Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [medievalsawdust] start a discussion?

Expand Messages
  • mit1369@aol.com
    If something is to look period it would have been recently made. Perhaps with a little wear but definitely not antiqued . Uadahlrich
    Message 1 of 7 , Nov 6, 2002
      If something is to look period it would have been recently made. Perhaps with a little wear but definitely not "antiqued".

      Uadahlrich
    • jrwinkler@msn.com
      Now for a good SCA Laurel answer T. DEPENDS! If I m building for myself, I ll try to artificially age a piece. Dark stains sanded out, worn edges
      Message 2 of 7 , Nov 6, 2002
        Now for a good SCA "Laurel answer" ™…    DEPENDS!   If I'm building for myself, I'll try to artificially age a piece.   Dark stains sanded out, worn edges (they get more worn with use) and other visual details that will make it fit in the tableau that m'Lady and I are trying to create.   For me, making period looking stuff includes LOOKING period…  or at least approximating that look.  (But then yer' treading on the "art" ground…  trying to make something look old without looking schlocky can be a trick…  best results… stain it dark then use it roughly for a couple of years… it'll look old then… Winking smiley emoticon.  But… not ALL my stuff looks old.  I recently turned some bowls…  didn't bother to artifically age them.  I figure that with relatively minimal use they'll start developing their own "used" look… 
         
        On the other hand… if I'm building for somebody else, I generally find that they prefer having stuff that looks "new-ish"…   no stains (but a good coat of matte poly generally makes them happy), wood grain showing everywhere, etc. 
         
        So I guess my answer is… depends on who the customer is and what they want.
         
        Chas.
         
         
        ----- Original Message -----
        Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 4:07 PM
        Subject: [medievalsawdust] start a discussion?

        I've got a question that might
        start a discussion....

        When making something that you want
        appear period, but not for an A&S
        competition, do you make it look new
        or do you artifically age it so that
        it looks old?

                thoughts?
      • Don Bowen
        ... Do you have some images of period bowl and plate profiles? I would like to turn some plates. At 11/6/2002, you wrote: Now for a good SCA Laurel answer
        Message 3 of 7 , Nov 6, 2002
          At 11/6/2002, you wrote:
          Now for a good SCA "Laurel answer" ™…    DEPENDS!   If I'm building for myself, I'll try to artificially age a piece.   Dark stains sanded out, worn edges (they get more worn with use) and other visual details that will make it fit in the tableau that m'Lady and I are trying to create.   For me, making period looking stuff includes LOOKING period…  or at least approximating that look.  (But then yer' treading on the "art" ground…  trying to make something look old without looking schlocky can be a trick…  best results… stain it dark then use it roughly for a couple of years… it'll look old then… Emoticon3.gif.  But… not ALL my stuff looks old.  I recently turned some bowls…  didn't bother to artifically age them.  I figure that with relatively minimal use they'll start developing their own "used" look…

          Do you have some images of period bowl and plate profiles?  I would like to turn some plates.


        • vinlandar
          Baron, DEPENDS was a good answer, I think. I have to remind myself that the Middle Ages were in excess of 600 years in length. That being so, a period
          Message 4 of 7 , Nov 7, 2002
            Baron, 'DEPENDS' was a good answer, I think. I have to remind myself
            that the 'Middle Ages' were in excess of 600 years in length. That
            being so, a 'period' piece could either be brand new to the user or
            something that has been in the family for generations, and still
            be 'period'. That being the case, it would seem reasonable that a
            piece could look just made, or around a while, or truly an ancient
            piece and still be quite within reasonable expectations for
            appearance. I guess it would also seem reasonable to consider that a
            piece which is well made and something likely to last for generations
            could either be very old or brand new, but a 'throwaway' piece which
            likely would not have lasted very long would more likely look new,
            because when it wore out, the user would just make a new one.

            Maybe?

            -charlie







            --- In medievalsawdust@y..., Conal O'hAirt Jim Hart <baronconal@y...>
            wrote:
            > I've got a question that might
            > start a discussion....
            >
            > When making something that you want
            > appear period, but not for an A&S
            > competition, do you make it look new
            > or do you artifically age it so that
            > it looks old?
            >
            > thoughts?
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > =====
            > Baron Conal O'hAirt / Jim Hart
            > Aude Aliquid Dignum
            > ' Dare Something Worthy '
            >
            > __________________________________________________
            > Do you Yahoo!?
            > HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now
            > http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/
          • Jim Hart
            nice range of answers..... Just so you know this was just a general question I m not looking for an answer specific to one time period or type of item. but it
            Message 5 of 7 , Nov 7, 2002
              nice range of answers.....

              Just so you know this was just a
              general question I'm not looking
              for an answer specific to one time
              period or type of item.


              but it looks like the general answer
              is

              '.....It depends.....'


              Conal
            • Ted Kocot
              ... Recently is a word that can mean a lot of things. There are pieces of furniture in England that are still in use after 500 years. Relative to that no
              Message 6 of 7 , Nov 7, 2002
                > If something is to look period it would have been recently made. Perhaps
                > with a little wear but definitely not "antiqued".

                Recently is a word that can mean a lot of things. There are pieces of
                furniture in England that are still in use after 500 years. Relative to
                that no piece of Arts and Crafts furniture is old, but I'd say it all
                looks old.

                The question is, what year do you think it it? What year was the piece made?

                Avery
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.