Thread: A DUD Carving

Terry,
Its still a nice carving, but I think I know what you mean when it just doesn't feel right somewhere.
Every part is right when you look at it, but all together its makes the buzzer go off in your head.
And its one of those things you can't put your finger on either.

Guess thats how some people are with a painting.
You knock em out so quickly, there will be a team full.

And I'm sure Lillee didn't bowl in high heels (but its the right proportions and scale as well when looked at).

Peter

Terry,

From what I have read and the caricatures I have done I have always done the arms and legs separately where the grain direction dictates that I do so. In my opinion you would have to at least do one arm and possibly a leg anyway otherwisw the risk of breakage is always going to be there.

By adding an arm and a leg separately, by pinning and then gluing you make a very strong joint. Anyway, when Lillie played the Poms he always grew another arm and leg.

It is a shame when you get so far and you ( We are our hardest marker ) and you are dissapointed. I always like to salvage something if possible. That is why I sometimes decide against the finish you have put on.

If I have to paint or put a wash on then I do. If I can an I have a crumbly feature some where I think about putting some fill in there. It took me awhile to come to that because I thought it was cheating, but when some of the most talented Caricature guys do it I decided to lower my standards to improve my standards. ( does that make sense )

Besides, if I did not do this then I doubt I would ever finish a carving easpecially as I am still getting my act together here.

I expect many purists would be in horrow at what I have written, but if I did it their way I would have given up long ago. Now, I try for perfection every time I start out, but if I have to deviate from the plan or chuck the object , then I will try to see if I can salvage something.

Sometimes, it is not possible and it goes to the graveyard or in the fireplace.

Pete

What I know about cricket wouldn't half-fill a thimble. Interesting game, nonetheless.

Carvings: one piece or many? This standard seems derived from competitive carving shows where they set the rules. Those rules vary from one comp to another. It could be a means of filtering the competitors. Gluing a broken piece is mostly a no-no. I know a judge who has seen some very clever repairs.

My first carving lessons were from a "one-piece" guy. I can appreciate the challenge. But the whole notion goes out the window, working in western red cedar. I use fillers where and when needed. I carve multiple parts as needed. I hope that you enjoy the result.

I don't know if this could be any help in analysing your work:



But the detail issue is easy ... go life-size!

No - you're right ... I can't help.
Paul

Sorry - should have done this:

And ... speaking as a non-sculptor or artist of anything other than bs ... I like the head. And the grain.

I reckon it looks great Terry 'cause I can see what your getting at and I think any cricketer would too even Dennis. Here's a couple to ponder over too:
Attachment 218222Attachment 218223

Paul, I downloaded both of those photo's to use as reference. The only thing I got close was one leg in the air.
Might go back to carving greenmen , they are more forgiving.
Regards

Gee Terry I don't think it's as bad as you think, especially now we see the photo used for inspiration, to me it looks like a very awkward pose you had to duplicate..

And if you don't get it right the first time, do it again and again and again
Not a half bad job I think. Go larger, give yourself a bit more wood to work with, if its too small and you make a tiny error you don't have anywhere to go.

Hi Terry,

I tend to agree with the others... I think its a bloody good effort mate. Ok.. its not quite what you were after but its a big learning curve to take on something this complicated.

First, you are after true-to-life, not caraciture which leaves you far less 'wiggle room'.

Secondly, your scale is fairly small. (I don't know exactly how big this thing is but it has the look of something less than a foot tall.) This means that you are really pushing things to get realistic fine detail into the face. Its not imposible, but its harder than if it was a bit larger.

Having said that, I'm going out on a limb here and offering you what I think is wrong. Feel free to disagree with me. Its not meant to be negative... I'm just trying to help. Take what you want and throw the rest back.

Studying the photo, I think part of the trouble with it is in the hands. The one holding the ball is turned about 90 degrees from what I would have though a natural angle. Secondly it has no clear opposable thumb. Both these things make the whole arm look awkward. The other arm is not as bad, but the hand is 'clumpish', again with no clearly defined thumb, which throws the visual balance of the arm out.

On the left leg, the thigh (area from knee to hip) is too long for the rest of the leg. Its subtle, but again, it throws the whole balance out. That part of the leg is also a bit too uniform in diameter rather than tapering from hip to knee. And then there's the shoe...

I can't really see the face in the photos so the following is just a general comment. Take it or leaving it as applicable. If the face is crumbling on you it may be partly the sharpness of your tools, but it may also have something to do with the the wood itself. I've never used white beech myself (is it really a beech or just a local name for something else?), so I can't speak with any authority here, but generally, the softer the wood the less fine detail it tends to hold. You may need to look at a harder wood.

Personally, I don't think attaching limbs is a problem, but even if you carve most of the limb separately, I'd suggest not carving the area of attachment on either limb or trunk, until the limb is attached and dry. Then carve the joint area as though it were one piece of wood. This will help disguise the joint and give flow to the area.

I hope the above is taken in the spirit in which it is offered. Again, please take only what you think is valid and chuck the rest out. My hat's off to you for being willing to post it, even when you aren't happy with it. Its this sort of thing that helps people learn, better than posting 'perfection' I reckon. Good on yer! Don't go back to your comfort zone just because of one set back!

The right hand does look a bit left handed, and the he does seem to have a front bum which makes it a bit back to front.

But the easy solution is to call it "Max Walker" and it's pretty good.

Thanks guys for your repleis and Whittling for your most constructive comments.
I think to improve as a carver a person needs to post the duds as well as what you are happy with.
I,myself, feel that I need the advice, opinion and constructive comments of my peers to hopefully improve my carving. This is much better than a "show and tell" and gee thats nice comment.
I appreciate your comments on the finer points but I think the one I have taken most on board is the size of the carving.
Thanks guys.

Hi Terry,
I am no where near a peer but may I make another suggestion? I will anyway Following on from Whittling's comments about the left leg, I think that is where the biggest jarring feature is. Since it is a stick-on, couldn't you try it again taking on Whittlings advice, but in addition, I think there is something else that has been missed about that leg in the photo of Dennis. The hips are about 3/4 to the camera and the thigh is foreshortened quite a bit so I think you should face the carved leg a little more forward from the hips rather than so sideways if that makes sense?

Cheers
Michael

Hey Terry,

Its a carving done with care and love and that makes the basic mistakes of small concern. The guy looks like he is trying to hold up a wall rather than in a rolling action where all momentum is focussed to a single forward point. Think ocean wave. Details are unimportant especially as one gets older and eyes just won't do it anymore (speaking from my own experience). Primarily you seem to be attempting an iconic piece rather than a study of action so it shouldn't matter, but that's not how it works. The most succesful iconic images, although they look very simply conceived are actually very well studied first. Going off the photo of DL I would start with a basic observation of lines of force in the figure This would be helpful in getting the feel of the overall action, proportions and angles (especially pelvis and shoulders). An art teacher I had back in the 70's who was in her nineties then had a fantastic traditional knowledge of drawing and sculpture. She said that those lies of force are actually there , though invisible to the eye, and that they are infinite in number but that one needed usually to only draw a few of them in the imagination or with a pencil in order to get the feeling of the movement. Its amazing how much it helps.



Arthur Boyd painted images that people regard sometimes as childish but when you see them in the light of depicting an action they are very well executed. look at the way this guy puts his whole shoulder into the bull and how well planted his feet are in the earth, which is absorbing all the might of the bull through the man's stance - not a fraction of displaced force anywhere!

http://www.knox.nsw.edu.au/images/arthur-boyd4-page.jpg