Making Pistol Patterns and Some Eye Candy

[Rasch Chronicles]

Howdy Fellows,

I've been looking for pictures to help me better grasp proportions and aesthetics. I have found that the top notch muzzleloaders presented on auctions are a great resource to help understand the how one part affects another, how they balance, and generally speaking, where one part goes in relation to another!

So I found these 1760's German beauties:


Image Credit: Herman-Historica

Real beautiful aren't they?

But if you remove all the embellishments, they are basically just like every other longrifle or pistol. What I mean is that they're gun barrels on wood stocks! The key though is the lines that make them elegant and refined. (You could take a pine 2X8 and hack out a stock that would work, but I don't think it would ever make it to the sales floor on Sotherby's!)

I really like the look of the pistols though.


Image Credit: Herman-Historica.

So what I did, was copy the picture and pasted it on a Word document.

I found, that given one dimension, I could extrapolate all the others. My version of Word has a function that makes it easy to do so.

First left click on the picture. An outline with little boxes appears around the picture. A "Picture Tools" bar appears up top also.
Click on the Crop Tool, and using your mouse, crop the picture to clearly defined points using the known dimensions. In the case of these pistols, I knew they are 47 cm long. So I cropped from the tip of the muzzle to the back edge of the stock.

Now right click on the picture. A menu box appears. Click on the Size and Position, and in the width box enter your dimension. 47cm = 18.5 inches.

Take note of the scale! In my case it is a 235% enlargement.

That's it fellows. Now you can crop whatever part you need, input the scale, and the picture is now actual size.

So using the example above, the pistols are 18.5 inches long. Therefore:
The barrel is 13.2 inches.
The height is 5 inches
The muzzle diameter is .75 inch

Every dimension can be measured (tediously) with this process. Of course programs like photoshop and the CAD ones make it even easier, but in less than twenty minutes, once I figured out the procedure I printed out and wrote the measurements on several pistols, all to life size.

One other note. Each individual picture is different! So you have to do the same process with each individual picture.

After it was all set and done, the hardest part for me was lining up the sheets and taping them together evenly. Those of you with access to large printers with the big paper are fortunate indeed! And if you have access to a plotter, you can do just about anything you want!

Of course this isn't exact, I'm sure it is a little bit off, but it won't be by much. And if you are just looking for a pattern or an outline to copy, you can't go wrong!

I found that some photos where very difficult to work with because they were blurry or poor resolution. But even then, you get a better than general feel for the design.

Well,

I hope this is a helpful idea to those of you like me, that can't draw a straight line with a ruler!

Your friend,
Albert “The Afghan” Rasch
The Rasch Outdoor Chronicles™
ΜOΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ!

[mjm46@bellsouth.net]

That's really great. Very clever. I like that solution. I tried it with my Word program and I get the photo with the boxes bue the photo tools doesn't come up like yours. But I'm lucky enough to have photoshop on my computer and can do the same thing with It.

[Dphariss]

I have an old version of Photoshop that I use for scaling.
HOWEVER. One must be careful to make sure the PHOTO used is not distorted or taken at some slight angle and does not induce errors into the process.

Dan

[Rasch Chronicles]

That's right Dan, I forgot to mention that.

There were a lot of pictures that I couldn't use because they were at an angle. Luckily, some sites take all their full length photos square, and then give you other views.

Best regards,
Albert “Yes, I am still in Afghanistan!” Rasch
The Range Reviews: Recreating the 18th Century Powder Horn
ΜOΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ!

