NORSKE LOVE - Billing Boats 1:75 scale

Dean62 said:
Well my side project was finished and it’s back to the NL.
First my side project…
View attachment 389062View attachment 389063

Three airplanes in 3 weeks! But glad I built them, was an interesting and fun project.

As for the Norske Love…
View attachment 389064
There is still so much to do, I often wonder what to work on next. I think I need to finish the cannon ports on this side. Then I will ponder treenails at this scale. At 1/75 scale, I fear I would have to use my smallest bit, which is .013”, and that’s smaller than a pencil tip. I am not even sure they would be visible unless you were less than 1ft from the model. So still undecided on that! ;)
Click to expand...
Wow, with such thin nails it's hard to see them at all. It will take you a lot of time on something hardly visible. The question is if it's logical. It's a daunting task which nobody will notice afterwards. 0.013" = 0,33mm metric scale. If it's smaller than 0,5mm = 0.019" I tend to leave it off, but that's just me or use a pencil to simulate the nails.

Finishing the gunports will be the logical next step in my eyes. :)

Peter
 
Dean62 said:
Well my side project was finished and it’s back to the NL.
First my side project…
View attachment 389062View attachment 389063

Three airplanes in 3 weeks! But glad I built them, was an interesting and fun project.

As for the Norske Love…
View attachment 389064
There is still so much to do, I often wonder what to work on next. I think I need to finish the cannon ports on this side. Then I will ponder treenails at this scale. At 1/75 scale, I fear I would have to use my smallest bit, which is .013”, and that’s smaller than a pencil tip. I am not even sure they would be visible unless you were less than 1ft from the model. So still undecided on that! ;)
Click to expand...
Just do make those treenails, Dean. Subtly applied and not overpowering, they are the most beautiful. That’s alk about nice details: you have to look closely to see them.
Regards, Peter
 
GrantTyler said:
Good morning Dean. Cool planes. I’m surprised the Fokker triplane is not red for Manfred (“The red Barron”);). Treenails….you are correct you don’t see them at that scale unless you are close (I did 0.4mm at my 1:60) but they do look cool when you check out the ship detail. Are a pretty tedious exercise tho - I’m surprised I even started themROTF. Cheers Grant
Click to expand...
Thanks Grant. The airplanes were modeled after the specific ones Ernst Udet flew. That dictated the colors, etc. ;)
 
Ptèr said:
Wow, with such thin nails it's hard to see them at all. It will take you a lot of time on something hardly visible. The question is if it's logical. It's a daunting task which nobody will notice afterwards. 0.013" = 0,33mm metric scale. If it's smaller than 0,5mm = 0.019" I tend to leave it off, but that's just me or use a pencil to simulate the nails.

Finishing the gunports will be the logical next step in my eyes. :)

Peter
Click to expand...
Yes, gun ports first. Contemplating treenails… ;)
 
I am in full agreement with those who complain about the monotony of doing repetitive work on a big man-o-war. Therefore, it is imperative that you have to love the ship that you are. If I were to build without any emotional attachment to a ship, there is no way that I would embark on tens of cannons, gunports, ratlines and the like. Case in point, for example, would be something like the Zeven Provincien. Whilst I like the ship and admire it, I do not love it! However, were a kit manufacturer to produce the Brederode, I would be all over it - irrespective of the monotony of some aspects of the build. Fortunately for me there is no such kit - therefore I am not faced by such decisions.

Interesting though, on Dusek Models' Website, they list the Friesland by Mamoli. The Friesland - even though not a factual ship - is essentially the same type of ship as the Brederode so hypothetically speaking one should be able to turn that into a Brederode. I mention this, because I know that Dean really likes the Friesland shape too. Strangely though, the website lists the model as "Not Available".
 
Heinrich said:
I am in full agreement with those who complain about the monotony of doing repetitive work on a big man-o-war. Therefore, it is imperative that you have to love the ship that you are. If I were to build without any emotional attachment to a ship, there is no way that I would embark on tens of cannons, gunports, ratlines and the like. Case in point, for example, would be something like the Zeven Provincien. Whilst I like the ship and admire it, I do not love it! However, were a kit manufacturer to produce the Brederode, I would be all over it - irrespective of the monotony of some aspects of the build. Fortunately for me there is no such kit - therefore I am not faced by such decisions.

