Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
Woodturning (rec.crafts.woodturning) To discuss tools, techniques, styles, materials, shows and competitions, education and educational materials related to woodturning. All skill levels are welcome, from art turners to production turners, beginners to masters. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#121
|
|||
|
|||
Derek Andrews wrote:
People like nice bottoms. They like feeling them too. Hey, this is a family forum buster! Watch the kinky talk... ....Kevin -- Kevin Miller http://www.alaska.net/~atftb Juneau, Alaska |
#122
|
|||
|
|||
M.J. wrote in message on Friday 13 May 2005
11:35 am: If I were to set out a half-dozen bowls with the dovetail and a half-dozen similar bowls without it and watched the bowls with the dovetail sell at least as well as those without, my days of bottom finishing, except for personal use, would be over. Bill So if you could get away with producing and selling what even you consider to be an inferior product ....you would??? Hmmm I wouldn't Bill......... I think the art/craft deserves the BEST product that one can produce......... Sadly others in this thread very obviously disagree with me..... Nope, not what I said. The customer is not always right ... but he -is- always the customer. What the customer wants and is willing to pay for is what determines the "BEST product that one can produce" not some arbitrary distinction that we might care to make. When I make something for my own use, I am the customer and I make whatever it is to my own specs. But consider this. For myself, I will leave a jig unfinished. For a customer, I would make certain that it had a smooth protective coating on it. Which is better? Neither ... both meet the customers expectations. Both are cost effective (I would have to charge a customer for labor plus actual material costs + markup, so their jig needs to perform somewhat better in order for them to recover their costs, but the costs of material for most jigs is negligible and I can make my own jigs in 'downtime' so a jig with less invested in it makes more sense for my own use.) Both would have acceptable use lives and perform acceptably during that time. When I am making something like that for a customer, time spent applying a finish goes into the price and represents income. When I am making a jig for myself, time spent finishing is (usually) a cost because I could be using the time spent finishing to make whatever that jig is designed to make. When I make something for someone else to use I am no longer the customer, they are. If it is within my ability to produce a design and within their ability to pay for it, the customer can have any design their little 'ol hearts desire. I have no (zero!) desire to force the customer to see design 'my way' and every desire to see it through the customers eyes so as to make an effective appeal to their mind, hearts and wallets. Especially the latter. Cash is the sincerest form of flattery. You seem to be arguing against giving the customer what they want and in favor of forcing the customer to accept your vision. There isn't any way that this is a correct perspective and I cannot accept it as my own viewpoint. I'm not even going to try. (Psalms 19:13) In the paragraph of mine quoted above, what I proposed was a marketing test which could provide direct guidance as to the relevancy (to the customer) of the bowl bottom. My preference for a finished bowl bottom is just that, a preference. There is nothing inherently superior about either a fancifully finished bottom or a well-done dovetail recess. The true function of the bowl bottom is to support the weight of the bowl on a surface in a reasonably stable fashion. And that goal is often missed in some of the higher priced, but incredibly top-heavy, 'bowl' designs. Yet, according to your definition, they are better designed and manufactured than mine because their bottoms are finished. Perhaps ... but mine will hold your soup until it cools enough to eat. They don't work as bowls and they definitely don't meet the requirements of a vase ... which needs to be stable with its load higher than the rim. Although I pay close attention to the aesthetics of a piece, I am also considering that once it leaves my hands I have no control over its fate. To that end, I try to make it so that it is also useful for ordinary purposes. I -really- don't want anyone slapping a steaming load of mashed potatoes in one of my bowls, leaving it out for hours and then putting bowl and all into the refrigerator overnight only to nuke it, bowl and all, in a couple of days. I am very explicit that doing this kills any hope that the customer might have that I will bail them out if their bowl breaks. I don't offer any warranty at all. Any replacing I do requires the customer to convince me that the bowl was scrap when it left my hands. However, I do try to accommodate a certain amount of use & misuse by my choice of design and materials. This accommodation is not contingent on removal of a dovetail on the bottom of the bowl. I DO produce the very best I am able. But -I- will be the one to determine what that is, not anyone else. My customers, not you, will tell me whether I have gotten things right or not. If you want to tell me how to make what, there is a mechanism for that already in place -- but Usenet is not that mechanism. Here's how that works. I have a nice selection of bowls and goblets available starting at $60. With and without dovetails. Money talks. Everything else walks. Bill |