[Captchee]

 I mentioned this  some time back and was poo pooed on the idea .
 But that’s ok  to each their own
 But ill mention it again  as its another way of doing what  your doing but without the computer .
 What you describing is called a Proportional enlargement .
 I used this process a lot when building giant scale model aircraft  . It allows you to make a  set of plans to any scale
 Here is what you need
A) . a  at least 1  photo that  shows the side view of the item your working  on . This becomes you base photo . Additional photos can be larger or  smaller . doesn’t mater because all your measurements are based off the  base photo.
 You also need at least 1 actual  measurement if you want to reproduce the actual originals size .
doesn’t mater what that measurement is. It can be something small like the height of a sight ,length of barrel  or total length.  The important thing is that it has to be actual  and not  measured from  the photo itself .
 This becomes you base measurement  that all other measurements are proportioned to.  
 Thus it maters not if the  photo is stretched  in the printing process
B) you need a Proportional scale “no this has nothing to do with the golden mean  for application “
  The one I have I obtained through a printing shop . Its made by Lithco  and is a simple 2 piece wheel type slide rule  and is capable of calculating as small as  15/16.
 You can also get these that are even more accurate .
  Its very easy to use and the instructions are printed  right on the face of the scale .
Cost to me 20 years ago was 4.50  not sure what they run now

C) you need a clear map compass . This can be the simple cheep clear plastic ones like used  by the military for map orientations all the way up to the more fancy and expensive heavy clear  plastic . The important part is that it must be ticked off  in 360 degrees .

D) 2 pieces of paper  .
 One large enough to do your drawing  and the second  can be just notebook paper . Your only going to use this as a strait edge for point to point measurements.
E) dividers

 To do this there is basically one set of steps that you repeat over and over.
 Here is how it works .
 Lets say you have  a photo of a pistol  like you posted above .   Your told that the barrel is  11  inches . .
 You measure the barrel in the photo and its  4 inches  
 You simply turn the wheel so that  the original size of 11 inchs  aligns with the  reproduction  size of 4 inchs .   Directly below this alignment   is a window that shows you the % of original size . Ie in this case the photo is  barrel 36.68% of the original size .
 Just below that the wheel tells us that the % of reduction  from the original to the  phot barrel is 2.75 X
 From this point on , every measurement you take from the photo is multiplied by that % IE 2.75.
So you start taking measurements from the photo and  drawing out you plans.
 The  thing to remember is that you don’t have to  draw to scale  unless you want to .
 You can enlarge or reduce any  photo or drawing , because the Scale gives you the % of enlargement based on that single actual measurement, you can  then take your photo  or drawing to most any print shop  and have them print it to scale on an architectural  printer . In which case if you so desire , they will also be able to tell you the % of distortion at time of printing  when printed on quality  drafting paper  .
 I know it may seem rather involved . But really its not .
 I can layout a complete gun in an afternoon  or back when I was doing scale  model aircraft drawings I could do a complete set of ¼ scale  plans  in a day or two . It all depends on how accurate and detailed you want to make your plans .

 Now it should be also noted that if you have a Cad program , it will also do the same thing much faster .
 One of the fellas I  build quite a lot for  is a steal fabrication engineer.
  Many years ago we flew a lot together  and I was showing him  the process I use in making my scale plans .
  As such  when he now finds a gun he wants me to build   he makes me a set of plans  in Cad thats as detailed as any structural set of drawings  .
 Whats really great about this is that from that he can generate a 3D  model  in virtual space . Not that this is needed in anyway  to build a gun . Its not . .

 The other thing to remember is that none of this will ever take the place of actually being able to  handle the original . There simply is no substitute for that . as with all things , the more information on has the more accurate the reproduction will be .

[Jim Kibler]

A few additional items to consider are perspective, foreshortening and lense distortion.  This becomes more significant with large overall shots of a rifle.   If considering using a rifle photo for a pattern consider using a photo of just the butstock section through the front of the lock.  This will minimize issues.

[fm tim]

2 thoughts:

1) Some images will import to Word, but the image formatting is "stunted".  For the ones that do not present the full image formatting in Word, paste the picture into a graphics program like Corel PHOTO-PAINT, then directly copy from the graphics program back into Word.

2) Output the full size image to a PDF printer driver.  Read back into Adobe Reader.  Then <File> <Print> under "Page Handling"  then "Page Scaling" choose  "Tile All Pages"  turn on "Cut Marks".  In Page Setup choose the paper size in your printer, then print.

It will automatically tile it to fit the paper size you have chosen, and will make + marks where the pages should mesh.

For this to work, Word must be set to paper big enough for the full size of the firearm.

