The Armour Archive

Irish,

I like how you have dealt with the place where the visor
interacts with the weird crest and "notch" of the bevor.
Making the visor's posterior edge have a point there, and
continuing the crest onto the visor both look good. I wish
that Konrad Leib had painted it that way!

On the other hand, I think it much more likely that the
visor is made in one piece, rather than the two you show.
The line which seems to divide the visor in the painting
into an upper and lower, is probably a crest line; sort of
like we see in stech helms.

Mac

Jestyr,

Thanks for posting the reversed and isolated heads. It helps to see it a different way.

A thing I was trying to do in addition to tilting the helm to a more normal position was to tilt the head within the helm back to normal as well. With a great basinet, there is a certain amount of movement of the head within the helmet. One of the other figures (who seems to be wearing a sallet) has a similar bevor. His head perhaps slightly tipped down, and his nose is almost in contact with the "lip" of his bevor. I am trying to sort of split the difference.

Mac

Dierick,

I like your early sketch.

I wish I could see what is happening in that second figure you posted. I have largely been ignoring it except for the bevor. I wonder if any of our geekier guys can extract any more information fro the shadows.

There are some extant great basinets which have the bevor pivoted on its own pivots, slightly lower and slightly forward of the ones for the visor. I thought about it for my reconstructive sketch, but decided that it would confuse the drawing somewhat and not serve much purpose. On the other hand, the more I look at the first image, the better that idea seems.

Mac

I have toned down the chin in response to popular demand.
I think it looks better.

Mac

[img]http://billyandcharlie.com/kastenbasinet4.jpg[/img]

Here's my sketch, at Mac's request

I did this probably over a year ago and haven't looked at it very recently.

While the side view seems pretty accurate to the paintings and I'm relatively happy with it even looking at it a year on against your sketches here, I'm not very happy with the front view. It looks very "cylon-like" or the comic character "Cyclops" to me, and I think I'll have to work on it some more. I think it could use some refinement in curves, especially on the skull.

What I tried to do with this was not "interpret" the painting any more than was actually necessary to get it to fit a reasonable actual head. I didn't want to put my own spin on it.

I'm open to criticism and suggestions. Thanks!

J

Mac: I think the new chin looks a lot better... more natural. The more I look at it, I think Jeff may be right that it may be round top, or only the most subtle of points.

Jeff: I think the side view looks really good, and I agree with you that the front on view is very cylon/cyclops. That may be due to the sharpness of the angle that it comes down to. I'm not sure, based on the painting, what the solution to that is.

I cropped out the helm a little more and changed the contrast of the image to possibly better see what the artist did. Hope it helps at all.



Overall, I am in awe of this conversation that you all are having. Sort of like being a fly on the wall in a conversation between hall of fame coaches, or nobel prize winning scientists.

Mac wrote:Irish,

I like how you have dealt with the place where the visor
interacts with the weird crest and "notch" of the bevor.
Making the visor's posterior edge have a point there, and
continuing the crest onto the visor both look good. I wish
that Konrad Leib had painted it that way!

On the other hand, I think it much more likely that the
visor is made in one piece, rather than the two you show.
The line which seems to divide the visor in the painting
into an upper and lower, is probably a crest line; sort of
like we see in stech helms.

Mac

That is what I was going for with the scalloped edge. The outward point of the cheek/bevor piece seems that is would interfere with the seating the visor down on the helm. I know the painting doesn't show it, but does that mean the visor would be large enough to cover the points or sit on them? Wouldn't that create some rather large gaps along the side of the helm where the visor and cheek area meet?

My 2 part visor was a mis reading of your sketch. I looked at it and thought you had drawn a brow seperate from the visor. I see know that I missunderstood your drawing. I am assuming that the visor is closer to a frogmouth or tilting helm?



I think that we are still missing something with the chin. In other Kastenbrust Ill. the front of the chin seems to dip into a point and a pronounced ridge runs from the "lip" of the chin to the bottom. This shape seems to appear on the bevors that have that cheek point as part of the helm. It almost looks like that same converging point happens in the original painting.

Jestyr

Can you do that contrast with the second pic, specifically the fore profiled helm? I don't have a way to save an image in that state and get it online.




I'm going to play around with a couple of ideas with different visor styles and the angle of the chin and lip in relation to that.

Jeff,

Thanks for posting your sketch. It's always good
to see different interpretations. It helps to thicken the stew.

You have finally won me over to the "no point"
point of view. I find that the point dies hard, but
the more I look at the painting, the harder it is to
convince myself that there is a point at all.

I think that the Cylon-esque front view would be
helped by sweeping up the arms of the visor. You
will need to raise the pivots some anyways to get
the visor to lift. Unfortunately if you do that, you
ose some of the curve of the line of the posterior
edge of the visor.

Mac

Jestyr,

I agree with you about the point. Like I said above,
the point is out and the round head is in.

Your comments and insightful image handling are a
very important part of this group project.

Mac

Irish,

You are quite right about the posible "gaposis" of
the visor with respect to the crest lines on the cheeks.
Laib did not address that is his painting, but surely
the visor must continue the crests, at least a little.

I am having trouble understanding your point about
the chin. Can you clarify that?

Mac

Hey Jeff, who did the drawing for you? I couldn't read the name with the GIANT copyright lettering in the way.

Mac,
I don't think I would abandon the point all together. If you look at the reflection (in the original painting) coming down the facing surface of the skull it does give the impression of a slightly pointed skull. I think the increased contrast may be exaggerating the dome effect, the reflection is subtlety suggesting a soft point.

When I look at the placement of the visor pivot point, it seems to be much lower on the helmet than any of our drawings. Mr. Hedgecock's seems to be the closest to that of the painting, riding almost on top of where the possible bevor pivot point would be.

Dierick,

When and where is the first painting from? Is it Laib's
Crucifixion from 1457 in Graz?

Mac

Dierick wrote:When I look at the placement of the visor pivot point, it seems to be much lower on the helmet than any of our drawings. Mr. Hedgecock's seems to be the closest to that of the painting, riding almost on top of where the possible bevor pivot point would be.

As low as it is in Jeff's drawing, it would be impossible to open the visor to clear the point of the visor above the face opening. I think this appearance of a lower pivot is an artist mistake or a trick of the perspective.

Mac,
Does this look like the same skull shape to you? (reflection)
[img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6b/Konrad_Witz_Sabobai_And_Benaiah_(1435)_fragment.jpg[/img]

Mac wrote:Irish,

You are quite right about the posible "gaposis" of
the visor with respect to the crest lines on the cheeks.
Laib did not address that is his painting, but surely
the visor must continue the crests, at least a little.

I am having trouble understanding your point about
the chin. Can you clarify that?

Mac

In the first 2 paintings on the first page the bottom of the helms seem to spread out at the chin bone area to a point on each side, then converge back to a center point at the chin line. If you were to look at them from straight on instead of the "chin" area looking like a curve"U" it would look like a "V".

The ridge I "think" I see is much like the median ridge on the top of a helm. Starting at the point of the "V" and ending under the bulbous chin.

Its hard to explain in words, I will have to draw a picture of what I am thinking.

Mac, that is correct, it is from the Laib altarpiece. I found this close up from the same. I really wish I had a good high res of the picture.



Also came across this as well, nothing to do with the helmet at hand but I thought it was one of the oddest things I've ever seen. Dated mid 15th century, the kastenbrust forefront and the clothing looks contemporary to the time period. THEN we have that... that time traveler... in the back right...

Mac wrote:Jeff,

Thanks for posting your sketch. It's always good
to see different interpretations. It helps to thicken the stew.

You have finally won me over to the "no point"
point of view. I find that the point dies hard, but
the more I look at the painting, the harder it is to
convince myself that there is a point at all.

I think that the Cylon-esque front view would be
helped by sweeping up the arms of the visor. You
will need to raise the pivots some anyways to get
the visor to lift. Unfortunately if you do that, you
ose some of the curve of the line of the posterior
edge of the visor.

Mac

Ooo. Sorry, didn't mean to try to convince you to eliminate the point altogether, just that in your first sketches the point seemed extreme. I actually really like how you handled the "vestigial" point in your later sketch. Really works for me, especially with the mini-crown on.

On the visor pivot location- As I said I was trying to avoid interpretation of the painting, so didn't at all consider the visor pivot not allowing the visor to lift. This is a valid point of course, and the location would need to be adjusted to make the thing work. That will come in my next sketch, when I add a head profile to make sure the shape actually fits a human head.

When I do work like this, working from paintings with no survivals to look at, I try first to understand -exactly- what the artist depicts, then adjust it to make it fit and function. I find this method keeps me as close as the original depiction as possible, and reduces the amount of "creative interpretation" that invariably happens anyway.

Thanks for your suggestions. I think perhaps what I will end up with when I make this will be somewhere between your sketch and mine. I'm a little concerned about the pivoting neck thing, but have a client now who wants a great bascinet like you made for Toby, so I'll have a little feel for it when I get done with that project.

What would you do about a visor catch?

Hi, here I got a picture with the friendly permission of Wolfgang Weninger. Due to the size of the original picture I can't load it up. So here are some close ups of the parts with helmets...

Some other questions that bother me.

1) it is a fact that many persons wear a a wrap around gorget like Signo said
2) the bevor/chinpiece is worn with other types of helmets
3) is it a three piece system?
4) if so, is the chin attached to the gorget (to be worn with a kattle hat) or to the helmet bowl like an armet or full helmet.
5) the chinpiece is not like other and later bevors with a staight upper edge, it goes up over the ears

maybe it is helpful not to concentrate just on this one helmet but to look around in time and region.
Here I found some other solutions:

Here some other pictures

And at last on of my ideas to interpret this helmet. The rigt one is inspired by the helmets I posted before. Maybe the left cold be a progressiv form of the right?

Cheers,
Chris

Chris,

It seems conflicting. The more I look at the outline
of the helmet skull, the more it seems to be one
smooth curve. On the other hand, the highlight does
get narrower in a way that suggests a point of some sort.

Nos that I am looking at the highlights, I see that
the artist has not been consistent in his lighting from
one figure to another. The lighting on Longinus's armor
appears to come from a slightly different place than
the lighting on the helmet of the crossbowman's helmet.
What's more, Longinus's light source has a dark vertical
line in it, like light coming through a pair of windows.

This is, of course not the only example of artists showing
studio lighting on specular surfaces even though they are
depicted in the out of doors. It's like they think we won't
notice....and for the most part, they are right!

Mac

Dierick,

That guy or the right is not a time traveler; he's a Roman,
so he wears old fashioned armor to let us knot "this happened
a long time ago". This sort of historical perspective can be
seen quite strikingly in the Resurrection painting by Matthias
Grunewald in the Isenheim Altarpiece.
http://www.bible-art.info/1510MatthiasG ... ection.jpg.
http://www.bestpriceart.com/shop-online ... &pID=10737

Although the painting was made between 1506 and 1515,
the Roman soldiers are wearing armor ranging from the
third quarter of the 15th C all the way back to the late 14th.
Indeed, the soldier in the fore ground wears rerbraces from
the second quarter of the 14th c.!

Let's not get sidetracked on that image though. It deserved
its own thread.

Mac

Jeff,

You make a very good point about how we all put our
own "spins" on interpreting period armor. I try to avoid
it, but I might just as well try to avoid breathing.

I like your idea of trying to draw the thing just as the
artist meant it, and making it work later. I like to combine
those steps, but it might well be better to separate them.
I will t try it your way some time and see what happens.

Your concern about the neck is well taken. The artist is
pretty vague about what is happening here. He show us
enough of the mechanics of the armor to let us know what
he was thinking. This is a "can of worms" that I was
hoping we could work out at some point. It looks like now
is the time. Between your post and Christian's, it looks like
we can not avoid it any further.

Mac

Christian,

Thank you for posting those images, especially the
Crucifixion details. There is a very striking how
similarities between the bevor of the helmet of the
crossbowman and the bevors of some of the other
figures that Laib has depicted. He shows very similar
things being worn with kettle hats and sallets as well
as what seems to be great basinets. It is difficult to
know if he is depicting what is fundamentally the same
neck and chin defense in all of these contexts or if they
are all mechanically different but stylistically similar.

Mac

Here is another sketch I did today. Something in Christian's sketch gave me an interesting view of the helmet. I don't believe I caught the correct look of the helmet in the front view, but a less deep skull gives its too much of a scifi look for my liking.

Jeff,

After looking at the thread for a while, there's one thing I noticed about the helmets in the artwork and the frontal view of your old sketch, and I hope it may be helpful to mention it.

The jaw line/mandible on your frontal sketch appears to head straight from the chin to the ears, rather than defining the corners of the "jaw" of the helmet that is clearly seen in the original artwork. I think that may be the element giving it such a "cylon-like" appearance overall.

Anyway, that just stuck out at me.

Tomburr- you could be right. Yes the sketch warrants revision, on many points.

Dierick- I think perhaps you've gone too far in the other direction, this time making the hat a little too close the head. I'd guess you're about only 1/4" off the skull, which is a tad close. I find about 1/2" to 3/4" works best depending on the area of the helmet and what type. My GB is about 3/8-1/2" off my head at its closest and that's barely enough. We should talk about armouring when I return from my trip Nov 19. Might be fun to work on a set of these concurrently.

I have moved these two images to the same post for
comparison. It took me a while to recognize that they
were the same painting!

Thanks again Christian for making this detail available!

Mac

The only thing for sure is that those artists were very good at detailing things and at the same time being creative and drawing in a very peculiar way. I mean, it's very hard to tell where the depiction of reality stops and where fantasy begin. It's a bit like modern movies, you can't say for sure which of the things you see are real or computer effects.
How can you draw a line? And secondly: how restrict was this fashion in time and space that left us almost only pictorial evidence and just few extant pieces? Is there any chance that this is more an artistic fashion than a real one?

IMO this is the most impressive thread in the history of this site. You guys are an inspiration.

Hi there, The hand sketching and computer sketching and pic work in this thread are amazing. My hats off to all the guys who posted drawings or computer renderings.

The only thing that was glaring at me (besides Jeffs copyright :0) just kidding sir) was ..

The brow plate would stop the 2 part visor from lifting if it was mounted solid, not sure if it was or not.

This is a great thread.

Thank you

Pitbull