#123
|
|||
|
|||
Bill,
Very well said! robo hippy Bill C. wrote: M.J. wrote in message on Friday 13 May 2005 11:35 am: If I were to set out a half-dozen bowls with the dovetail and a half-dozen similar bowls without it and watched the bowls with the dovetail sell at least as well as those without, my days of bottom finishing, except for personal use, would be over. Bill So if you could get away with producing and selling what even you consider to be an inferior product ....you would??? Hmmm I wouldn't Bill......... I think the art/craft deserves the BEST product that one can produce......... Sadly others in this thread very obviously disagree with me..... Nope, not what I said. The customer is not always right ... but he -is- always the customer. What the customer wants and is willing to pay for is what determines the "BEST product that one can produce" not some arbitrary distinction that we might care to make. When I make something for my own use, I am the customer and I make whatever it is to my own specs. But consider this. For myself, I will leave a jig unfinished. For a customer, I would make certain that it had a smooth protective coating on it. Which is better? Neither ... both meet the customers expectations. Both are cost effective (I would have to charge a customer for labor plus actual material costs + markup, so their jig needs to perform somewhat better in order for them to recover their costs, but the costs of material for most jigs is negligible and I can make my own jigs in 'downtime' so a jig with less invested in it makes more sense for my own use.) Both would have acceptable use lives and perform acceptably during that time. When I am making something like that for a customer, time spent applying a finish goes into the price and represents income. When I am making a jig for myself, time spent finishing is (usually) a cost because I could be using the time spent finishing to make whatever that jig is designed to make. When I make something for someone else to use I am no longer the customer, they are. If it is within my ability to produce a design and within their ability to pay for it, the customer can have any design their little 'ol hearts desire. I have no (zero!) desire to force the customer to see design 'my way' and every desire to see it through the customers eyes so as to make an effective appeal to their mind, hearts and wallets. Especially the latter. Cash is the sincerest form of flattery. You seem to be arguing against giving the customer what they want and in favor of forcing the customer to accept your vision. There isn't any way that this is a correct perspective and I cannot accept it as my own viewpoint. I'm not even going to try. (Psalms 19:13) In the paragraph of mine quoted above, what I proposed was a marketing test which could provide direct guidance as to the relevancy (to the customer) of the bowl bottom. My preference for a finished bowl bottom is just that, a preference. There is nothing inherently superior about either a fancifully finished bottom or a well-done dovetail recess. The true function of the bowl bottom is to support the weight of the bowl on a surface in a reasonably stable fashion. And that goal is often missed in some of the higher priced, but incredibly top-heavy, 'bowl' designs. Yet, according to your definition, they are better designed and manufactured than mine because their bottoms are finished. Perhaps ... but mine will hold your soup until it cools enough to eat. They don't work as bowls and they definitely don't meet the requirements of a vase ... which needs to be stable with its load higher than the rim. Although I pay close attention to the aesthetics of a piece, I am also considering that once it leaves my hands I have no control over its fate. To that end, I try to make it so that it is also useful for ordinary purposes. I -really- don't want anyone slapping a steaming load of mashed potatoes in one of my bowls, leaving it out for hours and then putting bowl and all into the refrigerator overnight only to nuke it, bowl and all, in a couple of days. I am very explicit that doing this kills any hope that the customer might have that I will bail them out if their bowl breaks. I don't offer any warranty at all. Any replacing I do requires the customer to convince me that the bowl was scrap when it left my hands. However, I do try to accommodate a certain amount of use & misuse by my choice of design and materials. This accommodation is not contingent on removal of a dovetail on the bottom of the bowl. I DO produce the very best I am able. But -I- will be the one to determine what that is, not anyone else. My customers, not you, will tell me whether I have gotten things right or not. If you want to tell me how to make what, there is a mechanism for that already in place -- but Usenet is not that mechanism. Here's how that works. I have a nice selection of bowls and goblets available starting at $60. With and without dovetails. Money talks. Everything else walks. Bill |
