- Joined
- Dec 3, 2022
- Messages
- 1,427
- Points
- 443
It's been a while since my package was so admired. Thanks Russ. x
Discussion Historical Accuracy vs. Creative Freedom: Where Do You Stand?
It's been a while since my package was so admired. Thanks Russ. x
Jimsky, thank you for posting this topic, I am enjoying other members comments on the subject. In regards to your question as to whether I have added anything to my commercial projects that were not on the blue print the answer is yes such as a heavy hawser for towing lines, decals for fire equipment and windshield wipers to name a few. My biggest advantage to building the commercial models while the ship yard was building the prototype was that I got to run around on the real one taking extra measurements and photographs. This allowed me to keep up with any changes they made that weren't on the drawings.
One of my favourite models ( which was the last ones before I retired commercially) was the 1/2 inch to the foot scale search and rescue vessels built for Canada Coast Guard. It was a lot of work to design the rib construction for the model off of the blue prints for the real ship. That boat has four separate chines at the bow which gradually disappear towards the midship and stern section for operating in heavy seas.
Along with having the blue prints and the ability to run around on the real ship my research for details on the fittings is rather simplified by searching the web for the manufacturers of the actual fittings used on the real ship. Most of the time, for example, crane measurements and schematics are easily found for me to scale down and make brass miniatures.
All of my hulls are composite 1/32 bass plywood and fibreglass over the frames. Since the real ships are constructed from steel or aluminum the model must never show any part that shows it was made from wood.
The following photos show some of the details in my work. Also I am not recognized as a great photographer
Canada Coast Guard " Pennant Bay" under construction in the ship yard.
The scratch built model and some of the details
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2020
- Messages
- 2,004
- Points
- 488
Are they fast?
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2024
- Messages
- 775
- Points
- 298
My objective for each project is to make a well crafted historically accurate model. I also strive to make all parts other than cordage and chain myself. I enjoy research that sometimes involves a bit of reverse Engineering. A highly rewarding part of all this is figuring out how to make things. This often requires several tries before arriving at a solution.
I try to build models of vessels that have not been modeled before. I avoid plans prepared by others and marketed to ship model builders.
Roger
I try to build models of vessels that have not been modeled before. I avoid plans prepared by others and marketed to ship model builders.
Roger
There’s something deeply satisfying about your chosen path: not just crafting with skill, but diving headlong into original research and problem-solving. Dedication to historical accuracy and hands-on ingenuity is a rare and admirable combination. Your focus on modeling vessels that haven't been represented before is especially compelling. It not only keeps the work fresh but also contributes something truly unique to the ship modeling community. And steering clear of commercial plans? Are you making those plans by yourself based on available research? That’s the mark of someone who’s in it for the love of discovery and the challenge of creation.
Having the same goal and so many contemporary plans and contracts available, there are hundreds of choices that have not been modeled in the past 250-300 years. We would need to live a lot more lifetimes to put a good dent. On the other side, I appreciate what the kit makers go through. There are a lot of choices when all the manufacturers are added up, but they try to put out a kit with a name that is familiar such as Victory. In the case of some like Diana or Enterprize there were a number of ships in their two classes of ships so at least the model builder can choose to have it be one that has not been modeled many times even if only in name.
Allan
Last edited:
This was one of the first models I assembled at around age 12: a rubber band-powered boat that you had to wind up by hand to get it going. It might be simple, but it was enough to get me hooked on the hobby. Building it sparked a fascination with ship modeling that’s stayed with me ever since. Funny how something so modest can launch a lifelong passion. 
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2023
- Messages
- 72
- Points
- 88
Put me in the Creative Freedom group. I tried to be historically correct in my first Constitution. I failed miserably. I was away from ships due to the experience for a couple of decades till I ended up with a 2nd one...a bit better build experience with some historical leeway, but she didn't survive a major move. A little over a decade later, I'm on #3 and have abandoned any real effort to duplicate the Connie before I even started it. It's a model of a battleship at sea in the late 18th and early 19th centuries. her fate like hundreds of others of the period -- unknown. I'll detail it to the best of my abilities to suit the times and no particular ship, that's the commitment I've made to myself. Enjoy the hobby, no matter your level!
Well said. I enjoyed my first ever wooden build in the 1970s and the builds of today. For some of us an occasional hiatus of various lengths of time still comes around for various reasons but that's OK too as it seems newly fresh when getting back into making sawdust.
