Please tell me how I could make it better the next time.
![Image](http://media501.dropshots.com/photos/793936/20131206/225244.jpg)
![Image](http://media500.dropshots.com/photos/793936/20131206/225333.jpg)
![Image](http://media502.dropshots.com/photos/793936/20131206/225416.jpg)
![Image](http://media502.dropshots.com/photos/793936/20131206/225443.jpg)
![Image](http://media502.dropshots.com/photos/793936/20131206/225512.jpg)
![Image](http://media501.dropshots.com/photos/793936/20131206/225532.jpg)
![Image](http://media500.dropshots.com/photos/793936/20131206/225618.jpg)
Thanks,
Todd
Todd, I'm referring to the stem. I've heard that the length of the shank on a lovat doesn't matter so long as the stem is proportional with the bowl.taharris wrote:Thanks guys. It's clear that I need to focus on my stem work a bit.
Ocelot, are you referring to the acrylic stem being too short or the shank?
Todd
Thank you for those comments. It never even occurred to me that the pattern in the acrylic would affect the overall aesthetics of the pipe.salty wrote:Lovely pipe! I feel it would have been nicer with a black mouthpiece, or at least a tighter straighter accent within the acrylic. The combination of straight grain sandblast, slim straight stem, silver ring and the contrasting wide spaced, swirly (on the side) pattern acrylic seems to me like wearing a paisley shirt with a stripy suit. I think that's what's drawing everyone's critical eye to the stem/saddle?
I agree with the saddle being too sloped, doesn't suit the bold angular bowl. The rest of the pipe is a masculine yet still elegant statement in lines and angles, the mouthpiece should harmonise that statement rather than contrast.
You've managed to do a panel pipe that works for me, personally it's not often I see one that I like. I especially like the way the grain direction is altered by the angles of the panels.