#124
|
|||
|
|||
"Bill C." wrote in message ... M.J. wrote in message on Friday 13 May 2005 11:35 am: If I were to set out a half-dozen bowls with the dovetail and a half-dozen similar bowls without it and watched the bowls with the dovetail sell at least as well as those without, my days of bottom finishing, except for personal use, would be over. Bill So if you could get away with producing and selling what even you consider to be an inferior product ....you would??? Hmmm I wouldn't Bill......... I think the art/craft deserves the BEST product that one can produce......... Sadly others in this thread very obviously disagree with me..... Nope, not what I said. The customer is not always right ... but he -is- always the customer. What the customer wants and is willing to pay for is what determines the "BEST product that one can produce" not some arbitrary distinction that we might care to make. When I make something for my own use, I am the customer and I make whatever it is to my own specs. But consider this. For myself, I will leave a jig unfinished. For a customer, I would make certain that it had a smooth protective coating on it. Which is better? Neither ... both meet the customers expectations. Both are cost effective (I would have to charge a customer for labor plus actual material costs + markup, so their jig needs to perform somewhat better in order for them to recover their costs, but the costs of material for most jigs is negligible and I can make my own jigs in 'downtime' so a jig with less invested in it makes more sense for my own use.) Both would have acceptable use lives and perform acceptably during that time. When I am making something like that for a customer, time spent applying a finish goes into the price and represents income. When I am making a jig for myself, time spent finishing is (usually) a cost because I could be using the time spent finishing to make whatever that jig is designed to make. When I make something for someone else to use I am no longer the customer, they are. If it is within my ability to produce a design and within their ability to pay for it, the customer can have any design their little 'ol hearts desire. I have no (zero!) desire to force the customer to see design 'my way' and every desire to see it through the customers eyes so as to make an effective appeal to their mind, hearts and wallets. Especially the latter. Cash is the sincerest form of flattery. You seem to be arguing against giving the customer what they want and in favor of forcing the customer to accept your vision. There isn't any way that this is a correct perspective and I cannot accept it as my own viewpoint. I'm not even going to try. (Psalms 19:13) In the paragraph of mine quoted above, what I proposed was a marketing test which could provide direct guidance as to the relevancy (to the customer) of the bowl bottom. My preference for a finished bowl bottom is just that, a preference. There is nothing inherently superior about either a fancifully finished bottom or a well-done dovetail recess. The true function of the bowl bottom is to support the weight of the bowl on a surface in a reasonably stable fashion. And that goal is often missed in some of the higher priced, but incredibly top-heavy, 'bowl' designs. Yet, according to your definition, they are better designed and manufactured than mine because their bottoms are finished. Perhaps ... but mine will hold your soup until it cools enough to eat. They don't work as bowls and they definitely don't meet the requirements of a vase ... which needs to be stable with its load higher than the rim. Although I pay close attention to the aesthetics of a piece, I am also considering that once it leaves my hands I have no control over its fate. To that end, I try to make it so that it is also useful for ordinary purposes. I -really- don't want anyone slapping a steaming load of mashed potatoes in one of my bowls, leaving it out for hours and then putting bowl and all into the refrigerator overnight only to nuke it, bowl and all, in a couple of days. I am very explicit that doing this kills any hope that the customer might have that I will bail them out if their bowl breaks. I don't offer any warranty at all. Any replacing I do requires the customer to convince me that the bowl was scrap when it left my hands. However, I do try to accommodate a certain amount of use & misuse by my choice of design and materials. This accommodation is not contingent on removal of a dovetail on the bottom of the bowl. I DO produce the very best I am able. But -I- will be the one to determine what that is, not anyone else. My customers, not you, will tell me whether I have gotten things right or not. If you want to tell me how to make what, there is a mechanism for that already in place -- but Usenet is not that mechanism. Here's how that works. I have a nice selection of bowls and goblets available starting at $60. With and without dovetails. Money talks. Everything else walks. Bill Well you certainly cured my insomnia...............ZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzz (Psalms 4003:7009 or thereabouts) :-) -- Regards, M.J. (Mike) Orr www.island.net/~morr |
