- ... 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 answerMessage 1 of 7 , Nov 6, 2002View SourceAt 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 . 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.
- 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 periodMessage 2 of 7 , Nov 7, 2002View SourceBaron, '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.
--- In medievalsawdust@y..., Conal O'hAirt Jim Hart <baronconal@y...>
> 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?
> Baron Conal O'hAirt / Jim Hart
> Aude Aliquid Dignum
> ' Dare Something Worthy '
> Do you Yahoo!?
> HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now
- 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 itMessage 3 of 7 , Nov 7, 2002View Sourcenice 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
- ... 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 noMessage 4 of 7 , Nov 7, 2002View Source
> If something is to look period it would have been recently made. PerhapsRecently is a word that can mean a lot of things. There are pieces of
> with a little wear but definitely not "antiqued".
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
The question is, what year do you think it it? What year was the piece made?