Interesting though, on Dusek Models' Website, they list the Friesland by Mamoli. The Friesland - even though not a factual ship - is essentially the same type of ship as the Brederode so hypothetically speaking one should be able to turn that into a Brederode. I mention this, because I know that Dean really likes the Friesland shape too. Strangely though, the website lists the model as "Not Available".
Click to expand...
This ship has 72 cannons, including the two at the stern. So basically 35 per side. 10 per side are on deck, the other 25 are dummy barrels. So there are also 35 doors per side too! Definitely a lot of repetitive work! ;)
I do like the Friesland, and it could be in my future… who knows?
 
Treenails, I have very mixed feeling about those. I added them to the basic structure (frames and keel parts), but omitted them for the rest of the build, I didn't trust myself getting it right. (Especially drilling holes of 0,3mm diameter...)
There are examples of both sides of the spectrum: beautifully executed, matching the period and the scale, but also (please mind, these are my personal opinions and by no means any offense meant) too coarse and too large and catching my eye in the wrong sense. And here's the funny thing, if it's done right, I don't register the treenails, done to the other side of the spectrum and it gives me sore eyes.
So in the end of the day it's you Dean, to decide upon the pressing treenail dilemma and any advice given by your fellow builders is exactly that: advice.
 
RDN1954 said:
Treenails, I have very mixed feeling about those. I added them to the basic structure (frames and keel parts), but omitted them for the rest of the build, I didn't trust myself getting it right. (Especially drilling holes of 0,3mm diameter...)
There are examples of both sides of the spectrum: beautifully executed, matching the period and the scale, but also (please mind, these are my personal opinions and by no means any offense meant) too coarse and too large and catching my eye in the wrong sense. And here's the funny thing, if it's done right, I don't register the treenails, done to the other side of the spectrum and it gives me sore eyes.
So in the end of the day it's you Dean, to decide upon the pressing treenail dilemma and any advice given by your fellow builders is exactly that: advice.
Click to expand...
Go for it Dean....just do it..
 
GrantTyler said:
Good morning Dean. Beautiful picture to mark your 100th page. Cheers Grant
Click to expand...
Thanks Grant!
RDN1954 said:
Treenails, I have very mixed feeling about those. I added them to the basic structure (frames and keel parts), but omitted them for the rest of the build, I didn't trust myself getting it right. (Especially drilling holes of 0,3mm diameter...)
There are examples of both sides of the spectrum: beautifully executed, matching the period and the scale, but also (please mind, these are my personal opinions and by no means any offense meant) too coarse and too large and catching my eye in the wrong sense. And here's the funny thing, if it's done right, I don't register the treenails, done to the other side of the spectrum and it gives me sore eyes.
So in the end of the day it's you Dean, to decide upon the pressing treenail dilemma and any advice given by your fellow builders is exactly that: advice.
Click to expand...
Thank you for your thoughts Johan.
I have given this much thought... and I am of the opinion that if they are too large in order to be seen better, it will look bad, and even if the proper scale my ship may look like it has a case of the measles! ROTF And there is no recovering from that!
I feel like the real focus on the side of the hull is going to be all of the cannon port lids which will be red with gold Lion heads. The treenails will be lost in the background, and could even be a distraction.
It is easy to tell someone to drill 3,000 or more tiny holes in their ship and then fill them, when you aren't the one who has to do the work! ;) I have to weigh the work and risk involved, and then ask myself is it worth it. I like the clean look of the hull currently. So I am trying to envision the ship with the nails, I have added them to the wales, but not so sure about the hull.
In addition, in my opinion I think sometimes people want to add them as a way of showing their build is of a higher caliber. At the risk of offending people, I don't think adding a bunch of holes makes you a better craftsman, it just shows you have a lot of patience and determination. A high caliber build has clean joinery and well finished and painted components, etc. It has nothing to do with how many nails you add, once again that is my opinion. So I won't get caught up in the mentality that if I don't add them, then my ship won't be first rate. ;)
So that's some of the things bouncing around in my head as I contemplate nails!

And a final note to all - I think people sometimes forget opinions can be neither right or wrong! Only facts can be right or wrong!
So if I say 2+2=5, then I am wrong. If I say ships look better painted red and gold, I am neither right or wrong, I am merely giving my opinion. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top