#125
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 13 May 2005 12:39:34 -0700, "Derek Hartzell"
wrote: Since my Stronghold #2 jaws require about 2 3/8" minimum recess ( I usually do a little bigger so I can measure the bottom depth with calipers between the jaws) I might need an as-yet undeveloped $5 or $10 coin. nope, just some brass discs with your name on 'em.. might be pretty cool.. "Kevin" wrote in message ... A year or so ago there was a post about incorporating the dove-tail recess into the design of the bowl. Someone mentioned they glue a penny of the current year into the recess. Perhaps a quarter would provide a better fit. The turner would then see what year the piece was made as would the customer while at the same time increasing the value of the bowl. -Kevin "Bill C." wrote in message ... I think that a customer sees a dovetail recess as a design element and evaluates it on that basis. Some like them, some don't. Sometimes the dovetail works into the design of the bowl. Other times it sticks out like a sore thumb. It should, I think, be neatly finished simply because anything less would look, to my eyes, incomplete. But that is my opinion and you are entitled to disagree. mac Please remove splinters before emailing |
#126
|
|||
|
|||
Neill, I enjoyed your album very much. You all do remember Neill? He
started this thread many posts ago. So moving right along toward putting it in the Guinness book as rcw's longest thread: We've about exhausted discussing a bowl's nether parts, so it's time to 'troll for tops'. I liked Neill's treatment of the orifices on his no. 2, 9 and 14 hollow forms. Clearly there is a place for, as well as not for adding collars to closed forms. The same with gossamer walls. Forget the bottoms. When and when not to add collars to closed forms? To enhance a bland timber? To strengthen an opening? Easier to make a wide opening and add a narrow collar? An artful addition? A jarring discontinuity? Intimations of artistic virtuosity? Indications of technical expertise? It's what you have always done....or not done and turners you admire do and don't do. Whatever, how and when do you ladies and gentlemen consider adding collars? Turn to Safety, Arch Fortiter http://community.webtv.net/almcc/MacsMusings |
#127
|
|||
|
|||
M.J. wrote in message on Monday 16 May 2005
12:33 am: Well you certainly cured my insomnia...............ZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzz (Psalms 4003:7009 or thereabouts) :-) Glad to have been of service. I included the scripture to show the foundation for my opposition. If you haven't looked it up yet, you might want to someday. Bill |
#128
|
|||
|
|||
"Bill C." wrote in message ... M.J. wrote in message on Monday 16 May 2005 12:33 am: Well you certainly cured my insomnia...............ZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzz (Psalms 4003:7009 or thereabouts) :-) Glad to have been of service. I included the scripture to show the foundation for my opposition. If you haven't looked it up yet, you might want to someday. Bill Not a chance Bill.... As soon as I saw that reference I stopped reading. I am sure there is a religious newsgroup. This is not it....... -- Regards, M.J. (Mike) Orr www.island.net/~morr |
#129
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 16 May 2005 8:30:43 -0700, Arch wrote
(in message ): Neill, I enjoyed your album very much. You all do remember Neill? He started this thread many posts ago. So moving right along toward putting it in the Guinness book as rcw's longest thread: We've about exhausted discussing a bowl's nether parts, so it's time to 'troll for tops'. I liked Neill's treatment of the orifices on his no. 2, 9 and 14 hollow forms. Clearly there is a place for, as well as not for adding collars to closed forms. The same with gossamer walls. Forget the bottoms. When and when not to add collars to closed forms? To enhance a bland timber? To strengthen an opening? Easier to make a wide opening and add a narrow collar? An artful addition? A jarring discontinuity? Intimations of artistic virtuosity? Indications of technical expertise? It's what you have always done....or not done and turners you admire do and don't do. Whatever, how and when do you ladies and gentlemen consider adding collars? Turn to Safety, Arch Fortiter http://community.webtv.net/almcc/MacsMusings thank you Arch, im glad you enjoyed the pics. i am amazed that this thread is still going. i never expected it to turn into a controversy over turning techniques.... and another controversy over finishing details, and all the other "thread drifts" along