Museal quality kits

[Tymko1878]

Hello!
I have searched a lot but have not found any similar topic.
What kit models do you mind as a museal quality? I mean by kind of wood - boxwood, pear or sth like that, highly recommended Admiralty style ones, precision, artful details.
I am going to build Requin distributed by ZHL (it looks perfect) but maybe you have any other ideas?
Best regards!

 

[AllanKP69]

What kit models do you mind as a museal quality

This is a long topic that has been hashed out numerous times. One easy definition...... Would the Royal Museum Greenwich, Musée National de la Marine in Paris, Preble Hall in Annapolis or other naval museums display it? Look at the models at the RMG Collections website for examples of what THEY consider museum quality as possible examples.

If one is to believe AI definitions, here is one.......
A museum-quality ship model is an exceptionally detailed, historically accurate, hand build replica using high-grade, materials and traditional shipbuilding techniques like plank on frame to give a compelling impression of the actual vessel.

Allan

 

[Tymko1878]

I know what you mean, but I thought about the museal quality as about peace of art, hand made and very accurate but from a kit. It is not about selling or giving such a model to the museum - but I know that in Prague and Cracovia there are very good quality kit models in Museums displays. I want to build it on my own and for my pleasure only.

 

[AllanKP69]

peace of art, hand made and very accurate but from a kit.

Which kit maker are you considering? I have not seen any definition that states it must be scratch built. Then again only a few kit makers' products bear any resemblance to reality so most would not qualify anyway. Even so these serve a huge purpose as they are meant for hobbyists, not professional builders, and fulfill that need. Sorry to open Pandora's box again, but if anyone knows of any maritime museum's (not model competitions) written rules to qualify a model that would be great to see. I did find the following that is interesting. https://www.rmg.co.uk/policies/collections-development-policy
Allan

 

[kuba91nt]

This is a long topic that has been hashed out numerous times. One easy definition...... Would the Royal Museum Greenwich, Musée National de la Marine in Paris, Preble Hall in Annapolis or other naval museums display it? Look at the models at the RMG Collections website for examples of what THEY consider museum quality as possible examples.

If one is to believe AI definitions, here is one.......
A museum-quality ship model is an exceptionally detailed, historically accurate, hand build replica using high-grade, materials and traditional shipbuilding techniques like plank on frame to give a compelling impression of the actual vessel.

Allan

Dear Allan.
I'll describe the current situation in Poland in one meme.
Currently, every model here is a museum art, every bread is craft, every ice cream is artisanal, every beer is craft from selected Czech ingredients, every wine is from selected grape varieties, every handicraft is a masterpiece, painting a room by a painter is an artistic art and requires consultation with a designer. Every old piece of junk imported from Germany is a relic and an antique.
Trust me, whatever he does, it will be a magnieficient museum treasure...

 

[AllanKP69]

Your post made me hungry. Happy we have a Polish delicatessen not too far away for my Keilbasa. Not as good as my grandmother made in the basement when I was a kid, but brings back memories.
Allan

 

[Bob Ellis]

Hello!
I have searched a lot but have not found any similar topic.
What kit models do you mind as a museal quality? I mean by kind of wood - boxwood, pear or sth like that, highly recommended Admiralty style ones, precision, artful details.
I am going to build Requin distributed by ZHL (it looks perfect) but maybe you have any other ideas?
Best regards!

The Nat. Maritime Museum has some very rough unsophisticated model ships in their collection. You would expect this in a contemporary Egyptian boat as an artisanal example. So it isn't detail, many of the 18c models lack detail and are rough builds (AI needs to get out more!)

It comes down to the same discussion as 'what is art'.

In kit terms it means 'expensive'!

 

[Roger Pellett]

The term Museum Quality is just kit marketing hype. The odds of any of the models that we build being purchased for display in a museum are about the same as a small country high school basketball star playing in the NBA. It ain’t gonna happen.

Even local museums are now reluctant to accept donations that do not relate to whatever story that they are trying to tell.
I spent my first 10 years after retiring volunteering for a very small local museum associated with the only surviving Great Lakes Whaleback Steamship. The cargo hold of the ship was the museum. It was like your grandmother’s closet; a catchall for all kinds of stuff; even a Revell Plastic Titanic. Those days are past. Professional museum curators are now trying to figure out how to get rid of this stuff.

If you want to build a museum quality model:

1 Choose a unique subject. (Not Victory, Constitution or Mayfower.)

2. Research it. Origional materials preferred

3. Build it to scale avoiding generic purchased fittings. Belaying pins that would scale to the size of bowling pins do not indicate Museum Quality.

