Last months efforts

[maxmil]

Very original and well executed.
Best regards.
Félix

Muy originales, y bien ejecutadas.
Saludos.
Félix

[baweaverpipes]

David,
You certainly are making some fine pieces and the journey is more than difficult.
Your shaping is quite nice and you "get it".
I just wanted to point out that there is beauty is understated simplicity.
When I view a piece, I want my eyes to follow the lines uninterrupted. It's tough to explain here, but simply put, when following the flow of the lines, you want your eyes to flow off to a near infinite point.
Here's an example:

[wdteipen]

I agree with a lot of what's been said so far, especially from Ernie, Todd, Bruce, and Rad. There's a lot going on with most of these pipes. They are all fine pipes but each have things that work really well and things that don't. I think if you posted them separately you would get better and more specific feedback. The Horn is nice but I agree that the bead interrupts the flow and the stem bend is overstated. Pipe six is very interesting and one of my favorites overall but the offset shank really bothers me. Pipe number eight is probably the best in the bunch. It's nicely done and simple.

[DMI]

Thanks Bruce I understand what you mean, but to my eyes the stem on that pipe looks wrong.

To me if you were to put the pipe in your mouth and clench the whole alignment of the pipe would be wrong, the airway would angle downwards so any moisture would run straight into your mouth, by putting a curve into the stem the pipe would be in a more natural position.

Different people different thoughts.

[Sasquatch]

But that's merely an argument of form versus function - I agree with you David and tend to make my horns an S-bend rather than a continuous curve. But that can still be done with fluidity of line. The lines on your horn's stem do not point at the lines of the shank. They are close, close enough that they SHOULD. If they aren't meant to, that's also fine, but then THAT should be done with vigor and purpose - if the stem is a seperate idea, make it a totally separate idea. In this case it looks like you tried to match it up and just didn't quite manage.



Blue lines follow the shank curve. It's as simple and small a detail as that. And it's the difference between people saying "Oh that's really cool." and "Oh that's really cool and I want to buy it."

[DMI]

If you take the ring of (it was the last thing added) then the stem and pipe match perfectly, all the shaping was done with the stem in place as normal. I think we can safely say that the ring was a mistake.

David.

[Boekweg]

@sasquatch

Thank you for the responce that you gave. You gave that responce in such a way as to help me understand where your coming from and it made perfect sence to me. I can now look at this from a better piont of view.
Thanks.

[Mike Messer]

But that's merely an argument of form versus function - I agree with you David and tend to make my horns an S-bend rather than a continuous curve. But that can still be done with fluidity of line. The lines on your horn's stem do not point at the lines of the shank. They are close, close enough that they SHOULD. If they aren't meant to, that's also fine, but then THAT should be done with vigor and purpose - if the stem is a seperate idea, make it a totally separate idea. In this case it looks like you tried to match it up and just didn't quite manage.

(I edited the big image, see above)

Blue lines follow the shank curve. It's as simple and small a detail as that. And it's the difference between people saying "Oh that's really cool." and "Oh that's really cool and I want to buy it."

I think the pipe looks REALLY COOL, ring and all, but okay, details...Your blue lines obscure the fact that the Bowl-Shank-Stem are curving and are perfect. Your blue lines are straight, and the pipe is curving.
And, Bruce, with all due respect, I think your fluid lines-infinity point is delusional.

[Sasquatch]

My lines are not straight, they are computer generated French curves, and they go almost to the button of the stem. I'm not making this stuff up to hurt David's feelings, I'm trying to show him how to make prettier pipes.

I can appreciate that you don't understand most of this stuff Mike because you haven't bothered to learn it yourself.

[baweaverpipes]

And, Bruce, with all due respect, I think your fluid lines-infinity point is delusional.

I understand where you're coming from, Mike.
Especially when talking about a "Box with Rocks" or "Tilted Snot".
You're a silly man!

[Mike Messer]

And, Bruce, with all due respect, I think your fluid lines-infinity point is delusional.

I understand where you're coming from, Mike.
Especially when talking about a "Box with Rocks" or "Tilted Snot".
You're a silly man!

