#5 (Stubby)

Zeeborn · Post by **Zeeborn** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 10:18 pm

I was working on this one at the same time as the last two but I just got the final finish on it today. The shank started out longer but when I was turning it my lathe tool caught it and exploded most of it off. I thought about making an extension out of some other exotic hard wood (I have boxes of scraps) but I held the stem up to the pipe just to see what it would look like and something about it just caught my liking, so I went with it. It’s a silly little pipe that makes me think of a pug. I haven't smoked it yet, but I imagine that unless there is a breeze I’ll just be getting a face full of smoke. On the other hand it should be easy on the jaw being so light and short.
What do you guys think? Pleas critique.
Cheers,
Nate Davis

AaronWhitehouse0077 · Post by **AaronWhitehouse0077** » Sat Mar 28, 2009 1:38 am

Hey Nate,

For once I got some decent advice. Just recently I bought two Pipes from Pavel Hap, they are short pipes minus the stem like this one, However his stems were a good three to three and one half inches long. They have a wonderful feel to them, and the shank is an inch roughly. The one might be only 3/4 of inch, both pipes are pokers one is barrel shaped. Otherwise the pipe is nice, I'd just make a longer stem. The stain work is really nice. Great work. It is neat as a stubby pipe though. If you want to see the pipes I refer to they are at

http://www.hap-pipes.eu/eng/pipes_250/27a.htm

http://www.hap-pipes.eu/eng/pipes_250/27d.htm

Hope this was helpful.

~Aaron

FredS · Post by **FredS** » Sat Mar 28, 2009 1:11 pm

I like the contrast stain you've acheived. It looks great.

Frank · Post by **Frank** » Sat Mar 28, 2009 4:08 pm

Aaron, short shank, long stem pipes like your two are usually classified as a "Don". If they had no shank at all, they would be classified as a "Duke".

Nate, judging from the height of the bowl it looks like you were trying for a "Chimney Stack" - pity about the shank breaking.

I agree with Aaron that a longer stem would improve the "balance". I would suggest that you remove the "underbulge" from the bottom of the bowl so that it flows horizontally into the stem.

The arc at the bowl/shank junction needs to be radically reduced so that the shank at the top can also flow horizontally into the stem, but still leave a small arc at the junction. Do the same with the sides of the shank.

With what you have there, you want to try for a short shank, long stem "Chimney Stack", which is essentially a tall billiard.

android · Post by **android** » Sat Mar 28, 2009 5:01 pm

cool idea and i agree with what frank said, especially about the bowl/shank junction.

Zeeborn · Post by **Zeeborn** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 1:32 am

Thanks for the input guys.
Yes, I was going for a chimney stack originally (although I didn’t know that was what it was called at the time).
About the bowel shank junction, I did consider removing more material and give it a more abrupt junction but I intentionally made it that shape to mimic the curve of the bottom of the bowl. I just thought that having the two curves mimicking each other would give it an interesting look. If you look at my other pipes I have definitely refined the junctures of bowl and shank to tight curves or even creases. So i definitely know that that is the preferred look. I’m just trying new things and get some experience under my belt. I’m not trying to defend my self from an offended point of view (because I'm not at all)I just thought I would explain my thought process in regards to that point. Thank you guys for bring it up. I kind of feel like a kid who has just been left with a new baby sitter and is testing to see just how much he can get a way with.

My experience with pipes is fairly limited. I just started smoking a few month ago and before that never really looked at a pipe in any other way than just to identify it as being a pipe. I’m still learning what forms are excepted as being a good looking pipe. My background is in art, more specifically sculpture witch has nearly limitless boundaries when it comes to what forms will be accepted. Not to say that pipe carvers aren't artists or that a pipe can not also be a sculpture, it’s just that with pipes the rules of accepted aesthetics seem much tighter. Correct me if I’m wrong with that. Long story short, I’m just not yet fluent in the language of the pipe.
Still testing,
Nate

Frank · Post by **Frank** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 3:17 am

Zeeborn wrote:About the bowel shank junction, I did consider removing more material and give it a more abrupt junction but I intentionally made it that shape to mimic the curve of the bottom of the bowl. I just thought that having the two curves mimicking each other would give it an interesting look.

No doubt, before it broke, the original shank probably continued from the shallow curve into a horizontal line straight into the stem. I grasp what you were originally trying to achieve, but due to the broken shank, you now have to rethink the bowl/shank and shank/stem junctions.