the way. its funny too that after all of this, some of my original questions were never really answered. so now we want to talk about collars? ok thats fine with me. the reasons why i have never added collars are pretty simple. a lot of my inspiration for enclosed forms comes from places other than the modern woodturning world. some of these would include potters, glass blowers, gourds & squashes, fruit, nuts & seed pods, traditional or primitive functional storage vessels in wood, clay, metal, basketry, etc. these forms tend to be of one material from foot to orifice. my own personal preference is more toward pure forms and flowing curves. i do admire some of the collared pieces i have seen. for me though unless it is done really well a collar does often seem like a "jarring discontinuity" http://neillswoodturning.myphotoalbum.com/ |
#130
|
|||
|
|||
M.J. wrote in message on Tuesday 17 May
2005 01:12 am: "Bill C." wrote in message ... M.J. wrote in message on Monday 16 May 2005 12:33 am: Well you certainly cured my insomnia...............ZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzz (Psalms 4003:7009 or thereabouts) :-) Glad to have been of service. I included the scripture to show the foundation for my opposition. If you haven't looked it up yet, you might want to someday. Bill Not a chance Bill.... As soon as I saw that reference I stopped reading. I am sure there is a religious newsgroup. This is not it....... I am also certain that a religious foundation for an ethics viewpoint (and that, not technique, was the meat of the thread) is every bit as valid as a secular humanist one. Oh well. You were given the authoritative source of my viewpoint as a point of courtesy. Feel free to turn your back on it. BIll |
#131
|
|||
|
|||
"Bill C." wrote in message ... M.J. wrote in message on Tuesday 17 May 2005 01:12 am: "Bill C." wrote in message ... M.J. wrote in message on Monday 16 May 2005 12:33 am: Well you certainly cured my insomnia...............ZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzz (Psalms 4003:7009 or thereabouts) :-) Glad to have been of service. I included the scripture to show the foundation for my opposition. If you haven't looked it up yet, you might want to someday. Bill Not a chance Bill.... As soon as I saw that reference I stopped reading. I am sure there is a religious newsgroup. This is not it....... I am also certain that a religious foundation for an ethics viewpoint (and that, not technique, was the meat of the thread) is every bit as valid as a secular humanist one. Oh well. You were given the authoritative source of my viewpoint as a point of courtesy. Feel free to turn your back on it. BIll Yawnnnnnnnn......................Oh excuse me.........ZZZZzzzzzz -- Regards, M.J. (Mike) Orr www.island.net/~morr |
#132
|
|||
|
|||
Include me out! I was not asking about clerical nor cervical collars. Turn to Safety, Arch Fortiter http://community.webtv.net/almcc/MacsMusings |
#133
Posted to rec.crafts.woodturning
|
|||
|
|||
Dovetail Recesses, A Design Element?
A dovetail recess as a design element? Yours must be much more beautiful
than mine! Dovetails in fine handmade furniture may be considered to be design elements. Some carefully disguised dovetail recesses on platter bottoms may be acceptable to leave as is. But I have seen very few dovetail recesses on bowls that could be considered a design element. (Richard Raffan's, maybe.) If you wanna leave 'em on your bowls, have at it. But please don't try to glorify them! Barry "Bill C." wrote in message ... M.J. wrote in message on Thursday 12 May 2005 12:59 pm: Simple. I'd buy the one that showed the woodturner cared enough to remove ALL evidence of how the item was held on the lathe. I do that to all my turnings just as a matter of pride and if it takes me a couple more minutes to do so then that is time well spent in my opinion. YMMV.......... I agree that it doesn't take a whole lot of time to do this and I think it adds to the appearance of the piece. What I don't see is the sense of making a religious war out of it. While I, personally, prefer a finished bowl bottom, I am not a customer. I repeat: I am not a customer. I bring practical experience to that perception. A customer, however, brings a checkbook. That means that we will each have different standards for excellence. I think that a customer sees a dovetail recess as a design element and evaluates it on that basis. Some like them, some don't. Sometimes the dovetail works into the design of the bowl. Other times it sticks out like a sore thumb. It should, I think, be neatly finished simply because anything less would look, to my eyes, incomplete. But that is my opinion and you are entitled to disagree. If I were to set out a half-dozen bowls with the dovetail and a half-dozen similar bowls without it and watched the bowls with the dovetail sell at least as well as those without, my days of bottom finishing, except for personal use, would be over. Bill |
#134
Posted to rec.crafts.woodturning
|
|||
|
|||
Beautiful Bottoms ! ! ! In The Eyes Of The Beholder ! ! !