4. Maintain a high standard of workmanship.

Roger

 

[Bob Cleek]

... if anyone knows of any maritime museum's (not model competitions) written rules to qualify a model that would be great to see.

Not a maritime museum per se, but probably the largest and most valuable curated collection of ship models in the United States:

https://www.navsea.navy.mil/Home/Warfare-Centers/NSWC-Carderock/Resources/Curator-of-Navy-Ship-Models/Specifications-for-Building-Exhibition-Ship-Models/

U.S. Navy’s Curator of Models Program

Jennifer Marland, curator for the U.S. Navy’s Curator of Models program, showcases a model of the gunboat USS Yorktown (PG-1) in the Curator Shop at Naval Surface Warfare Center, Carderock Division, in West Bethesda, Md. on Oct. 16, 2025. The program manages more than 3,800 models for display in...

www.dvidshub.net

https://www.navsea.navy.mil/Home/Warfare-Centers/NSWC-Carderock/Resources/Curator-of-Navy-Ship-Models/

 

[Bob Cleek]

What kit models do you mind as a museal quality? I mean by kind of wood - boxwood, pear or sth like that, highly recommended Admiralty style ones, precision, artful details.
I am going to build Requin distributed by ZHL (it looks perfect) but maybe you have any other ideas?

As others have mentioned, the term "museum quality ship model" is utterly meaningless. It's just advertising "puffing," like homemade apple pie, fancy ketchup, fresh lemonade, and so on.

Recognizing this, in the 1990's two preeminent ship modelers, Rob Napier and Bruce Hoff, created a definition designed to more accurately replace the overused and meaningless term, "museum quality ship model." They came up with the following which has since enjoyed widespread acceptance by serious ship modelers:

"A high-quality scale ship model provides a compelling impression of an actual vessel within the constraints of historical accuracy."

Rob Napier revisited the subject of "museum quality ship models" in his 2022 book, Caring for Ship Models - A Narrative of Thought and Application. (See: https://seawatchbooks.com/products/...tive-of-thought-and-application-by-rob-napier) Napier's book, which I recently purchased with a "Black Friday" discount, came as a most pleasant surprise. Not only was its coverage of ship model conservation and restoration far more instructive and detailed that I'd ever expected, but he begins the first section of the book with what is the best discussion of the philosophy of scale ship modeling I've ever seen. I can't recommend this book highly enough to any serious ship modeler.

Napier in his book fleshes out his analysis of the definition of a "high-quality ship model." He explains,

"Historical accuracy" encompasses all the objective, or measurable, standards of technical exactness that might apply to a ship model. These embrace the obvious hull shape and fairness; precision in fittings, rigging, and colors; lack of anachronisms; and so forth. But it also encompasses all aspects of craftsmanship because the lack of craftsmanship creates unrealistic and, therefore, historically inaccurate blemishes on a model. ... The phrase "historically accurate" alone effectively replaces the intention of the now-vapid "museum quality."

He further explains what is meant by the subjective quality of a "compelling impression:"

(A "compelling impression") allows and encourages aesthetic interpretation of a vessel that will help propel the viewers to make the leap of faith that allows a model to work or to willingly suspend the disbelief that keeps a model from working. Both processes help viewers accept the invitation to visit a ship instead of a model. Compelling impression is the result of applying artistic and interpretive decision-making processes... to amplify a model beyond being a mere assemblage of parts.

One could argue that it is more important and more difficult to teach inexperienced modelers how to tell if their model yields a compelling impression than it is to teach them how to put the thing together. If they are only interested in being satisfied with the latter, then the former is even tougher.

And he concludes:

It is important to recognize that neither arm of our definition considers how a model was made. There is no assessment of whether entire models or components of them are built from scratch, built from kits, or built by teams or modelers. The main thing is the appearance of the finished model. The ends justify the means.

It is important to note that Napier's definition of a "high-quality scale ship model" does not make any distinction between kit- or scratch-built models, a distinction about which kit-building ship modelers often seem quite defensive. Others strongly react against the imposition of any standards for "historical accuracy," arguing that they build ship models for their own enjoyment alone. Then there are those who are upset that the definition limits "high-quality ship models" to "actual vessels," when they wish to build purported models of ships for which we have no historical record of their appearance, or even fictional ships which never existed. There should be no cause for such disputes because anyone who wishes may elect to build their best effort at a "high-quality scale ship model," or, alternately, build a sculpture of a ship based on any other criteria they wish. Both the "high-quality scale ship model" and the artistic sculpture of a ship, however "historically accurate" or not, are miniature ships worthy of whatever artistic appreciation they might be found to deserve in the eyes of their beholders.

