Thread: What are the "right" proportions for a goblet?

G`day maybe I have been slightly missunderstood I do turn pieces that are entered in competition so I am also trying to impress judges aswell maybe what I am trying to say is a good piece will closely fit the golden mean a bad one will not. Is that what you are after.
Mick

Impress judges???? Ferchissakes the last ime I tried to do that I got 5 years just fer bein uglier than the woman what was the foreman of the bleedin' jury!

Originally Posted by Christopha

Impress judges???? Ferchissakes the last ime I tried to do that I got 5 years just fer bein uglier than the woman what was the foreman of the bleedin' jury!

now that's bloody funny

Originally Posted by mick61

G`day maybe I have been slightly missunderstood I do turn pieces that are entered in competition so I am also trying to impress judges aswell maybe what I am trying to say is a good piece will closely fit the golden mean a bad one will not. Is that what you are after.
Mick

Bingo! Thank you! Now, if somebody jumps up saying that the golden mean is totally wrong, we will have a lively discussion. If nobody does, we can all go back and try it for ourselves, if we have not done it before, to see how we like it and form our own opinion. Isn't this what a forum is for?

score so far: golden mean 2 - others 0. It's getting interesting!

Ok, when I waspart of the panel judging the National Woodturning Comp with other better qualified gentlemen a few years ago goblets didn't get a gong..... BIG didn't get a gong.... Tiny wasn't in it either... timber selection got a small mention..... turning SKILL was the prmary criteria combined with many other contributing factors led to our unanimous choice of the winning piece. Goblets? Don't remember any...

Originally Posted by Frank&Earnest

It has happened in many other threads where there has been an attempt to get a reasonable discussion of aesthetic values.

A lot of people feel compelled to say basically the same thing: "I do not care about them because I have only to please myself/my loved ones"

Part of the problem here is that there're just as many variations of form for a goblet as there are for a bowl. For every type of bowl, there's an equivalent type of goblet. Winged, hollow-form, double-ended, involute, segmented, whatever. Basically, the aesthetics that apply to one also apply to t'other. So any discussion of aesthetics for goblets is likely to go down the exact same path as the same discussion re bowls.

(Anyway... I thought your initial questions was "why turn goblets?" )

Originally Posted by Christopha

Ok, when I waspart of the panel judging the National Woodturning Comp with other better qualified gentlemen a few years ago goblets didn't get a gong..... BIG didn't get a gong.... Tiny wasn't in it either... timber selection got a small mention..... turning SKILL was the prmary criteria combined with many other contributing factors led to our unanimous choice of the winning piece. Goblets? Don't remember any...

Yeah, thats fine - Skew also said the same thing - but that is to be expected, isn't it: in a Woodturning Competition what matters is turning skill, what else? Is there maybe a suggestion in that experience that goblets do not offer a lot of opportunities to display such skills? (maybe because it is golden mean or nothing? )

Originally Posted by Skew ChiDAMN!!

Part of the problem here is that there're just as many variations of form for a goblet as there are for a bowl. For every type of bowl, there's an equivalent type of goblet. Winged, hollow-form, double-ended, involute, segmented, whatever. Basically, the aesthetics that apply to one also apply to t'other. So any discussion of aesthetics for goblets is likely to go down the exact same path as the same discussion re bowls.

Wonderful! The plot thickens! (or are you saying that the discussion about bowls has been done to death and I should go look for it?)

(Anyway... I thought your initial questions was "why turn goblets?" )

No, the original questions was about proportions, and you indicated your preferences, thank you. The question took that turn on the basis of your excellent explanation of good reasons why your goblets, and most goblets generally, should only be "decorative". Still very interested in your answer though.

[So any discussion of aesthetics for goblets is likely to go down the exact same path as the same discussion re bowls.

Yup thats the way I see it also and its been done a few times.

As to being done to death, dunno ?.........thats probably a matter of opinion....

Best looking proportions for a goblet is the ones you like the looks of best. There are no real rules just suggestions and opinions. Kids today say "If it feels good do it" same holds true, If it looks good to you , you got a winner. Whatever blow up your skirt, tickles your fancy, wiggles your waggle, toots your tooter. Now, to get someone else to like it.....Thats another adventure.

Sigh; can see why you pointed me in this direction F&E.

I have no problem with folk turning for their own satisfaction and maybe then giving the pieces away. I've done a heap of this, and all my family and friends have pieces of mine from early days.

But we shouldn't confuse our enthusiasm or the responses of those to whom we give our work with informed critical opinion.

There's a learning curve with all work and if we want to improve then we submit to critical review and learn from others in order to rate well.

Skew has generously shared his experience with us in respect of goblet form. Worth bookmarking as well as trying out, back in the workshop.

We have to educate our own 'eye' as well as those around us if the practice of woodturning is to gain the same acceptance here as it has in the US for example, where decorative turning can actually make a living for skilled practitioners.

'K, rant over.
.

Originally Posted by rsser

Skew has generously shared his experience with us in respect of goblet form. Worth bookmarking as well as trying out, back in the workshop.

That's just the form that I find most appealing now.

A couple of years back, I would've said otherwise (being in my "squat" phase) and 10 years from now I reckon I'll have moved to something completely different.

I hope my tastes are improving over time, but I wouldn't bank on it.

Like others, I have turned a lot of goblets. One of my customers was an Italian who loved his wine, had two "sets" of wooden goblets, one for red and one set for white wine.
In an effort to come up with a "good" shape, I turned a dozen of the dam things, and put them on a shelf. Every victim that walked into my shed was asked to arrange them from good to bad. After 12 months, I correlated the results and found the most popular had the bowl about half the total height. The bowl diameter was about two third the bowl height. The most popular bowl shape had a slight inwards turn so that the rim was slightly smaller than the widest part of the bowl. I cannot remember how many opinions were expressed, but it was in the hundreds. That was about 15 years ago now. It would be interesting to hear from any body who has done something similar, recently. The whole exercise was interesting.
Jim

First of all, being Italian born I feel obliged to offer the wine drinking community my humblest apologies for the bad example provided by your Italian customer. As regards your very interesting research, the results seem to prove that people chose according to traditional criteria: if I look at my glassware, it has very much the same proportions. After centuries of production, there is obviously a standardisation of basic criteria. Be it the chicken or the egg, taste guides production and production modifies taste. Fads come and go but the best remains.

This does not preclude brilliant new designs emerging every now and then, like the champagne cup purportedly modelled on Josephine Bonaparte's breast, but the room for innovation is fairly limited. Have you been able to put your hands on some good new design lately?