figures.

It's weird that D-M-J Henry didn't mention that the figures represented continents, not just "East" and "West." Attributing the designs of the figures to "the pencil of Puget" seems to me a misplaced leap of faith, considering that Le Brun had already designed all the allegorical statuary with the same subjects and attributes for the Versailles gardens. Makes me doubt that Henry had any more insight into the ship than researchers have now.  

You mentioned all the gold leaf at Versailles and the likelihood the first version of the ship was adorned similarly. I recall that in one of your posts you discussed some period document that gave a budget for gold leaf for one of the warships. I can't find that post, but I remember that the amount was scarcely enough to do much more than gild the figurehead. I've been thinking about how to limit the amount of gold leaf on my own Second Marine SR build. One thought was to use most of the gilt on the stern Apollo frieze and the upper reaches of the quarter galleries—keep all the major areas of gold leaf high up on the structure surrounded by blue, just like at Versailles.

 

 

Under this plan, I'd paint the major figures in shaded faux gold (original formula was yellow ochre with lead-tin or Naples yellow highlights, and darker yellow—red ochre mixed in—for shadows. I painted the SR figurehead this way as an experiment. (I can still repaint it metallic gold if I want to.) There would still be the Bourbon crest and crown on the forecastle surrounded by gilded ornament, so there would be some gilding forward. Any thoughts on how much gold leaf seems appropriate for the Second Marine period?

 

 

Thanks again for the information and all the inspiration. This has been a sweet deal— I post an odd little Photoshop and get a college-level education in return. Looking forward to your next post. Building and painting 104 guns in the meantime.

 

John O

 

 

 

 

This past week, John and I have been corresponding and hashing through a number of the issues he raises in this post.

 

First of all, I’d like to say that the revised almost-VdV portrait of SR is so good that it is completely passable, until you take a closer look at those lower window tiers, or a few other tiny details, like the side-lantern quarter pieces, for example.  By his own admission, there are simply limits to how far he was interested in taking that exercise, and it was never his intention to correct everything.  The skill it takes to do something like that is just beyond me!  John also has a wonderful turn-of-pun - good stuff!

 

Now, the stern drawing John posted above was one that I had always assumed was a re-draft for the replacement SR of 1693.  My main line of reasoning, there, was that the stern lights extended to the quarters, seeming to indicate fully closed quarters.  This is pretty definitely a feature of the Second Marine.

 

The eye sometimes sees what it wants to, though, and I had always just taken for Granted that Africa was wearing the elephantine headdress, as on the original Berain drawing.  Well, those are in fact the same ostrich plumes that Henry describes for the very first ornamental scheme.  I can’t find any other D.M. Henry divergences in the drawing, but it is nonetheless a curious detail.

 

John and I have also traded a fair amount of discussion about the curious placement of carvings within the quarter galleries of Tanneron’s famous model.  As John notes, they are so random.  He offered a fascinating possibility, though;  these carvings don’t exactly mirror those that existed on the Grand Chamber ceiling, but they are very closely related.  Maybe their placement, here on the model, was intended as a visual allusion to what can not be seen inside.  Whatever the answer may be, this is an interesting theory.

 

Since John first posted photos of his project proposals and the model, itself, my head has been spinning at the wonder of it.  The coloration and ornamental work is so brilliant, but he has done a masterful job of adding so many small and essential details like skids, scuppers, hancing pieces along the sheer line - which do so much to “finish” this aspect of the model - and an excellent fretted trailboard.  This is just a thoroughly remarkable and well thought-out modification of the Heller kit!  Thank you so much, John, for posting and I hope you will continue to do so.

Edited April 26, 2023 by Hubac's Historian

[Hubac's Historian]

There are still distress washes to apply and some touch-up to do, but things are progressing.

 

The upper stern balcony is finally rounding into form:

The balcony rail completes my circumference around the ship with a band of ultra-marine.  Maybe I will get to fixing this part in-place tonight.

 

There is still quite a lot of work to do with the head and the head grating, itself, but it is all finally coming together.  Yesterday, I made a new pair of seats-of-ease, which are sized according to the space available to them, and reflect the imperfect geometry of my custom head structures:

I have subsequently drilled the waste holes in these, but I wanted to tweak their fit to the model before I did so.  Here they are in their places:

Here is the forward grating terminus in-place and re-touched:

Can anyone spot my homage to modern seamanship and navigation, from starboard:

to port:

It’s a little subtle on this side, but don’t overthink it 😉

 

My greatest satisfaction rests in the fact that I created enough space below the headrails to craft reasonable headrail supports:

As I often say, this is all something of an imperfect approximation, but it is a significant upgrade over the stock kit.