[Rasch Chronicles]

Captchee,
Thanks for sharing the technique. Always good to know stuff like that. I copied your instructions and created a document for future reference.

I have in front of me the 100% prints of these:


Image Credit: Herman-Historica

You can cover one with your hand!

Best regards,
Albert “The Afghan” Rasch
The Rasch Outdoor Chronicles™
Feral Bull Fighting: Another Chronicles Adventure!
ΜOΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ!

[Dphariss]

I have a 1 1/4" barreled match rifle in processing, early stages, and in enlarging a photo of a rifle Found that by the time I increased the pull to 13.5 (from about 12) by enlarging it took very little to get the 1 1/4 barrel to fit right and the wrist is still slim enough, rifle is should be no deeper through the lock area than my Don King Flint Hawken.
Will see after I get the barrel in. Should make a pretty neat match rifle when done.
If I get done with todays projects I may even saw it out.

Dan

[Rasch Chronicles]

Ok fellows,
One more piece of eye candy!!



Best regards,
Albert

[Captchee]

A few additional items to consider are perspective, foreshortening and lense distortion.  This becomes more significant with large overall shots of a rifle.   If considering using a rifle photo for a pattern consider using a photo of just the butstock section through the front of the lock.  This will minimize issues.

This would hold true if one enlarged based on  the photo itself .
 But if you enlarge based on a given actual measurement  , then it really doesn’t play a part .

 In some cases though   a poor photo “ like the ones I take LOL “ can carry areas of distortion . These areas wont get corrected   in the process of  importing into a  electronic format .  But if your using a proportion scale , they will .
See with the scale , you can not only enlarge but also reduce  in scale  by imputing your calculated measurements.  
 Basically its like this  .
 Lets say your  drawing out your plans based on a 2.75%  or reduction  of the photo your using . You have  the barrel drawn and   are laying out the stock .
  Your at the lock mortises and   your calculations are to big or small .
 For what ever reason they just don’t fit or look to fit correctly .
 If you   use your calculated measurement as  the original size . Correspond that measurement with  the reproduction size , ie the measurement from your photo .  The reduction size and % of reduction   should still read 2.75 .
 If however it doesn’t , then you know your dealing with  photo distortion.
 In which case what you do  is simply turn the  wheel so that the  0 line aligns with the 2.75 reading  and Wa La  no more distortion .

Example: using the last photos that Albert posted .
 Lets say we are  measuring the distance  of the side flat on the barrel  down to  the stock .
 Now lets say that  we have been given a barrel length and thus calculated the X of reduction of the photo from the original  piece  and have came to Lets say 3.5 .
 Now lets say that the measurement on the photo is 1/8 of an inch .

 But for what ever reason we end up with  an actual measurement  that says the  original would have had  1 inch of the side flat showing .
 When can clearly see that cant be the case .

So  we pull out our Proportion scale .
Set the reduction size window to 3.5.
 In doing this we have now set all our measurements to that  size . So all we have to do is find 1/8 on the outer edge of the scale /the reproduction size  IE measurement from the photo  . All we have to do is look below that number  to the original size number and we find that  our measurement should be 5/8 .

 To double check this we can  input  1 inch back in as the original measurement. We then read that the X o reduction has changed  to 4.5 . Proving that we  have distortion in the photo .
 In which case we trust the math and  use the 5/8 measurement which is true to our X of reduction  based on our known factual measurement

Importing a photo will not do this  and what can happen is just as Jim stated .
The reason is that the computer is only enlarging  the photo . Its not accounting for  distortion . In fact it doesn’t even know the distortion is there . it doesn’t care
All it knows is that you want the photo enlarged  by what ever it takes to make  the  section of the photo you have chosen , to be the size you want . Thus it carries the distortion right along with the enlargement  

[Jim Kibler]

Perspective, foreshortening and lense distortion certainly can cause problems.  Remember, what we see isn't necessarily the true size and shape of an object.  For example, take an overall view of a longrifle.  Use a known barrel length to scale the photo and properly size the butstock region.  There will be distortion in the shape and size of the scaled butstock versus the actuall item.  The problem with these issues is distortion.  The size of one area relative to others can be skewed in a photograph.  Knowing the size of enough features in a photo can help overcome this in some cases, but it can get a little complicated.  Further we sometimes have few known measurements. 

