OK. Here's the problem: I have a drawing in 1/10 scale. I'd like to resize this in Photoshop to make it 1/6 scale. This would be done in the Image Adjustment dialogue box by giving a percent. I know this must be a simple calculation but I can't quite figure out what I would be doing to get an answer.

10 / 6 = 1.66667

Oh, the shame, the shame! [sm=red_smile.gif][sm=red_smile.gif]


OK. So 1/10 to 1/6 scale is a 166.67% enlargement.

And 1/48 to 1/6 scale would be a 800% enlargement (48/6=8).

I know, a jet lag can do awful things to people

Think of it this way Abu. In your original 1/10th. Multiply by 10. This gives you full scale. Then divide by 6, and you have taken the full scale to 1/6th scale. When I am doing things in AutoCAD, I always draw in full scale, then I can shrink to whatever scale I want.

Les

Problem solved. While my math is truly miserable, it turned out that one or the other of the files I was using were not exactly at their stated scales. Once I redid all the calculations and resized both to the same overall fuse length the two drawings overlapped perfectly. So happily I can now confirm that the DF drawings for the FE2b correspond almost exactly with the original factory drawings available via the KEW National Archives.

You need to watch all printed matter. Depending on the media the original was drawn on, and the media that it is reproduced on, paper stretches and shrinks with humidity. The old ammonia "blue line"/"black line" are probably the worst because they are wrapped around a cylinder while they are moist with ammonia vapors.

Les

The problem was that the two versions came from different electronic mediums (after having been scanned at some time in the past) and the files were no longer true 100% representation even when viewed at 100% size.

There are discrepancies however on some of the other views even after careful resizing.

question, is this model going to be entered in a precision scale event?

No. The only "standard" here is my own historical interest in the aircraft. That is, I only have myself to satisfy. Still (or perhaps "even more so") it would just be a shame to build a model assuming the correctness of one set of drawings only to discover afterward that these drawings didn't match other historical records. I look at it from the same perspective of a team planning to build a full scale replica of an aircraft for which no original remains.

Then again, Abu: in those days there is no assurance that most of the builds were the same. I am given to understand that very few were.

Les