Thread: Proportional Designing.

All the things you mention will affect the final appearance of the piece.
A lot of people use the 'golden mean' ratio, where sides are proportioned to each other in the ratios 0.618 : 1 : 1.618. (0.618:1 = 1:1.618) This usually looks good, but it's not something you must do.
Making sides too thick is a common mistake. Usually, things look better if the material is thinner (but sometimes thick sides can be an interesting feature). Generally, so many things are made 19mm thick that it starts to look boring.
Curves, angles etc. will affect the proportion, but you'll really have to suck it & see. Likewise, the timber you choose - it's really a matter of seeing how they all look together. Usually, darker timbers look heavier.
Why not try making a maquette out of cardboard, ply, or styrofoam to see how it looks?

And keep us informed with pics.

Originally Posted by AlexS

All the things you mention will affect the final appearance of the piece.
A lot of people use the 'golden mean' ratio, where sides are proportioned to each other in the ratios 0.618 : 1 : 1.618. (0.618:1 = 1:1.618) This usually looks good, but it's not something you must do.

To understand this; If my width is 1 meter the depth must be 1.618 meters. If my depth is 1.618 my height must be 1 meter? Or any fraction of the ratios?
On the right track?

Making sides too thick is a common mistake. Usually, things look better if the material is thinner (but sometimes thick sides can be an interesting feature). Generally, so many things are made 19mm thick that it starts to look boring.

Yes, I feel the same way. However on this cabinet the sides will be covered with a thick molding disguising/hiding any thick pieces.

Why not try making a maquette out of cardboard, ply, or styrofoam to see how it looks?

Sounds like a plan, I really want this cabinet to be something special, it would be wise of me to make a mock up, out of radiata pine even to really fine tune the design.

Here's just a five minute sketch up of what I would like the final piece to look like, very very rough.

Originally Posted by Wooden Mechanic

To understand this; If my width is 1 meter the depth must be 1.618 meters. If my depth is 1.618 my height must be 1 meter? Or any fraction of the ratios?

If adhering to the Golden Mean in three dimensions, then the width would be 1.6 times the depth and the height would be 1.6 times the width. However, that may leave dead space around your piece of pottery.

As AlexS suggested, a maquette always wins the day. Proportion is everything. I would begin with an A4 sheet of paper and cut a window in it. Hold it some distance from the piece of pottery and see how the window frames it. Adjust as necessary and then scale it up.

If the piece of pottery is smaller than a couple of feet tall, I would be inclined to scale the jpoinery down proportionately.

Although the Golden Mean is often proposed as a solution, it really is not necessary or even desirable to work with it. Classical architecture and most furniture that 'looks right' resolves itself into two elements:

1. squares
2. circles of the same diameter as the sides of the squares

Larger parts are often either:
1. Full multiples of the squares (including rectangles that are composed entirely of the basic square size) and
2. Curves that are based on circles whose diameter is a full multiple of the sides of the basic square.

For some useful discussion of this see George Wlaker's blog, Design Matters which will give you some really good insights into this.

Whilst your design there looks ok, I am thinking that something of a more oriental look may be more suited to the piece. (I'm reading between the lines here and assuming the piece is Korean in origin.)

So, whilst the design you have would look good housing a piece from Royal Doulton, I think you could probably come up with something that reflects the origins and heritage of the piece in question.

Originally Posted by Wooden Mechanic

To understand this; If my width is 1 meter the depth must be 1.618 meters. If my depth is 1.618 my height must be 1 meter? Or any fraction of the ratios?
On the right track?

That's the way it works, but it could just as easily be 1.618 high x 1.000 deep x .618 wide.
Also, you could have the legs 1.0 and the cabinet 0.618. But don't get too hung up on it. It's a tool. Using those proportions usually won't give an offensive design, but it may be unexciting or unsuitable for the contents. Read some good material on design (I'm off to have a look at JMK's link), and try a mask as WW suggests. Have a look at other designs, and think about why you like some and dislike others. This will help you work out what you want to incorporate in your own designs.

Thanks to everyone for their help, I have a better idea now on getting the dimensions right and in proportion to each other.

Will keep you all posted on the progress and designs.

Thanks,
Harlan

1. Use the word "must" with discretion. No such thing in this game.

2. Search the forum, and/or Google, for "fibonacci gauge."

Cheers,
Joe