art deco mouldings

[mark yundt]

Thanks Doris and Russ.

Yes...a 2 ( as all chisels are) is a very useful tool. My favorite happens to be a 5. Just recently I bought a back-up for the one that has served me well for the past 16 yrs. But in doing a flat surface a 2 is the one to choose. Ironically a flat,straight chisel doesn't make a flat surface very well..if at all...nor does it make the accurate cuts needed to produce the straight lines needed here for the sides of the V shapes. It only makes a mess out of things which is difficult to clean up. And if there is one thing I hate,,it's cleaning up bad cuts.

Did a quick test this AM and the most cursory pass with 220 makes these surfaces perfect with little effort required.No fussing is needed in the corners of the intersecting planes or the deep V relief under the center V. Good thing because I can't reach it anyhow.Good chisel work ultimately needs little if any sanding. If I'm spending any time sanding that tells me I'm not doing my job,,and wasting time trying to make a carving presentable by sanding it into shape. To me ,,that's a mistake.

[doris]

i actually wondered why you sand at all, i mean, you enlarge your carvings on fotos often, and we can see your cuts are super clean, so, i dont understand what is the idea of sanding afterwards ? is it to make the edges you carved less "sharp" to catch better the light ?...(oh, btw, soon is my birthday, and i will get me a number 5, in two width :-)...i expect this is the missing gouge in my set of oddities ...)

[mark yundt]

No Doris,,the edges are the very part I want,,and have to keep crisp and sharp. That's what makes a moulding such as this work. That in itself is part of the reason I don't care to sand.The most critical areas are the last thing you would want to sand,,the nooks ,crannies and edges.That's what defines a carving. If I hit it with sandpaper it dulls and takes away the definition. A riffler file can basically leave a mess. A micromotor can run the risk of leaving unnatural ripples in these areas.That's why sharpening your chisels as you have found will eliminate these problems and leave a beautiful cut.

The only areas I will sand ,,and it won't match the surface left by a chisel,,is the flatter areas. And this is only to harmonize the various facets left by the chisels. I happen to like that look,,but many like to see a smoother surface.And in some cases like this,,on this type of moulding,,looks just fine.As I said,,the surfaces requires so little sanding as is,,but just that final caressing makes it look effortless. You know someone carved it,,it's not a machine that did it,,and yet it looks basically perfectly done. It in a way can add to the "mystery" ,,,how did you do that so cleanly and smoothly by hand? Here the flat surfaces catch the light and reflect as a whole instead of being faceted.It works well on a more geometric piece such as this. I don't really see any evidence of the hand of man,,,yet I know that's how it was done.He couldn't have sanded the whole piece into existence since it isn't all smoothed over,,yet here it is all sharp,,,defined,,and yet so smooth.
Now all this might not go through you mind as such,,but it can and does add that bit of mystery.
Look for example at Freds piece,,he had to carve all the folds where they are,,you know it's carved,,yet it now ( with a bit of judicious and OH SO carefull sanding) looks like it has always existed just the way it is,,more like it's a real figure,,yet it's not,,and you know someone made it,,yet just how did it come to be.
THAT,,,,I believe,,,is the sole purpose of sanding. Not to correct mistakes made while carving. Not adjusting lines and folds. Not trying to get rid of fibers,,fuzzies or anything left behind after the chisel passes.It won't make a bad chisel cut look good,,,,NOPE!
Only to bring the perfection out of the piece,,that was knowingly done on purpose.
Many styles of carving are not conductive to this,,,and the path of the chisel/knife are part of the style. But in certain instances,,it can breath life into a piece if handled correctly.That's why I sand.Judiciously at best.

[doris]

ahh, i see :-) and beautifully said ... yes, i learned on my very first carvings, how sanding can destroy the identity of the piece (i did sand that, since i could not sharpen properly at that time, so had lots of fuzzies all over...but actually, and very truely, it looked better with these horrible fuzzies than afterwards smooth and clean after sanding) i was so disappointed...now, that is interesting what you explain, yes, the dress of freds carving, that is sheer perfection, and a geometrical pattern like you carved here, can certainly make wish for very smooth surfaces, acting them like mirrors in the whole...yes, i see... i think i go make some experiments, to see this difference in action, never thought this way, since i like the faceted look, sure good to know about this possibility ... thanks :-)

[mark yundt]

One other thing to consider in a piece like this. If the carving wasn't done accurately in the first place,,for example each one of the flat areas of the V sections,,no amount of sanding will make it look good.

If each one of the flats are carved at different angles,,where they break from the slight peak in the center is off,,if the levels are different from one to the next,,no amount of sanding will make it look good. Sure it'll look smooth,,but inconsistent.Here sanding would only accentuate how inaccurately it was carved in the first place.If the small taperd coves along the edges aren't true,,sanding won't help.
The apparent simplicity of this piece is precisely what can make it difficult to carve believe it or not.I do not have anyplace to hide uneveness,,ripples,,crooked lines. If the flat facets on a diamond were cut without care to angle,width sharp edges etc. in perfect symmetry it wouldn't work as well either. On this piece I believe once it's stained and sealed these flats I have carved,,then sanded,,will allow it to sparkle as well.