74-gun ship by Gaetan Bordeleau - 1:24

[John Allen]

Gaetan,

 

Do not have enough adjectives to describe your work I have to call you Master.

 

Pics A#1 Favorite was the low light and shadowed interior of the frames looking (I think) bow to stern?

Fantastic brings to mind What Jonah may have seen when swallowed by the whale, brilliant pics.

[Gaetan Bordeleau]

Few years ago when I decided to try cherry  wood instead of pearwood, it was not clear if

this wood was suitable for the task. In Europe, pear wood is a common tree, in Canada, pear wood is very expensive, but cherry wood is very much affordable. Workability of pear and cherry woods are very similar. For planking, pear wood is often use but it has no grain pattern. At the opposite, cherry wood has many grain patterns but not all of them are suited for the task, especially when the grain runs perpendicular to the length of the plank.

 

If we understand this  simple rule : ‘’The grain pattern must runs parallel to the length of the plank’’,  then I believe that cherry wood can be a good choice for the model ship builders.

[aviaamator]

Very fair point! Rightly said!

[Gaetan Bordeleau]

Possibly a good reading about copyright in UK for the photos:

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/copyright-notice-digital-images-photographs-and-the-internet

 

 

[cog]

Thanks Gaetan. Not much difference with the Dutch version

[Gaetan Bordeleau]

[druxey]

Yes, those pieces are very tricky with the compound curves! But you made the job look easy, Gaetan.

[BANYAN]

Very nice work well up to your usual high standards Gaetan; as druxey says 'you make it look easy' but it is anything but.  I have issues just straight sawing yet allowing trying to do a compound cut.

 

cheers

 

Pat

[Gaetan Bordeleau]

My last Experience: Focus Stacking

 

When focus is done on an object, the focus is done at an exact distance. This depth of field is  very limited especially with large opening like F4 by example.

There is a way to increase that depth of field: in manual focus, take a photo, readjust focus 1 clic or 2  forward, take a photo and 4-5 times like this.

In photoshop, you open these photos  a pile  and merge them in one photo.

 

In the example, the result will show a greater depth of field than F22  could give.

 

[cog]

Great result Geatan. I had a reasonable result at F32, but that depends on the lens and camera

 

I tried that, but photoshop frooze on me, probably because the images were to large. What size (px) and file size did you have to do this. I run Photoshop CS5 (64bit) on win 7 Ultimate, AMD A10, 16Gb mem, and AMD Radeon HD7660D graphic adapter (the latter could be improved upon I presume)

[Gaetan Bordeleau]

[cog]

Thank you Gaetan. Another try out on the list

 

At least the cake won't be squashed with thin blade, but I like thick slices ...

[Gaetan Bordeleau]

5 posts pass through the taffrail. 

The angle for the piercing is determined by tracing the angle on a block set on the vice as  seen on the second photo.

[Gaetan Bordeleau]

May be some peoples could be interested to see some programs for photos treatment:

 

[druxey]

Oh, my. Fancy framing! Those through timbers are tricky, but you succeeded very nicely.

[cog]

Thanks Geatan,

I am not displeased with On1 got their 2017 version, PS uses somewhat much PC resources, the other two I do not know. Pat (Banyan) isn't very pleased with On1. He prefers another one. If I am not mistaken that would be Photo Ninja. For Linux users Darkroom is a good alternative

[Gaetan Bordeleau]

Hi Carl, 

 

The program we chose  is a bit like choosing  a color, it is a personal preference. Basically, these programs do all the same thing. When you take  photos, it is interesting to be able to bring  some corrections to the photos. 

[cog]

Quite so Gaetan, although I try to minimise the corrections, if at all. However, since I got another camera which gives me double raw, I am forced to use other programs, as e.g. Photoshop CS6 can't deal with it

[Heinrich der Seefahrer]

Hello Gaetan,

thanks for sharing the dame of your workshop...

 

Due to your scale you are very close to the real thing and damned to show every wredge in a deck's plank's rawlplug...

So the light of the detailling and easier work finds it's shadow in the damnation without relief onto detailling. So my question is - 

Aren't you affraid of forgetting something in the the unreachable deep of these astonishing big hull?

[reklein]

I  really like that big framework,It will be a shame, kinda, to cover it in planking and metal.

