pipemakersforum.com

Sasquatch wrote:

sandahlpipe wrote:

PremalChheda wrote:It is not necessarily wrong. It is not ideal, but it actually does not look bad, and sometimes it works. A Dublin style bowl like the top left can look good with the straight shank.

Is this the exception that proves the rule? Or can you further explain when it can look good?

No Premal's just wrong here.

By your rules am I wrong.

I only make pipes by one definitive rule. You must be able to smoke tobacco out of it.

PremalChheda wrote:

Sasquatch wrote:This is not about straight or curved shanks. Some of the pipes in my picture have straight shanks - the kaywoodie at bottom left, the greek thing top right.

It's about shank placement on a bent and the geometry that follows.

Bent pipes where the bottom curve of the pipe occurs right at the vertical axis of bowl symmetry look amateur. You cannot find me a Dunhill, Charatan, or Peterson where this occurs.

Never the one on the left, always the one on the right.

Per your drawing, the one on the left looks better than the right.

Premal, please show me an example of a professionally made pipe, a Dunhill, Peterson, Charatan, Comoy etc, or an Artisanally crafted pipe by a well-respected pipe maker which shows a pipe shaped like the one on the left, a pipe where the heel is directly under the bowl. I'm talking traditional bent billiard, not acorn or hawkbill.

Pipe Dan
https://www.google.com/search?q=pipe+da ... s-Ch2X5QKR

Charatan
http://www.smokershaven.com/charatan-es ... randy.aspx

GBD
http://www.smokershaven.com/gbd-estate- ... rspex.aspx

Stanwell designed by Sixten Ivarsson
http://passionforpipes.squarespace.com/ ... 0450606880

And I have seen a few Dunhills over the years as well, but I cannot locate photos at the moment.

I see them as a different shape altogether. If the apex came out as in the picture in the right it becomes a different shape.

I think there is something objective to what Walt and Sasquatch are pointing out with the bottom line of a shape. Sure, you can make holes in a block and smoke tobacco in anything. But I wouldn't call the shaping on any of those examples that Premal shared great.

Here's why. Some lines are easy on the eyes. A good line in a composition is like a story. It guides your eye steadily from one part to the next. A good line keeps your eyes from finding a place in the composition to rest. Good lines also make the difference between a pipe that is just a pipe and a pipe that looks like it's alive. Good lines make the pipe feel like it's alive. Why? I think there's some psychology to it, but the short answer is that good lines are found in nature. I think most people are naturally drawn to pipes that follow the S-curve because they imitate forms of beauty in nature. Not to say that the S-Curve is the only beautiful form, but it's the most common one.

And here's a source: http://poetryinstone.in/lang/en/2010/06 ... ent-page-1

You can find quite a bit of material on the S-Curve as it pertains to sculpture. For those who are interested, it is fascinating.

I am not saying that it is the best way. I myself do not make pipes like the one on the left, but it is possible to make them and make them look good. I do not believe it is wrong to make a shape like that.

Sas, the drawing of the pipe on the right is lacking a bit. I know what you mean by the curve and apex, but it can be done poorly as well.

PremalChheda wrote:I do not believe it is wrong to make a shape like that.

I don't know that beauty can be a right or wrong issue. There's a certain degree of objectivity with beauty, but much of beauty depends on a host of other factors, including taste. But several centuries of sculpture show us that there's something that transcends taste in the S-Curve.

PremalChheda wrote:I am not saying that it is the best way. I myself do not make pipes like the one on the left, but it is possible to make them and make them look good. I do not believe it is wrong to make a shape like that.

Sas, the drawing of the pipe on the right is lacking a bit. I know what you mean by the curve and apex, but it can be done poorly as well.

Is is possible, and indeed as your previous post indicated, what happens is that now we are talking about making a different shape. I think Walt's post is directed at newer guys, cutting very ordinary shapes for the first time, so I went in the direction I did. And yeah, my diagram sucks but it got the idea across (I hope).

That GBD is the ugliest production pipe I've ever seen.

GBD made a lot of ugly pipes. I got more.

Bottom line (heh heh pun intended) is that you have to know the rules before you break the rules.

Ratimus wrote:Bottom line (heh heh pun intended) is that you have to know the rules before you break the rules.

For most of us yes. However, Maigurs hit the workshop running with his wild asymmetric shapes that did not follow our traditional composition guidlines. Wallenstein did too. They may have followed guidlines and perfected them in their other areas of crafting before they started making pipes.

I think you may be right to a point about learning composition of sculpture in some sort of form. I think Maigurs and others probably developed it in their other crafts first. I am not sure.

[quote="PremalChheda"

Per your drawing, the one on the left looks better than the right.[/quote]

Premal,
You know I love you, but what are you smoking? I sincerely doubt it's Exotique. If that was a joke, I withdraw my commentary on your choice of...uh...pipe leaf.

PremalChheda wrote:

Ratimus wrote:Bottom line (heh heh pun intended) is that you have to know the rules before you break the rules.

For most of us yes. However, Maigurs hit the workshop running with his wild asymmetric shapes that did not follow our traditional composition guidlines.

Well, in the sense that Maigurs didn't make many (if any?) billiards, yes, but he certainly understands the rules. His pipes display an understanding of proportion, graceful lines, etc. He clearly has an eye.


