Full hulled or waterline?

[ProvenceTristram]

So, I am at something of a crossroads and need a bit of advice (and as you folks model ships [even if they aren't generally steel-hulled] far more than most people in the special themes forum, I felt like it was better to ask this question here than there). Simply put, I have been working in LDD on a very detailed model of a King George V class fast battleship for the last week. The entirety of the upperworks are complete, and the model is (roughly) 4' in length (so not minifig scale, but fairly hefty). Currently, it's ~3,000 bricks in size, and it is glorious.

Originally, I had hoped to complete a full-hulled model. However, I also maintained ambitions of building the thing in real life. And, after spending about 6 hours last night tinkering with the full hull (IE, just putting a framework in place; not the actual outside sheathing), I've realized just based on guesswork that the bottom half will more than double the part count, putting the project into the realms of absurd expenses. It must also be said, I'm not having a lot of fun working on the hull (not that it matters; a project that must be done must be done) - I feel I am capable of producing the correct shape and size, but it's enormously tedious to get the contours correct, as well as boring.

Thus my question: knowing that it is going to balloon the price tag into the thousands of dollars, should I proceed with producing a full-hulled model, or should I instead do a (much simpler) waterline model? Obviously, the full hull is a good deal more dramatic for display purposes... but it is also, to a degree, a lot of unexciting, wasted parts; the 'drama' of a 20th century battleship is all from the water's surface upwards.

Any suggestions and/or thoughts would be most welcome.

Edited October 8, 2016 by ProvenceTristram

[Littleworlds]

First of all: sounds like a pretty cool project and I'd like to see pictures of it, even in its current, unfinished state. 

And since you are questioning a full hullmby yourself, you kind of gave the answer already  I would also prefer a waterline-build (and maybe use loose transparent 1x1 tiles to mimic the sea, if the size of the model allows). It is a hobby after all and should be in the first place enjoyable for you. Its your build, you make the rules. And if you, at some later point, want to add a full hull to it - you can still do that. That would also distribute the financial burden more.

[ProvenceTristram]

9 minutes ago, Littleworlds said:

First of all: sounds like a pretty cool project and I'd like to see pictures of it, even in its current, unfinished state. 

And since you are questioning a full hullmby yourself, you kind of gave the answer already  I would also prefer a waterline-build (and maybe use loose transparent 1x1 tiles to mimic the sea, if the size of the model allows). It is a hobby after all and should be in the first place enjoyable for you. Its your build, you make the rules. And if you, at some later point, want to add a full hull to it - you can still do that. That would also distribute the financial burden more.

This was kind of my thought as well - if I went waterline, I was only going to put a very, very generic plate base on the thing (or possibly use old water baseplates with the thought that, if I ever desired to do so, I could just strip it and then tack on the remaining hull).

I am still going to kick it around for the next few hours (and see if anyone else replies), but I have some ambition - if I go waterline - of completing the project tonight, and I will post some photos here as soon as it's done. 

Edited October 8, 2016 by ProvenceTristram

[kurigan]

Well, the cliche thing to do is to preface any advice with "it's your decision", but, come on... duh. 

 

So if it was me: I'd be basing my decision of a few factors. For my sail ships I went with all water line based on this line of reasoning. If I wanted to make museum quality static models, there are better mediums which require a lot less compromise, like wood. What I want are models the maintain a certain playability all be it a more grown-up kind of play. I also wanted them to be able to interact with other lego creations, for the likes of creating scenes or collaborative builds. It's much easier to accommodate water line models since they can be placed atop the same flat surface and other contributing elements while fulls hulls will need to be sunken or otherwise accommodated. I also find that the best techniques for either style do not translate well to the other. Bent hulls like mine, for instance, look pretty neat as waterline models but transitioning them to full hull would look silly. Cb4's technique for full hulls on the other hand makes the best overall effect but without the underwater portion it seems like it would be a lot of extra effort for little gain. So if it's a model ship, then perhaps the full hull is best. If it's a Lego ship, perhaps a water line will be more convenient. 

 

As far a costs go, isn't a 4ft model already in the ridiculously expensive range. Maybe it’s not Yamato, Missouri or Intrepid, but you're already making quite the investment. I wouldn't advise cheaping-out and regreting it later over taking longer to acquire and build to be more pleased with the end result. Then again, I have ship models in the work for years and still tear them down to be rebuilt, so maybe I'm no one to listen to on that matter. 

 

Another suggestion would be to take advantage of the modularity of Lego and rig the submerged portion to lift on and off, like the stories of a modular building.  

[Capn Frank]

I had moved your MOC topic into the Special Themes forum.  I would encourage fellow pirates to check out Provence Tristam's HMS Duke of York topic. 

[gotoAndLego]

Why not design yours to where you could add a full hull at a later point?

[The Architect]

I really think it comes down to personal preference . Good luck.

[cb4]

I agree with kurigan, it really, really depends on what you're going for with the MOC or scene.

From a practical point of view, waterline models are better suited to most normal situations. I build full hull models because I enjoy going for maximum structural realism and solving all the problems involved with that - but the amount of trouble they cause me is pretty ridiculous. Most of the time you just want your ship sitting there in the (flat) water, and if you have a full hull model you have to figure out how to hide that in your shot. Full hull models also tend to want to fall over (especially sailing ships, though this will not apply in your case).

On the other hand, assuming you have a wealth of bricks (I don't) you can create very interesting and dynamic scenes with full hull models. A sailing ship can be heeled over or cresting a wave in a huge storm, or run aground or hauled up on a beach for careening. Or, if you just want a cool static model on a stand, that's nice too. Yes, it is in some ways 'easier' to achieve that using other materials, but doing it in Lego is just as valid and impressive in its own way.

Edited November 24, 2016 by cb4