PainShop Pro Graphics

Author

War.

Adriaan Barel

2006-09-08, 7:00 pm

underprocessable

Spandex Rutabaga

2006-09-08, 7:00 pm

Adriaan Barel wrote:
>
> The attached image took nearly 5 hours to render in Vue. I couldn't stand
> waiting for it to finish so went to bed.

Nice render but a few comments about the ship stuff. Don't take
these as criticisms since it turns out the physical world is
really hard to model realistically.

Looking at the flag on the ship on the left, the wind is blowing
from the left to the horizon at the rear of the image. The way
the sails are set on the shop on the right indicates the wind is
blowing from the horizon to the right of the image. One of the
ships (if not both) have to be sailing into the wind, which means
the sails have to be angles so they act like airplane wings. The
curvature of a wing produces a velocity difference across the
wing and so a pressure difference and lift. The equivalent of
lift for a sail is forward motion of the ship.

Since the sails on both ships are distended and not hanging slack
there must be a reasonable wind blowing (though not strong enough
to require reefs in the sails). With at least a moderate amount
of wind you'd expect the ship to be moving fast enough for the
rather blunt bow to create a visible bow wave and for the ship
to leave a wake behind it. With two ships moving in opposite
directions but close to each other you might even get some
interference effects where the waves caused by the two ships
intersect between them.

>From a purely tactical point of view, the captains of the ships
would probably maneuver to pass across the stern or bow of the
other ship. There was little armament at the stern and bow and
what there was was usually light. Consequently the ship firing
its broadside of guns down the full length of the other ship
could cause fantastic damage (especially from huge wood splinters)
while sustaining little or no damage herself. (The stern is
typically more frail than the bow.) The captain of the upwind
ship would also do everything to maintain that position since it
gave an advantage over his enemy. During fighting ships would
likely be under reduced sail since with so many of the crew manning
the guns there would too be few to spare to tend to a large suite
of sails. Assuming this is not the first shot you would probably
see holes in the sails and loose rigging. Much of the shooting
was designed to disable a ship so it could be finished off more
readily when unmaneuverable (e.g. by shooting down it's length).
Consequently guns were loaded with things like chain or bar shot
that could disable rigging at a distance. There is a good chance
the captains knowingly going into battle would have hung the yards
from chains so they wouldn't drop too readily on people's heads
when shot through. There'd would also probably be some marksmen
up in the crow's nest attempting to shoot down the officers on
the other ship.

Here are some links that might be helpful:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sailing
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval_...the_Age_of_Sail
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval_warfare
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chain_shot

Adriaan Barel

2006-09-08, 7:00 pm

"Spandex Rutabaga" <SpRu@agabatur.xednaps> wrote in message
news:44FF5C29.2ACB3EE4@agabatur.xednaps
> Adriaan Barel wrote:
>
> Nice render but a few comments about the ship stuff. Don't take
> these as criticisms since it turns out the physical world is
> really hard to model realistically.
>
> Looking at the flag on the ship on the left, the wind is blowing
> from the left to the horizon at the rear of the image. The way
> the sails are set on the shop on the right indicates the wind is
> blowing from the horizon to the right of the image. One of the
> ships (if not both) have to be sailing into the wind, which means
> the sails have to be angles so they act like airplane wings. The
> curvature of a wing produces a velocity difference across the
> wing and so a pressure difference and lift. The equivalent of
> lift for a sail is forward motion of the ship.
>
> Since the sails on both ships are distended and not hanging slack
> there must be a reasonable wind blowing (though not strong enough
> to require reefs in the sails). With at least a moderate amount
> of wind you'd expect the ship to be moving fast enough for the
> rather blunt bow to create a visible bow wave and for the ship
> to leave a wake behind it. With two ships moving in opposite
> directions but close to each other you might even get some
> interference effects where the waves caused by the two ships
> intersect between them.
>
> would probably maneuver to pass across the stern or bow of the
> other ship. There was little armament at the stern and bow and
> what there was was usually light. Consequently the ship firing
> its broadside of guns down the full length of the other ship
> could cause fantastic damage (especially from huge wood splinters)
> while sustaining little or no damage herself. (The stern is
> typically more frail than the bow.) The captain of the upwind
> ship would also do everything to maintain that position since it
> gave an advantage over his enemy. During fighting ships would
> likely be under reduced sail since with so many of the crew manning
> the guns there would too be few to spare to tend to a large suite
> of sails. Assuming this is not the first shot you would probably
> see holes in the sails and loose rigging. Much of the shooting
> was designed to disable a ship so it could be finished off more
> readily when unmaneuverable (e.g. by shooting down it's length).
> Consequently guns were loaded with things like chain or bar shot
> that could disable rigging at a distance. There is a good chance
> the captains knowingly going into battle would have hung the yards
> from chains so they wouldn't drop too readily on people's heads
> when shot through. There'd would also probably be some marksmen
> up in the crow's nest attempting to shoot down the officers on
> the other ship.
>
> Here are some links that might be helpful:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sailing
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval_...the_Age_of_Sail
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval_warfare
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chain_shot