 

As a bonus, John Ott has put together a highly informative info-graphic on the statuary and colors of the stern:

As always, thank you for your interest, your comments and likes, and for stopping by.

 

More to follow!

Edited April 26, 2023 by Hubac's Historian

[yancovitch]

hmmm...if the original ship was built as you have depicted it, i'm sure the enemy would have been terrified, from the beauty of it alone, and turn tail ☺️

[Hubac's Historian]

Well, the English must have been blind that day, cuz they sent the fireships in anyway.

[yancovitch]

😀

[knightyo]

This is going to look spectacular after you've applied your washes.

 

Alan

[Hubac's Historian]

The subject of period colors often comes up on this forum and, fortunately, John has an info-graphic for that as well.

And some additional insight:

 

WHITE—I think they mostly used lead white for mixing hull paint. Guy says "calcium oxide," quicklime, which, along with calcium carbonate (chalk), made whitewash. I know they used whitewash sometimes in ship's interiors, but I don't think it's sturdy enough for exposure to wind and waves. Also doesn't cover as well. Lead was a superior mixing pigment, dried fast, was cheap, opaque, and was permanent as hell.

BLACK—lampblack.  Lampblack was also known as "vine black" because the French had to do something with all those old grapevines. Burnt them to ash and made dry pigment out of them.

RED—red ochre, basically red clay. Vermilion (mercury sulfide) was made from cinnabar. It could only be synthesized in small quantities and was very expensive. Almost in league with ultramarine.

YELLOW—yellow ochre. More clay.  Lead-tin yellow (lead-tin oxide) was the lightest and brightest yellow. Orpiment (arsenic sulfide) was up there with it. Naples yellow (lead antimonate) wasn't common in the middle 1600s because it hadn't been synthesized yet. A natural form of Naples yellow was dug from the side of Mt. Vesuvius, but as you can imagine, it wasn't common.

FAUX GOLD—was yellow ochre with painted-on lead-tin highlights and red ochre in the shadows and undersides. Sometimes they painted over it with Burgundy pitch (spruce resin) and brass or copper powders to give it a metallic lustre.

BLUE—this is the big one. Guy says it was "copper carbonate mixed with sulfur." Partially right.  In all your posts and in all the other discussions about the blue used on 17th-century ships, I haven't seen anyone mention blue verditer. Blue verditer was the synthesized version of azurite (copper calcium carbonate—which had been the most important blue paint pigment in the middle ages). Blue verditer was made by some alchemical mixing of chalk with copper nitrate. You can watch YouTube videos about hobbyists making it with their home chemistry sets. The synthetic pigment was manufactured in France and the Low Countries, and cheap and common enough in the 1600s that it was used as wall paint.

Verditer comes from verd de terre, because natural azurite was to some degree mixed with malachite (copper carbonate hydroxide) which was green. The natural pigment was more or less greenish blue, but the less malachite in the mix, the more blue it got.

 

 

It's not used much any more because the pigment reacts chemically with the low pH in linseed oil and turns dull green or black. Works best with non-oil binders. (I used to have a Winsor-Newton tube of blue verditer watercolor.) It also greened or blackened with age, but ship paint obviously never lasted that long. Interestingly, it also turned black with exposure to sulfur or hydrogen sulfide. 

Somehow—I don't know how, chemically—but it was often mixed with lead white and somehow that made it compatible with oil paint. (Lead is pH neutral, maybe that buffered the acidity of the oil.) That's why there's all the light blues in Versailles. It was also mixed with lampblack to darken it. When I decided on the light and dark blue hues for my ship, I started with verditer.
 

[Hubac's Historian]

After what has been a very busy time with many competing interests, I’ve been trying to restore some momentum for the project.

