Calling all Essex-class (WWII configuration) fans

[Rdutnell]

Oh man, did I ever discover something that makes the scan merging of plans process WAY easier. I knew that Photoshop had the ability to merge photos for panoramas, so I put my scanned jpg files on a thmb drive and went to the computer lab and started Photoshop. While it was loading, a quick search on Adobe�s Help screen found this site:
http://help.adobe.com/en_US/photoshop/c ... 75e8a.html

So, I opened all of my files as directed and, TADA! I had an aligned plot. Unfortunately, in the first go around I didn�t select Reposition, so it was skewed and one side was bigger than the other. Redoing it with the right selection worked like a charm.

Now I have a high resolution JPG file of the plans to bring into AutoCad and scale. The detail is excellent and just looking at it is an adventure. Here's a clip of it.

Life is Good!

[Tracy White]

Interesting... my version pf Photoshop doesn't have that. Might be what pushes me over the edge into an upgrade!

[pbudzik]

It's not fool-proof every time. While it usually works great, when I was doing the drawing for the Enterprise shafting, I had to take the information off several pages in the Maryland Silver Book. No matter how I scanned the pages, I couldn't get it to stitch them all together. There has to be enough information that it can find on each page. I'm using CS5.5

Paul

[Rdutnell]

Interesting... my version pf Photoshop doesn't have that. Might be what pushes me over the edge into an upgrade!

I think there are add ons that do the same thing with older versions. I have CS3, OU uses CS5, I believe.

Paul is right. Upon closer inspection, there are some alignment problems in places. I think I need to lay it out, mark off some common corner points, so that each scan has 4 of them. If this doesn't work automatically, I think I saw that one of the options is to manually do it. And I need to really make sure that they are flat, which is difficult to do while wrestling with all of the extra paper. I'll let you know how it goes.

[Tracy White]

I'm running Photoshop 6. Not CS6... Photoshop six, from about a decade ago.

I have to hand-stitch all of my damage plates together now, and it can be a pain, particularly with paper ripples. There are times I swear I've got the thing pressed flat, yet certain areas are clearly distorted and will not line up. It becomes an art to distort it back together in ways that aren't apparent to the viewer. Thanks for the heads up though.

[Hippy Ed]

I'm running Photoshop 6. Not CS6... Photoshop six, from about a decade ago.

I have to hand-stitch all of my damage plates together now, and it can be a pain, particularly with paper ripples. There are times I swear I've got the thing pressed flat, yet certain areas are clearly distorted and will not line up. It becomes an art to distort it back together in ways that aren't apparent to the viewer. Thanks for the heads up though.

A neva ending battle fer sure...

[Tracy White]

It's all balance. Time/money. The cost of photoshop would pay for a week's research in San Francisco, and since I haven't run into any show stoppers, it's harder to make the case I need it.

That said, the ability to turn around documents faster would be an obvious benefit as well. There are some larger ones I've scanned in that I'm not contemplating posting because of the hours of image work it would require....

[Timmy C]

Tracy, have you tried using Microsoft ICE? It's another stand-alone auto-stitcher available for free.

[Rdutnell]

Good Morning All!

I have yet another question. After looking at the Bennington plans I got and comparing them to the model I noticed something interesting (again). On the plans there are ovals, with some of them marked "Landing Lights". I assume they didn't label them all. I filled these inwith red on my AutoCad drawing, since that's what they would have been. (according to a document Tracy sent me. Actually the document says red aft and forward, others white or red. The plans say red, so I chose red.) In the image below, these lights are circled in red.

On the model kit I have, the Trumpeter Essex 1/350, there are smooth square areas, imprinted on the flight deck, that look like they are supposed to represent the landing lights. In most places, they line up well with the lights on the plans. In the image below the red circles show where they correspond. the yellow circles are where they are on the model, but not the plans.

Does anyone know if these marks on the model are indeed supposed to be lights? Also, is it likely that the locations of the lights would vary from ship to ship? It wouldn't surprise me. Many other things are different. As another example of differences, comparing the Bennington plans with the Essex model reveals that many of the flight deck side mounted 20mm gun platforms are in different spots. Looks like more scratch building is in order.

CHEERS!

[Tracy White]

I believe so, but keep in mind these would be fairly flush lights with restricted viewing angles; you don't want to just pop some bulbs or red paint.

[Rdutnell]

Well, I was thinking that maybe those SMD chip LEDs would work if you built a little open ended box with a sloped top (a triangle viewed on end). I ordered one of the lights just to see what they look like. Pix don't cut it.

[Russ2146]

Looking at your first deck plan photo above, I notice that the lights appear to be place just outside of the edge of the flight deck, rather than in the metal that borders the wood of the fight deck. I have looked through a lot of photos that show the edge of the flight deck and while the little arms that raise the arresting cables during landing ops are visible, there is nothing that remotely resembles a lighting device, nor a potential light that rises up out of the flight deck when turned on.

Is it possible that these lights were actually fixtures of some type that were attached to the inboard bulkheads of the galleries that edged the flight deck?

Need some photos taken from the galleries and looking inboard or along the galleries. They could be nothing more than boxes attached to the bulkheads with suitably protected and shielded bulbs protruding from the top.

[Rdutnell]

I really do not know. I spent a little time last night looking through photos trying to see if I could see them, but was unsuccessful.

[Tracy White]

If you want a beacon go ahead, but I really wouldn't worry about it. Get the running lights and some white and red lights for the hangar bay in and you're going to be ahead of 99% of the builders out there.

[Rdutnell]

Yeah, I think I've ruled those out. Looking at where they are, and how thick the plastic is there and the difficulty of doing it, I think it would be insane to try. I'm already bitin' at my limit I think. Hell, I can't always glue two pieces together and have them look decent. I appreciate your comments, as always!

[Capt652]

I have this picture from when my Dad was on the Shangri-la. The man in the photo is not my Dad but I think he is working on one these lights.

[Rdutnell]

Oh man, THANKS!

Really cool pic. I'm learning slowly that you often find what you are looking for in unexpected places. This picture confirms that I am NOT going to do the landing lights. They are no bigger than the guy's head, which at 350 scale would be TINY and I haven't seen the chips yet, but I doubt that even they would be small enough.

[Capt652]

This photo may show two of the landing lights.

[Rdutnell]

NICE!
It looks like it to me, and maybe they are a little bigger than a head.

[Rdutnell]

This photo may show two of the landing lights.

Image02032.jpg

Two more interesting things about this pic; the weathering on the hull, it looks like someone took a giant piece of sand paper to it, and the doors on the catwalk below the flight deck. How and the heck would you do those on the Trumpeter 1/350 Essex? The plastic must be close to 1" thick there. I guess they could all be closed?