Whether a model is scratch-built or not or to what degree is a consideration relevant only in the context of some ship model exhibition judging classifications. It has nothing at all to do with whether a model is a "high-quality scale ship model." "Historical accuracy," on the other hand, has everything to do with whether a model is a "high-quality scale ship model."

Which brings me to the original poster's basic question: "What kit models do you mind as a museum quality?" My answer is "none," because the description is meaningless. That said, I will say that whenever you hear someone describe a ship model as "museum quality," you should recognize that they are ignorant of its meaninglessness, unless, of course, they are trying to sell you a built model or a kit and should know better, in which case, I will leave it to you to decide whether you want to do business with someone who is making empty promises about their products.

I expect there are ship model kits from which can be built "a high-quality scale ship model" that "provides a compelling impression of an actual vessel within the constraints of historical accuracy." However, I have seen many ship model kits over many years, and I've seen very few which did not appear to me that they would require a substantial amount of modification and replacement of original raw materials and fittings to qualify as a "high-quality scale ship model." I do know there are those modelers who do go to great lengths to upgrade kits to high-quality levels. I also know that there are a few very expensive kits which many hold in high regard. The catch, though, is that if a modeler is sufficiently capable of building a "high-quality scale ship model," as defined, from a kit, they will have no need to buy a kit because they are able to build a better model from scratch for a lot less money and sometimes a lot less work than by trying to upgrade an expensive kit, the quality of which at the outset is necessarily constrained by the economics of the marketplace.

 

[kuba91nt]

To summarize final part of this statement, economics of the local market are as follows: any cheap Occre or Artesania Latina model here is a top level quality masterpiece of art, and its value is comparable to abbroad museum models handcrafted from scratch.
In other words, our market is at bottom of the Mariana Trench...

 

[Tymko1878]

To summarize final part of this statement, economics of the local market are as follows: any cheap Occre or Artesania Latina model here is a top level quality masterpiece of art, and its value is comparable to abbroad museum models handcrafted from scratch.
In other words, our market is at bottom of the Mariana Trench...

Why do you think so? There are a lot of perfect models (Cracov, Gdańsk, Poznań) in museums - made from scratch, somę from 17/18 century (like in Gdańsk).
Another thing is what modelmakers statisticaly do - and there is a situation like anywhere - 99% do Occre, Artesanía etc things but 1% makes great builds from scratch. I am surę that there could be made a perfect model - like Requin - kit - which could reach museal quality. Thats all - but this needs good wood, many innovations etc

 

[kuba91nt]

No museum or gallery will buy this model. Why? Find out.

LE REQUIN - Xebec - 1750 - Ancre

This monograph on the xebec LE REQUIN is based on documentation that gives us a complete picture of this ship. including all plans of the timber works in 1/48.

ancre.fr

And second.
I've sent you two museum-quality models by PM, according to authors "top of top quality models", you'll understand where problem yourself. However, you'll only understand this once you've completed this 1% model in top quality and are willing to sell it or donate it to a museum.

 

[serikoff]

Hello!
I have searched a lot but have not found any similar topic.
What kit models do you mind as a museal quality? I mean by kind of wood - boxwood, pear or sth like that, highly recommended Admiralty style ones, precision, artful details.
I am going to build Requin distributed by ZHL (it looks perfect) but maybe you have any other ideas?
Best regards!

Some may disagree, but I liked the Alert 1777 kit from Trident. I'm building it and, at the same time, another hull made of precious wood, complete with rigging and sails. Yes, it's not based on drawings (which are unfortunately missing, and the anatomy is a complete contradiction), but it could be turned into a very good project, since it's not the materials or drawings that ultimately determine the final outcome, but the skill and craftsmanship of the builder. So, if that's what you were asking about, here's an option. There are also pearwood versions available, many of which are available, but I haven't personally seen them. There are plenty of reviews of these kits here, though. Good luck.

 

[DAWarden-(Jaager)]

OK! Before any more of a fire storm is generated My reply below is intended to refer to a strict academic set of standards and only within those standards.
A museum worthy of the name is academic. The Nautical Archaeology Program at TAMU is academic. Before advertising hype made the term "Museum Quality"
meaningless it was an academic term.

