30' plywood sharpie

[troy2000]

Originally Posted by gonzo

I have those books and it doesn't seem so hard to read the plans. Make a copy and enlarge it.

Perhaps you'd like to come over and read them to me then, if you have no problem with them.

Maybe the illustrations are a little clearer or larger in the editions you have. But I've been buying books with boat plans in them for probably thirty years, and these are the first ones I've ever owned that I can't read.

And yes, I think I've mentioned at least twice now that I was going to try to enlarge them with a copier when I get back to work. If the images in the books are sharp enough, that'll work.

[gonzo]

I have a 1969 edition and the offsets and plans are really clear.

[troy2000]

I'm not sure what year these are. They're both published by Norton. The latest copyright renewal in the Boatbuilding book is 1994, with a forward by Jon Wilson, founder of Woodenboat Magazine. The other one has nothing in it but the original 1951 copyright date. But it's obviously a new edition.

They're both much smaller than the editions I remember looking at years ago in a bookstore. Those were about the size of my laptop, like the editions I have of books by John Gardner, Edwin Monk and others.

[gonzo]

That sucks

[troy2000]

Originally Posted by gonzo

That sucks

I agree. Somehow, taking plans that were probably originally drawn on 22"x30" sheets, and fitting them onto a 6"x9" book page printed on fairly coarse paper, does something to the legibility...

[Earl Boebert]

I'd suggest scanning them at 1200 dpi with the scanning software set for color photographs (I strongly recommend VuScan). Then you can use a graphics program to reduce the intensity of the paper colors and increase the intensity of the ink colors. I've succeeding in bringing up some really reduced plans that way.

Just a thought.

Cheers,

Earl

[kayaker50]

I know what you mean about the print being damm small. There are several offset tables in the very back of American Small Sailing Craft which are larger than the offsets in the text. But I agree, it should be a coffe table size book! Chip.

[troy2000]

Originally Posted by Earl Boebert

I'd suggest scanning them at 1200 dpi with the scanning software set for color photographs (I strongly recommend VuScan). Then you can use a graphics program to reduce the intensity of the paper colors and increase the intensity of the ink colors. I've succeeding in bringing up some really reduced plans that way.

Just a thought.

Cheers,

Earl

That's a good suggestion.

There's a fancy copy/fax/email/scan thingie the size of a desk in the front office where I work. Starting tomorrow evening, I'll be working three 12-hour graveyard shifts; with a little bit of luck I can get out of the control room long enough to play with it. Then I can email the results to myself, and tweak the pics at my leisure.

Or I may not even have to do all that; with a little more luck, just a straight copy enlargement might do the trick. But it's nice to have the option.

Several years ago when I was looking at Woodenboat's reconstruction of Egret, I took the book with the study plan down to a copy center. The gal fiddled with her machines for a while until she was able to hand me some beautifully legible copies of the study plan, blown up to a scale of precisely 1"=1'-0". Then she charged me only for those copies, and wouldn't even let me pay her for the trial runs where she had wasted paper adjusting her settings.

Unfortunately, when I swung by a year or two later the copy shop had been replaced by a bookstore.

[troy2000]

Another random thought: maybe the reason shaping the bottom of a sharpie hull so it has a flat run forward, a rocker amidships, and a straight or almost straight run aft works so well is because it approximates a shallow parabola?

Yes, I know....I should post first, then drink.

[wardd]

couldn't you import the image into a cad package and develop xyz dims from 3 views?

may not be perfect but with some practice close enough

you'll have to know how to scale the image

[frank smith]

Originally Posted by troy2000

Another random thought: maybe the reason shaping the bottom of a sharpie hull so it has a flat run forward, a rocker amidships, and a straight or almost straight run aft works so well is because it approximates a shallow parabola?

Yes, I know....I should post first, then drink.

That maybe be a matter of how they were built . Forward of the center board case they just ran a plank out to the bow . Not terribly complex way to deal with it . Also when looking at a working sharpie remember that they carried a lot of weight aft of the case . So think of them loaded down 4" or more .

[troy2000]

Originally Posted by frank smith

That maybe be a matter of how they were built . Forward of the center board case they just ran a plank out to the bow . Not terribly complex way to deal with it . Also when looking at a working sharpie remember that they carried a lot of weight aft of the case . So think of them loaded down 4" or more .

According to Chapelle and others, sharpie bottoms were quite deliberately shaped that way for performance. It wasn't just happenstance or a byproduct of the construction method.

[gonzo]

Hey troy2000 if your enlargement doesn't work I can email you a copy of mine.

[PAR]

You have to remember when Chapelle wrote about sharpies, he was talking about working craft, that often would have a ton or three of oysters or fish to bring home. The shapes used in these sharpies can't be taken for the shapes used in modern craft of similar model. The reason the "run" tucks up fairly quickly is to keep the stern clear when loaded, other wise it'll drag it's butt, which kills speed. Try not to read too much into the lines of these antique craft, without veering too far from what their primary purpose was, because they didn't.

[troy2000]

Originally Posted by gonzo

Hey troy2000 if your enlargement doesn't work I can email you a copy of mine.

Thanks for the offer, gonzo. I'll be at work tonight, and should be able to try copying and enlarging sometime before I get off, unless things get hectic. I'm an operator at a natural gas compressor (pumping) station, and my job pretty much matches the definition of combat sometimes: long periods of boredom, punctuated by moments of sheer terror.