Hello USS Forrestal

[shippy2013]

I have this, hadn't got around to resizing it, I was planning on having ago one day but after my alternate 80's carrier I think ill obstain from having a go on my own


not sure if it'll be of use to you.......

got it off a website called blueprints.com you have to register but they have all the USN CV and CVN's

[acelanceloet]

on that lineart, check it for accuracy before using the forward lineplan has an shape that is nothing like the real ship, so the sideview might be off too.

[shippy2013]

Before I use any lineart I try to get good side on photos and overlay them both sized to scale this usually brings up any flaws I can then get references for these areas.

Still wouldn't like to tackle any of these post Essex carriers alone though.......

Would be great if someone on this forum that lives close to we're she is gonna meet her fate and get some photos of her in a dry dock before to much destruction takes place.........

[TimothyC]

Before I use any lineart I try to get good side on photos and overlay them both sized to scale this usually brings up any flaws I can then get references for these areas.

Still wouldn't like to tackle any of these post Essex carriers alone though.......

Yeah, the super carriers are not easy to get done right, and very easy to stall out on.

Exhibit A being CVAN-65.

[heuhen]

The front view is probably only to show of some basic lines.

I can do this with it, clean it to an drawing with just the basic lines.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/887 ... restal.PNG

shall I continue?

[Tempest]

It looks quite arty the way you've redrawn it

[Tagger 1-1]

Hello Charybis,

In the prior thread, I had discussed by wishes to draw FORRESTAL. Might I suggest that you choose another topic? CV-67 KENNEDY, perhaps?

S/F TAGGER SENDS

Might I suggest first showing proof that you are actually capable of the level of artistry needed to correctly depict a USN carrier? It's a bit premature to claim one of the more massive and complicated ships to draw when you haven't actually shown us anything but a hastily removed drawing in another thread.

Hello MishoiK,

I apologise heartily for any offence, but the drawing I had was inundated with negative criticism: hence its removal.

Perhaps in the future, the moderation staff might assist a newbie with NOT being curbstomped by the veterans when they post their first designs? That would be a welcome change.

S/F TAGGER SENDS

[heuhen]

It looks quite arty the way you've redrawn it

I made it so simple as possible. all details is up to other.

[shippy2013]

@TJ

The other problem is the shear variety, although realistically there's only, Forestall class, Kennedy, Kitty hawk, Enterprise and Nimitz. Because they were built over almost a 65 year period the detail differences even within a class are phenomenal.....

[KHT]

Tagger*, the main issue here is not your welcome here, but how you act against other forum members. From post number 1 you been acting aloof and patronizing, having no respect for anyone, while youself demanding their respect in turn.
Example: In the thread where you mentioned you were going to draw the Forrestal, you said you were going to do it in a Canadian version(which, while implausible due to issues allready explained by others, I can agree with doing, just for shits and giggles). When someone asked if you could draw the RL US versions as well, you responded by saying you wouldn't be taking any orders.
Contrary to this, you've also made several posts in which you loudly declare your oppinion that it's the main artist of a drawing's duty to keep an uploaded(as in uploaded to the mainsite) drawing completly up to date, regardless of circumstances. While these two things are not the same, they're very related to each other.
You also protest greatly when somebody makes a personal design or an AU design that doesn't follow you strict view of "realism", but can't seem to accept that your idea that Canade MUST HAVE an overaged supercarrier isn't going to fly according to the majority of the forum - which collectively holds a lot of knowledge regarding ships and naval history.
Regarding your remake of BCRenown's HMCS Annapolis in 1993, the main issues were that you broke shipbucket style is some ways, and presented no proof(i.e. sources) whatsoever as to why your version was superior.

Also, a supercarrier is a project of immense size, which requires A LOT of skill to do. Since the only drawing you've presented was a mod of someone else's drawing, not following SB standard rules, you have not shown any true proof that you'd be capable of drawing something as large as a supercarrier. Couple that with your attitude, and it's not something strange that the forum doesn't trust you.

My advice? Draw something smaller, say a frigate or something similar, from scratch. It will be easier, and show us if you are truly capable of making a SB drawing of proper quality. That, and take it easy. We're not after offending every newbie. Most people who come here are welcomed, but people usually come here with a more relaxed attitude.
If you have an issue with how the forum works, you don't have to stay.

*As long as you keep misspelling other members' names I see no reason to stand on your conditions of formality regarding your name. I'm also a lazy, impolite bastard. I'm not only proud of it, I'm smug about it*.

*Monty Python reference