Ogay, I'm gonna ignore the insluts, and try to spray on the topic. The (correction) "flow of the lines-inflinity point" sounds like something Tude and/or Jou came up with which means nothing but sounds impressive. Correct me if I am wrong, of course, but I just don't get it, so please explain what it means?

[Mike Messer]

My lines are not straight, they are computer generated French curves, and they go almost to the button of the stem. I'm not making this stuff up to hurt David's feelings, I'm trying to show him how to make prettier pipes.

I can appreciate that you don't understand most of this stuff Mike because you haven't bothered to learn it yourself.

Get Real.

[Sasquatch]

C'mon Mike, I have to jump through fuckin hoops to even read your posts ever since I set you as non-existent.... you gotta give me more than two words.

[RadDavis]

Get Real.

Mike, it's time for you to get real, you dumbass, you.

You make amateurish, OK pipes and put a$1200, $2500 or $6500 price on them. This doesn't mean you are a good pipe maker. It means you are being silly. You say you have no problem with your pipes not selling. That's pretty obvious. You're making "art for art's sake". That's just fine. For you.

Please don't confuse newbie pipe makers on the forum by telling them, "That's 2000 EUROS good!" That's just stupid, and you do them a disservice, just like any other newbie pipe maker who declares a very amateurish looking pipe to be "absolutely amazing" or "perfectly executed".

It just ain't so. I don't know of any maker who makes a "perfectly executed" pipe. Some come very close, but there's always something that could have been done better. Always.

There are standards for pretty, no matter what anyone thinks or says to the contrary. Most everyone knows pretty when they see it, and ugly when they see it, and amateurish when they see it. An object can be unappealing to an individual's personal taste and still be appreciated by that individual for it's prettiness. Pretty pipes don't have to be "perfect". They just have to be pretty, and amateurish looking pipes just aren't pretty. They can show potential.

Beauty is only skin deep, but amateurish is to the bone.

Rad

[baweaverpipes]

so please explain what it means?

To be simplistic, the briar is the subject matter or canvas. It is the central point of the piece.
Within that piece, there are lines that should flow or have symmetry.
From the subject matter, there is an extension. This extension should compliment the central subject matter and not detract.
Think of the Mona Lisa. What if there was a bright red splotch in the bottom right corner? Where would your eyes go?
Mike, don't toy with me. Damn, you're a frustrating person.
What you considered insults were, in fact, truths. A box can have rocks and be, as Rod puts it, pretty. Or, it can be just plain stupid and lacking any artistic merit.
I will say your Red Clod pipe was really cool. I bet if you put $300 on it, the pipe would sell.
Just curious, are you bored? Do you want to be a pipe maker, or just be obnoxious? You have talent, but don't make your talent being a pain in the ass!

[mredmond]

Mike, Bruce's point about lines and how the interact is a basic art concept. It's not something he made up. It's taught to pretty much every art student that ever was, classical and contemporary. It's a fundamental element of all art because it's how our eyes and brains perceive the physical world. Mathematically, all lines converge at a distant point, too, unless they are perfectly parallel. A bent pipe's lines are generally not perfectly parallel, so the lines implying a distant point where they meet is more pleasing. That doesn't mean that other methods aren't also pleasing, but there are different degrees of pleasing, and most of the time most people would agree with the point Bruce made, so if you are trying to sell to a wider audience, using techniques people subconsciously connect with, and are pleased by, seems to make a lot of sense.

Micah

[Mike Messer]

Bruce, I honestly did not comprehend your infinity point, and I'm not ignorant of art. I've studied art, been a painter, and even studied drawing on a technical level. I studied Three-Dimensional Descriptive Geometry at Ga Tech and I made good grades. I also have designed buildings and done 3-D renderings of buildings. I know all about vanishing points fading in the background to infinity, but your infinity point made no sense to me.
I kind-of see what you're talking about, now, I guess? But it seems irrelevant to me, or at least irrelevant to the way I look at things, which, I think, is more direct. I'm not sure how to put it.

