The Ship Model Forum

Perhaps one can somewhat bridge both of those worlds. I like building things but also tend to have some historical connection to the ships I build. My "thing" is to avoid any commercial parts which I have so far been able to achieve, as progress is made, with better results. The design program I use does not yield captivating renders of a rather perfect virtual world, so the emphasis is on actually building things with all their imperfections and warts. For quite a few years I was involved in the flight simulator community and though not designing the aircraft themselves, I was fairly successful at doing the flight dynamics, which made the planes fly in a faithful manner. So a virtual world can be entertaining.

As to assembling the parts into a complete ship model, even from 3D printing, serious challenges in thought and dexterity are still encountered. Ship modeling has various interest groups, a broad tent! Researching and reading the various threads continually increases knowledge for the inquiring mind.

Thanks to all! Tom

Tks Gentlemen, we're in agreement.

I started to draw the hull plates on this light file which will be used to cut the hull sections that will be printed, a very long work.

We can see them very well, from my previous experiences.

On this ship I made the shallower impressions because on the real ship you can't see the plates much because it's extremely tight and the rivets are flush with the sheet metal.

Here I drew 0.2 mm impressions. It should be perfect for the final rendering.

Here it's 0,3 mm on SS Hydrograaf.

viewtopic.php?f=13&t=329319

I have seen many discussions about how much detail is enough on a model, and in the end it depends upon what the modeler wants to add, or what limit is set. But in most cases the discussions center on what would be visible from the real ship at some distance and a corresponding viewing distance at scale.

In the photo below you can see the hull plating from a distance of 50-100 feet (15-30 meters), a fairly close distance in the real world, corresponding to a viewing distance of a foot (25 mm) or so at 1:100. This would be a reasonable close viewing distance for the model. Even in photos taken a few hundred yards/meters distant the shadows from the edges of some strakes are still visible.

If I ever get around to building the 1:96 scale model of the ship I will include the hull plating - but not the rivets! Even though the CAD model has every nut, bolt, screw and rivet down to 3/16 inch (4.7 mm) at 1:1 scale (at least half the 1 Gbyte file is fasteners) almost all of these are too small at 1:96 scale to bother with.

Phil

Phil:

Perhaps you meant 25 cm? Easy to slip? I remember reading a text that said one could omit ship items smaller than 2'. With 3D we can well represent much smaller items. For WWII ships the extreme clutter of the topsides was a constant feature except for larger warships such as Battleships which did have some space for lounge chairs. What we need for smaller details is photo documentation. A single photo can have a wealth of small items to add. However we are stuck with many areas that are not covered. For my APA there was a movie shot aboard and each still I captured had a wealth of small items contained.

We all hope that you are able to turn your cruiser into a flesh and blood model. That would be a learning experience for all of us!

Regards: Tom

Totally agree, once again...

It's ending!

There is still the bottom of the ship to do, but that's going fast.





The plating adds a lot to the realism:

Tom,

Yep! 25.4 mm is an inch! That would be close viewing. 30.5 cm is a foot.

I think 0.008 inch (0.2 mm) is about as small as I want to try to model.

Phil

With my 3D printer (filament type) it goes as small as 0.4mm - unless I change the nozzle and then it goes to 0.25mm. I've not tried that yet.

From my perspective, I'm working on a 1/96 scale ship, and so there's some small bits that just won't be there. I'm not going to make padlocks on lockers...not going to happen. The locker needs to be represented though.

How do I decide? I like your input of 'if it's smaller than 2 feet, I don't do it', but that would leave a lot of empty space around the edge of the flight deck. So, I'm printing things that I think I can both paint and install. Wheel chocks - individual? No. The racks of 8-16 wheel chocks? yes. Not a perfect representation of them, but a grey rack, with yellow chocks is representative of what they are/were.

I'm not losing sleep over not including some detail bits. I have seen all but one of the 'local' HMCS Bonaventure models, and even spoken with the builder of two of them. My version already has more detail than the ones on display in the Maritime Museum of the Atlantic, the Atlantic Canada Aviation Museum, and the Shearwater Aviation Museum. It's not a builder's reference model, it's a functional RC model ship.

