This is a bit of a blend between Arts & Crafts and Mission...the table
came out more looking like Metro.
I stole the design components from all over the place. So here is my
question:
Do the table and chairs look compatible?

I was thinking cherry, any other suggestions?

(I also made sure that it was reasonably easy to fabricate)

http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o...iningMetro.jpg

On 14 Jan 2007 18:13:55 -0800, "Robatoy" wrote:

This is a bit of a blend between Arts & Crafts and Mission...the table
came out more looking like Metro.
I stole the design components from all over the place. So here is my
question:
Do the table and chairs look compatible?

I was thinking cherry, any other suggestions?

(I also made sure that it was reasonably easy to fabricate)

http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o...iningMetro.jpg

IMHO, they certainly look "compatible" though not necessarily similar.
The curve in the chair back rail seems incongruent with the sharp angles on
the table. Not necessarily bad nor bad-looking, just not equivalent (I'm
not sure how exactly to express this correctly)



+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

On 14 Jan 2007 18:13:55 -0800, "Robatoy" wrote:

This is a bit of a blend between Arts & Crafts and Mission...the table
came out more looking like Metro.
I stole the design components from all over the place. So here is my
question:
Do the table and chairs look compatible?

I was thinking cherry, any other suggestions?

(I also made sure that it was reasonably easy to fabricate)

http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o...iningMetro.jpg

Sorry for the second follow-up, hit "send" too soon.

a) Cherry would look quite nice for this style.
b) Downloaded and brightened up the picture, I missed the curves on the
seat rails in my previous comment. As I mentioned in my previous post,
it's not necessarily bad, it just doesn't match with the straight lines on
the A&C style table. BTW, that is a very minor nit -- you did a really
nice design and rendering job on the overall design.



+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

"Robatoy" wrote in message
oups.com...
This is a bit of a blend between Arts & Crafts and Mission...the table
came out more looking like Metro.
I stole the design components from all over the place. So here is my
question:
Do the table and chairs look compatible?

I was thinking cherry, any other suggestions?

(I also made sure that it was reasonably easy to fabricate)

http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o...iningMetro.jpg

Looks good to me.

I am sure that your daughter will be thrilled.

Mark & Juanita wrote:


Sorry for the second follow-up, hit "send" too soon.

a) Cherry would look quite nice for this style.

I think so too.

b) Downloaded and brightened up the picture, I missed the curves on the
seat rails in my previous comment. As I mentioned in my previous post,
it's not necessarily bad, it just doesn't match with the straight lines on
the A&C style table. BTW, that is a very minor nit -- you did a really
nice design and rendering job on the overall design.

Why thank you, kind sir. I made a couple of adjustments and uploaded
them for your perusal.

http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o...Lowangle-1.jpg

http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o...oy/Chairsq.jpg

Lee Michaels wrote:

Looks good to me.

I am sure that your daughter will be thrilled.

Thanks, Lee. I have till September, so lots of time (ya right)

On 14 Jan 2007 20:30:07 -0800, "Robatoy" wrote:


Mark & Juanita wrote:


Sorry for the second follow-up, hit "send" too soon.

a) Cherry would look quite nice for this style.

I think so too.

b) Downloaded and brightened up the picture, I missed the curves on the
seat rails in my previous comment. As I mentioned in my previous post,
it's not necessarily bad, it just doesn't match with the straight lines on
the A&C style table. BTW, that is a very minor nit -- you did a really
nice design and rendering job on the overall design.

Why thank you, kind sir. I made a couple of adjustments and uploaded
them for your perusal.

http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o...Lowangle-1.jpg

http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o...oy/Chairsq.jpg


The straight chairs look more compatible with the table, the rounded
chairs look more refined. You've got a conundrum there, good luck to ya.

I like the fact you can make those changes that quickly, what drawing
and rendering packages are you using?



+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

Mark & Juanita wrote:

The straight chairs look more compatible with the table, the rounded
chairs look more refined. You've got a conundrum there, good luck to ya.

Thanks.
I can make the joints at the corners a bit bigger when using the curved
sides. With the straight sides, I'm almost thinking of stretchers.
I'll think of something.



I like the fact you can make those changes that quickly, what drawing
and rendering packages are you using?

