Knowledge You Can Build On — Est. 1998
last night's chat results
TD
>Interesting chat last night. Results were quite mixed as expected but I think we can say that in club competition can be good but is risky. It can be devisive but it can also produce better skills. It seems a lot depends on who does the judging. Some suggested outside judges to avoid the politics. I think most of us felt that a "show and tell" table is safer. Any follow-up?
TD
Re: last night's chat results
Dick Hines
>I like the show and tell better. It seems to cause ruffeled feathers.
Re: last night's chat results
Bob Hackett
>Our club does a show and tell every month.Along with that show and tell you(as the maker) have an opportunity to either ask a particular member to critique your work or put it out there for an open critique.
Afew of the members who had been there awhile asked Jacques Vesery to help develope a critique format based on what he had used successfully at symposiums.The format starts with leading questions and is always aimed toward bringing the work and the turner to the next level.It starts on a positive and ends on a positve and focuses on exploration,direction and improvement in between.One of the best questions asked of the maker is "If you were to change one thing about this piece what would it be and why would you change it".
I`ve been asked to critique other`s work both at the meetings and in the gallery and my first question is "how in depth and candid do you want to be".Even in informal settings I still follow the format as it tends to lead the maker into being thier own critic and stating thier own opinions while taking a hard look at the hows and whys of thier work.
There are no right and wrong,pass or fail.Critiques should be about different possibilities and suggestions aimed toward excellence in craft.
Then again,this is all just my opinion.
Mainely,Bob
Re: last night's chat results
Ron in Drums PA
>Terry
If I remember correctly the new chat room allows the dialog to be saved to a file. Is there a record of each chat or do we need to request that the chat be saved? If this has not been done yet, can I request we save the chats in the future?
Thanks
Ellis, this one's for you.
TD
>
Re: last night's chat results
John Lucas
>TD
It seemed really interesting but I kept getting phone calls last night during the chat and had a really hard time keeping up.
Re: last night's chat results
Stuart Johnson
>I think my problem with contests and I guess also critiques is they are based on opinions. It is too bad there aren't standards that can be applied based on the type of turning. For example a fine salad bowl doesn't have the same criteria as a fine hollow form, or how is an award winning segmented piece compared to a box that has also won an award. This type of judging is done in the dog world by having set standards for each breed. Why can't it be done with woodturning. If it was then contests could be held with experiance being one of the catagories. This way a beginner can show advancement by winning in their experiance catagory prior to moving up to the next level.
On the other hand I don't belong to a club and have no desire to join one so I don't have a dog in this fight.
Re: last night's chat results *LINK*
Russ Fairfield
>Functional items are easy to critique because the first rule of usability is that it must be useable. That is an up/down yes or no answer. Salad bowls are a functional item and I think we can be fairly definitive about them.
I use what I call the "Seven S's" as the basis for critiquing salad bowls and they are fairly easy to judge.
Art is different. There are no rules.
What makes a good salad bowl
Re: last night's chat results
Molly Winton
>John, where are your priorities??? That's where voice mail or an answering machine comes in handy. If those aren't available, if it's really important, they'll call back. Sounds as if you need to reevaluate who's important...us, or THEM! (Insert really big grin here.)
Re: last night's chat results
Molly Winton
>Stuart I see your reasoning, but I have to disagree. I don't want set standards of what is good vs. bad. To me that leads too much to cookie-cutter pieces. I'm a glutton for critiques, but very particular with whom I ask for one. You're right about it being very subjective, therefore I seek out critiques from folks whose skills and techniques I admire and respect. It's all about considering the source. But even given that, I've received critiques from well known turners whom I admire, but after considering their comments in the context of my intent of a piece, I may reject their opinion. I still want to hear it, because it makes me think more, and further define my intent or give me ideas for future work. I don't think there is really any way to narrow down criteria to one objective list of what works and what doesn't. In the end, to me, that's the beauty of it all.
Re: last night's chat results
Molly Winton
>Okay Russ, I should have read your response prior to writing mine to Stuart. You summed it up quite succinctly.
Hmmmm...
Ellis Walentine
>Yes, you can request, but I only log special guest chats because of the amount of work involved in producing presentable pages. The raw chat transcripts are legible enough, but I would prefer to do things more professionally if possible.
This said, since the turning chats tend to be well directed and focused, I have no objection to the moderator logging the chat for posterity. I will need to set up a generic index page for these chats, because I am unable to spend any time producing or indexing them for posterity. It will be easy enough to set up a default index page for them, though, so decide among yourselves whether you would like to log chats and I will accommodate you the best I can.
Let me know.
Cheers,
Ellis
Re: last night's chat results
Stuart Johnson
>My point is without some sort of guide or standard there is no way to compare a salad bowl to an artistic piece. As a result a mediocre functional piece could be scored much higher than a well done artistic piece if the judge prefers function over art.
Russ, lists his seven s standard which I think is very good but still his opinion rather than a recognized standard. Where does a bowl that meets 5 of them stand against a given hollow form if the hollow form doesn't have a set of standards?
Molly aren't we tending toward cookie cutter form for the most part? Small footed vases and hollow forms, designer rings being above the center, widest part being placed properly above or below center line all lead in that direction. And, they all lead to what is considered proper form. So this proper form for the type of turning is a beginning of consistent critque.
Once the basic standard is used for both function / form then artistic design, wood selection, finish would come into play. These I think will always be very subjective.
Re: The herd mentality???
Russ Fairfield
>It may not be the way that things ought to be, but critiques are important because they set the trend for design. Example: When Ellsworth admired bowls without feet, and admonished those that did, a couple years ago at the AAW Symposium, everybody started making bowls without feet. That set a new design trend for bowl forms. A similar thing happened with natural edge bowls at a previous Symposium about 10 or so years ago. For the next 5 years, everything I saw had bark on it.
Same for the local expert who does the club critique. If their opinion is respected, their preferences shown during a citique session will determine the style that will be seen on the display table for months to come.
Yes, I am prejudiced towards the simple bowl form; I prefer them with outrageous grain patterns; I like them with feet; and I like them to be "useable". I don't like the artificial, the bright, and the gawdy. Maybe that's why I don't get asked to give many critiques.
examples
TD
>Russ, I have 2 regular customers who have great credentials; one teaches art at a college and one is a collector and interior decorator. An item that one does not like is certain to please the other. They each like my oil finish but it ends there. One wants everything thin and very "plain" and the other wants things a bit heavier with some trim or shadow lines. Each of them likes wood with a lot of character. If we had a critique session and asked either of these people to be the judge I would have to know which one was judging to know which piece to bring. There is nothing wrong with this, thus the saying, "Different Strokes for Different Folks". But at a local club meeting my opinion is that our critique should be done only if asked and certainly not in public unless the turner wants it that way. In our club, anything that causes polarization of members is avoided. I think "Show and Tell" where the turner critiques his own work is the safe way to go.
TD
Re: last night's chat results
Wally Dickerman at Green Valley, Az.
>I wasn't part of last nights chat, but I find this thread quite interesting. Many years ago in the early days of the Seattle Chapter, our demo for the meeting was a critique for all of the members who brought pieces to be critiqued. The critique was by 2 turners, Michael Peterson and me, 2 well known potters, and a gallery owner. The results were very interesting. We all had different sorts of comments and a different view of the work that was presented. Quite instructional, I think.
Wally
Re: last night's chat results
Duane C.Leach
>When I think of a critic at our club. A club with alot of bigeners or biggener level turning skills. It becomes more important for them to learn the diff between pleasing shape and clunky. Removal of sanding scratches, and dig-ins. a 3/16" wall vs 3/4" wall. A bowl with 5 screw holes in the bottom. You know the bowls each of us made when we began turning. Most of replies in this threads here seem to be talking about gallery quality turnings. As if all in your club are that good. Truth is we all need improvement. And the best way to get it is to ask someone else their opion. Be honest in your opions and execpt only honesty from others.
Rember Turning should be fun.
Duane
Re: last night's chat results
john Lucas
>Molly you are definetly the most important, usually. As you may know I just bought a house and I've been trying to get all the logistics for moving in, water, electricity, computer hook up, really dumb strong friends. Well I'll have to settle for skinny and pretty darn smart for the help but all this calling and trying to get in touch with everyone is killing me, not to mention moving a truck load or 2 each night after work. If weather permits I will probably move everything else this weekend.
Re: last night's chat results
Duane C.Leach
>Rite on Molly. Get your priorities straight John.
Duane
Re: Hmmmm...
John F
>Ellis, if its a matter of formatting the pages for better viewing, I used to specialize in text manipulation utilities back in my computer consultant days....
If I knew what you wanted as to page layout I could supply a util to produce it for you.
John F
Remove the 1 for email
Re: last night's chat results
Russ Fairfield
>I don't understand why we should be comparing a salad bowl and an artistic hollow form in the same venue?? The only thing they share is that they are made from wood and turned on a lathe. Each has to stand on its own merits.
There it is!
Bob Hackett
>what`s better,an apple or an orange?
MB
I agree with both of you but...>>>
RonZ
>...>>> Russ is right when it's an AAW Symposium then people submit their work knowing that it will be critiqued. I would prefer a 3rd party critique instead of turners. While it's nice to know what a pro thinks, I want to know what buying customers might think, too. From what I've seen, either they set the pace as Russ said or the have a skewed view of things with mostly the second crtiquer being a yes man and agreeing with whatever the 1st one says.
On a local level one must proceed with caution and as a board member I'm all to familiar with this and other intracacies of a local group. In the IAW, and I'm sure it's with others that there are those that think they know and they don't. They're too stubborn to ask for help and there work shows it, especially in the area of finishes. If there work was critiqued not just right, they might not come back. Then you loose out on what a local group is for. Then you have those that really want to know but then the critique is sugar coated so you might never impove.
Our biggest problem at the IAW is pleasing everyone [impossible] especially when it comes to bringing in demonstrators [if we can get anyone to come to Israel]. There are those that want to learn and are happy with any pro that comes. There are those that want say Alain Mailland which while being entertaining, 99% of the group will not ever apply anything they saw and many think they'll obtain his skills through osmosis.
To sum it up....OY!