 

I’ve been working steadily, albeit at a snail’s pace, on the bow and stern.  This pile of crooked pick-up sticks will eventually become my cambered head grating:

Each slat section is hand-fit and placed by eye.  It will not be possible to neatly align these next three tiers of fore and aft slats with the splayed set immediately aft.  This is an imperfect compromise that I can live with. In the end, after the grating surface has been sanded smooth and re-painted flat black, these small discrepancies will hardly matter.  It looks like it is going to work out just fine:

There’s a significant amount of paint re-touching that has to happen - which I have not been in the mood for - but the upper balcony rail is in-place now; again, imperfect in multiple ways, but I am happy with it:

When I really have the focus and determination to, I will re-visit the paint.

 

What has excited me, lately, is that I have finally reached the stage that the entire ornamental program has been inching towards for years - the coronation of the stern!

 

These past couple of days, I’ve been making up and fitting the two primary layers that make up the tafferal:

It will take a combination of subtraction and addition, but I am feeling pretty confident that the stock sculptures for Europe and Asia can be re-worked to fit my new cornice shape:

Unlike the stock kit, which has an interior backing plate that extends above the reverse-cyma curves of the tafferal, I will make it so that the tafferal shape is continuous to the poop deck.

 

I took some care to scribe-in plank lines for the tafferal backing boards:

I am happy that I increased the camber of the middle and upper window tiers because it lends an appropriate sense of lift for the big carving.  The extremities of the clouds will be slightly modified so that they sit lower against the frame.

 

The national coat of arms now fits within the dome:

While these arms are centered on the central window pilaster, they won’t be perfectly centered within that dome shape.  I checked the dimensions of the tafferal framing, and that dome shape is perfectly centered.  This discrepancy has likely to do with cumulative error stemming from some aspect of the layout for my lowest or maybe the middle window tier.

 

At this stage, there’s no fixing it, and like all of these discrepancies they will kind of fade to the peripheries of consciousness when the completed stern is considered in its entirety.  For the most part, the important details look more right than they do wrong.  Most especially, I think I have nailed the correct shape for the big carving panel and the shape of the cornice:

There is very much work and layering of detail to come, but I am pleased with where it is all going.

 

Thank you all for your interest!

 

Edited May 18, 2023 by Hubac's Historian

[Hubac's Historian]

[The following is in response to an observation by John Ott, on the other forum.  John pointed out that my problem with centering the French coat of arms has more to do with the fact that the leaves are asymmetrical from the port side to starboard.  This was a key insight for me, and one that I hadn’t picked up on.]

_____

You are right on-time with that observation, John! Nice to see you here, BTW.

Last night, I was measuring once again, and the center pilaster is only a 1/64” to port, which is visually insignificant, so your observation is right-on. I will do as you suggest, and pare down the laurel leaves on the port side.

I’ve been making the moulding that defines the lower boundary of the big carving. On Berain’s drawing the shadows indicate an architectural moulding of some significant weight:

I experimented with making a coved profile scraper from a hacksaw blade, however, the arched center section of the moulding would be difficult to scrape if the scraper tracked along both outside edges of the moulding stock; there’d be a lot of chatter in the profile. Instead, I tried to make a scraper that would only track along the bottom edge of the moulding, cutting the low shoulder and coved profile only. This wasn’t working well, either, on my straight stock.

I decided the best course was to carve the moulding by hand with a gouge:

I first blacked the main face and small shoulder side with a Sharpie. I then scribed two razor reference lines, so that I’d know what the boundaries of the coved profile should be.

I started with the straight stock:

After carving the cove, I used a round file to smooth out any irregularities in the surface. Lastly, I used a sanding stick to round over the top profile.

Feeling confident now, I applied the same procedure to the coved section of moulding:

I cut a test miter just to see how the two profiles mated. It’ll require a little finessing of the profiles, at the final fitting, but this is not a big deal.

I spent a little time this morning perfecting the fit of the tafferal plate. This enabled me to position the arched moulding which, as it turns out, had to shift a solid 1/32” to port so that it centered perfectly over the 3rd and 5th pilaster. This helped my coat of arms situation a little bit:

Now, with John’s insight in-mind, I can file down the port side a little bit and then add a little material to the starboard leaves. These adjustments should bring me pretty darn near to center. Once that is corrected, I can inlet the coat of arms into the arched moulding.

Thank you, John Ott!

[druxey]

Excellent result with the curved cove molding! Particularly in small sizes, the method you've used is really the way to go on this.