It is a very intuitive design package called Strata 3D CX5. Runs on
mac, like mine, or on a wintel box.
I have been doing most models in CAD and then importing them into
Strata for textures, lighting and rendering. But something as simple as
these chairs, I do the modelling right inside Strata, a package which I
have been using for 13 years (with various upgrades along the way) I
recently opened a model which took almost 18 hours to render back in
1994. Took 22 minutes this time around and at a higher colour depth and
tighter anti-aliasing. Computers have come a long way....and the one on
order will cut that 22 minutes down to 5.

r

On 14 Jan 2007 21:00:17 -0800, "Robatoy" wrote:

.... snip
I like the fact you can make those changes that quickly, what drawing
and rendering packages are you using?

It is a very intuitive design package called Strata 3D CX5. Runs on
mac, like mine, or on a wintel box.
I have been doing most models in CAD and then importing them into
Strata for textures, lighting and rendering. But something as simple as
these chairs, I do the modelling right inside Strata, a package which I
have been using for 13 years (with various upgrades along the way) I
recently opened a model which took almost 18 hours to render back in
1994. Took 22 minutes this time around and at a higher colour depth and
tighter anti-aliasing. Computers have come a long way....and the one on
order will cut that 22 minutes down to 5.


Thanks, I've taken note of that for future reference. I'm currently
using Turbo-CAD. Good 3D package, with pretty good rendering, but it does
take quite a bit of time to draft out the components.



+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

In article om, "Robatoy" wrote:

Mark & Juanita wrote:

I like the fact you can make those changes that quickly, what drawing
and rendering packages are you using?

It is a very intuitive design package called Strata 3D CX5. Runs on
mac, like mine, or on a wintel box.

Odd... I thought you had a Cray. g

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

"Robatoy" wrote in message
This is a bit of a blend between Arts & Crafts and Mission...the table
came out more looking like Metro.

"Very Prarie" ... to coin a new term.

I stole the design components from all over the place. So here is my
question:
Do the table and chairs look compatible?

Absolutely.

I was thinking cherry, any other suggestions?

That would be startling.

Not a criticism, but do you have enough overhang on the ends of the trestle,
and do you really want the side chairs to have arms, or was that just a
convenience in rendering the model?

(I also made sure that it was reasonably easy to fabricate)

Perhaps a bit too easy? ... hard to tell, but the back legs of the chairs
appear to angle toward the front legs at the same chair back angle? If so,
and with that tall back, you may find them to be a bit too easy to tip
backwards.

I really do like your design ... they'd look gorgeous with a leather 'slip'
seat. Well done!

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 1/06/07

Do the table and chairs look compatible?

Yes, I do.

I was thinking cherry, any other suggestions?


Absoluetly.


Nice rendering!

FWIW, these are the changes that my eye wants:

1. Six rungs under the table, the five seems a little sparce next to the
chair. Either group them closer, add a rung or both.

2. Reproduce the arch design element in the table in the lower rail of the
table end.

3. I don't care for the base beneath the table end. I would just loose that
component.

4. I would have to put a taper on the last 4 inches of all the legs (table
and at least the forepaws of the chairs). Only because I find mission too
damn square .... an arc and a few tapers and I feel much better.

Cheers,

Steve








--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Doug Miller wrote:
In article om, "Robatoy" wrote:

Mark & Juanita wrote:

I like the fact you can make those changes that quickly, what drawing
and rendering packages are you using?

It is a very intuitive design package called Strata 3D CX5. Runs on
mac, like mine, or on a wintel box.

Odd... I thought you had a Cray. g

I do, but I only use it as intended; for my finances. g

Do the table and chairs look compatible?

I think so!

I was thinking cherry, any other suggestions?

Cherry would look great - you weren't going to stain it, were you?
Also, I like a lot of Steve's ideas, and had some of the same thoughts:

1. Six rungs under the table, the five seems a little sparce next to the
chair. Either group them closer, add a rung or both.

I wouldn't disagree with this, though it didn't jump out at me. Maybe
(if you have a mortiser or some easy method) you could do a row of the
same 3/4" or 1" spindles that are on the back of the chair? Something
like this
http://www.ci.state.id.us/images/Fur...StyleTable.jpg
(http://tinyurl.com/ygtcl5), but maybe without the spindles down the
middle. (Who knew that inmates made custom mission style furniture?)

