Thread: Attempted deception!

This piece started out purely as a hollowing exercise to give my BIL a shot at the Proforme. When I roughed down the outside it was only to get it to maximum diameter of timber - shape wasn't involved at all - obviously Hollowed to about 10mm or so wall thickness, it then bounced around the shed for over a year until I needed something to test my laser-gauge with the '' hollowing support. I then took the walls to 3 to 4mm to prove the laser system, still with out worrying about the shape. Had no intention of doing anything else with it until it started whispering at me "c'mon dude - ya reckon ya' can fix anything - fix me - gimme a makeover". So who am I to knock back a challenge.
What I wanted to do was take peoples attention away from the crappy shape. Considered cutting the top off and calling it a 'calabash' but in Orstraylyun that translates to 'crappy shape' anyway. Thought about bands and rim textures and so on but I figured they might actually make the shape look worse. Then I wondered if drawing attention directly to the problem area would help disguise it.

So I want to know.....
A. Do you agree the original shape was crappy?
B. Do you think the 'worms' worked?
C. Is the pyrography at the overlaps too much?
D. How would you have 'hidden' the shape?

Be brutal people - I can handle it (in my best septic accent!)

G'day TTIT

Love the shape after the event, love the design and love the intrigue. Don't like the pyrography, bit of an overkill methinks. Kid of detracts from the craftsmanship and skill, both of of which you far too much of.

Cheers
Shorty

Same here TTIT.I like it better without pyrography.I love the design.cheers Tony.

A: No.
B: Yes.
C: Yes.
D: Dashed if I know.

I think you could have stopped at the carving. Very cool either way, though.

Joe

Inclined to agree with Joe, the pyro is ok but the plane carving I think was better.

G'day Vern,
Yep, the shape is "crappy", but remember it was not pre-designed, but simply "grew". In my opinion, the carved holes are too circular. If they were more tear drop shape, ie more pointed towards the bottom, the profile may have been a bit more concealed. May still work if the circular bottom to the carvings be elongated towards the bottom of the bowl???
The fullness of the bottom would be better about one third of the total height and the narrowness of the neck, two thirds the height from the bottom. Just my opinion.
Still a good effort to achieve 3 -4 mm wall thickness.
Jim

Hey TTIT,

Nice work - it is a real art to asses how a project is going and adjust accordingly. Something we all aspire to really. I do like the carving over the form, but i think the pyrography makes the carving lines very heavy.

To hide the shape (which is not terrible btw) i would suggest having more carving around the base. I think the carving at the top made it look more bottom heavy. If the eye could follow the carvings up and down, the form behind it would become secondary and might maintain balance. In this case you would need to make some solid sketches around the base and see how it actually looks.

What do you think?

TTIT,
I reckon , scrap the pyro , and finish the carving at the top .
By that I mean , complete the Knotwork .
Return the threads back up and into the weave . Knotwork , and especially Celtic Knotwork , very rarely , if ever , has loose ends .
I like the shape and proportion as is , it has an earthenware beaker look about it

Starting with the worms area a bit thicker would have given it more natural/organic look, you'd have to work down the areas inbetween the worms too blend in the bottom half so the worms would stand out proud.

Thanks for the input everyone As soon as I started the pyrography I suspected I wasn't going to get the look I was after. Wanted that aged-look like really old carvings where all the nooks and crannies are dark and dirty. Any idea how you get that look in a hurry???????

Originally Posted by powderpost

....... In my opinion, the carved holes are too circular. If they were more tear drop shape, ie more pointed towards the bottom, the profile may have been a bit more concealed. May still work if the circular bottom to the carvings be elongated towards the bottom of the bowl???

Originally Posted by Robomanic

...... To hide the shape (which is not terrible btw) i would suggest having more carving around the base. I think the carving at the top made it look more bottom heavy................
What do you think?

I reckon you both might be onto something there - I've got it in my mitt right now and I'm thinking about extending the cut-outs downwards like negatives of the worms - could work!

Originally Posted by TTIT

Thanks for the input everyone As soon as I started the pyrography I suspected I wasn't going to get the look I was after. Wanted that aged-look like really old carvings where all the nooks and crannies are dark and dirty. Any idea how you get that look in a hurry???????

Shoot the "nooks & crannies" spots with black paint . Let the paint flash dry for about 15 minutes, then shoot over the black very lightly with brown paint, let dry for another 15 minutes, then follow with a very, very light dusting of off-white spray paint.
After the whole affair has dried, sand the high areas around the "nooks & crannies" ....this should give you the desired effect

I think without the pyrography it is not strong enough of an image, with the pyro too much.

I think what Ed Suggests will do what you had in mind. I would seal the whole piece with comething clear before painting so the paint doesn't bleed into the grain.

I like the loose tails

Overall I like it.

Paul

Don't sit it on a high shelf, it looks better when viewed from slightly above. (lower than eye height)

Originally Posted by Cliff Rogers

Don't sit it on a high shelf, it looks better when viewed from slightly above. (lower than eye height)

That would be on the floor for me. the name says it all

Cheers
Shorty