Vasa - 1:65 DeAgostini [COMPLETED BUILD]

[kirill4]

Good day Paul,
I see...but You know, there are a lot of such , invisible things on the model , but than why did You show us this knot... under camera magnification?
what did You want to tell us about this knot? )) what was the message ? ))
ps
believe me, how knots were made in your "scale " still well visible, even without magnification...
by my opinion , these are the most interesting things on the model of any scale, how master managed with his tasks ... ))...
What I meant , on the models of your level of creation, such small - invisible things often became key points...!
Usually when I see the model, after first glance there is immediate impression and you decide , do you want to get a few or many hrs of adventure of watching and studying any details of this model and most probably many times will return to some interesting points again and again or just look at some model and walking passing by ...

 

[kirill4]

regarding sails, I think there could be dispute about color, but not about "weathering"...
as I understood, and if You want to use some historic basis of appearance of your model,
sails they used were not made from cotton, means they couldn't be such white color in principal...
there was detailed study of European sail making process in J.Boudriot 74 gun ship , volume 3...

 

[Steef66]

Sails made of hemp came mainly from the Netherlands. In those days, they were treated with "potash". potassium-carbonate. The sailcloth was boiled in a mixture of "potash" and this leaching process preserved the sailcloth. But "potash" also bleached the sailcloth, making its grey colour considerably lighter.

 

[dockattner]

regarding sails, I think there could be dispute about color, but not about "weathering"...
as I understood, and if You want to use some historic basis of appearance of your model,
sails they used were not made from cotton, means they couldn't be such white color in principal...
there was detailed study of European sail making process in J.Boudriot 74 gun ship , volume 3...

Sails made of hemp came mainly from the Netherlands. In those days, they were treated with "potash". potassium-carbonate. The sailcloth was boiled in a mixture of "potash" and this leaching process preserved the sailcloth. But "potash" also bleached the sailcloth, making its grey colour considerably lighter.

I have not been careful to show you the color of my sails with any accuracy. I would say they are light hemp color (maybe an antique paper shade). They are definitely not in a gray tone which would now be impossible (nor am I inclined to put grey sails on my ship). I believe the color could be tweaked darker quite easily. Maybe I'll put one on the ship and take a picture in natural light and folks can see what I've got.

 

[Steef66]

My contributie is just made that there is a mistake about the colour of hemp sails. Sails could have a lot of colour tones. Light gray to dark green/yellow gray or even red to Brown.
It depends on how it was treated. Sails whare also treated in a sort of tea made from wood. We call that "tanen". This coloured the sail red/Brown. It protect against fungust.
I like your sails, it's not necessary to make them weathered or so. Just off White is beautifull and besides in years they get darker.

 

[Steef66]

Good day Paul!
Looks nice! Well done! Very accurate and clean job!
How did You make that brace pendant knot - mmm...(no good !?) could try do better ^))) ... it shouldn't be made just as simple fanny knot from the same rope...
as variant \imitation knot on the pendant could be made from other piece of thread of the same size... making a simple knot, applied it at the end of the pendant+SA gel+nail cutter\for fast clean cut running ends of the thread + tweezers for proper forming imitation of this knot(need to do it while it is still wet with CA gel-to give knot oval shape), than seizing need to be made on the end of the pendant above this knot ... ( Guterman skala or similar thin thread is very handy for making imitation of seizing, or ordinary synthetic thin thread need to be undone in three strands and one of them could be used for imitation of seizing or splicing of the rope )
https://karopka.ru/bitrix/components/bitrix/forum.interface/show_file.php?fid=2324186 https://karopka.ru/bitrix/components/bitrix/forum.interface/show_file.php?fid=2324789

Thanks for sharing, that is a nice way to make these knots. Keep them in mind.

 

[dockattner]

Hello Kirill,

You have made several interesting points that I would respectfully respond to.

I see...but You know, there are a lot of such , invisible things on the model , but than why did You show us this knot... under camera magnification?
what did You want to tell us about this knot? )) what was the message ? ))

Indeed. There are many 'invisible' things on our models - things we are often aware of that no one will ever see. But there aren't a lot of those on my ship. I am certainly aware that some modelers will put in details just because 'they (themselves) will know' even though those details are later hidden under future stages of construction. I have chosen to not do that. I did not include a whipstaff, I did not build out the cabin for the king with a view through a window, I did not rig guns on the enclosed gun decks, etc. There is nothing wrong with including 'hidden' details - just isn't my thing. I suppose part of it is ROI. I have a full time job and a part time job and do not have the time margin for a ten year build.