[Ferrus Manus]

The French strategy at sea must have been something along the lines of "make it so beautiful they can't bring themselves to destroy it". 

[Hubac's Historian]

This has been a satisfying week spent detailing the tafferal plate.  First task was to complete the architectural moulding and to shape the top mouldings and scrolls:

I have taken a somewhat different tack with my adaptation than what Tanneron/Heller show.  I have decided to run this large architectural moulding all the way out to the ship sides.  The reason for this is that I chose to use the between window pilasters to bracket the outermost windows on all three levels.  These window pilasters are notably more narrow than the long rectangular panels on the outside edges of the tafferal plate, so this architectural moulding caps the lower window pilasters and provides a visual transition to what is happening above.  The rectangular panels need to be wider in order to accommodate the long bellflower ornaments.

 

The next step was to skeletonize the extra stock stern plates I have for these decorative elements that would otherwise be extremely difficult to carve or sculpt from scratch, in this scale:

I use the Dremel grinding disc to excise the relevant sections and then sanding drums to waste away material from the backside.  Once I can begin to see light through the plastic, I manually sand the parts with finger pressure against a coarse sanding stick.  I frequently check to see that the light is coming through evenly as a gauge of how evenly I’m removing the ground material.  It doesn’t take long before the desired elements only need the very tip of a sharp EXACTO to separate them from the ground.

 

I was able to extract the Zodiac symbols in this same manner:

But, the shortened height of these recessed panels is such that they no longer will fit in those spaces:

That’s okay - I will simply paint them-in with a very fine brush a little later in the process.  Above, you get a clear sense of how dramatically I’ve reduced the height of the backboard and the shape of the cornice.

 

The lower cornice moulding had to be pieced-in segment by segment.  I think the result is good:

The national coat of arms is still not perfectly centered, but I am happy enough with it’s placement.  To this point, here’s how the plate looks on the model:

Next, was the challenge of adapting the figures of Europe and Asia.  I first had to re-shape the backing to sit snugly on top of the new cornice profile:

The tricky bit is the bevel that must be incised along this mating surface so that it matches the return bevel of the cornice top.  Hopefully, this picture will make what I am trying to say clear:

Next, I had to in-fill the back of these figures where the stock kit would have an interior planking plate above the poop royal deck.  Out of the box, this plate really serves as the glue surface for these figures.

On my version, I want the reverse curves of the cornice moulding to be visible, inboard, so my figures will glue directly to the cornice cap rail.  Here, Asia has been faired and filed smooth:

As I was going through all of this I began to be concerned that the apparent height of the figures was no longer in-scale with my shortened back board.  However, I began to feel better about this after trimming back the lower swag of the figures’ robes, so that the cornice moulding would be visible.  Here is trimmed Asia to compare against un-trimmed Europe:

And, after trimming and final fitting both:

Berain’s drawing does show a little swag dipping below the upper cornice moulding, and I think this is a reasonable facsimile.

 

On the model:

I may yet decapitate and then re-capitate the horse and camel heads in an effort to shorten their necks a little bit.  I have some time to decide on that.

 

In the meantime, I can modify the big carving drawing a bit, so that I can begin making that.  I can also begin painting the backboard. which is obviously much easier to do off the model - particularly those Zodiac symbols.

 

Thank you all for your interest, your comments and for checking-in.  Enjoy the holiday weekend!

Edited May 26, 2023 by Hubac's Historian

[Ferrus Manus]

I think they look fine as they are. Amazing job on the transom, i can't wait to see it painted! 

[Bill97]

Marc maybe I am selling myself short. I don’t know. But every time I look through your updates I am amazed!  There are two separate areas of amazement that I can’t decide which is more impressive. One is your complete physical remake of the ship regardless of what color scheme you would decide to use. Two is your exquisite detailed paint scheme that you could have just followed on the kit right out of the box. Early on, at the beginning of my build, I decided I would go no where near attempting to follow your lead on redesigning the structural build. I would have just made a fool of myself. I only picked a few things here and there to copy. Secondly, way before I started mine I studied your painting. The beautiful detail everywhere, especially in the painting of your statuary, is incredible! I thoroughly enjoy small detailing and colorful painting but your skill level is so impressive. I decided it best for me to not attempt your expression of the ship, but to leave this version of the ship to you alone in the history of model ship building. Better to not attempt a poor imitation of the Mona Lisa.  Now after all this Saturday morning pats on the back let me just summarize by saying very well done my friend. Tres bien joue mon ami en effet!

