Thread: Critique pictures. Read 1st post

I will leave the finer shape things to more experienced than me but one thing that i have been told that shows between hand made and mass produced is the defining of the edges and corners.

What i mean is on the side view the corners are rounded - maybe from sanding - it is best to sand too the corners from both sides not around them (if you can understand what i mean)

The third photo to me the top half inch and the bottom half inch - straight bit) would look better if parralell or the curve went to the corner. It just looks a bit not quite there sort of.

Something to help others crit

What did you sand too?
What finish?

Hope that helps, nice looking character in the wood.

Cheers

Interesting bit of wood. Nice work

As for form, my 2c worth would be to have tapered to a narrower foot.

Is it really oval, or is it a trick of the camea? My 2c is that the inside and outside shape should follow each other so that the thickness is consistant all the way. In the pics it looks like the inside curve of the side is one smooth line but outside is an s-curve. Is this a shape you are playing with in a lot of your work?

Would agree with alm about the definition of the corners and transitions. Don't round the corners too much. Just enough not to injure.

Very interesting wood. I like the worm holes. Keep playing with the shape. It will refine itself with each one.

Originally Posted by tea lady

Is it really oval, or is it a trick of the camea?

I agree it's not oval, I doubt its the camera but more like the picture has been stretched in one dimension somewhere along the processing line.

Most rulers like that are 1" or 25mm wide.
If you look at the attached picture I have copied and pasted and rotated a 25 mm vertical section of the ruler by 90º. The ruler only measures 20 mm wide. This suggests the picture has been stretched in one direction by 20%. I did the same with a radial cross section of the bowl. The bowl is indeed 20% out of round.

Nice bit of forensic graphics Bob ;-}

Agree with TL that the inside and outside lines should follow each other, except for the foot if you have one, and except for the rim obviously.

Thank you for the comments.
No need to worry about being the Pink Panther and investigate ,
The bowls are both very round , and the inside profile follows the outside profile.
No tricks or ruses,the bloody camera definately tells different stories.Just a very simple bowl.I am still very green at this turning caper.
Wish I could get some more of this very ..very ..old mangrove.
Cheers.
steve

tea lady and other commentators
I've finally got around to trying to redefine the base, see post 166 et al
What is the consensus now?
please ignore the dings, it manage to flip off the lathe a couple of times and the concrete floor of the shed is a tad unforgiving

Originally Posted by stevew

I have been given some mangrove that was underwater for who knows how long,was left to dry for about 20 years.An old friend (80yrs old) had it under his bench and gave it to me.I have not had a lot of experience at end grain bowls at all.Have not had much experience at all really ,I got my lathe for Xmas 2007 and have been pottering about trying to teach myself and getting tips and hints from this forum.
The first one I turned to be like a small bollard to keep the nautical type theme,as you can see they have lots of character as they are riddled with toledo worm holes.
Please be critical as to shapes etc as I have a lot to learn and you only learn by mistakes and someone wiser correcting your errors.Hope the quality of the photos come out as I have trouble with the reduction in size.
Cheers.
Steve

Steve nice effort. Like the colour and grain. not sure can comment on the form or shape given the b@#$# camera's effort

Was wondering, what's the consensus with worm holes etc. leave as is or fill with something, coffeed epoxy maybe?

Just came across this piece on w/t design:

http://www.woodturner.org/resources/tompkins_design.pdf

Originally Posted by Sawdust Maker

...What is the consensus now?....

Much better.

Now.... the rings...
The finish/sanding/burnishing/polishing whatever it was, something left concentric rings from the dark timber across the pale timber.

Do you know what caused it so you can avoid it next time?

Originally Posted by Cliff Rogers

Much better.

Now.... the rings...
The finish/sanding/burnishing/polishing whatever it was, something left concentric rings from the dark timber across the pale timber.

Do you know what caused it so you can avoid it next time?

I thought that was just the grain. Seems to be very lined up with the direction of rotation, but not quite.

Originally Posted by rsser

Just came across this piece on w/t design:

http://www.woodturner.org/resources/tompkins_design.pdf

Interesting article, I wonder if that is all the best bits out of the book or if the book is worth getting.

Has anybody got it or seen it?


Oops, looks like it isn't a book, well, not that I can find on the internet.... this seems to be course notes.

Originally Posted by Cliff Rogers

Much better.

Now.... the rings...
The finish/sanding/burnishing/polishing whatever it was, something left concentric rings from the dark timber across the pale timber.

Do you know what caused it so you can avoid it next time?

That's just a fluke of the grain in the lighter timber.
one thing I've noticed (as did SWMBO) is that the lighter timber is, or appears, darker then it originally was

thanks for the comments

Originally Posted by rsser

Just came across this piece on w/t design:

http://www.woodturner.org/resources/tompkins_design.pdf

Ern
thanks
every bit helps.