- Joined
- Oct 25, 2022
- Messages
- 282
- Points
- 128
Ok, I've heard the book also got pics and drawing that can be inspiring, I'll try to take it with floating baroque and patrick villiers book.
initial Soleil royal using the heller 1/100 scale kit (post prepared in advance)
- Thread starter aurélien wolff
- Start date
- Watchers 20
-
- Tags
- heller soleil royal
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2022
- Messages
- 282
- Points
- 128
just to be sure, the "chambre de volontaire"/"deuxième pont" would be where the 1st level of windows be located. I think the drawing page 18 show well parts of the 1st SR were reused in the second/reconstructed one.
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2022
- Messages
- 282
- Points
- 128
On Neko soleil royal thread, there's a instructive part about the flags of louis XIV marine, what do you guys think? https://5500.forumactif.org/t52p600-soleil-royal-1669-echelle-1-72 I wonder if he'll finnish his soleil royal by the way, I'd like him to.
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2022
- Messages
- 282
- Points
- 128
I wonder if I can't do like this drawing for the stern sides since dassie was putting "liston" in plural with a "s" in his description, it's possible the SR could've had something like this drawing but "sober"(?)
Marc has been much more active on the modeling boards in the past year. His primary focus, lately, has been what he deems a less-serious “quick” build of the Altaya L’Ambiteaux. Not surprisingly at all, his upgrades and modifications to this kit have transformed it into something much greater than the sum of its parts.
His Soleil Royal is the finest scratch-build of this ship currently in existence, IMO. I am confident that he will complete the model, as he is a relatively young person. I think that the standard of work that he wishes to maintain on that model can be fatiguing, though, and he probably takes breaks from the project in order to keep his interest and excitement for it.
I wonder if I can't do like this drawing for the stern sides since dassie was putting "liston" in plural with a "s" in his description, it's possible the SR could've had something like this drawing but "sober"(?)
My theory of SR 1670 is that the quarter galleries would have been open and terraced as seen on the Monarque, above. This is the vestigial origin of what will eventually become the fully closed bottle of the Second Marine.
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2022
- Messages
- 282
- Points
- 128
For the quarter galleries, I plan to "simply" keep what heller did and open them, you told me it was fine to do that in your thread and it's easier for me to do +since we don't know what the 1st quarter galeries looked like, it still work for me. So it's fine to do the stern sides somewhat like on the monarque(Guy M refers it as the royal louis in his document and there seem to be things that correspond with the time description[the tritton per example]). I did a test with my verry old milliput today to see if I can do something with it, I can, even if the tubes exteriors dryed (and became brown for the gray tube but the interior's fine), here's what I got out of this first trial on a visit card.
Yes, I think it is fine to simply open the Heller quarter galleries as a representation of this earlier time.
Personally, I will continue to stubbornly argue against the generally accepted notion that that portrait represents the Royal Louis. The ornamental programs for these two ships were very similar, but the main thrust of my argument is that the gun number and distribution are not close to adding up; there’s no armed forecastle, nor are there guns on the poop.
The other thing that is impossible for me to ignore is that the starboard quarter “Vienna” portrait is even inscribed “Le Grand Monarque, par P. Puget.” The entirety of academia disagrees with me, on this, but to me it is a matter of observable common sense:
Personally, I will continue to stubbornly argue against the generally accepted notion that that portrait represents the Royal Louis. The ornamental programs for these two ships were very similar, but the main thrust of my argument is that the gun number and distribution are not close to adding up; there’s no armed forecastle, nor are there guns on the poop.
The other thing that is impossible for me to ignore is that the starboard quarter “Vienna” portrait is even inscribed “Le Grand Monarque, par P. Puget.” The entirety of academia disagrees with me, on this, but to me it is a matter of observable common sense:
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2022
- Messages
- 282
- Points
- 128
For the guns, it might be the artist mistake? I'll add a molding/liston to the 3rd battery too.
Too many guns un-accounted for. The portrait is as close to the realism of a photograph that tue times allowed for.