Allan
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2024
- Messages
- 119
- Points
- 88
To date I'm only a kit builder. I try to stick to the kit plans and instructions as close as I can interpret them. However, I'm itching to replace some molded parts with wood creations as I go forward. The Adrea Gail will be one of those. There is way too much plastic on that 1/30 kit (railings, ladders, etc.). I can make those items out of wood.
There’s absolutely nothing wrong with building from kits; many of us started (and still build) that way. Kits are a great foundation for learning, refining techniques, and just enjoying the process. That said, it’s great to hear you’re starting to explore replacing parts with your own handmade elements. That kind of customization is where a lot of the fun and satisfaction come in. The Andrea Gail sounds like a perfect opportunity to experiment—swapping out plastic for wood will definitely give it a richer, more authentic feel. Looking forward to seeing how it turns out!
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2016
- Messages
- 5,768
- Points
- 728
For the purists, tell us: what’s your process for researching ships like the Falcusa or HMS Victory? What resources (books, plans, museum visits) do you swear by to get every plank and rigging knot just right? Share pics of your historically faithful builds and any challenges you faced chasing accuracy.
i went to the wreck spent a week measuring it, documenting it, photographing it
went down deep inside and studied its structure
once i had my field notes and pictures i drew a set of plans using computer aided drafting
then built a 1:48 scale model timber for timber plank for plank. The big one is the Alvin Clark the small one is the gun boat Caustic which was built from scratch using admiralty plans framing is based on documents on ship building of the time and place it was built.
down to the number of teeth on the gears
with help from a little crew the model is as exact as anyone could get to the actual Alvin Clark,
WHY? because there was no kit and this was a piece of maritime history that needed to be documented. Also i wanted to learn how a lake schooner was built and no kit provided that information.
Just because i wanted to and now i have the one and only authentic scale model of the Alvin Clark
it is my own personal master's thesis on the construction and building of a scale model of a Great lakes schooner of 1840 which means nothing to anyone just me
someone had to do it
i went to the wreck spent a week measuring it, documenting it, photographing it
went down deep inside and studied its structure
once i had my field notes and pictures i drew a set of plans using computer aided drafting
then built a 1:48 scale model timber for timber plank for plank. The big one is the Alvin Clark the small one is the gun boat Caustic which was built from scratch using admiralty plans framing is based on documents on ship building of the time and place it was built.
down to the number of teeth on the gears
with help from a little crew the model is as exact as anyone could get to the actual Alvin Clark,
WHY? because there was no kit and this was a piece of maritime history that needed to be documented. Also i wanted to learn how a lake schooner was built and no kit provided that information.
Just because i wanted to and now i have the one and only authentic scale model of the Alvin Clark
it is my own personal master's thesis on the construction and building of a scale model of a Great lakes schooner of 1840 which means nothing to anyone just me
someone had to do it
Last edited:
Kurt Konrath
Kurt Konrath
You have great ships models for multiple reasons, the desire for accuracy, the ability to do the historic research, and you have the wood and knowledge of how to build the models due to your relationship and perhaps training from other great modelers.
It does show in your work, and bravo to taking up this method, I just wish I could be able to do hands on research of even a ship like the USS constitution , or the Charles Morgan, on the east coast, but I am just a LAND LOCKED hobbies with more dreams than skills, trying to learn from the others here on this forum, which is one of the best things I like about it.
Here we are all family or very close to it, the beginners and learners and the masters who show and teach others what skills they have learned. I enjoys seeing what others have done, even if I will never get close to it.
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2016
- Messages
- 5,768
- Points
- 728
For the purists, tell us:
the alvin clark project was a one off and on that project i consider it a purists approach to historical accuracy. but i have also created steampunk models totally created out of thin air which you can also call "purists" because it was indeed purely made up something from my imagination.
Could you say the meaning of "purists" approach to a project is something you did from start to finish?
You can even apply the term purists to someone who built a model out of a box exactly how it was designed and intended to be built and not to vary in any way. purely out of the box.
the alvin clark project was a one off and on that project i consider it a purists approach to historical accuracy. but i have also created steampunk models totally created out of thin air which you can also call "purists" because it was indeed purely made up something from my imagination.
Could you say the meaning of "purists" approach to a project is something you did from start to finish?
You can even apply the term purists to someone who built a model out of a box exactly how it was designed and intended to be built and not to vary in any way. purely out of the box.