Thanks for the information Spandex; all very interesting stuff. :-)

--
----oooOOOooo----

Adriaan Barel

Lori Davis

2006-09-08, 7:00 pm

Adriaan Barel wrote:
> The attached image took nearly 5 hours to render in Vue. I couldn't stand
> waiting for it to finish so went to bed.
>

Ooh, that's very nice, Adriaan. -Lori

Lori Davis

2006-09-08, 7:00 pm

Spandex Rutabaga wrote:
> Nice render but a few comments about the ship stuff.

Looks like we're gonna all be much better better informed about warships
as well as about horses. :)

Thanks, Spandy.

Lori

Jerry Rivers

2006-09-08, 7:00 pm

> The attached image took nearly 5 hours to render in Vue. I
> couldn't stand waiting for it to finish so went to bed.

I have captured every one of your outstanding renderings. My
congrats for being not only a consumate software artist
across multiple apps, but a creative artist as well.

-- Jerry

Adriaan Barel

2006-09-08, 7:00 pm

"Lori Davis" <loriweb@pair.com> wrote in message news:44ff6560$1_1@cnews
> Adriaan Barel wrote:
>
> Ooh, that's very nice, Adriaan. -Lori

Thanks Lori. :-)

--
----oooOOOooo----

Adriaan Barel

Adriaan Barel

2006-09-08, 7:00 pm

"Jerry Rivers" <None@none.xxx> wrote in message news:44ff8157_1@cnews
>
> I have captured every one of your outstanding renderings. My
> congrats for being not only a consumate software artist
> across multiple apps, but a creative artist as well.
>
> -- Jerry

Thanks very much Jerry! :-)

--
----oooOOOooo----

Adriaan Barel

Rustiferion

2006-09-13, 12:24 am

To add a bit to the technical details of 18th-century naval warfare:

Square-rigged ships were notoriously bad at "pointing up" close to the wind,
in fact "tacking" (turning up into, then across the wind) was often so
difficult in heavy wind that squareriggers, the leisure of time and room
permitting, would often "gibe" instead (turn away from the wind and going
320 degrees to the other tack). Thus, much of the tactical pre-salvo
maneuvering would have been attempting to cause your opponent to veer too
close into the wind and thus lose headway and steerage. Of course both
ships were trying to do the same thing to each other, so often the ships
would crash into each other just as the cannons went off, literally
muzzle-to-muzzle. Bad for the woodwork. Each gun had a crew of between 3
and 5 men, depending on size, and everyone else - even the cook - would have
been on or in the rigging, tuning the sails for the slightest change - a
dangerous place to be.

Chainshot (two-foot pieces of chain) was used to cut rigging, and grapeshot,
often fired from the smaller swivel guns on the bow and stern, was used on
the deck crew. It is astounding that *anyone* on either side survived these
encounters.

For good, technically-accurate and vivid descriptions of life aboard a
British warship during the Napoleonic Wars, as well as just for a rollicking
good read, I would highly recommend any of Patrick O'Brian's excellent
"Master and Commander" books - yes, even better than the movie. Most of his
descriptons of naval battles are based on documented historical encounters
and adventures, and I have yet to spot a flaw in his tales. I love to sail,
but man, you couldn't pay me enough to set foot on one of those ships. Of
course, most of those crews weren't exactly given a choice...