IAWS (even though it pains me) & IAWWC

It's rare that a perfectly cylindrical shank pairs well with a bent pipe. It does happen, but it's not very frequent. It's jarring to the eye to see curving lines flow into rigid lines.

e Markle wrote: It's jarring to the eye to see curving lines flow into rigid lines.

I hate it when that happens.

How long you been waitin with that one George?

Being a returned (after many years) pipe maker, I am having some difficulty with this thread.
Part of my difficulty has to do with the amazing changes in techniques since I last shaped a stummel or fitted a stem, but another part is the modern tendency to "standardization". 40 years ago there was no such thing as a "blowfish" or a "squashed tomato", let alone some "standard" by which to judge the execution of those shapes. Those shapes may have been produced, but they had no names, and the idea of "standards" for a hand made pipe would have been meaningless. To me, "freehand" means exactly that. Each pipe is different.
I see nothing wrong with Mr. Cannoy's first pipe. It appears to be balanced, well made and has lovely grain. It also has the appeal to the lesser skilled of us that we don't have to skate so close to the draft hole.
However, I also can see the appeal of subtle, smooth changes in direction noted in the subsequent discussion.
I even read some of the sculpting essay on the "S" curve before my head began to hurt.
What I am not understanding is the use of the appellation of "wrong" with many of the examples, including Mr. Cannoy's first pipe pictured. I would certainly smoke that pipe and be proud of it. As Mr. Cheda says, the basic motivation for making a pipe is to be able to smoke tobacco in it (which is why I can be perfectly content to light up a corn cob when I am working with objectionable materials or when I might drop the pipe).
Also, as Mr. Cheda says, the two pipe's shapes are different , so why not appreciate each as a unique effort to create a beautiful artifact with which to enjoy tobacco?
DocAitch

If what a pipe maker wants to accomplish is self-gratification, this sort of thing:

[why can't we]...appreciate each as a unique effort to create a beautiful artifact with which to enjoy tobacco?

...is where all talk of design, shape, and technical execution ends.

If a pipe maker wants to do something that will be appreciated by others as more than a gesture, attempt, or effort, though, such a view is merely sentiment. He must produce something that's measured against a standard.

Doc, I battled these same ideas. You take a block of briar, you battle it for ten hours, and out comes a pipe. Then someone says "It might be nicer if you did.... X" and for awhile I was like "No, this is MY pipe (my art), you don't tell me what's not good!". Then a few things happened. One is, I learned that if I made some subtle changes, my pipes sold. Always. So there's that. Whether we are catering to some generalized human judgment of beauty or just what pipe buyers expect, you meet those needs, you sell pipes.

The other idea is that, as you do more of this, you'll see certain tendencies in new pipe makers. Blobby heavy shaping, things that are maybe round here, square there (and not QUITE round and not QUITE square). I call these the "grade 8 shop project" pipes. Cuz that's what they look like. And you can make those and sell 'em for 80 bucks all day long. No one will pay 400 for one. No one.

Because somewhere along the way, the buyer is becoming educated about what makes a good pipe, a beautiful pipe, an exceptional pipe, a masterly pipe.

The little perfections of shaping, proportion, and execution are what does it.

We'll argue about these things, maker to maker, about little tiny subtly variations. But it's pretty clear to most of us, as we go along, what a graceful balanced shape is, vs the shop project shape. (Usually the difference is about 50 grams too )

NO ONE is saying "make pipes that look like this" - no one is trying to get anyone else to make indentical pipes or saying that there's some "right way" to go about being a pipe maker. Do whatever the hell ya like, there's lots of room in the market! But here, this board, anyhow, this is a place where we talk about making pipes that are as good as they can be, judged from various techinical and aesthetic grounds. We'll talk about those grounds all day long too. If you reach the pinnacle with your first pipe in grade 8.... this wouldn't be near as fun or challenging.

I can certainly see that certain objective standards can and should apply- lines/contours, finish, attention to detail, stem inserts, stains and other technical details are things that I follow with great interest on this forum. On the other hand, aesthetics tends to be too subjective to attach the terms of "right" and "wrong", once you get much beyond the golden mean. Pleasing, not pleasing, liking, disliking, beautiful, not beautiful, ugly etc. would seem to be more appropriate.
As to the lowest point in a bent pipe having to be behind (posterior to) the lowest point of the tobacco chamber, I am completely lost on that one, or that it is "wrong" when that "standard" is not achieved.
When the time comes, I will post my pipes in the "Gallery" section to be critiqued and take my hits, but I know that I am not there yet.
In the mean time, I will make posts of my "shop" pipes if they illustrate a point or progress in my development.
DocAitch

On the other hand, aesthetics tends to be too subjective to attach the terms of "right" and "wrong", once you get much beyond the golden mean.

The more you work with pipes---make, study, own, talk to people about, photograph, and so forth---the more you'll see that as logical (appealing?) as that sounds, it isn't the case.

Until then, you'll have to either trust that you're in good hands on this board---some of the best pipe makers on Planet Earth have been and/or currently are regulars here---or dig in and play pit bull regarding the matter. (A course of action pretty much guaranteed to frustrate the hell out of everyone involved, including you. Not recommended.)