As previously mentioned, working with photos of smaller areas can help overcome these issues.  For example, on a rifle, using a photo of just the butstock region when trying to develop a stock pattern will help a great deal. 

For large relatively flat items, a series of small photos can be taken and then stitched together using photo editing programs.  I've done this a few times with firearms. This approach minimizes perspective and photograph distortion.

[Captchee]

here is a good exsample of what  jim is taking about .
 take this photo of the LePage i just finished



  now take not that  the trigger guard looks bent . but in reality its not . its a distortion of the photo . Importing and enlarging isn’t going to change this distortion .
Same thing can often happen  with other areas .
 Thus in a photo the gun may look  long and slim  Or it my be little chubby .
 Many times the distortion makes say a butt stock look alittle fuller , slimmer , or longer then it actually is.
 This is why its very important to have a base measurement to figure your   base of photo reduction as in doing so  this distortion becomes very evident .
  What is very important in doing this though is that  the factual base measurement.
 Lets say a Auction house states that a barrel is 43 inchs long .
 What we don’t know is how they took that measurement.
Did it include the breech  or did it stop at the  back of the actual barrel ?
Se we don’t know , we have to assume . Because we are using that measurement, it can throw everything off  by fractions .
 Thus the more information we can compare, the better off we will be in using the process to  make a set of drawings or plans     

[volatpluvia]

Albert,
While everyone is still concerned with photos  I want to thank you for the pic of the double locked gonne.  Had to chuckle when I looked at it.  They sure came up with some amazing ideas back then.  Some of them actually worked.  Astonishing design.
volatpluvia

[KennyC]

Nice candy I want some

[Rasch Chronicles]

Vol,

Thanks! I was going to do a seperate post on it, but it really isn't something that Americans put together, least ways I don't know that we had any here. None-the-less, it is a really neat piece of engineering.  I bet that second shot is well compressed! My guess is that they used a well greased patch and a very tight ball for the first load.

Just one comment on the photo copying and enlargement stuff. I did it strictly to get an understanding of the proportions and silouette of the stocks. Seemed like an easy way to get an idea of how to cut out a stock. I had originally tried to draw the lines out by hand, use the "Golden Mean" formula, I even taped a couple of strips of wood together to get the natural angle of my grip. The closest I came to a reasonable understanding was the two pieces taped together!

But it's the curves that really throw me off.

One thing though. Just like today, there where lousy builders back then. I have looked at several dozen duelling pistols now (Only in photos) and even my poorly educated eye can see that some of them are very pleaseing to the eye, symetrical, well proportioned, and well built. Others... not so much.

If I was going to try to copy an original, I would certainly try to see and do the takeoffs directly from the gun itself. Otherwise, the best we can hope for is a close aproximation of the original.

In my case, I just hope I can cut out a blank that kinda looks like a pistol blank... LOL!

Best Regards,
Albert “Afghanus” Rasch
The Rasch Outdoor Chronicles™: George Washington, President and Fisherman
ΜOΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ!

[Rolf]

Rasch, I'd recommend you make some practice stocks out of box wood. It is cheap and easy to work with. I did four practice stocks before I attempted to build my first pistol. I learned a lot from it and was able to weed out the worse mistakes. Same goes for metal working . I made a bucket of brass parts before I started on the silver. The first gun was planed as a "dress rehearsal" for the pair of silver kentuckys I made. Nothing beats hands on practice.







Best regards
Rolf

[Glenn]

Rasch, I'd recommend you make some practice stocks out of box wood. It is cheap and easy to work with. I did four practice stocks before I attempted to build my first pistol. I learned a lot from it and was able to weed out the worse mistakes. Same goes for metal working . I made a bucket of brass parts before I started on the silver. The first gun was planed as a "dress rehearsal" for the pair of silver kentuckys I made. Nothing beats hands on practice.