So why did I show a magnified picture of a knot? Simply out of habit. I take close up images of most everything I present here on the forum. I think it makes for an interesting build log. Plus, it is an unusual connection that my research indicated was correct on a ship of my era so I made a representation of it.

I confess that your question "what did I want to tell you about this knot" never crossed my mind. I'm certainly not pretending to hold myself out as a master storyteller of how a model should be made. Someone would have to wildly unfamiliar with this build log to conclude that I am highlighting my work over-against the work of others (in fact, I have been taunted by forum friends for being hard on myself ).

believe me, how knots were made in your "scale " still well visible, even without magnification...

Agreed. When examined by a master familiar with early 17th century Dutch made ships those details would be visible. If one of those 25 people show up at my house I'll be forced to throw a blanket over my ship and slink away in shame. My golfing buddies will just make fun of me for making a model of anything at my age.

by my opinion , these are the most interesting things on the model of any scale, how master managed with his tasks ... ))...
What I meant , on the models of your level of creation, such small - invisible things often became key points...!
Usually when I see the model, after first glance there is immediate impression and you decide , do you want to get a few or many hrs of adventure of watching and studying any details of this model and most probably many times will return to some interesting points again and again or just look at some model and walking passing by ...

Certainly I can't disagree with whatever it is you find most interesting or most important when you examine a model ship. When I was at the Rijksmuseum I did the same (albeit with my beginner's level of knowledge). But my wife, who couldn't care less about model ships, had just as much fun as I had during our visit. Maybe she was happy to see me happy, or maybe she found it all interesting in her elementary way.

While I would not take away your keen eye and interest in the details it is not universally true that those details are the singular portal for liking a model or not liking a model. Having spent several hours looking at model ships with me her concluding statement was, "I like the ships with the sails better." She had a great time - didn't have the foggiest idea what she was looking at - but still was able to say what she thought looked best. Prior to her saying that I had decided there would be no sails on my Vasa - now I am trying. To make her happy. After all, she IS the one who will have to walk past my ship every single day .

I'll appeal to the unofficial (?) motto of the forum: build what you like - like what you build.

 

[RogerD]

Hello Kirill,

You have made several interesting points that I would respectfully respond to.

Indeed. There are many 'invisible' things on our models - things we are often aware of that no one will ever see. But there aren't a lot of those on my ship. I am certainly aware that some modelers will put in details just because 'they (themselves) will know' even though those details are later hidden under future stages of construction. I have chosen to not do that. I did not include a whipstaff, I did not build out the cabin for the king with a view through a window, I did not rig guns on the enclosed gun decks, etc. There is nothing wrong with including 'hidden' details - just isn't my thing. I suppose part of it is ROI. I have a full time job and a part time job and do not have the time margin for a ten year build.

So why did I show a magnified picture of a knot? Simply out of habit. I take close up images of most everything I present here on the forum. I think it makes for an interesting build log. Plus, it is an unusual connection that my research indicated was correct on a ship of my era so I made a representation of it.

I confess that your question "what did I want to tell you about this knot" never crossed my mind. I'm certainly not pretending to hold myself out as a master storyteller of how a model should be made. Someone would have to wildly unfamiliar with this build log to conclude that I am highlighting my work over-against the work of others (in fact, I have been taunted by forum friends for being hard on myself ).


Agreed. When examined by a master familiar with early 17th century Dutch made ships those details would be visible. If one of those 25 people show up at my house I'll be forced to throw a blanket over my ship and slink away in shame. My golfing buddies will just make fun of me for making a model of anything at my age.


Certainly I can't disagree with whatever it is you find most interesting or most important when you examine a model ship. When I was at the Rijksmuseum I did the same (albeit with my beginner's level of knowledge). But my wife, who couldn't care less about model ships, had just as much fun as I had during our visit. Maybe she was happy to see me happy, or maybe she found it all interesting in her elementary way.

While I would not take away your keen eye and interest in the details it is not universally true that those details are the singular portal for liking a model or not liking a model. Having spent several hours looking at model ships with me her concluding statement was, "I like the ships with the sails better." She had a great time - didn't have the foggiest idea what she was looking at - but still was able to say what she thought looked best. Prior to her saying that I had decided there would be no sails on my Vasa - now I am trying. To make her happy. After all, she IS the one who will have to walk past my ship every single day .

I'll appeal to the unofficial (?) motto of the forum: build what you like - like what you build.