Edited May 27, 2023 by Bill97

[Hubac's Historian]

Ferrus and Bill - thank you both very much.  Your compliments are truly appreciated.

 

I appreciate also, Bill, that this build has given you inspiration to try various things, and the results are coming to fruition on your beautiful model.

 

What you see, here, is mostly a patient layering of detail.  My hope with this project is to demonstrate that even complicated looking things are achievable with little prior experience, if you break things down into manageable chunks and take your time.

 

It is exciting to me to see so many people take this kit to places it hasn’t been before.  Some day, some one will decide to take a stab at Le Royal Louis of 1668, with this kit, and that will be a fascinating journey to follow along on.

 

I understand why historians aren’t in love with the idea of these sorts of projects, but as long as we are honest about what they are and what they aren’t, I don’t see the harm in it; they are merely an artistic expression of what might have been.

Edited May 27, 2023 by Hubac's Historian

[Ferrus Manus]

That's how i see it. We don't really know much about what the Soleil Royal looked like, so there is a lot of room for creative expression. I may attempt to paint every figure realistically, instead of gold, for example. 

[John Ott]

In the 1960s and 70s, a gentleman named Alan Armitage wrote a bunch of magazine articles popularizing the use of styrene in model building. Alan was a superb railroad artist, plan draftsman, and an amazingly skilled modeler who made the masters for a lot of the favorite styrene railroad model kits that are still around today. People called him (in good 60s fashion) the "guru of styrene." I—and a lot of other modelers—learned to scratchbuild in styrene from his articles. I haven't thought about him much in the last thirty years until your work brought him back to mind.

It's really enjoyable to see such artistic model-making being created, one step at a time.

[Hubac's Historian]

I will definitely take a look at Alan Armitage, John.  Thank you for the compliment and the reference.

[wefalck]

"I understand why historians aren’t in love with the idea of these sorts of projects, ..."

 

I gather there are couple of reasons: academic 'historians' these days seem to be more interested in the sociological aspects of history and are not really interested in the material culture as such, only in the sociology of their production. If I was nasty, I could say that in some respect this is a fall back in epistemology into those dark pre-enlightenment times, when all science and research had the main objective to validate a 'god-given' societal order. The historians these days seem to be desperate to prove how bad those old times were for most of the people.

 

Academic historian may also have a valid point in treating 'our' work with some scepticism, as many amateur historians don't keep carefully track of their sources and the conclusions they draw from them. Such building logs are valuable in that sense, because they document the sources and how/why the builder has arrived at a certain interpretation.

 

Another problem is that very few academic historians (which includes today unfortunately often also professional museum staff) have a background or training in maritime matters. There is a gap between understanding the socio-economic context of maritime artefacts and understanding how they were produced and used as objects as such. Because historian typically don't understand the latter, they are not interested in the objects. In the last 40+ years they were simply not taught anymore about material culture.

[mtaylor]

I suspect that you are correct, Wefalck.  Seems many if not most archaeological/historical types have an agenda.  

[Ferrus Manus]

I entirely plan to be the exception to the rule. 

[Hubac's Historian]

“In the last 40+ years they were simply not taught anymore about material culture.”

 

It’s a shame because it is the technology, the machinery that enables a society to push forward.  This is as true for warships as it was for the discovery of fire.

[Bill97]

Marc I have been thinking about you as I am seeing on the news the air quality issues there in New York because of the fires in Canada. Hope it is not causing you or your family very many problems. 

Edited June 8, 2023 by Bill97

[Hubac's Historian]

Thanks, Bill!  The air quality is pretty astonishingly bad today, but we are taking all

necessary precautions.  It is amazing to consider that states like California live like this for long stretches of every year.  If anyone remains in doubt - climate change is a real thing.

[John Ott]

No doubts on climate change. Just regrets that the fire/smoke thing is now happening to you too.

And most of us in California are thankful that we won't have to go through it again this year.

 

John O

[Ian_Grant]

Sorry about our fires smoking everyone out!  The Premier of Quebec was saying on the news tonight that they have crews to fight 40 fires at a time but they have 150 fires right now. Here in Ottawa we have fires to our northeast and our southwest. Back to N95's again. 😭