Best regards
Rolf

Sounds like great advice.  I was considering doing the same with pine or some other cheap wood before I started on maple, or cherry, or walnut.

Thanks also for sharing the photos.  Looks like your advice works !!!  

[Captchee]

I was considering doing the same with pine or some other cheap wood before I started on maple, or cherry, or walnut.

  now this is just my advise , but  i would  practice on the wood. you intend using.
 Pine doesn’t cut , sand , inlet , carve like maple cherry or walnut .
Maple isn’t that expensive especially in sizes one would be looking at for blanking out pistol stocks   

[Rasch Chronicles]

Rolf,

Absolutely! My main objective for the next year is to practice inletting with ordinary pieces of metal, trigger guards, trigger plates, lockplates, and a barrel. I also have created a computer file with simple inlay silhouettes to practice that also. (First cutting them out of sheet brass, and then inlaying them.) I'm pretty condident in my metal working abilities, and I am looking forward to also hand making soem triggers and lock plates. I have the time, I better get something out of it!

I have also picked up some inexpensive maple to practice on. Ummm, where do you get your boxwood from? As far as I have determined, it's pretty expensive here! I wanted some for some tools I am making.

Glenn, I had thought about using pine, and I may still at first since I have plenty of it floating around here. Actually what we have here in Afghanistan is some kind of European pine. It's pretty hard and many pieces have very close growth rings. Getting the Maple here isn't hard, It's getting it out that's a BEAR!

Thanks again fellows!
Albert

[Glenn]

I was considering doing the same with pine or some other cheap wood before I started on maple, or cherry, or walnut.

  now this is just my advise , but  i would  practice on the wood. you intend using.
 Pine doesn’t cut , sand , inlet , carve like maple cherry or walnut .
Maple isn’t that expensive especially in sizes one would be looking at for blanking out pistol stocks   

I'd love to try it on maple but it's scarce here in Texas compared to other places and therefore a little more expensive.  I'll try it on yellow pine first just to learn the basics of the tools then I'll find some maple somewhere and proegress to that.  I appreciate you pointing all that out because I had thought about working around the wood differences also.

[Rasch Chronicles]

Glenn,

I picked up a piece of good tigerstripe maple board large enough for a half dozen hawk handles and two Kentucky pistol stocks for less than a couple of finished hawk handles, off of ebay. It was still a good piece of change, about $30 incl shipping. I haven't looked for just straight grained Maple, but I have found plain ash and other woods at decent prices. Speaking of ash, whenever I find a broken baseball bat, I keep it; lots of wood there for tool handles!

Best regards,
Albert “The Afghan” Rasch
The Rasch Outdoor Chronicles
Big Cutters, Rank Hogs, and Coffee!
ΜOΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ!

[Rolf]

Nobody sells maple in Norway and cherry and walnut costs to much to practice on.  Only reasonalbly priced wood here is pine, birch and poplar(box wood). I like box wood because its quick and easy to shape. The main object of the practice stocks was to figur out the shapes of lock panels, grips, inlets, ect. I did all the tang carving and wire inlay practice on walnut scraps.


 


Best regards

Rolf

[Glenn]

Glenn,

I picked up a piece of good tigerstripe maple board large enough for a half dozen hawk handles and two Kentucky pistol stocks for less than a couple of finished hawk handles, off of ebay. It was still a good piece of change, about $30 incl shipping. I haven't looked for just straight grained Maple, but I have found plain ash and other woods at decent prices. Speaking of ash, whenever I find a broken baseball bat, I keep it; lots of wood there for tool handles!

Best regards,
Albert “The Afghan” Rasch
The Rasch Outdoor Chronicles
Big Cutters, Rank Hogs, and Coffee!
ΜOΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ!

I considered trying to find some beech to use instead of pine.  I dont know where I can get that however maybe E-bay also.  Should be a little cheaper than maple, walnut, or cherry and I think that is what CVA used way back when.  It should carve and work close to maple I think.

[alyce-james]

Thanks, Rolf & Glenn; The information and pictures you both shared, I'm sure be very helpful to young builders. Jim