2. Reproduce the arch design element in the table in the lower rail of the
table end.

I was thinking about this idea before I read this response - I think
that would tie them together nicely. But I really think they match
each other very nicely, even with a curve in the chair and straight
rails on the table.

3. I don't care for the base beneath the table end. I would just loose that
component.

That was my first thought when I looked at your picture - is there
another piece you were emulating with that element? It seems like it
would facilitate toe-stubbing.

4. I would have to put a taper on the last 4 inches of all the legs (table
and at least the forepaws of the chairs).

Sure - that's a good classic mission style design element, and it's
fairly easy to do. Gives you a good selection of doorstops. Just
don't make the angle too sharp! I like the slightly lighter look it
imparts to the generally solid furniture design.
Good luck and have fun,
Andy

Swingman wrote:
"Robatoy" wrote in message
This is a bit of a blend between Arts & Crafts and Mission...the table
came out more looking like Metro.

"Very Prarie" ... to coin a new term.

Vince Gill played in a band with a name something like that, now the
song 'Amy' is stuck in my head for ther rest of the day.


I stole the design components from all over the place. So here is my
question:
Do the table and chairs look compatible?

Absolutely.

I was thinking cherry, any other suggestions?

That would be startling.

Not a criticism, but do you have enough overhang on the ends of the trestle,

Good point. I'd have to make sure there's enough room for feet at the
end seating arrangement.

and do you really want the side chairs to have arms, or was that just a
convenience in rendering the model?

I plan on only one chair with arms. I modelled it first and got lazy
and copied it for the other positions.


(I also made sure that it was reasonably easy to fabricate)

Perhaps a bit too easy? ... hard to tell, but the back legs of the chairs
appear to angle toward the front legs at the same chair back angle? If so,
and with that tall back, you may find them to be a bit too easy to tip
backwards.

Maybe a perspective thing. Pure side views show them parallel.
I plan to introduce a very slight curve to front of the back/legs, but
just to the front of the back/legs as I want to keep the straight look
as much as possible.

I really do like your design ... they'd look gorgeous with a leather 'slip'
seat. Well done!

Thank you, and yes, leather is the choice there (told you I was ripping
off ideas, this time FLW/Taliesin/Brophius)
Dropping the model onto a Liberty rug gave me a better understanding of
what I'm after. (Now I'll have to hunt one of those rugs down and add
it to the package....good thing she's worth it. Maybe something
Navaho-ish.)


As always, thanks for the positive input.

r

Stephen M wrote:
Do the table and chairs look compatible?

Yes, I do.

I was thinking cherry, any other suggestions?


Absoluetly.


Nice rendering!

Thank you.


FWIW, these are the changes that my eye wants:

1. Six rungs under the table, the five seems a little sparce next to the
chair. Either group them closer, add a rung or both.

That's one of the beauties of modelling. I tried many configurations
and with the base
beneath the table end, the heftier look works better for me. This thing
will be large, I can't get too 'spindly' with this.

2. Reproduce the arch design element in the table in the lower rail of the
table end.


That I will give a try.


3. I don't care for the base beneath the table end. I would just loose that
component.

I really like the look of it. Saw one somewhat like it, and taking it
in and out of the model, I now feel it needs to be there.
This will be a workhorse. My kid will do her crafts and stuff on it, I
doubt it will ever be used as a formal dining room.... it really isn't
formal at all.

4. I would have to put a taper on the last 4 inches of all the legs (table
and at least the forepaws of the chairs). Only because I find mission too
damn square .... an arc and a few tapers and I feel much better.


Only a little bit of taper. I'll try that too.

I appreciate the input.

r

Andy wrote:
Do the table and chairs look compatible?

I think so!

I was thinking cherry, any other suggestions?

Cherry would look great - you weren't going to stain it, were you?

Bite your tongue!

Also, I like a lot of Steve's ideas, and had some of the same thoughts:
Something
like this
http://www.ci.state.id.us/images/Fur...StyleTable.jpg
(http://tinyurl.com/ygtcl5), but maybe without the spindles down the
middle. (Who knew that inmates made custom mission style furniture?)

That is a nice table, I really like the design, I am trying for
something 'heftier'-looking.