Edited October 11, 2018 by reklein

[Gaetan Bordeleau]

Hi Carl,

 

I guess it is like a trio: I use without problem: Mac High Sierra 10.13. 6 with Photoshop' Creative Cloud  19.1.6  with Canon  .CR2  files of around 40 Mo. The camera can also be activate  Dual Pixel RAW  boosting the image to 60 Mo.  I think that the principle  it is in the  same family as what they do with tv picture when they boost from Hd  to 4K. On you tube there is also 8K video and more,  but there is a limit to what the human eye can see.

 

 

Hi Heinrich der Seefahrer,

 

1/24 scale is still very far from 1/1 scale, each time scale decrease details decrease too, it is like a law of the Nature. I am not sure about your question: Am I afraid to forget a part in the hold? In fact, in every 1/24 built, I lost parts; sometimes parts are effectively unreachable or sometimes I drop a  part and I do not see where it falls.

 

 

Hi Bill,

 

I guess you will like the framework  for still a long time, because minimal planking will be fit,  as it is now. Planking installed at the top of the frames looks like sufficient to hold the thousand parts together. The idea is to get some kind of  open structure.

[tkay11]

On 10/11/2018 at 10:44 PM, cog said:

Quite so Gaetan, although I try to minimise the corrections, if at all. However, since I got another camera which gives me double raw, I am forced to use other programs, as e.g. Photoshop CS6 can't deal with it

Just a note about CS6 and new cameras: although Adobe RAW is not updated any more for CS6, you can use the DNG converter for it (produced by Adobe) which is regularly updated for all cameras. All you have to do is run your RAW picture through the DNG converter, then you can load the DNG file into CS6. However, as Gaetan says, the results are always depending on the viewer's taste.

 

Tony

[cog]

You are right Tony, but with every additional pass through software, you loose image information. Since I am no fan of cloud software licenses (I like to own it, and not be surprised by increases in yearly license fees) I switched to software which is afordable and can deal with the high demands

 

Thanks abbout mentioning the DNG converter, forgot about that one!

 

Cheers

[Moab]

Carl; I've recently gotten back into model ship building. Your "build" simply blows my mind. Incredible and beautiful...Moab

[Gaetan Bordeleau]

[James H]

If you have Adobe Lightroom, it converts RAW images to JPG on export.

[cog]

Sorry for hyjacking your build log Gaetan.

Last remark on this subject:

1 hour ago, James H said:

If you have Adobe Lightroom, it converts RAW images to JPG on export.

So I have double raw image, high res, and open it in lightroom (loss of data), export it to jpg (even more loss of data) and then start to polish it up in CS6 to compensate for the loss of data ... I'd better buy a cheaper camera with a less quality raw image format but better than the image which remains after passing it through one program after another ...

 

Gaetan,

 

Back to knives ... talking about razor sharp. I would have expected a Swan Morton to be sharp ... the disadvantage about scalpels is the tendency to wobble whilst cutting under pressure. On the other hand, I wouldn't know what to expect from one of yours when I would be cutting PE at the scale I work at presently.

[Gaetan Bordeleau]

Hi Coq,

 

I have difficulties to follow you: what is double raw image? Why do you have loss of data in Lightroom? Export in .jpg; you can also export: psd tiff dng and original file.

 

Swann-Morton blades are sharp, in fact much sharper than Exacto blades and I guess that the sharper the blade the less strength needed and a cleaner job too.

[bartley]

I am not 100% sure but I think these files are actually "double precision".  ie more digits for each pixel (and so more bits and a larger file)

 

John

[cog]

You're partly right John, actually it is dual pixel raw (my mistake - me stupid foreigner), it does increase the number of pixels which can improve sharpness, depending on the software one uses image manipulation has a few additional features too. These files do not have to be larger necessarily. I have Raw files which are actually larger than a lot of the dp raw files. The size of the file depends largely on the richness, and depth of your image. Furthermore, it is a misconception to think a large file has a better image quality than a small file. It depends on the colour palette, and a few more factors.

Raw images are what are called lossless compressed images, jpeg images are also compressed, but when compressing, these loose data, not discernable but every time they are manipulated and saved they loose a fraction of their data, not visible to the human eye, hence my remark that when I pass them through Lightroom they loose data, and when I manipulate them in e.g. CS6 they loose futher data.

 

Gaetan,

Until I need to cut metal instead of brass PE. Sometimes the parts on the frets bend easily, and slicing through isn't an option, because the part will distort beyond "repair". Hence pressing down is the alternative (I quit using exacto blades very soon after I started using them because of the poor quality). When cutting into softer materials like wood a scalpel like blade will - in my experience - follow the grain, because there is some flex due to it's thickness, which makes it prone to break under pressure

 

Coq .. Rooster (love the one prepared in wine)