Great post Paul, you make some very valid points. My approach to model building is similar to your comments above. However, you have skills that many of us can only hope to strive for. At the end of the day, and indeed the build, it is ultimately what pleases you that is important.

 

[Peter Voogt]

Paul, I fully agree with you comment. It’s your interest in how far you go with the details and it’s also depending on your skills. And you have great skills and made great details and paint jobs.
And it is good that you refer to the motto of the SOS.
Regards, Peter

 

[Nomad]

Mark, I have been thinking about the color of my sails as well. Vasa's sails were fresh off the sailmaker's work table (new sails were made for her - they were not recycled from another ship) so they would have looked better than they might have in a year (if she had survived more than an hour or two). My ship has absolutely no 'weathering' so I am of the mind that properly weathered sails would look out of place?

Makes perfect sense Paul. I didn't know much about the fate of the Vasa but learnt after a quick lookup-up that she met her demise less than a mile into her maiden voyage in 1628 . Interestingly, they were able to recover six of her ten sails during the salvage operation in Stockholm harbour in 1961. No weathering there for sure, although I wonder how well the sail material held up after 333 years immersed underwater in a compartment on the orlop deck? Either way, I think it is perfectly reasonable to assume that the Vasa's sails were brand spanking new at the time that she sank and you would be entirely justified as representing them as such

 

[kirill4]

Dear Paul,
Everything I told , it is my deep private point of vew... ah...it is not a call to make corrections or dogma , that things must be done in this way only!
Please consider existing language translating troubles ....
My remarks ,they are mainly ,90 %about rigging issues, deck fittings , spars...all which are not hidden inside model...which I could see on the posted pictures...
if I see smthg "wrong" , again, this could be " wrong "is in my mind only, I tell about it...sure other people will have different opinions...
That knot of the brace pendant... which shown on macro...
correct that it should be here, very good You noted it and shown this arrangements ,
but it's shape, which is also demonstrated - looks" wrong"....
By the way there are more a few specific knots commonly used in vessel rigging/used in buntlines,clewlines, bowlines for example, which are very interesting looks on the model, when they performed...( all not for our wifes or non modelling friends eyes!) ))

 

[RDN1954]

Dear Paul,
Everything I told , it is my deep private point of vew... ah...it is not a call to make corrections or dogma , that things must be done in this way only!
Please consider existing language translating troubles ....
My remarks ,they are mainly ,90 %about rigging issues, deck fittings , spars...all which are not hidden inside model...which I could see on the posted pictures...
if I see smthg "wrong" , again, this could be " wrong "is in my mind only, I tell about it...sure other people will have different opinions...
That knot of the brace pendant... which shown on macro...
correct that it should be here, very good You noted it and shown this arrangements ,
but it's shape, which is also demonstrated - looks" wrong"....
By the way there are more a few specific knots commonly used in vessel rigging/used in buntlines,clewlines, bowlines for example, which are very interesting looks on the model, when they performed...( all not for our wifes or non modelling friends eyes!) ))

Hello Kirill,

Yep, having to converse in a language, not being your native tongue, sets you back quite a couple of miles, when compared to those who were born speaking that other language.
I guess we're lucky a lot of our English-speaking community realize English is not our first language and that we often need to use dictionaries and even then we might mix up. Paul's (@dockattner ) response speaks volumes in that regard. We're lucky people like Paul understand our struggles and have the patience to respectfully respond to our sometimes brass posts.
It also offers us the possibility to learn.

Johan

 

[kirill4]

Thanks Johan!
Sure , there was no intention to make my posts kind of " brass "(? arrogant ? is that what You meant) ? I wanted to make accents on technical questions and importance of details in whole model appearence ....

 

[Richie]

Lots of interesting discussion about many details which I am also taking on board, it seems to come down to where the modeler wants to draw the line, for mortals like me there will probably be always a more correct way but it comes down to time and skill of the builder to implement it otherwise you end up like me paralyzed with fear to continue and making all these mistakes because of incorrect research.

Regarding the sails and it's something I will also need to consider, my thoughts for new sails would be how white was white 400 years ago, I am thinking not as bleached white as today so some sort of off white I would say is acceptable.

Paul I think your work is top notch and however much detail you decide to build into it you definitely shouldn't be covering it up.

