Shipbucket

Let me first say that I'm loving this new resource I've discovered called Shipbucket! As a non-artist who's always in search of good illustrations... And to think that many of them were done using just MS Paint! I think you guys are amazing...

So having said that, one criticism I would have is that there doesn't seem to be any consistency between whether the drawings are waterline drawings or full-hull drawings, which makes many of them hard to compare. I don't really have a clear preference one way or the other, but consistency is important for comparability, and when I have, say, only a waterline Bismark and only a full-hull Littorio, it makes it hard... so my question is, do you guys have a preference? I didn't see a mention of it in the standards section (or maybe I missed it?) Sorry if it's a dumb question...

Full hull is preferred, but if no sources are available, we do waterline only.

_________________
“Close” only counts with horseshoes, hand grenades, and tactical nuclear weapons.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error

Worklist

Source Materiel is always welcome.

''only a waterline Bismark and only a full-hull Littorio''

I'm confused by you! They are both drawing aswell with hull and underwaterhull..

back when we started to drawn these things we did the upper works only. At somepoint we decided to introduce full sidewiev with underwater parts as well (mainly becouse submarines were dull to draw above waterline only)...
most of the drawings that don't have underwater hull dates from the times they weren't part of the style. 99% of the current drawings tends to feature them...

_________________
Shipbucket mainsite, aka "The Archive"
New AU project "Aravala"

I was going off the top of my head... I guess I was thinking Deutchland and Dunkerque rather than Bismark and Littorio (as well as Bismark-Deutschland...)

Another thing I'd love to see you guys do is a Bismark in the equivalent camo scheme as you guys' Deutschland 1, as well as a full-hull version of the latter... and a Hipper in the same camo scheme/ hull arrangement combo... (I know I've seen all of the above in that "dark grey zig-zag stripe scheme," whatever it's called, but only in waterline drawings.)

But the main point was the full-hull vs. waterline question, which I guess you'all more-or-less answered by saying you do have current prefereance for full-hull but that some inconsistency comes from a change in this preference...

\


Bismarck IS DONE in full hull.

99%? I believe I am somewhat out of this standard then, as I draw mostly small modern ships nowadays, often from pictures with no clear references or drawings, so I think in my case it is more 80% with full hull..... or less. is this a problem?

_________________
Drawings are credited with J.Scholtens
I ask of you to prove me wrong. Not say I am wrong, but prove it, because then I will have learned something new.
Shipbucket Wiki admin

It's seems he's making a problem of it.

My preferance is full hull drawings, and so I'm trying my best to draw only full-hull, where there is enough source material.
Some drawings are done only as water-line hull, and I believe it's because full hull details are not available.

_________________
Thank you Kim for the crest

"Never fear to try on something new. Remember that the Titanic was built by professionals, and the Ark by an amateur"

Yes, I was reminded of this fact and then remembered that it was the Deutschland class that wasn't full hull, but the point is that the lack of consistency makes for a lack of visual comparability