[snip]

....about the table bases:

That was my first thought when I looked at your picture - is there
another piece you were emulating with that element? It seems like it
would facilitate toe-stubbing.

I am still trying to figure out why I like it as much as I do. Funny
thing about stubbing toes.. it has an automated teaching device built
in. It really isn't that intrusive, I don't think. I know I have seen
it before, I just can't recall where.... but I liked it.

4. I would have to put a taper on the last 4 inches of all the legs (table
and at least the forepaws of the chairs).

Sure - that's a good classic mission style design element, and it's
fairly easy to do. Gives you a good selection of doorstops. Just
don't make the angle too sharp! I like the slightly lighter look it
imparts to the generally solid furniture design.

I will play with tapers, but it might take me away from what I'm trying
to do. We'll see.

....keep them cards and letters coming, because I am on a thieving
mission, and will steal any and all ideas.

r

"Robatoy" wrote in message

Vince Gill played in a band with a name something like that, now the
song 'Amy' is stuck in my head for ther rest of the day.

Pure Prarie League ...

Maybe a perspective thing. Pure side views show them parallel.

My mistake ... the other photo links hadn't come across when I posted that
and I saw later that was the case. Besides, I figured/knew you were smarter
than that.

As always, thanks for the positive input.

You bet ... you're doing it right with all the 3D modeling. I'm stuck in 2D,
but even with a good deal of practice visualizing house plans and shop
drawings down through the years, I'm still learning what works and what
doesn't from a flat space.

I really need to spend the time to pick up on 3D.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 1/06/07

Sun, Jan 14, 2007, 6:13pm (EST-3): (Robatoy) doth
query:
snip Do the table and chairs look compatible?
I was thinking cherry, any other suggestions? snip

My first thought for a wedding present would have been something
along the lines of a cedar chest - but I like chests and that's just me.

Well, I'd have said something more along the lines of a trestle
table, but I'd say they're pretty well compatible. Sure look a lot
better than a lot of the stuff out there with huge prices asked. So
yes, I think they look good. EXCEPT for that chair on the table. I
expect it's the lighting or something, but it looks like it'd been
buried for quite awhile, then dug up.

I think cherry would be good, I like cherry. On the other hand, I
think those chairs and the table should look good with about any wood,
except knotty pine - depending on how it's finished, of course - I don't
think I'd cae for maple much, if it was left light for example; but
nothing real dark either. Actually, I'd say the table top is just
about right.



JOAT
I do not have the huge amount of faith needed to be an Atheist.

Sun, Jan 14, 2007, 6:13pm (EST-3) (Robatoy) doth
query:
snip any other suggestions? snip

On the way to town I thought about the response I gave before, and
the one I "should" have given. So I retract my previous response.

What you think doesn't mean Jack. What I think doesn't mean Jack.
Or, anyone else. Anyone except the bride, that is. Find out what "she"
thinks, go from there.



JOAT
I do not have the huge amount of faith needed to be an Atheist.

On 14 Jan 2007 20:30:07 -0800, "Robatoy" wrote:


Mark & Juanita wrote:


Sorry for the second follow-up, hit "send" too soon.

a) Cherry would look quite nice for this style.

I think so too.

b) Downloaded and brightened up the picture, I missed the curves on the
seat rails in my previous comment. As I mentioned in my previous post,
it's not necessarily bad, it just doesn't match with the straight lines on
the A&C style table. BTW, that is a very minor nit -- you did a really
nice design and rendering job on the overall design.

Why thank you, kind sir. I made a couple of adjustments and uploaded
them for your perusal.

http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o...Lowangle-1.jpg

http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o...oy/Chairsq.jpg


You know, what might work is if you make a curve in the bottom rail
members of the table. that would allow you to keep the curves on the
chair and tie the designs together.

Just like conversations, one always thinks of something after walking
away.



+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

Mark & Juanita wrote:

[snipped for brevity]

You know, what might work is if you make a curve in the bottom rail
members of the table. that would allow you to keep the curves on the
chair and tie the designs together.

I liked that idea, so I got my tools and went to work:

http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o...oy/fixedit.jpg

Is that what you were thinking?

Just like conversations, one always thinks of something after walking
away.

Yup.

