opinions please

Re: opinions please

Gary in Zirconia, NC

>I don't think the top and bottom go with the box. The box is of a different style than the top and bottom.

Re: opinions please

Fog Tanner

>The basic box by itself looks fine. The finial and base are a little busy and detract from the box. I would set it on the shelf as a reminder for what doesn't work and the why. I have several pieces that I keep for that reason. The same with good looking pices, why are they pleasing. In one of Raffan's books or tapes he makes a statement, "that something is only as good or bad as what its compared to".

You made a good looking box, just got carried away. Now you have something to compare the next one to.

Re: opinions please

Carole in VA

>Ken, I'm certainly no expert, but if it was mine I'd take the base off, drill it out and use it as a candle stick! Then I'd take the finial off and let the box stand on it's own. IMHO, there is not a thing wrong with simple, clean lines. They always seem to "work".

Re: opinions please

Keith Tompkins

>Hi Ken, welcome to woodturning design......I think some of the things you added to the box were afterthoughts, and they usually don't work well that way. Each individual unit is attractive standing on its own, but they don't work well together.

The box form itself is simple: I would leave it that way with no further ornamentation. The grain of the wood is enough. The finial seems to just sit on top, and doesn't tie in with the form, in this case, I would remove it.

I think a spherical form would work with the base...maybe you could turn a couple of forms to see what you like. It's a good thing you are experimenting with form....keep it up!

Re: opinions please

Carles, in Barcelona

>Hi,

Without the top, this box would be a good tea candle stick. Just my opinion.

Un saludo,

Carles.

Re: opinions please

Mike Schwing from Md.

>Hi Ken. I don't turn forms like this so take it for what its worth. There are a few design areas here that you've attempted to tackle. Kudos for your willingness to try! There are 3 overall sections to this piece. Tackled individually, they would each benefit from some application of the triangle principle Keith posted last week. Then taken as a whole, the three sections need to compliment each other, but as they exist, they are really 3 distinct works. This is not an easy thing to figure out! In an effort to demonstrate this, I am posting a photo of another gent's work (Phil Manzi). I just happened across it this morning and thought of you. Notice how the top and bottom sections have identical design elements? The eye is drawn to the comparison and finds them favorable. The extended base is long enough to give the eye some time as it draws upward to adjust to the larger diameter of the center section, and you can draw a continuous arc from the widest part of the base in towards the center and then out to the widest diameter of the pot. The human eye finds this pleasing. An almost identical arc is reflected in the top part, which is very complimentary and ties the top and bottom in with each other. In short, there are no abrubt direction changes and the beads and coves present pleasing detail.

Now back to your piece - see how the bottom/pedestal curves upward? That is nice, but then the box changes direction abrubtly and creates tension - if it flared out on the same curve it would follow more smoothly. I echo the comments that this is really 2 or 3 individual pieces tied together, the box is nice and the pedestal is nice. Incorporating a few design ideas would tie them together. Hope this made some sense. I tried!

Opinions helpful/thanks all

ken chase

>The comments posted were terriffic and greatly appreciated

Re: Finial Box Designs *LINK*

Brad Vietje

>BTW: The design for this beautiful little finial pot is lifted right out of Robert Chapman's excellent book, Woodturning: A Fresh Approach, a GMC publication, and my favorite turning book. He gives step-by-step instructions for making this as well as other lidded pots and boxes (then bowls, platters and hollow forms).

The link below (also www.robchapman.com) will lead you to many beautiful turned objects, well-made tools, and The Book.

Safe Spinning,

Brad Vietje

Thetford, VT


Robert Chapman

Re: opinions please

Brad Vietje

>Ken,

First -- congrats on getting some of the bugs worked out of the "finial thing" -- I know you've been working on mastering finials, and you're well on your way.

Box and lidded pot design is very subjective, so the more you play with forms and discover what really works for you, the more you'll love the results. You might look at the work of others, and note what design elements you really like. Reproducing them, or blending them into something new is a whole experiment in itself.

Elswhere in this thread, in response to Mike's post of a lidded pot, I gave reference to Robert Chapman's excellent book (which has very detailed and delicate finials); another great source on box design is Richard Raffan's book and video: Turning Boxes With Richard Raffan.

Safe spinning,

Brad Vietje

Thetford, VT

Re: Finial Box Designs

Keith Tompkins

>Hey Brad,yes, the Chapman book is an excellent one! Check out some of his techniques, and most curiously, the tool rest height. He turns with a very low rest, like you previously mentioned. I think a turner will learn a great deal from this book.