I'm happy with that.

And, because it's functional, I expect that I'm going to break some bits when I launch and recover it - so having them 3D printed means that I just go and re-print, re-paint, and re-place.

NS

There is also the viewing-distance dilemma: if I am observering a model at arm's length, certain details won't be discernible or only in their outlines, however, unless the model is presented in true diorama fashion with a fixed viewing distance, the observer may move closer until the nose almost touches the model to inspect it in detail - and then you need the detail that is not discernible at greater distance.

The same applies, incidentally, for close-up photographs. If a model is designed for a certain viewing distance, then you should not take close-up shots or you will attract negative comments.

Drawing the linoleum plates of deck 1 and the forecastle.

I'm preparing deck 2 to draw them too, I have to arrange the front parts by group, because I have to make impressions to facilitate the gluing of the parts when it will be printed. Very long and tedious operations, but very useful for the assembly, it's the first time I'm doing this.











There is camber, on the first 2 main decks, which does not make it easy to draw some elements, like linoleum, or even the move itself because of the irregularity of the edges of the decks, casemates etc... It's not easy.

Well, this boat has no shear, that's something, flat as a flatfish!

I'm almost done with the linoleum on deck 2, the upper deck of the C turret remains.





Footprints of the elements

Incredible talent you've got there. That really is stunning. Would love to see this available as a mainstream injection molded kit.

Thank you for your encouragement, Martin.

It's not planned, I'm doing this for fun, but maybe my online drawings can motivate and inspire producers of injected models?

The camber is a little more pronounced normally.



Sectioning plan of the hull for printing.

For the cuts, you have to be careful not to fall on a porthole, an edge of sheet metal, or any protuberances, because it will be necessary to sand at this level after gluing and sometimes put putty if necessary, which will erase what is on the surface. As for the window, it may not be round anymore.

For the rear and the lines of trees it is necessary to try to print all in the same section by taking into account the rules above. �:lol: �

I started to print the hull by starting with the section N�1 of the bow.

I had a very small problem with the deck coming off a few supports, the section is usable but a little deformed, rectifiable with very little filler.

But as I have another little thing that I don't like (a forgotten a wall in the front that deforms the deck), I reprint it.

The problem comes from the protective film of the glass that reduces a little the UV radiation, I put it in place a little while ago, it plays a little on the exposure times, especially on the layers of the deck.

I corrected it in the settings and now it's ok for the second copy of section 1.

I also printed the second section, it is very good. I keep the prototypes in general, it allows to show people how the printing of the ship is done.

In any case it will make a hell of a beast, it is far from being ridiculous next to the Bismarck at 1/200 too.

I am very happy with this first round.















You can see the flaw on the forecastle deck in low light. A useless transverse bulkhead that I forgot to erase on the inside. It causes a stretch on the deck indirectly during printing, a known phenomenon.

You can see some on the hull plating, because of the hawksbills which are very big and embedded on this ship, but there it's normal, there's nothing to do, it's unavoidable, except sanding a little. �:)





Section 2, I made an impression for the threaded rod nut that will hold the vessel and bracket, the nut will be glued on with Pattex bi-component glue.







What's next:

Joining section 2, gluing and sanding.

Pause a transparent Rhodoid behind the portholes before gluing, it will not be accessible afterwards.













The No. 1 board of front range equipment.



Trying to get the anchors in place.

Amazing!

HOLY COW!

I've kept an eye on this thread from the start, and have really enjoyed seeing the 3D model coming to be. Now, seeing it printed and coming from a screen into your hands...wow.

Well done!

Thanks Martin and NS!

Pascal,

Very nice; I think I'm going to enjoy watching the assembly of the printed vessel almost more than I enjoyed the 3d development and I thought that was outstanding!

So exciting seeing the printing stage.

Indeed the printing is coming along nicely. There is quite a bit of leger de main involved in producing really good prints. At this Pascal really shows his experience.

Best regards: Tom

Printing such large pieces that need to fit together, such as the hull, is quite a challenge ...