Thread: Anyone else into decoys

Hi, Arron!
I'm not in to decoys, but here's a site run by a guy I know that has a lot of info, plus sales listings, etc.

www.decoysales.com - www.decoysales.com

Claude

Hi Arron,
Thats some fine work you have there. Did you do it?
Im not into carving decoys but know someone who has carved many song birds and predator birds. Every now and again he does wild fowl.
This is a wood duck that's been carved and painted. One thing this carver had the biggest problem with and that was painting.
If YOU carved and painted those shore birds, then you're doing really good. I personally prefer seeing some of the wood showing through but that generally is harder to do. Many carvers use wood burning to do the feathers and other details so this of course will show through which is why many use a sealer / primer . ( see pic ) KT Super Sealer. From my understanding they dilute this down to their preference and it not only seals the wood but adds a consistent base so colours will show better. This wood duck is a prime example. While it's very dusty at the moment you can see all the detail that's been added with the wood burner.

If, however, you want the wood grain to show through then I don't recommend this. In fact, using this will ruin that clean finish you are looking for. For that tinted translucent colour many people use either diluted tints in oils or watercolours. With water colours the grain is lifted so something to seriously take into consideration.

Unfortunately a wing tip got broken of of this beautiful carving. image.jpg
image.jpg

image.jpg

No, unfortunately they are not my decoys. They are the work of the late Elmer Crowell - regarded as the master in the field. In fact the Canada goose is the actual $1.3million bird. His most desirable works date from about 1920. The other bird sold for a bargain-basement $35,000.

You're right about the painting. Looking at the site ClaudeF showed us indicates most people can carve a bird pretty well but people who can paint well are very rare.

There is lots of different ways you can go with decoys. The original hunting decoys were pretty rough and ready and some people like to mimic that style. A peg for legs and nails for beaks were all you needed to fool the birds. Shorebird hunting was banned in the US in 1928, so the focus went onto the decorative side. The extreme is the super-naturalistic style - little air-brushed wonders with perfect paint jobs, glass eyes and moulded legs and beaks. I guess I like something in between.

To the best of my knowledge, shorebird (eg waders like curlews and godwits) hunting was never a thing in Australia. Most states have banned water bird (duck, goose,swan) hunting, and I expect the remaining states will follow fairly soon. I've never seen an original handmade decoy actually made in Australia, although I guess they must have existed at some time. In that sense decoys as art is an American thing only. In fact I've read that it's one of only three art forms originating in North America (the others are jazz and scrimshaw).


In the interests of further promotion here is my Pinterest board on decoys, showing some of the good stuff. https://au.pinterest.com/adavies0454...a19885067e1ef6

Cheers
Arron

not exactly into decoys but often carve wild fowl heads for hiking poles

p&j hiking (56).jpgp&j hiking (51) - Copy.jpgprint 2 017.jpg

Here's where I'm at so far. Here's a shot of a small flock of waders in my home. 5 marsh sandpipers and 2 bar-tailed godwits (at back). The painting is unfinished, I'm learning as I go but its a long haul for someone with no artistic background. I next need to learn to do the subtle markings on the bellies. With no guidance available locally its just a matter of try, paint over, repeat.

Also, the eyes are missing as the glass ones don't seem to be available locally - so I'll have to come up with a substitute.

This is the style I like. Dowells for legs, like the original decoys, which would have been simply pushed into the mud for a days shooting. I like a representational body (ie stylised, not naturalistic) but naturalistic painting - the bird on the far right is probably the best example.

cheers
Arron

Decoys.jpg

Arron. These are really nicely done and finished quite nicely from what I can see.
I'm not sure how long it took you to make all these but if you made them all since starting this thread; that's good.
Keep carving because it's very inspiring.
Thanks for showing us the pic.

No one mentioned this one, so here it is. Supposedly the pinnacle of bird carving.

World Championship The Ward Museum of Wildfowl Art ...