Now, looking at Adriaan's three ships, I would have to say that they were
all on the same side, perhaps meeting for the Captains to discuss the
impending blockade of Gibralter port (that IS a Spanish pennant on the
left-hand ship, isn't it?), or perhaps to just watch the sunset over a
shared mug of grog - oh wait, that would make them English, wouldn't it?
Anyway, it looks much too placid and calm for mayhem to be in the wind,
whichever direction it's coming from...<g>

Good job, Adriaan

~RL

Adriaan Barel

2006-09-13, 12:25 am

"Rustiferion" <no.reply@all.com> wrote in message
news:450200ff$1_2@cnews
> To add a bit to the technical details of 18th-century naval warfare:
>
> Square-rigged ships were notoriously bad at "pointing up" close to
> the wind, in fact "tacking" (turning up into, then across the wind)
> was often so difficult in heavy wind that squareriggers, the leisure
> of time and room permitting, would often "gibe" instead (turn away
> from the wind and going 320 degrees to the other tack). Thus, much
> of the tactical pre-salvo maneuvering would have been attempting to
> cause your opponent to veer too close into the wind and thus lose
> headway and steerage. Of course both ships were trying to do the
> same thing to each other, so often the ships would crash into each
> other just as the cannons went off, literally muzzle-to-muzzle. Bad
> for the woodwork. Each gun had a crew of between 3 and 5 men,
> depending on size, and everyone else - even the cook - would have
> been on or in the rigging, tuning the sails for the slightest change
> - a dangerous place to be.
> Chainshot (two-foot pieces of chain) was used to cut rigging, and
> grapeshot, often fired from the smaller swivel guns on the bow and
> stern, was used on the deck crew. It is astounding that *anyone* on
> either side survived these encounters.
>
> For good, technically-accurate and vivid descriptions of life aboard a
> British warship during the Napoleonic Wars, as well as just for a
> rollicking good read, I would highly recommend any of Patrick
> O'Brian's excellent "Master and Commander" books - yes, even better
> than the movie. Most of his descriptons of naval battles are based
> on documented historical encounters and adventures, and I have yet to
> spot a flaw in his tales. I love to sail, but man, you couldn't pay
> me enough to set foot on one of those ships. Of course, most of
> those crews weren't exactly given a choice...
> Now, looking at Adriaan's three ships, I would have to say that they
> were all on the same side, perhaps meeting for the Captains to
> discuss the impending blockade of Gibralter port (that IS a Spanish
> pennant on the left-hand ship, isn't it?), or perhaps to just watch
> the sunset over a shared mug of grog - oh wait, that would make them
> English, wouldn't it? Anyway, it looks much too placid and calm for
> mayhem to be in the wind, whichever direction it's coming from...<g>
>
> Good job, Adriaan
>
> ~RL

I loved reading that; thanks for the info. :-)

--
----oooOOOooo----

Adriaan Barel

Spandex Rutabaga

2006-09-13, 12:25 am

Rustiferion wrote:

> Chainshot (two-foot pieces of chain) was used to cut rigging, and grapeshot,
> often fired from the smaller swivel guns on the bow and stern, was used on
> the deck crew. It is astounding that *anyone* on either side survived these
> encounters.

I guess some of the survival was due to inaccurate weapons and a
violently moving gun platform. The hammocks in the netting around
the rail may have absorbed some of the smaller stuff. Even in
modern warfare statistically it takes many, many bullets to kill
a single enemy. But apart from warfare, the death rate from sickness
or accident could be quite impressive even when there wasn't any
fighting. I think people (and especially movies) underestimate the
effort and skill required just to cope with the weather and the
navigation.

> I love to sail,
> but man, you couldn't pay me enough to set foot on one of those ships. Of
> course, most of those crews weren't exactly given a choice...

I don't think I'd like to sail in one or even eat a meal on one :)
However it was interesting to visit such a ship. I had a chance
once to visit the Victory: http://www.hms-victory.com/
I haven't had a chance to see the Constitution but I'd like to:
http://www.ussconstitutionmuseum.org/