Compact Sherbourne plans

[mic-art]

Having very limited work space i decided to scan the plans for my Sherbourne kit and make a new layout in a more manageable size (A3+).  It would even be possible to strip it down to several A4. How do you people do with huge plans?

I suspect it is not legal to share the plans, else I could share it with other Sherbourners.

On a side note; while doing this, I noticed that the the plans are not exact so one should be careful taking measurements from it.

 

[tkay11]

I just scanned mine on overlapping A4 sections then joined in Photoshop after a bit of readjustment for distortion. As you say, they were not very accurate, but proved to be accurate enough for the deck layout. You need to work with card cutouts to achieve final shaping here and there.

 

The page in the manual with the pictures of the bulkheads came in very handy to determine the waterline for my own model (I created a blue perspex 'sea' for the model to lie in). The drawings of the bulkheads I found to be the exact size of the parts in the kit.

 

Tony

[mtaylor]

One of the problems with scanners is that they do not produce exact copies even at 100% to prevent the counterfeiting of money.  You can do what Tony suggests but also if you first scan a ruler at the size needed, you can then check and see what needs to be tweeked as far as size using photoshop or similar.  

 

The other way is to find an architectural copy shop that does copies for architects.  They will automatically produce an exact copy scaled down.  

 

I use both methods depending on the size of the original.

 

Nope.. not legal to share plans.

[tkay11]

Just to add to Mark's post, you need to remember that ordinary scanner distortions occur in all axes (not necessarily those of the architectural scanners). You can't be absolutely perfect, but you can at least adjust the horizontal and vertical axes independently.

 

The problem is that the distortions also change depending on the position of each part of the drawing. So distortions at the centre are different from distortions at the edges. For that reason I take scans that overlap by at least half the width of the preceding scan, and then similarly of the length as I go down the plan. You can then use the transparency layers in your photo editing programme to overlap the scans accurately. It is after this overlapping that it is best to do the final horizontal and vertical adjustments.

 

The way I do it is to look at the scanned image in Photoshop or TurboCAD and then take accurate measurements of the horizontal and vertical at their widest possible margins. Taking smaller lengths increases the possibility of inaccuracy.

 

I then enter these dimensions in a spreadsheet (or a calculator) and divide them into the distances measured on the plans. You will very likely find different ratios for the horizontal and vertical axes.

 

These ratios are then used to re-size the images in a photo-editing or CAD programme. So if the horizontal axis is found to be 1.04 times that of the paper plan, you simply divide the length on the scanned plan by a factor of 1.04.

 

Sorry if this is all very obvious, but I'm adding this info just in case you might assume that the distortions are consistent.

 

Tony

[thibaultron]

I scan the large plans on my regular size scanner, allowing a generous overlap. I scan them using the "Grayscale" option, rather than "Color", at 300DPI. For a more detailed scan for smaller sections, I scan at 600 DPI. All the scans to be combined should be at the same resolution. I remove the scanner cover, so that I can move the plans around freely, and use the separated cover placed on top of the plans, to hold them flat on the glass. Some of my scanners have had the top attached such that the hinges on the cover interfere with reusing it this way. Then I find some other object to use. A book, or even a piece of foam board, cut to the right size. After I get every thing scanned, I use the old MS Photo Gallery to combine the scans using the Panorama function. I find that it does a much better job than the Photoshop one. If that does not work for the scans (make sure you scanned with the generous overlaps), I align the scans in my CAD program.

 

As far as distortions, use the advice above.

 

Microsoft no longer offers the MS Photo Gallery as a download, but if you do a search for "Photo Gallery full download", there are sites that offer a download for it. I've saved a copy, and use it when I change to a new computer, have to fix a crash or failing drive.

[RussR]

I use to work for an electric utility and I had to work off of large D size drawings. Sometimes I would take them to a office supply like Office Depot and get them reduced. It didn't cost but about $5.00 a sheet.

Russ

[mic-art]

I also scanned with overlap making 9 layers in photoshop. It is difficult to keep the same angle on each scan so it was hard to align them at 90 degrees. I ended with only using parts which was undivided and masked the rest on each layer, it was quicker. Then I did the layout in Illustrator.

I'm not so sure that the scanner caused major distortions in this case as it is a professional copy/print machine. But I think I will check it up and do some testing/measuring 🙂

[iMustBeCrazy]

6 hours ago, thibaultron said:

Microsoft no longer offers the MS Photo Gallery as a download

Microsoft ICE is a free panorama stitching program which I have often used to join scans of line drawings. The same 'rules' about scan resolution and size apply.

[tkay11]

To align at 90 degrees, you can straighten the scans by using a vertical (or horizontal) line on the drawing (e.g. a station line), superimposing a straight line with a photo editor and then using that line to rotate the whole drawing. After doing that you make all the distortion adjustments and then the superimposition of each of the subsequent scans.

 

Tony

[thibaultron]

Craig; Thanks for the ICE link!

[iMustBeCrazy]

6 hours ago, thibaultron said:

Craig; Thanks for the ICE link!

No problem.

 

It works quite well. I used it to stitch 219 images into a 1746 map of London, the final result is a 20,464 x 10,913 pixel image.

 

This is 1/24th of the image (reduced in size) stitched from 9 images.