Yes, it's not based on drawings (which are unfortunately missing, and the anatomy is a complete contradiction), but it could be turned into a very good project, since it's not the materials or drawings that ultimately determine the final outcome, but the skill and craftsmanship of the builder.

I see mutually exclusive factors with your premise.
It takes a high degree of skill, experience, and talent to build "a high quality ship model". It requires the investment of time and practice. It is almost a requirement that scratch build experience is in the mix.
I do not see why a builder of that rank would waste their talent on a fantasy subject to begin with. No matter how much effort is invested the result is pointless garbage from an objective aspect.
A builder of that rank would be repulsed by most any kit, no matter the pretensions to quality, as a waste of time.

If there are Chinese manufacturers providing boxwood and other high quality primary wood with their initial kit offerings, it will probably be a short lived opportunity. It will ultimately prove to be unsustainable to provide expensive wood species and high man hour components at a price that would be reasonable.

 

[serikoff]

I see mutually exclusive factors with your premise.
It takes a high degree of skill, experience, and talent to build "a high quality ship model". It requires the investment of time and practice. It is almost a requirement that scratch build experience is in the mix.
I do not see why a builder of that rank would waste their talent on a fantasy subject to begin with. No matter how much effort is invested the result is pointless garbage from an objective aspect.
A builder of that rank would be repulsed by most any kit, no matter the pretensions to quality, as a waste of time.

If there are Chinese manufacturers providing boxwood and other high quality primary wood with their initial kit offerings, it will probably be a short lived opportunity. It will ultimately prove to be unsustainable to provide expensive wood species and high man hour components at a price that would be reasonable.

Judging by your words, 90% of people posting reviews here are posting garbage? Don't forget that this is a hobby, and people do it for fun! I don't do this professionally and don't have the time or resources to build everything correctly from scratch using blueprints, but don't think that true professional builders think kits are garbage. I personally know several world-class builders, and they have a different opinion. They don't call anything garbage; everyone is just at their own level and has their own goals. For a hobby, a kit is ideal; it's not garbage or a waste of time if it brings you joy.

 

[Dubz Modelling World]

100% agree @serikoff.

Written words like "A builder of that rank would be repulsed by most any kit, no matter the pretensions to quality, as a waste of time." are ********* in my opinion.

 

[kuba91nt]

If a kit is perfect for the hobby, isn't nonsense or a waste of time, and brings you joy, then how can you determine that this particular model is simply a well-made historical model and not a museum piece?
If someone buys a model for $1,000, upgrades it for another $2,000 to perfection, and then thinks it's a museum piece, i wholeheartedly sympathize with their mental state...

 

[serikoff]

100% agree @serikoff.

Written words like "A builder of that rank would be repulsed by most any kit, no matter the pretensions to quality, as a waste of time." are ********* in my opinion.

I tried to write it more gently.

If a kit is perfect for the hobby, isn't nonsense or a waste of time, and brings you joy, then how can you determine that this particular model is simply a well-made historical model and not a museum piece?
If someone buys a model for $1,000, upgrades it for another $2,000 to perfection, and then thinks it's a museum piece, i wholeheartedly sympathize with their mental state...

For anyone, something they've made with their own hands is more valuable than a monstrous museum piece, but to be honest, it's unlikely anyone would position "their masterpiece" as a museum piece. But no one is stopping you from doing everything possible to make your product look like a museum piece, at least in appearance. I'll be making my model in the style of a museum piece. It's not exactly from a kit, but practically from scratch. I don't consider it a museum piece; I just like the stylization (bitumen and all that). I also advocate for a reasonable and adequate perception of one's work, and I think few people who create something from a kit would consider themselves museum pieces (unless they're developing something for their own personal museum)

 

[kuba91nt]

And once again we end up in the same place: everything is subjective.
Museum quality, top kit, best model all of it means whatever author wants it to mean.
Problem is that museum quality is not a subjective category. It is an objective one, based on documentation, research value, originality, and the creator’s own contribution.
And a kit can never fully meet those criteria, because it is built on someone else’s design, assumptions, and research.
Reducing a term to pure aesthetics, it looks nice, so it’s museum quality, is a classic symptom of new modern disease of sick subjectivism.

This does not diminish really good kits, some kits are excellent, well designed, and a real pleasure to build.
But calling them “museum quality” dilutes meaning of this term and is simply unfair to people who build from scratch, spend years, tousends hours for researching, and create genuine in all historical reconstructions...