 

[kirill4]

What is more realistic color of the sails cloth could be ,in that time, for Europe made cloth, I think we could find some information from museum models and ancient pictures ... not of the 16 th , but there are a few of 17th , which looks like still have original sails - I mean Pr Willem model as example...and famous dutch artists paints
and there are more modern models of 18 th century , from existing museum collection... all they have sails of more or less dark( variation of ocher) colors...and non of them have bright/ white sails...
as I understood from the books , it depends on of origin of material which were used for sail's cloth making... and only american built vessel of later time 18-19th had white cotton sails...?
But Paul already pointed that he made his choice of the sails color for his model.

 

[kirill4]

By the way, on the Vasa museum model, sails are very bright !!! Why not to fitt same color on the model ...

 

[Steef66]

Dear Kirill,

By the way, on the Vasa museum model, sails are very bright !!! Why not to fitt same color on the model ...

It doesn't really seem like a problem to formulate the language properly, it seems more like you have problems accepting someone's decisions. Too bad you keep making a point about something that has already been discussed at length.

The words of Paul where in the place and kind and like he said what seems to be the motto here on this forum

build what you like - like what you build.

Your extra input gives in this case a nasty feeling. I didn't want to say anything about it. And don't get involved in this matter.
But sometimes I also feel offended by your words like in post #2940 where you say:

"... and I saw some our collegues appreciate such mistakes?"

Such a shame that this happens when I can also enjoy the input you give. Too bad and maybe sometimes you have to accept that someone else has a different opinion. So that we can all enjoy this wonderful hobby and each other. Sometimes be critical and sometimes not. Sometimes just listening to what the other person has to say or just reading carefully. And most important, sometimes just express a word of appreciation.
Please do not take my words too hard, they are sincere.
And I hope I am not offending anyone with my words because this is not my intention. For that I apologise in advance.

Stephan

ps. Sorry Paul for giving my input on this matter, but I too could not resist responding.

 

[kirill4]

Dear all, Paul,
I sincere apologise, sometimes really I can't stop in time ... when have to do that ...very sorry!

 

[RDN1954]

Thanks Johan!
Sure , there was no intention to make my posts kind of " brass "(? arrogant ? is that what You meant) ? I wanted to make accents on technical questions and importance of details in whole model appearence ....

"Brass", as I understand it, can be used for very direct or bold. May be seen as overbearing.
I think often issues arise when we're using translating software. I used Google translate a couple of times and what came out of that needs a lot of scrutiny; it was plain to see those translations are overly simplistic and could even come across as being offensive.
It also may have a cultural component. We Dutch are often seen as direct, to the point and often on or over the edge of being blunt. Knowing this I try to be careful in my wording when posting on SOS.
We also have seen quite a few conversations on the historical accuracy of certain aspects of our builds.
What I've come to realize is that it's not always possible to prove our assumptions to be true "beyond any reasonable doubt". Personally I'm not to worried about that; what I build is at best a representation of how the ship might have looked. If one pursues to build one's model as accurately as possible, I'll applaud their efforts. But I think my main point on the accuracy of our models is this; look at @Heinrich 's build log of Willem Barentsz ship and read the extensive conversations on the configuration of 1) the kolderstok and the helsman and 2) the position of the windlass. Quite some well respected people participated and yet, with all the available information and evidence, different conclusions were reached. Heck, we don't even no the name of the ship he sailed.

 

[Heinrich]

"Brass", as I understand it, can be used for very direct or bold. May be seen as overbearing.
I think often issues arise when we're using translating software. I used Google translate a couple of times and what came out of that needs a lot of scrutiny; it was plain to see those translations are overly simplistic and could even come across as being offensive.
It also may have a cultural component. We Dutch are often seen as direct, to the point and often on or over the edge of being blunt. Knowing this I try to be careful in my wording when posting on SOS.
We also have seen quite a few conversations on the historical accuracy of certain aspects of our builds.
What I've come to realize is that it's not always possible to prove our assumptions to be true "beyond any reasonable doubt". Personally I'm not to worried about that; what I build is at best a representation of how the ship might have looked. If one pursues to build one's model as accurately as possible, I'll applaud their efforts. But I think my main point on the accuracy of our models is this; look at @Heinrich 's build log of Willem Barentsz ship and read the extensive conversations on the configuration of 1) the kolderstok and the helsman and 2) the position of the windlass. Quite some well respected people participated and yet, with all the available information and evidence, different conclusions were reached. Heck, we don't even no the name of the ship he sailed.

Exactly Johan. And we build models out of all kinds of different wood types EXCEPT oak which was in 99% of the case the wood used. My point is that somewhere a line has to be drawn between what is deemed feasible by the builder and what not.