Thanks.

r

"Robatoy" wrote

Mark & Juanita wrote:

[snipped for brevity]

You know, what might work is if you make a curve in the bottom rail
members of the table. that would allow you to keep the curves on the
chair and tie the designs together.

I liked that idea, so I got my tools and went to work:

http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o...oy/fixedit.jpg

Is that what you were thinking?

I approve also. It is a subtle touch, but it goes together. It works.

What I wanna know robatoy, is how you build these tables and chairs SO
FAST?!?!

Lee Michaels wrote:
"Robatoy" wrote

Mark & Juanita wrote:

[snipped for brevity]

You know, what might work is if you make a curve in the bottom rail
members of the table. that would allow you to keep the curves on the
chair and tie the designs together.

I liked that idea, so I got my tools and went to work:

http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o...oy/fixedit.jpg

Is that what you were thinking?

I approve also. It is a subtle touch, but it goes together. It works.

What I wanna know robatoy, is how you build these tables and chairs SO
FAST?!?!

Did you see the teeth on that saw? That sucker cuts real quick!
(I was too lazy to add too much detail)
In terms of modelling, it helps if you do it often. After a while, the
metaphor between real construction and 'building' a model becomes quite
natural, assuming your software allows that way of thinking, and most
don't. I have 3D level AutoCAD certification from the local college and
thoroughly despise the program/software. There is nothing 'natural'
about it. I don't use it.
I use MiniCAD (now called Vectorworks) and Strata 3D. For proper, to
scale, dimensioned drawings, I use Vectorworks. All on a Mac, but all
that stuff runs on Billyware as well.
Yet, a neighbour of mine has been using AutoCAD since screens were
green, and finds it the most intuitive software there is.
a) he uses it every day.
b) he stays in shape.
c) poor guy doesn't know any better. NOMEX suit =ON

On Tue, 16 Jan 2007 09:56:55 -0500, "Lee Michaels"
wrote:

What I wanna know robatoy, is how you build these tables and chairs SO
FAST?!?!

A few brads to hold it while the glue renders.


-Leuf

"Robatoy" wrote in message

Did you see the teeth on that saw? That sucker cuts real quick!
(I was too lazy to add too much detail)
In terms of modelling, it helps if you do it often. After a while, the
metaphor between real construction and 'building' a model becomes quite
natural, assuming your software allows that way of thinking, and most
don't. I have 3D level AutoCAD certification from the local college and
thoroughly despise the program/software. There is nothing 'natural'
about it. I don't use it.
I use MiniCAD (now called Vectorworks) and Strata 3D. For proper, to
scale, dimensioned drawings, I use Vectorworks. All on a Mac, but all
that stuff runs on Billyware as well

I got jealous after looking after your "stuff" yesterday and, since it too
damn cold to go in the shop, I decided to try my hand at "Sketchup" ...
pretty cool concept, but the free one is certainly is not the one to design
furniture with AFAICT.

I do have a copy of DesignCAD 3D ... might reload it and see if it's any
better while it's too cold for this thin blooded coonass to work in the
shop. (.... and all you Canuckians can quit laughing about 32 F being "too
cold".)

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 1/06/07

Swingman wrote:
[snip]

I got jealous after looking after your "stuff" yesterday and, since it too
damn cold to go in the shop, I decided to try my hand at "Sketchup" ...
pretty cool concept, but the free one is certainly is not the one to design
furniture with AFAICT.

Sketchup is kinda cool, sorta not. Very limited to a basic
....errmm..sketch?

I do have a copy of DesignCAD 3D ... might reload it and see if it's any
better while it's too cold for this thin blooded coonass to work in the
shop. (.... and all you Canuckians can quit laughing about 32 F being "too
cold".)

I have seen some decent stuff done in both Turbo- and DesignCAD. But,
like any tool, make it work for you.
Three tools to look for: (sometimes called by different names) are Add,
Clip, and Multiple Extrude.
'Add' allows you to take two objects, join (or overlap) them to become
one new object: two rectangles become an l-shape.
'Clip' (sometimes called subtract) does the opposite: Take a rectangle
and overlap with another object and the result will be a rabbet, or
when using an overlapping circle, a core-box bit look-a-like.
Third, and very useful: Multiple Extrude. Take a square 3"x3" and a
square 1"x1" put them parallel to each other and 30" apart.
Multiple Extrude will create a tapered object, like a table leg. Those
are the three tools I used for the table and chair frames. The seat
cushion is a bit more complex.

