![]() |
|
Following are my answers to some of the FAQ addressed to Digital Navy. Some of them are very general questions, some are more detailed, but all apply to our models. What you will find here are my suggestions as to how I would approach particular problems, but I don’t claim that these are the only methods and solutions. These simply work for me. |
||||||||||||
|
2. What does it mean to “double” the part to 1mm of thickness? |
||||||||||||
|
This is one of the most important issues for “digital” card modelers. When you buy a printed kit you don’t have a choice - you just have to live with whatever the publisher gave you. On the other hand, you can print
digital models by yourself, and this gives you a great advantage but also presents you with a hard decision - which paper to use. |
||||||||||||
![]() |
||||||||||||
|
In the past, I’ve relied heavily on #1 and #3 plate bristols. These were thick, 100lb, 2-ply bristols with good forming characteristics. By good forming characteristics, I mean - for example - that they didn’t break when rolled and the layers of the paper did not tend to separate. The drawbacks were that, as art papers, they come in 9”x12” size and have to be cut to 8.5”x11” sheets before printing. They also displayed some bleeding when printed on my Stylus 980, especially when printing thin black lines. Bristol #2 had similar qualities but was thinner - I used it for some delicate small elements like ship planes. Nowadays, I most often use Hammermill card stock - #4. It’s a bit thinner than bristols #1 and #3 ( somewhat between #3 and #2 ) - 74lb weight. I did not notice any bleeding so far with this paper. It does, however, have some tendency to break when rolled in tight cylinders, and you have to be careful when handling small parts as the top layer of this paper can separate and fall off. The paper is cheap ($10 for 250 sheets) and is 8.5”x11” in size - big pluses. Paper #5 is probably the cheapest paper you can find in Staples and the most generic copy stock. But it is one of my biggest discoveries in card modeling - the discovery that I can print some elements on this thin paper (20lb) and roll perfectly shaped tight cylinders - gun barrels for example. |
|
2. What does it mean to “double” the part to 1mm of thickness? |
|
|
|
There are two reasons why some parts need reinforcement. First, some parts need to be less flexible, for example all elements of the ship hull. Second, sometimes more gluing surface is needed. This is illustrated in Fig.1. Case #2 is a regular “tab” connection. As I don’t like this type of construction, I prefer the connection depicted in case #1, where no “tab” is involved. The joint is cleaner and more precise but it requires that the gluing surface be incresed by “doubling” or “laminating” the part. This issue is connected to the next FAQ: |
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Onboard catapults, chart house windows, platform supports etc., all these elements require precise cuting and bending of delicate patterns. Plastic modelers simply reach for a fret of photo-etched parts to offset plastic kits’
inability to replicate the above-mentioned patterns with satisfactory quality. Also, they usually have a lot of problems with proper shaping of the photo-etched parts, painting them etc. |
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
This is how I do it - first of all, I print gun barrels on very thin paper - like copy paper #5 on the picture above. Cut out the part and run it a few times on the edge of the scissors. This will give it some tendency to roll. Note that, in the case of the gun barrels, the parts are sections of the cone, not cylinders. Nothing looks less convincing than cylindrical gun barrel - smoke stacks are cylindrical, gun barrels are conical! Next, start to roll the part as tight as you can - for now without applying any glue. You may help yourself with a small bit as a rolling guide. In the case of really thin gun barrels, just roll the paper on itself - don’t worry that initial bends are not smooth, they will be covered by subsequent layers of the paper. (See Fig.10) |
|
|