NORSKE LOVE - Billing Boats 1:75 scale

[dockattner]

A pervading FACT...we all have OPINIONS .

 

[Dean62]

A pervading FACT...we all have OPINIONS .

Correct! But sometimes people want to argue opinions, as if they were facts.

 

[RDN1954]

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.

Hear, hear!

 

[RDN1954]

Correct! But sometimes people want to argue opinions, as if they were facts.

That's seems to be about the theme of our times...

 

[dockattner]

Correct! But sometimes people want to argue opinions, as if they were facts.

Indeed. And other times people defend their opinions as if they were facts (so we run into trouble from both directions).

Not so easy this communication thing! Still, I believe it's worth the effort on an exchange forum like this! For me the best solution is to ascribe to others the best possible intent and let it go at that...

 

[Heinrich]

To treenail or not? I think Dean mentioned a very valid point when he spoke about risk. I have seen some builds where the best intended treenails (in my opinion) detract from an otherwise excellent build. In the end, it all comes down to the builder. On the WB with an overall hull length of 57 cm (including the galleon) I have not even bothered about adding treenails to the deck (let alone the hull), so I tend to agree with Dean on this one.

 

[Dean62]

Indeed. And other times people defend their opinions as if they were facts (so we run into trouble from both directions).

Not so easy this communication thing! Still, I believe it's worth the effort on an exchange forum like this! For me the best solution is to ascribe to others the best possible intent and let it go at that...

I agree wholeheartedly, but as you know, even tongue in cheek comments can be misconstrued as taking jabs at people. So I try to tread lightly these days!
Some of the best looking ships I have seen have treenails, your Vasa included. So it’s a tough choice.

 

[Dean62]

To treenail or not? I think Dean mentioned a very valid point when he spoke about risk. I have seen some builds where the best intended treenails (in my opinion) detract from an otherwise excellent build. In the end, it all comes down to the builder. On the WB with an overall hull length of 57 cm (including the galleon) I have not even bothered about adding treenails to the deck (let alone the hull), so I tend to agree with Dean on this one.

I am certainly not opposed to treenails, as I said, some of the best models I have seen have them added. I have also seen them ruin a model. So at 1/75 scale I have to refrain from the thought that my ship will not look as good if I don’t add them. I did add nails to the deck and gratings, and the wales (on one side so far). And they are to scale, and can’t be seen until you are within a foot of the model. That would also be my approach to treenails on the hull. The good news is that they will not be added to the painted areas of the hull, as this seems to be a waste of effort in my opinion. So that leaves the band of stained hull with the cannon ports. I tread carefully on this decision because once begun, there is no turning back. And I don’t want to spend countless hours adding something that actually detracts from the ship. So my plan is to test on a piece of wood and hold it up to the ship to make my final decision.

 

[Dean62]

One final note… there is a logical order…the cannon ports should be located prior to nails, and the nails should be done prior to stain. I am already out of order, so to speak. I stained first and then added cannon ports. So now when I add nails, I have lost the ability to sand them flush without creating a mess with matching stain, especially since I weathered it. So I have to see if I can either add wood putty and level and wipe while wet, or add metal pins and cut flush without sanding. The later being the harder approach. I will test on a piece and see if I can get satisfactory results that look worth the effort. As I may have painted myself into a corner!

 

[NMBROOK]

Hi Dean

I personally would not treenail the hull. That is my opinion obviously, but one based on tree nailing most of my models until now. The only model I will continue doing so, and these are scale nails, is my 1/36 Saint Phillipe. I feel it will spoil the lovely grain pattern you have going on on your hull.Just thought I would throw one in from a now converted member of the "other" camp.

 

[Dean62]

Hi Dean

I personally would not treenail the hull. That is my opinion obviously, but one based on tree nailing most of my models until now. The only model I will continue doing so, and these are scale nails, is my 1/36 Saint Phillipe. I feel it will spoil the lovely grain pattern you have going on on your hull.Just thought I would throw one in from a now converted member of the "other" camp.

Thank you for your opinion and advice!
I am slowly coming to the same conclusion.

 

[Dean62]

I finished the cannon ports and started adding nails to the wales…

Do you see the nails?

How about now?

And finally I have to take a micro shot to get close enough. They will be there upon close inspection, but will not take away from the model at all from a normal viewing distance.

I may add some next to the cannon ports, but that would be it.
For reference, the other side…


Should I add nails to the side of all canon ports, along with the wales and call it a day? Opinions welcome. Advice welcome. Thanks for checking in.

 

[dockattner]

Opinions welcome.

The strong wood grain would conflict with planking/framing trenails. I like them alongside the gun ports. Or maybe just in the places where the cannon rigging would have been secured through the hull (if that would have been done on the NL)?

 

[Dean62]

The strong wood grain would conflict with planking/framing trenails. I like them alongside the gun ports. Or maybe just in the places where the cannon rigging would have been secured through the hull (if that would have been done on the NL)?

Thanks Paul, my thoughts as well. Maybe just the openings without frames?

 

[Dean62]

Another example of what’s visible at scale…

See any nails?

And now?

You really have to lean into the model closely to see these details. And once in a display case, that won’t be possible.
Now I like these details and having built too many models of all different types, I think we all know how many details get buried in a model. But for some reason we get satisfaction knowing they are there, and that we didn’t take any short cuts. But more and more, I am starting to question this madness!

 

[Kurt Konrath]

As you point out the viewing distance needed to see the treenail detail is very close which only a camera can get now, but not once in a case on display.

Its a Macro point in a Micro world. Having a background in professional photography it's an issue of looking at a photo too closely. An 8x10 photos is viewed at about 18", and a large portrait size would be viewed at arms length or greater, and fine details are not seen at these distances.

 

[NMBROOK]

I will through a real curved ball out there. Should the ports not have the ends of clenched eyebolts either side? Not too sure with this vessel, just know French do and English don't as a general rule. That would add real visual interest

 

[Heinrich]

My point has been highlighted by the series of photographs - the nails are invisible with the naked eye from a normal viewing distance.

 

[Dean62]

I don’t know where to start sometimes, or what to work on next. So…I made a few modifications to the beak head behind the figurehead or Lion.

This is heading in the right direction, but I still don’t like the extra vertical support to the left of where the rails meet the keel. I may carve it out. I may also make adjustments to the upper rail, going to let it sit awhile longer before committing to anything.

Meanwhile it’s time to start making some progress on the stern galleries.
The instructions…





The way they have you build it sets you up for failure in my opinion. The lower set of windows are at an angle and follow the curve of the piece they sit on. The side windows are at an angle and curve as well. Rear windows angle outward, and the side windows angle inwards. I will show how I am going to ensure these are properly done when the time comes.

Here is my reference material…



So I am starting with the lower rear windows…


Rather than make the window frames from individual pieces, which would be more fragile, I am going to see if I can make them from the cutouts. Then I can sand them thinner, paint and glue to the clear plastic and glue the plastic to the back of the wall or frame. The wall and columns will be black, window frames red, and the upper and lower trim and carvings will be gold.
Anyway, it will all make more sense as you see it come together. But for now I have to spend an insane amount of time making window frames!

I started on the first one. First I laid out the frame in pencil on the wood, and now I am cutting them out carefully with magnifying glasses.
The ships galleries are an important aspect of this build and this ship! A real focal point.
So I say, without a satisfactory result, this ship will become fireplace wood!
Everything I have done so far means nothing if I don’t make this look great! No pressure!

 

[RDN1954]

My point has been highlighted by the series of photographs - the nails are invisible with the naked eye from a normal viewing distance.

Agree.