Hi Kurt!!Many thanks to Mark P. on the MSW forum for providing clues as to the overall shape of the stern and it's details. We have had a few PM exchanges and this changed my perspective on several details. We discussed the mismatched roofs of the stern and side galleries in the Lely Painting of Peter Pett and SotS.
Note how the windows do not line up between Lely and Payne between the side galleries and the stern. The roofs should line up along the yellow line. However the scallop decorated roof in the Lely painting lines up with the side gallery windows instead of being higher, above the level of the side gallery windows. The windows shown with the red lines should be lined up in the Lely painting, and they're not. While making 3-D objects, this height mismatch will affect how tall some of the decorations will be.
View attachment 583452
The propose solution to correct the Lely painting would be to move the red section shown below down relative to the side galleries such that the roofs line up at the corners.
View attachment 583454
Note how the TWO rows of decorations just below the wiindows on the side gallery line up with ONE decoration row on the stern in the Jacob Knyff painting. This resolves the mismatch, and allows the windows and roofs to line up.
View attachment 583457
Mark P. noted that the statue alcove may project farther out from the stern that the surrounding decorations. Knyffe's painting hints at this, but a Van de Velde drawing of HMS Royal Prince has a definition protrusion of a very similar statue alcove to the Sovereign. In preparation for the change to the prominence of the alcove, I spent several hours optimizing the alcove mesh and thickening the columns so they will have more depth and not be as flush with adjacent decroation when attached to the ship. Below, the alcove is shown flush with nearby decorations. This will not be the case on the model.
See the protrustioon of the statue alcove from the stern on HMS Royal Prince.
View attachment 583456
I wouldn't want to contradict you, but in my opinion, based on various diagrams and illustrations that I have seen, the entire surface of the transom appears to be flat. After reviewing and analyzing your reasoning on this subject, I would venture to say without wishing to cause any disagreement hehehe, that all the balconies, on both the port and starboard sides, are set back one step behind the stern face itself. Furthermore, I have added arrows pointing to the specific areas that, in my view, are common to both. Also, the red rectangle you made and the curves seen in the transom also give me the impression that it can't be flat, because in that case the lines would be completely horizontal. In the example you’ve provided here in this second photo, I would venture to say that the transom is rounded not even flat. If you look closely at the area where you drew the circle, there appear to be some lines shown in perspective; this suggests the presence of a step, and that all the ornamentation, on both the right and left sides actually sits atop a bulkhead that encloses the stern galleries on the port and starboard sides. Please correct me if I am mistaken. I will attempt to illustrate my theory by adding a few lines to make it clearer: the area where I’ve drawn the rectangle is the section I believe is set back—that is, recessed toward the bow. I’m curious to hear what you all make of this observation.
I just hope I haven't caused any confusion; if so, I'm sorry.
In the third photo, I tried to make the image a bit sharper so it wouldn't look so blurry, and this is the result. It seems to me that there are differences in the surface between the balcony wall and the curved transom, what do you guys think?
Last edited:
