This is just awe-inspiring.

Dude that is awsome! im working on a church my self and have gotton some ideas from yours. Great Work!!

Some more progress, I still have to try and terra cotta the roof which hopefully will get done today, and Claude thanks again for the info.
I still need to put stone railing caps on the staircase and upper and lower terrace walls.
I also need to decide on the roofing on the small upper terrace part, should I cover the whole terrace or just the portion over the doorway out to the terrace wall ? I don't really want to cover the font at the top of the stairs.
The small metal tube over the yellow barrel is the end of the rain gutter that will go up the wall behind the staicase at the irregular join of blocks. The window behind the window iron is supposed to be stained glass - not too happy with it but it's set in stone so to speak so it's a done deal. I've added more Michaels finds to make the font at the top of the staicase and the inner lolumn on the staircase and facing wall. Can't think of anything more at the moment ............
Glenn

It took me a long time to create these red x's so I want some feedback !!!

Think I've sorted it out.

Glenn,

Frankly, i'm not convinced.

First, the good points,your stained glass looks good to me, i see nothing wrong. Second, i agree with you for covering the little room. But, now it comes ,third point, i think you took the easy way to lay all the stones around the windows and some more.
Under the balcony (sorry if i notice that to late) you put the stones the high way, idem for my point 3 on the picture. I do not really like it. i even don't know if it is correct from a architectural standpoint (bzuilding strength) Under the balcony i would have put two more regular rows instead of one the high way. (you did that a bit more to the left. )
Around the windows is a bit strange to. Vertical stones under the windows, only one row at left and right. I'm missing half stones for example. I really have the impression that you hurried just to finish it and plaster some stones anywhere just to get it done.! I know that this buildings are sometimes a bit of a patchwork, but this looks incoherent to me.
Glenn, my friend, this is the first time we are not on the same length, i hope my comments are ok with you.


If that is based on original pics ,ok, than i am wrong

I have a bit of doubt if i should push the "Reply" button, my comments seams harsh even to me, but i think you can handle them.

Cheers
Claude

Claude no offence taken, I'm trying to load some ref. pics. but can't seem to paste them from my gallery to this post. I'll try again from my gallery and photobucket is down for maint. so I'll add/edit this with some explainations later.

Edit : Ok, as discussed with Jean [ JBA ] I wanted to mix structural elements from ancient Italy [ 2nd & 1st cent. AD ] to the present dio, that being 1943 - 1944. I didn't want an entirely ancient build.
The single story rectangular portion of the monastery has architectural elements of limestone - lava carved block/brick, laid block on block with no caementa [ early stone and mortar between the outer and inner facade ] to bind the outer facade stone/block/brickwork.
This was not a very strong structural method and usually was only one story built on a strong [ fishtank stones ] foundation.
The two story portion used the below [ pic ] method of construction. The blocks like an iceberg had only a small flat carved portion on the outer facade and a larger " root " to be held by the caementa. This way any facade shape vertical/horizontal shape could be used.
This build is a fictional town in Italy somewhere along the coast, so some artistic wiggle room is being used.
Like a guy who has a train set up in his basement on 4 or 5 sheets of plywood, always being worked on. I plan on adding my 1/35th VIIC, Schnellboat and the freighter with docks and a small seaside town area. Massive yes - keeps me busy and out of the bars [ l.o.l. ] yes. This is my project and I really have no desire to publicly show it or enter it into contests, it's just what I like to do. I do however like to keep it as architecturaly feasible as possible and share what I'm doing with you guys.
I do take you're suggestions often [ the beergarden fountain with Gargoyles, l.o.l., etc ], but I don't feel I'm too far off here. I think it will look alot different [ better ]when I dress the stonework up, add the stairway stone caps, etc. Right now - yes the vertical blocks look odd and they do standout.



First up are the vertical blocks. I blame myself for giving everyone the impression of everything being " brick ". It was just easier to type than " limestone - lava carved stone blocks ". In the beginning of the build I was typing in posts " brick/block ".
The vertical blocks are ornamental - not structural. I tried to show this by having the vertical blocks raised in relief from the horizontal structural blockwork, as in the bottom two pics.





Some examples of vertical blocks. The first pic is very wierd because there is no structural support below the vertical blocks at the top.



This pic is more of a structural element used by the vertical blocks to support the dome and opening.This is Neros Golden house.



Some more vertical blockwork. The second pic is surely marble but still vertical.





Last but not least a public bathroom with herringbone blocks - purely ornamental.



The windows, yes in the build the blocks look thrown on, they're not done yet.





A stone church in Sicily, notice the stand out blockwork around the windows and the vertical eavework, purely ornamental.





One piece window trim block without a finger joint arrangement.



Windows with vertical blockwork above.



My window with vertical blockwork above, under the ornate thingie - and a row of horizontal stretchers right below.



Some examples of block/stonework without mortar joins between them. Also some pics. of the mixture of the two types.





This last pic. is what I mean about combining ancient structural elements with newer methods. Wich I will incorporate in the build.

Hi Glenn,

Thanks for the reference pics and for the work involved to post them.

I will probably have to wait the painting stage to see how it turns out, because i'm still not really convinced.
The main reason is probably because you used everywhere the same stones, be it for structure or for ornament. Best seen on the your reference pic of the stone church in Scily. There you have massive blocks for construction and tiny bricks for decoration, the intend is very clear. You have the same ones for both.
Vertical stones as support over doors and windows was never my point, you are absolutely correct for those but i do not see any real reference picture for a big surface made with vertical stones, even for decoration (or did i missed it ?)

The mix of various stones (thickness and style) was also not my problem, but where did you do such a mix on your build?

I want to stress that, although i already did build a castle, that i am still not a specialist for architecture and am glad to accept more lessons.
I really hope we can have a third opinion. (Carlos, where are you?)

Your plan to incorporate your other builds into a big scene sounds great! They will finaly find a place.

Cheers
Claude

Claude thanks for being honest. Like I said right now it does look odd because it's not finished. Like I also said it's architecturaly sound - but not a depiction of a real building.
Hopefully when I dress up the vertical stone areas with overhangs and stairway caps it will look better, as I said it's a little stark and in your face right now.
There are already two methods of construction on the monastery building. The first one story rectangular part is 1st century BC or thereabouts being a stone on stone build with no caementa method of bonding the blocks [ shown by the bombed portion of the one story section ]. The two story section is far later mid 1st century and later with the caementa method. The inner bonding can't be seen, I don't want to bomb out each different portion of a section just to show the inner workings, l.o.l.
Unfortunatly any referencing done on Italian early architecture leads right to pictures of vast ,ornate structures in Rome. A fairly rich place that could afford the best arcitects and materials.
The setting of my build, structure and material wise [ coastal rural ] would have been dictated by the political and economic times, let alone availability of materials.
Did you go to the ref. site I posted in a previous post about construction of Italian walls and buildings ?
The same looking carrved limestone - yes, the carved limestone - lava rock only with a root [ which can't be seen on the later two story build ].
Usage of materials at hand in the region. To have used early sun dried Italian brick I would have to paint everything a bright red. Left in the sun for a lesser time to dry would make them a yellowish red - didn't want that.
The mixture of old and newer materials [ unmortared stone and actual 19th - 20th century brick ] will come on the annexes that will be on the buildings that span to the church proper.
Yes there are sections of vertical block and no there are no concentrations [ ref. wise ] of it. That's my little artistic license to break up the block patterns. I did however check to see if it was done, didn't want to have a Tiger II in North Africa type of thing.
I do see what you mean about the Sicilian stone church and widows, whereas my build uses the same blocks. The ref. pic. I have with the solid block window casings also has a different stone wall pattern, this I didn't address and am sorry now as I do see what you mean. For the rest of this building for continuity sake I'll keep it the same [ only one more window to add anyway ]. I will remember to make some changes in the transition from window framing to wall on the rest of the buildings.
Thanks again - Glenn

Hello Glenn and Claude

One of the problems that have in the forums in non Spanish language non is to find the fair words to be the most exact thing possible in my opinions of the works of the colleagues. Always intent to be able to give a solution to the things that I don't like, but in this case non find this solution. In internet the words are as the lost bullets: they can hurt without the one that has shot the he knows.
I will try to explain my opinion.
I believe that this piece has several aspects that don't convince me.
in the first place the proportions: I believe that this stairway is too big in connection with the building. this she has a proportion among the long one and the width that I don't find appropriate.
in second place the ornamentation: the architectural ornamentation follows some concrete rules that it allows to distinguish in that period the building was built: Gothic, romanic, neoclassicist, etc in this case cannot be said to that time belongs the building for that there is not anything characteristic of a concrete time.
in third place the textures, I believe that there is too many: round stone, ornaments, bricks and any I see that it is the dominant one
During many summers pass my vacations in a called monastery Santes Creus (saints crosses ) in Tarragona Spain there could familiarize with this type of constructions. In Spain the Church doesn't have modest monasteries all they are made of stone and surrounded of the best cultivation lands: they always used the stone in their constructions, maybe in other places it is different.
This message is alone an opinion more and of course rebatible in each point ...
and what like me: the volume of the stairs, and the general volume of diferent parts, except the building metioned above. and over all the creativity that you show in your woks
cheers
Carlos

So Glenn, have you decided on a location for this amazing building yet. So far, I've heard North Africa, Spain, Sicily, Italy and the Philippines come up in conversation. Whats it gunna be?

Chas

L.o.l. , Chas, never mentioned Spain [ only that it looked like it could be in Spain ] and the Phillippenes was a thought early in the build.
Lately my role models seem to think it's architecturaly unfeasible.
So from now on I would appreciate it if you refer to the build as the Salvador Dali - Sci - Fi build, l.o.l.
This is going to be somewhere in coastal Italy, it's a fictional building and place. Even though I feel it's architecturaly feasible - with maybe 1% Salvador Dali, Sci - Fi.
After our post conversations about hard charging Aussies though, I'm now itching to do something Pacific or back to Tobrok.
Glenn

Hi Glenn,

Gaudi would be a good choice to

We are waiting until you put a bit of paint on it and see again. Don't let your motivation be destroyed by some jerks without fantasy.

Cheers and have fun,

Claude

Magnificent job, you certainly do not need to fear.
Continuing to follow so as to be a work of art

Domi

Domi, thank you very much.
Claude, l.o.l. I'm reworking the blocks to horizontal as we speak.
Maybe - Geiger, you know the artist whose work the movie Alien was made.
Glenn

Glenn -

As always, this is masterful stuff. Well researched, historically and technically supported but most of all so visually pleasing and imaginative. A would say that it is even more accurate and plausible then 'fictious' as you mentioned. The amount of work in all respects is truly amazing. So much to look at and enjoy. Please to keep up the updates and thanks for sharing,

Blade48mrd[:::]

Mike, thanks. I do try and do as much research as I can.
I want to get this as close as possible. The artistic license part is due mostly to my ecomomic and political availability of materials also. I can't very well carve 1/35th scale marble medallions and fancy scrollwork. So the next best thing is the moulds I have that I fill with wall mud. The plaster/wallmud blocks/bricks I use, I both like and find easy to make and use. They represent crude carved limestone or tufa [ lava rock ] good enough for me.
The wrong color bucket hanging on the back of a tank thing I can live with. However a Panther in North Africa - no.

You know the funniest thing about whether at this stage it looks right or not, whether it's vertical or horizontal, or this or that, is the most obvious historically incorrect thing on the build and also the most in your face blatant " it dosen't belong " thing.
This rates with the Panther tank in North Africa thing, when was the last time you saw a middle ages looking stone fireplace in Greco/Roman architecture, l.o.l.
It looks like it belongs in Davey Crockett's log cabin, l.o.l.
All along that was the thing I worried most about and was never called out on it - go figure.
Glenn

Glenn

Wow....what the heck..just keep up the good work.....

Superb building! Great workmanship....more

its coming along really well. just amazing good luck.

I have to say dude, your work is an inspiration!

I can't believe I've missed this blog up until now, what are you going to do with the build once it's finished?

Stuart

Hello Glenn

Among many other things I do not have the mastery of English language, so I find it a bit further comments. (Blessed automatic translator)

I guess they thought, but as you have not see in the pictures you remember that a small bell to be his bell
Very well.

Tapeworms if it thought the apology intrusion

Domi

Jubelum, DJ Judge, Ethan, Stuart, Domi, thanks alot guys.
Here is the tramp steamer I'll be putting in a port at the base of a craggy hill with the church/monastery on top. Also in port will be an Accurate Armor VIIC [ pictured ], an Azimut Schnellboat [ hopefully the Italeri one ].
Or I can go Allied and partially sink the steamer and add Italeri's PTs. Either way a small fishing village will also be incorporated into this mess.

There are alot more pics. and explanations that can be found on the Model Shipwrights construction forum.
Thanks for looking - Glenn

The real Venture of King Kong fame.



My efforts before and after the chop job. This originally scaled out at 200 plus feet.





After the chop.





Pics. from a year or so ago when I started the steamer.

Nice refresher. The ship looks much better chopped.
So, I hate to ask, but I"m going to --- what are you going to do about the bow in the port rear penal? Can you brace it from underneeth?

Hi Scott, Skipper over on Shipwrights has already picked that out for me. The bow needs to be more beam on to the bow. I will probably rework the whole bow section, I came here first this morning, I'll jump over to Shipwrights and see if there are more developments.
Glenn

This might be interesting...
http://ipmsstockholm.org/magazine/2007/06/abbazia-of-chiaravalle-part-2.htm

Hi cheyenne,

Just when i thought you could'nt get any bigger, you just did!!
This could be the diorama of the year.


James84,

This is the most beautifull roman church / monestry i'd ever seen in scale!
Thanks for sharing.


Frank