And Rad, one dumbass to another (if you will remember that scene near the end of the George C. Scott's "Patton" movie), I disagree. I have seen perfection in many pipes, and I'm sure it wasn't my imagination. I know what you mean about "always something that could be improved," but I think it's a point of view, and not "always" true. Some pipes are pure perfection.
I also understand what you are saying about disservice to other pipemakers, but that, too, is your point of view, and my point of view is different, and just as viable as yours, so don't come down on me because I'm not like you. There is no absolute right and wrong, here.
DMI's No. 6 pipe is so amazing. I don't give a damn what anyone says, but, yea, I could tear the shit out of any pipe that's ever been made if that was my ambition.

[DMI]

The rules of composition that you are referring to are relevant to two dimensional paintings not 3D objects and can only be applied in a limited fashion, they were developed to frame and focus on an element within a picture (amongst other things).

As far as I can remember the infinity point is also a 2D concept allowing the artist to create the impression of depth, the point of convergence is where two or more lines meet (in reality or by projection).

Thanks to a knuckle duster I have limited depth perception which can be a real pain in the ass.

Box with rocks? Japanese stone gardens reflect the spiritual, to a westerner they may appear barren and pointless because we do not understand the rules used in its composition, we miss the harmony or the purpose of the alignment of certain rocks or the reasoning behind raking the pebbles in different patterns.

Can I point out that the Horn sold within 12 hours of being posted.

With regards to Mike if you don't understand where he is coming from don't rise to the bait.

So in conclusion I'm heading in the right direction but need to pay more attention to 'flow', my stems need refining and my embellishments need to be more subtle.

Pipe by Arita.

[mredmond]

My point about line, etc is not just for 2D art, it applies to 3D art, as well, because we still see those lines and implied points on a 3D object. Most sculptures start out as a sketch.

David, with my comment I was not making any statement about your pipes. I still have issues with these things on my pipes, too. I just felt that Mike was being dismissive of something that happens to be a fundamental element of art. Mike frames his contrariness in the context of being outside the box but I really think he just likes to start shit. He defends people's work and undermines advice from the pros, not to help others make better pipes, but to start arguments. I wasn't rising to the bait, so much as I was trying to point out the flaw in Mike's argument. He follows the very rules he dismisses. We should all know better than to argue at this point, but stating he does things differently and isn't understood as an artist, as an excuse to stir the pot is poor form. Bad art and bad behavior have been using those excuses for centuries.

I'm a big fan of the Japanese aesthetic, modern and contemporary art, non-traditional/western artistic ideas in general. Lines are still lines, and lines always converge in the distance, 2D and 3D. Look at an asymmetrical Arita or Tokutomi and at a lumpy, badly formed pipe. They are both asymmetrical, but one looks way better than the other...why?

David, I don't think anybody was trying to pile on with criticism, they were trying to help. Unfortunately, this is what happens when Mike starts defending other's work the way he does. It's unfortunate, because you ended up getting harsher comments and the thread lost focus.

Mike

[RadDavis]

The rules of composition that you are referring to are relevant to two dimensional paintings not 3D objects and can only be applied in a limited fashion, they were developed to frame and focus on an element within a picture (amongst other things).

As far as I can remember the infinity point is also a 2D concept allowing the artist to create the impression of depth, the point of convergence is where two or more lines meet (in reality or by projection).

Thanks to a knuckle duster I have limited depth perception which can be a real pain in the ass.

Box with rocks? Japanese stone gardens reflect the spiritual, to a westerner they may appear barren and pointless because we do not understand the rules used in its composition, we miss the harmony or the purpose of the alignment of certain rocks or the reasoning behind raking the pebbles in different patterns.

Can I point out that the Horn sold within 12 hours of being posted.

With regards to Mike if you don't understand where he is coming from don't rise to the bait.

So in conclusion I'm heading in the right direction but need to pay more attention to 'flow', my stems need refining and my embellishments need to be more subtle.

Pipe by Arita.

Congratulations on your sale, David!

I would point out that just because a pipe is sold doesn't mean it's pretty. It means it was priced right for what it was, which was a good solid effort.

I've had to explain this concept to "Lil' Baw Waw" on more than one occasion.

The more pipes you make, the better you'll "see" them. I would concentrate more on shaping than embellishments at this point. Keep at it, and one day you'll look at that horn and think, "Geeez, what was I thinking when I was so proud of this thing?" All pro pipe makers have been there.

I've made and sold many ugly pipes.

Rad