One of the ladies in our church quietly boasts of having a "beautiful
bottom"! Only her closest friends know she is speaking of a flat piece of land near a small creek (a bottom) at the rear of her property. :-) Barry "Arch" wrote in message ... Derek, as Stuart brightened with the onset of daylight, so did my view of our tempest in a weed pot. Your explanation is heartily accepted and I offer mine in return. Yesterday, I lost my little turning pal of 12 years, my beloved mini-schnauzer and admittedly I was grieving and not myself. My most admired professor & chief used the Socratic method to teach and I have always tried to emulate him. This way may not fit a ng format too well, but I'll forego the cup of hemlock. Not to start a premptive bottom finishing jihad, but I figure that most people inspect the bottoms of objects to see who made them and when, instead of for visual or tactile gratification. That's more for tops and sides. Those who care check for makers' and guild marks and confirm the materials used, purity etc. We all hope to find a sterling silver piece in the two-bit bin, but most buyers of our turnings aren't looking for a pink ivory bowl turned by a master, altho some of them left tool and holding marks. An ugly bottom turns off turners and public alike, but this isn't what we of lesser pride promote. It's now time for the obligatory, "Let's all get back to turning". All best, Arch Turn to Safety, Arch Fortiter http://community.webtv.net/almcc/MacsMusings |
#135
Posted to rec.crafts.woodturning
|
|||
|
|||
Stronghold chuck jaws, whats wrong with this picture.
25 cents? A Jab? Heck no. Some of my bowls aren't worth nearly that
much...........especially the ones that come off the lathe and leave their tenon/recess in the chuck. :-) Barry "neill" wrote in message ... On Fri, 13 May 2005 12:11:57 -0700, Kevin wrote (in message ): A year or so ago there was a post about incorporating the dove-tail recess into the design of the bowl. Someone mentioned they glue a penny of the current year into the recess. Perhaps a quarter would provide a better fit. The turner would then see what year the piece was made as would the customer while at the same time increasing the value of the bowl. LOL! am i the only one who read this as a jab? http://neillswoodturning.myphotoalbum.com/ |
#136
Posted to rec.crafts.woodturning
|
|||
|
|||
Dovetail Recesses, A Design Element?
In article ,
"Barry N. Turner" wrote: A dovetail recess as a design element? Yours must be much more beautiful than mine! Dovetails in fine handmade furniture may be considered to be design elements. Some carefully disguised dovetail recesses on platter bottoms may be acceptable to leave as is. Which is what I try to do... (really bad ASCII art) bottom rim dove-tail ----- / \ ------ ------------\ | | __________________ \ / ---- inside of bowl -- -------------------------------------------------------- Personal e-mail is the n7bsn but at amsat.org This posting address is a spam-trap and seldom read RV and Camping FAQ can be found at http://www.ralphandellen.us/rv |
#137
Posted to rec.crafts.woodturning
|
|||
|
|||
Dovetail Recesses, A Design Element?
"Barry N. Turner" wrote in message .. . But I have seen very few dovetail recesses on bowls that could be considered a design element. (Richard Raffan's, maybe.) If you wanna leave 'em on your bowls, have at it. But please don't try to glorify them! You're saying what? There's some absolute standard of beauty for the bottom of a bowl? Seems to me that individual expression is in what you don't do as well as what you do. Personally, I find a lot of the attempts to jazz up the bottom of the piece fairly ugly. Even though they try to glorify them. Not to mention all the time and frustration spent in trying to get there. Care to start a thread on the "ideal bottom," Arch? http://groups.msn.com/NovaOwners/geo...to&PhotoID=234 |
#138
Posted to rec.crafts.woodturning
|
|||
|
|||
Ping George and other Nova owners
Can anyone pass along the height of the headstock above the base? I have one on order, but want to start preparing the stand I will use -- -------------------------------------------------------- Personal e-mail is the n7bsn but at amsat.org This posting address is a spam-trap and seldom read RV and Camping FAQ can be found at http://www.ralphandellen.us/rv |
#139
Posted to rec.crafts.woodturning
|
|||
|
|||
Ping George and other Nova owners
"Ralph E Lindberg" wrote in message ... Can anyone pass along the height of the headstock above the base? I have one on order, but want to start preparing the stand I will use I'm a 3000. The information in the manual seems correct to me. http://www.teknatool.com/support/index.htm Imagine the DVR would be as accurate. Which are you getting? |
#140
Posted to rec.crafts.woodturning
|
|||
|
|||
Dovetail Recesses, A Design Element?
