Thread: Critique pictures. Read 1st post

Foot rings are a b&^$@# aren't they? In pottery you pay more for a piece with a foot ring 'cause someone spent time on it. I like foot rings.

I think your footring just needs definition. It looks like you tried to make it flow into the form of the bowl but its not quite right. Which I guess is your instinct too. The laminations go "over the line" which makes it all seem a bit haphazard. Maybe there could be some sort of relationship between the foot ring and the stripes. (I'll go away now and try and do a thumbnail sketch to post.)

OK. Here it is. At least you'll get a good laugh from my drawing with a mouse skill. My thoughts are that the footring should meet up with either the inside or outside line of the stripe. I tried to show with squiggles what I meant. Prolly only ended up with giggles though.

I was about to say but then.... well.

I kinda know what she is getting at but I'm kinda scared to admit that.

It does need a more defined foot.

Tea Lady
Thanks
I think I have a vague idea what you mean. unfortunately your post was a tad small for me to work out the writing and maybe all the squiggles.
I'll reverse it on the weekend and see what I end up with, knowing my luck a funnel
thanks Cliff as well

Sorry the pic came out so small. Was having trouble with the file size for some reason. Lets try that again.



Does that make more sense?

Foot rings add extra finesse to a bowl, and encourage it to lie flat on the table, so time is well spent IMHO.

The relationship to the stripes is a distraction, though, as tea lady notes. It's a bit late to align with the outside of the stripes without risking creation of a donut, and inside would offer a better bottom diameter ratio anyway (closer to one-third).

I'd also consider adding a tiny step at the outside bottom of the revised foot ring: About 1mm high x 2-3mm wide. This can elevate the bowl so it appears to be floating in air. The entire bottom will have to be re-worked to preserve the foot ring, but I'd duplicate the additional concentric grooves, if there's still enough bottom thickness, for the pizzazz effect.

Joe

tea lady

thanks for the bigger piccy. I get the drift

Joe

I tend to agree, this was a bit experimental and I wasn't sure it worked. or maybe I knew it didn't work and hoped someone would talk me out of it

I'll have another play with it and see what we get

thanks TL and JG

OK. Its so close to being great. And its certainly not bloody horrible. Just a bit of tweaking.

Finishing off the Musk bowl ... see post #141:

Whacked the vacuum chuck on the Stubby, placed the bowl against the foam and brought up the tailstock. I put a garden tap click fitting over the live centre to avoid damaging the foot. Hadn't left a centre in the foot to align it but first placing was spot on for round. (I've marked the foam facing of the chuck with concentric circles to help with initial placing).

Hooked the vac up to the inbuilt vac port, switched the vac on and removed the tailstock.

Took a first light shear scrape on the foot to remove the jaw marks and darn, the bowl spins off into the sawdust. $%$#@ ?!

Doh. Forgot to plug the plug the spindle at the handwheel end. The Stubby's vac port is a line from the headstock casting to the spindle hollow by means of various do-dads.

OK, bit of masking tape over the outboard end of the spindle; the 1 cm rubber bung bought for the purpose has disappeared somewhere along the way.

Good, cooking with gas. All done. Only a couple of black rim marks from the off which cleaned up well with a bit of fine steel wool.

No matter how careful I am doing this kind of clean-up, the vertical section of the foot ends up with slight concavity. Looks OK here. IIRC Cliff mentioned aiming for something like this anyway.

Originally Posted by rsser

...No matter how careful I am doing this kind of clean-up, the vertical section of the foot ends up with slight concavity. Looks OK here. IIRC Cliff mentioned aiming for something like this anyway.

Is your camera busted?

I checked back, what I said was...

turn the dovetail edges off so the foot tapered toward the centre of the base.<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->

K, well, it's a concave taper, in the direction the base would be if it were 3" above where it is now ;-}

So it tapers up, not down?

... er, it's a slight cove shape, with the junction at the bowl narrower in diameter than the base.

Make sense? (The macro function on the digicam no longer works so no pics).