Just for the moment, ignore the underside of the pipe and let's look at the upper side of the shank/stem junction. Referring to the top picture you posted, look closely at the stem where it joins the shank - the saddle is perfectly horizontal. Now, look at the shank where it meets the stem - it swoops down meeting the stem at a sharp angle. The shank should flow into the stem as if it were all one piece, not veer off at an angle.

If you're satisfied with it as it is, that's OK too - for all I know, I could be way off base with my ideas.

(Yeah - take that Frankenfurter)

Zeeborn · Post by **Zeeborn** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 4:07 am

So if I understand what your saying it should look something more like this? It’s kind of a sloppy Photoshop job, but then again it is like 1 in the morning...

Post by **KurtHuhn** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 10:15 am

Zeeborn wrote: About the bowel shank junction, I did consider removing more material and give it a more abrupt junction but I intentionally made it that shape to mimic the curve of the bottom of the bowl. I just thought that having the two curves mimicking each other would give it an interesting look.

That technique is rarely use in pipes, because it rarely looks right. All the curves should all work together in harmony and flow, but you'll find that they almost never mimic each other to that degree. Having the bowl/shank transition mimic the curve of the bowl's transition from front to bottom makes a pipe look very chunky - giving it the signature "new pipe carver" look.

Frank · Post by **Frank** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 1:53 pm

Zeeborn wrote:So if I understand what your saying it should look something more like this?

Not 100% OK, but much better. See if you get further critiques, but I still think my original critique is valid for top, bottom and sides.

Zeeborn · Post by **Zeeborn** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 3:49 pm

I see what your talking about how it looks chunky. I’ll add that to my mental book of Pipe Aesthetics (Chapter 1. What not to do).

Frank wrote: I would suggest that you remove the "underbulge" from the bottom of the bowl so that it flows horizontally into the stem.

Frank, I think at least part of the “underbulge" you were talking about was an optical illusion from the slightly high prospective of the picture. There is a slight “underbulge” but possibly not as severe as it looked. Here is a more straight on with the bottom picture. Is that amount acceptable or should no part of the bowl extend below the stem?

Also, taking your guys advice, I made another Photoshop redo of my pipe. Is this looking better? I think so.
Thanks,
Nate

Frank · Post by **Frank** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 4:31 pm

OK, you're correct about the exaggerated "underbulge" - it was just a camera angle thing, although there is a very small "belly" there.

I hate to do this to you, but that picture makes it obvious that with the long sweeping curve on the front of the bowl, you've already removed too much material in making that curve. If you look at the very last (photoshopped) image you posted, the (now) very tight shank/bowl curve looks completely wrong with the rest of the pipe.

The stem length looks much better, but honestly, I've plumb run out of ideas of how to correct this pipe. It's possible we're now flogging a dead horse. Perhaps someone else has other ideas as to what can still be done to correct it.

For future pipe designs:
I use CorelDraw, so I would assume that Photoshop has a similar vector Drawing program. Draw your pipe design to scale so that you can sit back and get a good objective view. It won't generate perfect pipe designs, but it does allow for chopping-and-changing until it looks right.

Zeeborn · Post by **Zeeborn** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 5:18 pm

Ok just to flog that dead horse a little more I have another version of the photoshoped pipe with a less severe angel to the shank bowl connection. I think this might be the one.

Frank · Post by **Frank** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 6:43 pm

That's probably about as good as it's going to get.

BTW, put that fish away, Hammy wants a cookie not a stinkin' ole fish!

ckr · Post by **ckr** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 7:35 pm

Could put another bullet in this horse.

Stain, finish, applying stem drilling look good. I would say take what you have learned, move on. I don't think you are going to learn more on this piece.

One thing that I noticed is that the walls look precariously thin. It looks like a 7/8 bore but it doesn't look like the outer diameter is anywhere near 1 3/8, maybe a bit over 1 1/8 or so. So I think it has a good possibility of being a "hot" one, especially for a pipe that holds that kind of a load. Might even scorch or burn out. DON'T ask how I know.

I try to shoot for .25 - .28 for chamber wall and it can go a bit thinner toward the rim since most of the heat is mid bowl to bottom.

I haven't seen your 4 previous pipes but I would also recommend to follow what has already been posted - billiards, pots, dublins etc. will give you plenty of experience as you have something to measure against.