How to carve a virtual bust of Mozart:
Take a big virtual block of wood.
With the Clip tool, remove everything that doesn't look like Mozart.
(Yup, there is such a thing as CAD humour.... such as it is.)

r

I liked that idea, so I got my tools and went to work:

http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o...oy/fixedit.jpg

I like the curve there. I wonder if there'd be some way to integrate a
curve into the base? If you like the base, go for it (assuming the
bride approves - great advice JOAT!)
One other thing - I don't know if it'd be a real concern or not, but
are you going to do some sort of lower side or front rails on the
chairs? They'll probably be skidded around a lot in their lifetime,
including with the weight of a person on them. Seems like a little
extra support would add a lot of strength. A front rail would also
supply a place to rest one's feet.
Again, I haven't tried this both ways (only chair I've built is a
rocker); just wondering aloud.
Looks nice,
Andy (who doesn't have a clue about 3D renderings - I do most of my 2D
"renderings" in a program called "Pencil & Graph Paper 2.0", but I
occasionally use "Pen & Scrap Paper 1.1" when I don't have access to
all my home design tools).

Andy wrote:

I like the curve there. I wonder if there'd be some way to integrate a
curve into the base? If you like the base, go for it (assuming the
bride approves - great advice JOAT!)
..
That was good advice from JOAT, ultimately, it is the couple who has to
live with it.

Inside information has it that they would also like a couple of stacks
of barristers' bookcases.
They're both serious bookworms.

Either project is going to gobble up some serious materials.
Lemmeseehere....MultiRouter..check.
Pile of fabulous cherry...check... $5k?

On Tue, 16 Jan 2007 10:13:40 -0600, "Swingman" wrote:

I got jealous after looking after your "stuff" yesterday and, since it too
damn cold to go in the shop, I decided to try my hand at "Sketchup" ...
pretty cool concept, but the free one is certainly is not the one to design
furniture with AFAICT.

It works for me, though if you have a lot of curves you've got
problems. I find it especially useful just for playing with
dimensions to see how it's going to look and I can fill in the details
myself. For example:

For a chest for a client I started out with these two sketches to show
possibilities:

http://krtwood.com/chest1.jpg
http://krtwood.com/chest2.jpg

And after deciding on the frame and panel that got refined to this:

http://krtwood.com/chest3.jpg

And the result:

http://krtwood.com/chest7.jpg



-Leuf

"Leuf" wrote in message

On Tue, 16 Jan 2007 10:13:40 -0600, "Swingman" wrote:

I got jealous after looking after your "stuff" yesterday and, since it
too
damn cold to go in the shop, I decided to try my hand at "Sketchup" ...
pretty cool concept, but the free one is certainly is not the one to
design
furniture with AFAICT.

It works for me, though if you have a lot of curves you've got
problems. I find it especially useful just for playing with
dimensions to see how it's going to look and I can fill in the details
myself. For example:

For a chest for a client I started out with these two sketches to show
possibilities:

http://krtwood.com/chest1.jpg
http://krtwood.com/chest2.jpg

And after deciding on the frame and panel that got refined to this:

http://krtwood.com/chest3.jpg

How'd you do that??

Did you do this with the free version?




And the result:

http://krtwood.com/chest7.jpg

Absolutely gorgeous, on both counts!!

You're miles ahead of me, but then I just downloaded it yesterday and went
through the four downloadable "tutorials" ... maybe I better have another
look, eh?

Thanks for the inspiration!

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 1/06/07

On Tue, 16 Jan 2007 18:46:59 -0600, "Swingman" wrote:


"Leuf" wrote in message

On Tue, 16 Jan 2007 10:13:40 -0600, "Swingman" wrote:

I got jealous after looking after your "stuff" yesterday and, since it
too
damn cold to go in the shop, I decided to try my hand at "Sketchup" ...
pretty cool concept, but the free one is certainly is not the one to
design
furniture with AFAICT.

It works for me, though if you have a lot of curves you've got
problems. I find it especially useful just for playing with
dimensions to see how it's going to look and I can fill in the details
myself. For example:

For a chest for a client I started out with these two sketches to show
possibilities:

http://krtwood.com/chest1.jpg
http://krtwood.com/chest2.jpg

And after deciding on the frame and panel that got refined to this:

http://krtwood.com/chest3.jpg

How'd you do that??