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2022
- Messages
- 282
- Points
- 128
While looking on MSW Hubac thread, there's a link to this finescale thread on heller SR. I think Jtilley, while correct on pointing out the kit innacuracies, is also way too harsh toward it, I'm not sure how heller was deceiving the public per example "In promoting this thing as a scale model of a real ship, Heller is (or perhaps we should say "was") deceiving the public.", they based their model on Tanneron SR who was an interpretation of the real SR based on what Tanneron knew at the time so I think it can still count as a model of a real ship and I think it's impossible to have a accurate representation of both versions of the SR since we don't know everything about them and one has to speculate a lot for both versions and make assumption based on other 1st rate ships (even more the case with the 1st one since we don't have drawings of the hull side/quarter galleries). The thread here: https://cs.finescale.com/fsm/modeling_subjects/f/7/t/68138.aspx
Yes, I think that that individual completely misses the whole point of the Heller SR, while simultaneously removing it from the context that it deserves; at the time of its creation, in the mid 70’s, it was the most advanced and detailed and reasonably accurate (given what was known at the time about 17th C. warships) plastic model of its time. Heller essentially brought the trappings and effect of a famous museum model into the living rooms of the average person. This was a remarkable achievement! It’s really that guy’s problem, if he can’t appreciate the kit for what it is, and work around its defects.
This is my opinion, concerning that individual.
My only disappointment is that, for whatever reason, Heller never included the HMS Prince at 1:100 scale, with the original Prestige Series. They had the Science Museum model from which to take measurements. Perhaps it may have been the case that lingering Anglo/French tensions precluded any such cooperation. Who knows - the 70’s were a crazy time!
I know, I know - we have the Airfix Prince; while that kit is great for what it is - it could have been a much better basis for a detailed scale model at a larger scale. Only talents like Rex Stewart can bring out the best result in that smaller scale.
This is my opinion, concerning that individual.
My only disappointment is that, for whatever reason, Heller never included the HMS Prince at 1:100 scale, with the original Prestige Series. They had the Science Museum model from which to take measurements. Perhaps it may have been the case that lingering Anglo/French tensions precluded any such cooperation. Who knows - the 70’s were a crazy time!
I know, I know - we have the Airfix Prince; while that kit is great for what it is - it could have been a much better basis for a detailed scale model at a larger scale. Only talents like Rex Stewart can bring out the best result in that smaller scale.
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2022
- Messages
- 282
- Points
- 128
And it was made with 70' molding technology, that shouldn't be forgotten when criticizing a old kit (this is why I'll be less critical of old stuffand they might've not have a better knowledge of the thing too, per example, heller based their 1/100 scale concorde on the 1964 project so there isn't going to be all the details and it was done with 60' tech[the model can be a good base for what if concorde]). The SR also look good even if build from the box, I've seen people doing good things with this kit, this is another reason why people defend it. In my opinion, while heller had access to berain/vary drawings, they might've ignored them due to their inconcistencies and the cost of the mold (it was already 10 tons, so a kit that cost a lot of money to make).
For me, it'll be heller not making the bloch 131 or amiot 351 for their "heller musée" range and I wish for a air france DC 10 too.
Edit: later on, jtilley seem to talk for all serious ship modellers, even tho not everyone will have the same POV as him, I'm a serious one and like accurate models, yet I still like the kit and I don't see it as a piece of junk "A serious scale ship modeler is likely to regard the kit as a piece of extravagantly-priced junk; it doesn't meet most reasonable definitions of the term "scale model," as it's normally applied to aircraft, railroads, cars, armor, modern warships, etc", if the heller caravelle can fit the definition of the term scale model, as well as the their amiot 143, then so can heller soleil royal. There's this one too, I've seen serious modellers wanting to give their takes on the kit, so clearly the innacuracies don't make them avoid it like the plague "In other phases of scale modeling, a list of mistakes like that would make serious modelers avoid such a kit like the plague." As said, while I agree on the kit (and tanneron model) innacuracies, I do find the guy way too harsh over the heller kit.
For me, it'll be heller not making the bloch 131 or amiot 351 for their "heller musée" range and I wish for a air france DC 10 too.
Edit: later on, jtilley seem to talk for all serious ship modellers, even tho not everyone will have the same POV as him, I'm a serious one and like accurate models, yet I still like the kit and I don't see it as a piece of junk "A serious scale ship modeler is likely to regard the kit as a piece of extravagantly-priced junk; it doesn't meet most reasonable definitions of the term "scale model," as it's normally applied to aircraft, railroads, cars, armor, modern warships, etc", if the heller caravelle can fit the definition of the term scale model, as well as the their amiot 143, then so can heller soleil royal. There's this one too, I've seen serious modellers wanting to give their takes on the kit, so clearly the innacuracies don't make them avoid it like the plague "In other phases of scale modeling, a list of mistakes like that would make serious modelers avoid such a kit like the plague." As said, while I agree on the kit (and tanneron model) innacuracies, I do find the guy way too harsh over the heller kit.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2022
- Messages
- 282
- Points
- 128
I got a question: Can I use this "le dauphin royal" drawing as an inspiration for the port lids? Do good drawings showing the faces of french 1670' port lids in detail exist?