On Sat, 7 Jan 2006 20:00:27 -0600, "Barry N. Turner"
wrote: A dovetail recess as a design element? Yours must be much more beautiful than mine! Dovetails in fine handmade furniture may be considered to be design elements. Some carefully disguised dovetail recesses on platter bottoms may be acceptable to leave as is. But I have seen very few dovetail recesses on bowls that could be considered a design element. (Richard Raffan's, maybe.) If you wanna leave 'em on your bowls, have at it. But please don't try to glorify them! Barry Spoken like a true turner, Barry... Which is great if you're judging a contest at a turner's club or something.. IMH experience, buyers are really rather dumb.. they don't know anything about how the bowl is made (or how their car is made), they just make uneducated purchases because the like the way it looks.. I've never even seen one whip out a pair of calipers and measure the wall thickness before handing over the cash..... whodathunkit! "Bill C." wrote in message ... M.J. wrote in message on Thursday 12 May 2005 12:59 pm: Simple. I'd buy the one that showed the woodturner cared enough to remove ALL evidence of how the item was held on the lathe. I do that to all my turnings just as a matter of pride and if it takes me a couple more minutes to do so then that is time well spent in my opinion. YMMV.......... I agree that it doesn't take a whole lot of time to do this and I think it adds to the appearance of the piece. What I don't see is the sense of making a religious war out of it. While I, personally, prefer a finished bowl bottom, I am not a customer. I repeat: I am not a customer. I bring practical experience to that perception. A customer, however, brings a checkbook. That means that we will each have different standards for excellence. I think that a customer sees a dovetail recess as a design element and evaluates it on that basis. Some like them, some don't. Sometimes the dovetail works into the design of the bowl. Other times it sticks out like a sore thumb. It should, I think, be neatly finished simply because anything less would look, to my eyes, incomplete. But that is my opinion and you are entitled to disagree. If I were to set out a half-dozen bowls with the dovetail and a half-dozen similar bowls without it and watched the bowls with the dovetail sell at least as well as those without, my days of bottom finishing, except for personal use, would be over. Bill mac Please remove splinters before emailing |
#141
Posted to rec.crafts.woodturning
|
|||
|
|||
Ping George and other Nova owners
Can anyone pass along the height of the headstock above the base?
Ralph, I'm assuming two things, one, you haven't received a satisfactory answer to your question and, two, you are asking the height of the spindle center above the base. In my DVR Instruction manual they show the distance from the base of the lathe to the center of the spindle as 297 mm or 11-11/16" Hope this helps, Harry |
#142
Posted to rec.crafts.woodturning
|
|||
|
|||
Ping George and other Nova owners
In article ps.com,
Harry Pye wrote: Can anyone pass along the height of the headstock above the base? Ralph, I'm assuming two things, one, you haven't received a satisfactory answer to your question and, two, you are asking the height of the spindle center above the base. In my DVR Instruction manual they show the distance from the base of the lathe to the center of the spindle as 297 mm or 11-11/16" Thanks Harry -- -------------------------------------------------------- Personal e-mail is the n7bsn but at amsat.org This posting address is a spam-trap and seldom read RV and Camping FAQ can be found at http://www.ralphandellen.us/rv |
#143
Posted to rec.crafts.woodturning
|
|||
|
|||
Dovetail Recesses, A Design Element?
I have to agree with you 100% Mac So far Very few of the items that I have
made none of them would be the ideal piece that I would show at a woodturning show but I have received many positive comments on them from people that are not turners. The beauty of a piece is what the customer is satisfied with. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Nova2 vs Vicmarc: Advice please | Woodturning | |||
Nova Compac Chuck | Woodturning | |||
WTB - Stronghold Chuck | Woodturning | |||
ENCO no-name chuck or Bison? | Metalworking | |||
Cuemaking-Metal Lathe Chuck Question? | Metalworking |