Did you do this with the free version?

Yes. Basically, draw a rectangle that's the footprint of the piece.
Pull it up to the height. Draw your rails and styles on the faces.
Push the panels in. Easy. The edge profile on the top is the tricky
part, but I don't usually even bother with details like that.

One thing that definitely helps is to change the format of the units
from architectural to fractional, so that all your dimensions are in
inches rather than feet and inches. It's buried in a menu,
Window-Model Info.

And the result:

http://krtwood.com/chest7.jpg

Absolutely gorgeous, on both counts!!

Thanks! Client has a whole maple/cherry bedroom set that I was
matching. Working on a small dresser for her now too, so I guess she
liked it.

You're miles ahead of me, but then I just downloaded it yesterday and went
through the four downloadable "tutorials" ... maybe I better have another
look, eh?

There's a lot where it seems like I'm banging my head against the wall
trying to get an arc or something. But sticking with mainly
rectangular shapes it works real well, real fast. Well suited for
mission type stuff I think.


-Leuf

Leuf wrote:

And the result:

http://krtwood.com/chest7.jpg


Fabulous!

The knowledge how a piece gets made and how it goes together in RT
really helps the model construction.

For a look and feel about the proportions of a project, a high-end
rendering engine isn't really required.

Leuf wrote:


There's a lot where it seems like I'm banging my head against the wall
trying to get an arc or something.

Arcs aren't a problem in Strata. Here are some examples of Strata's
capabilities.
This guy (Leif Buckley) is good.

http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o290/Robatoy/SG.jpg

http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o...atoy/razor.jpg

http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o...batoy/taps.jpg

Swingman wrote:
"Robatoy" wrote in message

Did you see the teeth on that saw? That sucker cuts real quick!
(I was too lazy to add too much detail)
In terms of modelling, it helps if you do it often. After a while, the
metaphor between real construction and 'building' a model becomes quite
natural, assuming your software allows that way of thinking, and most
don't. I have 3D level AutoCAD certification from the local college and
thoroughly despise the program/software. There is nothing 'natural'
about it. I don't use it.
I use MiniCAD (now called Vectorworks) and Strata 3D. For proper, to
scale, dimensioned drawings, I use Vectorworks. All on a Mac, but all
that stuff runs on Billyware as well

I got jealous after looking after your "stuff" yesterday and, since it too
damn cold to go in the shop, I decided to try my hand at "Sketchup" ...
pretty cool concept, but the free one is certainly is not the one to design
furniture with AFAICT.

I do have a copy of DesignCAD 3D ... might reload it and see if it's any
better while it's too cold for this thin blooded coonass to work in the
shop. (.... and all you Canuckians can quit laughing about 32 F being "too
cold".)


I live in the second coldest national capital of the world. Ottawa. This
has been the mildest winter in my memory, and I've logged more shop time
than I thought possible. My shop is a tin shed on a ply floor that's
heated with kerosene.

On truly bitterly cold days like today, I just bail out and read Usenet.
Tonight is supposed to hit - 13F or -25 C. My cutoff is around 5 F or
-15 C. Any colder than that outside and the temperature in the shop hits
the "stupid time" temp. I'm too cold to think properly and I end up
trying to use my scary sharp chisels on the tips of my fingers.

Someone in another post ( I think it was charlieb) used the count to ten
rule. If you had 10 digits going in, and have 10 digits coming out of
the shop, you've been successful. I try the 21 rule. God help me if I
ever come out of that shop and only count to 20.

Tanus

--
This is not really a sig.

On 15 Jan 2007 22:06:15 -0800, "Robatoy" wrote:


Mark & Juanita wrote:

[snipped for brevity]

You know, what might work is if you make a curve in the bottom rail
members of the table. that would allow you to keep the curves on the
chair and tie the designs together.

I liked that idea, so I got my tools and went to work:

http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o...oy/fixedit.jpg

Is that what you were thinking?

Yeah, that seems to tie things together pretty well.

You know you didn't need to hurry with that, I'd have waited for you to
put the tools away before posting. ;-)




+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+