I think I'll use milliput to do the ornaments (fleur de lys/sun...).
It's me or heller forgot a porthole on the quarter gallery?
I think I'll use milliput to do the ornaments (fleur de lys/sun...).
It's me or heller forgot a porthole on the quarter gallery?
That is not a porthole, but the entry/exit door to the lower quarter gallery. Nobody seems to do so, but if you are going to cut out the decorative panels, you might consider cutting an opening for this entry door.
This drawing of the DR is the best and really only detailed drawing that shows the gun-port decorations. From the stern, you can see that they are relief sculptures and not painted on:
You can see that the lid ornaments are a combination of Fleurs, the Royal symbol, and dolphins, which supports the name of the ship.
On this closeup of the Monarque, you can get a sense for the variety of ornaments employed:
This drawing of the DR is the best and really only detailed drawing that shows the gun-port decorations. From the stern, you can see that they are relief sculptures and not painted on:
You can see that the lid ornaments are a combination of Fleurs, the Royal symbol, and dolphins, which supports the name of the ship.
On this closeup of the Monarque, you can get a sense for the variety of ornaments employed:
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2022
- Messages
- 282
- Points
- 128
Noted that on the monarque/royal louis drawing, only 1 battery is shown with decorated port lids. I think I'll cut the doors for the lower galleries, I thought it was a gun port because it looked like one. For the lids, I'll use 1 sheet of styren/plastic with the ornament being done in milliput. Currently reading loic charpentier LOS! 63 article on the french marine, I'm done with the one telling a general story of the french 1st rate and the living condition of their crews.
I hope they do more articles on sailing ships considering how large the subject is (and it's what got me in sailing ships and wanting the heller soleil royal in the first place with J-C carbonel book on heller story). The kit might arrive at some point this week.
I hope they do more articles on sailing ships considering how large the subject is (and it's what got me in sailing ships and wanting the heller soleil royal in the first place with J-C carbonel book on heller story). The kit might arrive at some point this week.
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2022
- Messages
- 282
- Points
- 128
Thinking about it, since the 1st rate french ships past the royal louis were supposed to have a lower budget for their decors and the soleil royal is thought to have sober decor than the RL in its first version, I wonder if they wouldn't cut down on the decors of the port lids, per example, by having only 2 symbols like on the dauphin royal, not 3 like the royal louis (or one, tho I think I'll stick to 2).
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2022
- Messages
- 282
- Points
- 128
In Guy M 104 pages document, there's a mention of 3 color choices for the pillars/column/pillaster (?not sure of the english word here), beige, gold and golden yellow (page 24), I wonder what's the basis for the beige on a french warship decor of the middle 17th century. I think I'll go with beige there with a mix of gold(maybe).
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2022
- Messages
- 282
- Points
- 128
My parents got me floating baroque this morning, still wondering about the 3 colors choices tho.
Floating Baroque is an excellent book for appreciating the French approach to monumental architecture of the stern facade. It is also fascinating to note the discrepancies that often exist between established sets of Berain stern and quarter drawings. These discrepancies pose challenging choices for the modeler to interpret.
Take, for example, the sets for Le Brillant:
By this time in 1690, the open lower stern balcony would have long been a thing of the past. There is nothing in the stern drawing to suggest that the lower stern counter even projects as an open balcony, yet that is exactly what he draws in the quarter view. Tanneron interprets this detail correctly:
As for the pilasters, are you referring to those between the windows of the stern facade? Although I do not know whether the following is actually a colorization from 1697, this portrait of L’Agreable does, in my opinion, provide food for thought:
Take, for example, the sets for Le Brillant:
By this time in 1690, the open lower stern balcony would have long been a thing of the past. There is nothing in the stern drawing to suggest that the lower stern counter even projects as an open balcony, yet that is exactly what he draws in the quarter view. Tanneron interprets this detail correctly:
As for the pilasters, are you referring to those between the windows of the stern facade? Although I do not know whether the following is actually a colorization from 1697, this portrait of L’Agreable does, in my opinion, provide food for thought: