Wednesday, 26 June 2019

3-D Model of Loch Ness




I collect many items related to Loch Ness and its Monster, so I came across this nice little item on eBay which is a 3-D print of the loch based on the 1903 bathymetric survey done by Sir John Murray. The description runs thusly:

3D Printed High Detail Bathymetric Survey Model of Loch Ness created from original info obtained in 1903 by Sir John Murray.
This model gives a unique view of what the Loch looks like under the water.
1000mm version - Scale 1:38,000 Horizontal & 1:19,000 Vertical.
A large scale model of this is on display in the Loch Ness museum.
Printed in Glow in the dark green or blue PLA.
All models include a recessed area at the bottom for a UV LED strip Light. (included)
This will come in 3 sections that are not fixed together.
 
It's not my cup of tea, but others may be tempted to spend the £88 on it. There is also a cheaper but smaller unpainted model listed by the same seller here.
 
 
The author can be contacted at lochnesskelpie@gmail.com
 
 


17 comments:

  1. Hmmm, its been bumped up from £80 to £100 now.

    ReplyDelete
  2. They should sell a family of tiny LNMs to go with it...

    ReplyDelete
  3. You'd need a magnifying glass and tweezers to play with them. ;)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A 1:38000 horizontal scale, so a standard 10m monster would be a manageable 0.25mm long. :)

      Delete
  4. Not if they are the size as claimed by Torquil MacLeod ;)

    ReplyDelete
  5. At that scale they would be nano Nessies. Even Macleod's 40 ft behemoth! LOL

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Just wondering John... is Torquil McLeod's sighting the largest ever recorded?

      Delete
    2. Hi Kyle. Well I don't know about that, but the Peter MacNab photo (1955) would suggest a whopper of at least 40 ft plus, if in fact it is genuine. Then Torquil McLeod's sighting (1960) would suggest an animal of great size if he could see it clearly through binoculars at a distance of one mile from the opposite shore. I wonder if it could have been the same animal. Maybe the bull of the colony?

      Delete
    3. A Donald MacDonald claimed to have seen a 90ft beast in March 1938 as did a Hunter Gordon in June 1950. No distance is specified for either whic makes me wonder if they were far away which increases the chances of mis-estimating the size.

      Delete
  6. Very cool but I don't really need it. My missus bought me a huge ordnance survey map of Loch Ness a couple years ago for my birthday. It's in my living room so every time non Scottish guests comes over they'll often ask if the monster is real. I don't hesitate to dead pan: "Yes, I've see it many times. It's ruined the composition of loads of my photos," or something equally hysterical.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lucky you, all I have is an 8 by 11 printout from a website. Nice line you give your guests...just don't try any hoaxes. :)

      Delete
  7. The McLeod sighting has well known optical probs that Ronald Binns rightfully points out. McLeod's large estimate of size of the creature at the range of a mile is to be treated with caution IMO.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As I point out in my land sightings book, the problem is more to do with the editors and artists of Dinsdale's book than Torquil MacLeod. I also speculate on whether there once existed a large bull creature in the loch which is now dead.

      Delete
    2. Yeah, I kinda think the creature McLeod witnessed is a little exaggerated in the well known drawing depicted in the book. I mean what was he using 1000 power binoculars? Probably the exaggeration of the artist for clarity. Wasn't McLeod himself was it? Can't remember

      Delete
    3. I doubt it was MacLeod, I am not even sure he lived to see the book.

      Delete
  8. I had long thought that 1960 might have been a good year to be a astute observer at Loch Ness, a good 16mm film and a partial land sighting of many minutes featuring maybe the same creature.

    ReplyDelete