Musing about turned designs. When do they begin and how do they end?

When I turn bowls, the size and shape of the wood hopefully dictates what the final form will be. There are some general shapes that I prefer and my slant the result in that direction but generally I just try to make a pleasing, to me, shape.

Ornaments and other craft items are another thing entirely. I have made CAD drawings for most of them and am working on drawings for the rest. Basically, I'm trying to come up with the most efficient procedure that uses the wood economically. In some cases I can mass produce parts and have a degree of interchangeability.

Hi Harry, Thanks for your ideas and what you do. Just to invite opinions and not to disagree with what you and the rest of us are often forced to do. I've sometimes gone farther and fared worse by letting the wood's size and form dictate what my turned object's size and form will be. I've turned some sad abortions by trying to get the largest possible turning out of a piece of wood. :)

IOW, whenever possible I think it's best to turn to our design not the blank's. Not everyone will agree and of course, there's a big difference between wasting the wood we bought and the wood we found.

Turn to Safety, Arch Fortiter

ever let figured wood dictate form at the expense of good form itself. The ultimate success of a piece depends on it's form. I always have a form in mind when starting on a blank. On occassion, flaws, a change in grain or whatever, may cause me to change that form while I'm turning but not without some planning. Beautiful figured wood is wonderful but without good form it's wasted.

When I'm teaching classes I always have the students use plain wood. I don't want figured wood to get in the way of learning good form.

Anybody can learn to use the tools, but not everybody learns what makes good form and can use it in his/her turnings.

Wally

I think for me that it depends on what I am turning. If I am turning the oil lamps that I sell, I always try to turn a form that will highlight an occlusion, swirly area, a knot, or maybe some ink lines from the beginning of spalting. The feature or two that is in the wood helps dictate the form.

However, the form is always first, even if I am making spoon. I have looked at too many things that have I think, "too bad that thing is so ugly.... that sure has some nice quilting in that grain" or something similar. In those cases, the feature may be the only redeeming quality of the piece.

But you will appreciate a well proportioned form no matter what the wood. A well proportioned ming vase styled turning (sorry, don't know which pro turner thinks he pioneered it) out of featureless wood looks much better than a old fashioned looking milk jug turned out of curly maple.

I think the hardest part about turning the wood the way I do is knowing some cases you will eventually have to turn off the feature(s) you liked in order to achieve a nice looking piece. Many is the time I have put out the effort and time to fill a flaw with epoxy mixed with something, only to come back the next day and turn it all off. Same with the natural features; I have turned off many areas of wonderful coloring, swirling, etc. to make the form look right. In those cases, it is truly disappointing to think "what could have been". Those pieces might still look OK, but nothing spectacular.

I have made so many oil lamps, spoons, ladles, and Christmas ornaments, that I usually know what to expect. But them again, many is the time I have started out with a nice chunk of log, and wound up with a pencil holder at the end.

Robert

I guess my theory is that I should get as much as I can out of the blank- but I like to basically finish the outside to a pleasing shape, and then worry about the inside. As Robert said, there have been times where a 12" dia X 6" tall hunk of wood ended up as a 4" mini-bowl. As far as the design goes, it's like jazz- I just turn away until something nice develops. Maybe if I get into something a bit more complex than making smooth bowls out of salvaged wood it'll take a bit more planning, but so far it's working fine to play around with it.

People use a variety of methods to solve problems. We learn most of our problem solving skills as children. We alter these as we learn what works and doesn't work. It is not uncommon for a person to have only one or two problem solving methods. Some of the methods are:

Play until the outcome is pleasing to us or someone else Use published plans Copy other work Think what someone else would like Ask someone else to design the shape Apply aesthetic principles (i.e. form, texture, negative space, color, golden mean, balance, contrast, etc.) Use design shortcuts (i.e. always use catenary curves) Create a problem statement, "A 16" bowl suitable for a corporate gift that can be used to hold dried flower arrangements on the boardroom table." Use craft methods (i.e. I have a beading tool, therefore all my bowls will have beads) Be superstitious (i.e. 'listen to the wood')

My training is industrial design, which is taught in art and design school, so I lean toward applying aesthetic principles, looking at the grain, visualizing the grain pattern in the finished piece. I often sketch the form, sometimes dozens of sketches for a single bowl, sometimes none. (hint: never erase!) Sometimes I'll create a metaphor for the piece, as in "I want it to look canoe-like, but with a pagoda feel." Other times I'll take the last bowl and modify it slightly. Perhaps because the next blank has different dimensions, or perhaps to remove what I didn't like about the previous bowl, or to add some new element. I don't stick to one method, I'll use one or more of my design tools. To me, it is valuable to have more than one problem solving tool in my tool box.

Remember, "If it doesn't add, it WILL detract."

Dan

Good post Dan, Thanks for helping us to think about what we want to turn.

This might be a good place to interject a quote by my friend and fellow turner, Dinyar Chavda, of a Japanese quotation that's worth thinking about. "Beauty must never be held hostage to perfection".

Turn to Safety, Arch Fortiter

Interesting topic. I am sure there are many different methods and everyone has their favourite ways to plan (or not plan) their work. Usually most of the turnings I have done have limits pre-set. I consider these first. Things like the size of the block, and properties of the wood. The limits of my lathe, tools and skills. I then like to review some similar objects made by others more talented then I. These works can trigger ideas of what maybe possible.

vision into the concept. Sometimes the plan is sketched on paper, sometimes in my mind only, depends on the complexity of the idea and how soon I can start turning. Next turn the lathe on and start, adapting the plan based on what happens, what is uncovered under the surface and any new ideas that emerge as the work progresses. Brad

Arch,

For myself, it depends. Everyone, I'm sure has an approach that works for them. Here's what seems to work for me.

If I'm rough turning green blanks the size of the chunk and the figure (especially the figure) strongly influence the result. But I do make sure I have the general shape in mind before I start. I've found that I end up with something "far less satisfying" if I don't have at least some idea where I'm trying to go.

For (semi?) segmented new designs I usually make a drawing to make sure the piece is going to look good (at least on paper). I don't get obsessive about matching the paper dimensions exactly - smooth curves & form are too important to do that.

Finally, on something I need to work out the production sequence/technique for or on something that I have multiple (slightly different) options for, I make one or more prototypes out of cheap wood or scraps. Usually one (or one of each option) is enough to tell me what needs modification, both in shape and production sequence. On one particulary difficult piece I made 5 "trial" pieces before I worked out all the production problems.

Cheers, Larry