Interesting take—and I can see where you’re coming from. I think “purist” means different things to different people, which is exactly why the term gets so muddied. Some define it as strict historical accuracy, others see it as staying 100% true to a kit, and now you’ve raised the idea that it can even mean sticking purely to your own imagination, start to finish.
Based on the examples, it seems that proposing a "purist" approach to a project can indeed mean something you did from start to finish without deviation from a specific set of principles. These principles could be historical accuracy, a singular creative vision, or even the instructions of a model kit.
It's a thought-provoking way to look at the term and expands its meaning beyond just historical contexts. What do you think of these different interpretations of "purist"?
It’s always interesting to hear different interpretations. That said, let’s try to keep the focus on the thread topic so it stays clear and useful for others following along. There are lots of great places for deeper dives into definitions or philosophy if folks want to explore that separately. Thanks for understanding!
I am far from a purist as any of my models will show my mistakes. Hopefully fewer now than 30 years ago.
I have found the following can be extremely useful for finding information for a particular ship if available.1. Contemporary as-built drawings
2. Original contract
3. Contemporary design drawings
Other sources with a wealth of information that I go to if the first three are not available or complete.
Establishments from 1719-1750 for British ships
The Shipbuilder's Repository 1788
David Steels Elements and Practice of Naval Architecture as well as The Elements and Practice of Rigging and Seamanship.
RMG regarding British ships as well as captures from other countries which were often drawn after capture. Marine Museum Madrid for Spanish ships and the Marine Museum Paris for French ships. The Danish Archives for a variety of ship nationalities can be a good source.
The Library of Congress
The National Archives, Kew, England
The National Archives, Washington DC
Books based on contemporary sources such as models, public records office, and the above listed sources
Contemporary paintings and drawings
Input from authors such as Endsor, Antscherl, and others. Those that I have contacted have been extremely receptive helping answer questions I asked.
Curators from museums such as Preble Hall and the USS Constitution Museum
No matter the source, possibly with the exception of as-built drawings, it is a good idea to compare multiple sources as the information does not always match.
Modern drawings are a good source at times, but if they are based on contemporary drawings I feel more comfortable using the same originals on which theirs are based just in case.
Allan
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2022
- Messages
- 1,427
- Points
- 443
Hey @Jimsky , this thread has encouraged me to do a little lateral thinking about my current boat project, the Amati Xebec 1753.
My invented backstory so far is that it was built on the Barbary Coast as a pirate and then taken in battle by the French and used as a privateer.
So what if, when the French were refitting it after capture, the technical and scientific minds of The Enlightenment seized the opportunity to experiment with diagonal bracing, fifty years before Sepping’s ironwork and with true French style…
I like to know the historical details of my ships, their context, how they worked and so on. Then I chose to either build for accuracy or build for drama, sometimes both in the same project.
“I contradict myself? I am large. I contain multitudes.”
My invented backstory so far is that it was built on the Barbary Coast as a pirate and then taken in battle by the French and used as a privateer.
So what if, when the French were refitting it after capture, the technical and scientific minds of The Enlightenment seized the opportunity to experiment with diagonal bracing, fifty years before Sepping’s ironwork and with true French style…
I like to know the historical details of my ships, their context, how they worked and so on. Then I chose to either build for accuracy or build for drama, sometimes both in the same project.
“I contradict myself? I am large. I contain multitudes.”
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2022
- Messages
- 1,427
- Points
- 443
Perhaps extremist or fundamentalist is nearer the mark? Substitute either of those in the sentences in question and see how it alters the readers’ or writer’s interpretation.
I love this thinking - blending history with imagination in a way that gives the model its own personality. Your backstory for the Xebec is both plausible and dramatic, and that nod to Enlightenment-era innovation adds a clever layer. It’s a great example of how historical curiosity and creative freedom can work together instead of being at odds.
Personally, I think building models should be rewarding on multiple levels. Some days it's about precision and research; other days it’s about telling a story or exploring a "what if." There's no one-size-fits-all approach, and like you said, why not contain multitudes?
Looking forward to seeing how your Xebec evolves!
Hah...an interesting point, but I think we need to be careful with words like “extremist” or “fundamentalist” - they carry a lot of weight and can shift the tone of a conversation quickly, even unintentionally. In the context of a hobby, most of us are just passionate in different ways, and it’s more productive (and welcoming) to focus on that variety rather than attach labels that could be misread.
It’s perfectly fine to have strong preferences, but let’s keep the discussion open, respectful, and centered on what we all enjoy: building and sharing.