Claude

I once read that one technique decoy carvers use to make the feathers subtle looking & soft is after carving them but before burning in the barbs they use a small abrasive point in a rotary cutter to shape & further smooth them .
I tried the technique & have used it a few times over the years for micro carvings that required a sanded finish , it did make for a really fine finish (much faster, finer, tighter & cleaner than would be possible with hand methods ) but great care had to be taken no to burnish & compress he wood grain in fact I'd raise the grain a couple of times as part of the process.
Maybe that soft woolly effect might have been desirable on a decoys feathers in places without the grain raising ?

Although I do totally understand Arrons decision not to go down that super detailed & doubling the time taken path ( & aesthetically too), when done well it is very impressive .

Originally Posted by Mike the knife

I once read that one technique decoy carvers use to make the feathers subtle looking & soft is after carving them but before burning in the barbs they use a small abrasive point in a rotary cutter to shape & further smooth them .
I tried the technique & have used it a few times over the years for micro carvings that required a sanded finish , it did make for a really fine finish (much faster, finer, tighter & cleaner than would be possible with hand methods ) but great care had to be taken no to burnish & compress he wood grain in fact I'd raise the grain a couple of times as part of the process.
Maybe that soft woolly effect might have been desirable on a decoys feathers in places without the grain raising ?

Although I do totally understand Arrons decision not to go down that super detailed & doubling the time taken path ( & aesthetically too), when done well it is very impressive .

Not my work but yes it can be done.
image.jpg image.jpg image.jpg

Interesting SW, it appears that the whole finished texture was completed with the rotary stones alone , missing out the burning of feathers - that would allow an unpainted finish.
Hmmmm...... I'll file that for later possible use .
Mike

Originally Posted by Mike the knife

Interesting SW, it appears that the whole finished texture was completed with the rotary stones alone , missing out the burning of feathers - that would allow an unpainted finish.
Hmmmm...... I'll file that for later possible use .
Mike

Basically yes, except instead of using a rotary stone on basswood, these little ceramic sticks are used instead. They can create more accurate , precise texturing. They are .091 inches long which is 3/32 "
This wood isn't basswood, it's Tupelo, and while it still gets fuzzy, it doesn't get nearly as fuzzy as basswood.
. Once finished texturing with these ceramic sticks you use this scotch brite pad and brush the fuzzies off going with the grain. If you have one of these, it can be quicker. After that a razortip burner is used to randomly addi feather splits.
image.jpg image.jpg image.jpg

Originally Posted by Mike the knife

Although I do totally understand Arrons decision not to go down that super detailed & doubling the time taken path ( & aesthetically too), when done well it is very impressive .

Yep, you are right, it is the aesthetics. The birds with feather texture look scaley to me - like little fish. They don't look natural to me, and if things cant be natural then I would rather they were clearly representational. Everyone will think differently about that.

I also don't like the fact that texturing needs a rotary tool. The thing about carving is I enjoy hand carving and hand painting, and would rather not destroy the contemplative moments with a machine tool.

Originally Posted by Spiritwolfe

Arron. These are really nicely done and finished quite nicely from what I can see.
I'm not sure how long it took you to make all these but if you made them all since starting this thread; that's good.

Well, yes, and more as well, but bear in mind that carving these is really quick. In fact it scarcely deserves to be called carving. Given a blank bandsawn from some nice soft jelutong, you can do the basic shape in a few minutes with a drawknife and a very large chisel. From there you can use a flatter gouge, but actually a coarse rasp or a sureform is just as good. Sanding is the long part but I only go to about 80 grit. After its sanded I carve some more detail around the head and tail, then 80 grit sand these parts again.

I could make them more refined but it kind of defeats the object - rat with a new gold tooth effect.

The painting is a different story. As I starting from zero base, its slowly, slowly up a very long learning curve.

cheers
Arron

I know it's an old thread but here are a couple of links for you.
Claude

www.worldofdecoys.com - World of Decoys

www.decoysales.com - www.decoysales.com