Author

[Sickle]

this was my attempt at holding lines.

I know I have to work on being more careful to follow my drawings and work on my carving skills to make things more concentric. this is not perfectly circular, so it almost looks kinda like a tomato.

also, I had to redo my Delrin tenon, because I fucked it up when I was bending the stem. I ended up regluing it with CA glue, which I had some reservations about at first (as CyanoAcrylate breaks down into Cyanide at 400 degrees F) but I did the math and there really isn't any risk, as the smoke doesnt stay hot long enough to ever do damage.

Overall, I'm pretty happy with this one, but now that I know what I don't know and what I'm doing wrong, I can already see what I'm going to fix on the next one.

[brownleafbeardsman]

In my opinion, this is well done. You already mentioned the concentricity of the stem tenon, and the bowl shape. I think it does have a bit of a belly, and might look a little cleaner with a slight bit more taken off the bottom-front of the tobacco chamber.
I have a similar tendency on my last post, it is a little low hanging, as Walt mentioned to me.

It has a nice flow, and the bend that you've put on the stem is well done. It's an attractive piece.
You are definitely progressing very fast, I'm glad to be able to see your progress.
Nice one, Sickle.

[seamonster]

Unfortunately, some of the images are gone with this post, but the discussion is lively and interesting and relative to this pipe. Take a look at the post, apply it to this pipe, see if you can see what I mean.

https://r.tapatalk.com/shareLink/topic? ... source=app

Sent from my bloopty-bloop using hooty-hoo.

[Sickle]

Ok, so something sas and some of the other members were talking about is the lowest point on the stummel being behind the centerline of the chamber, whereas mine has that point in front of that line.

After seeing it explained, I can see that my pipe looks almost like it has an underbite (Big chin). Which also matches brownleaf's suggestion of taking off some in that area.

The funny thing, is that every time I make a pipe, I feel like it looks almost perfect, then I learn something, and instantly see the pipe as ugly. The weight feels very far forward on this one.

If I were to make it again, it looks like the shape wants more fat on the bottom, not taken away from the front. And that bottom mass that would be added needs to better follow that bottom line established by both the front of the stummel and the angle and curve of the shank.

Also, in that thread, sas mentions rookie pipes being "blobby messes", being not truly round and perfect, and that is something I felt about this pipe even before reading about it. I hand carve everything with a Dremel, and rarely even use my disc sander. Maybe if I spend more time hand sanding I can work that out, but my problem now is that I will try to correct a bulge or low spot, and completely change the shape of the pipe. This is actually why the tenon is not centered on the shank, I ended up taking to much of the bottom to get the bottom line where I wanted it.

I would love to learn other people's processes for shaping like this, but all the videos I can find are about perfectly concentric pipes like billiards. So they just carve it on the lathe then finish the shape on the sander.

I know this was probably too much typing, but I'm trying to learn as much as possible, as I made my first pipe less than a month ago, and my first REAL pipe a bit over a week ago.

[DocAitch]

I think this pipe is pretty attractive, granting the proviso that the bottom line could be better at the heel (chin) and the underside of the mortise.
You can’t address these now, there is not enough material, but there is no need to beat yourself up about it- this pipe is not ugly.
When free hand carving a specific shape, it helps to have a reference. Lathe turned stummels have turned in references - the upper bowl and shank. Hand carved stummels have more subtle references- the chamber and the mortise. Learning to cut the stummel involves viewing the stummel from many viewpoints and knowing that a tiny bit of material removed can result in a significant change in the aesthetic of the stummel.
I am away from the shop now, but when I return, I can suggests some ways to enhance your use of references.
One that I have photos of now is the use of a compass to utilize the chamber as a reference. I turned a dowel to use as a center point for the compass and marked the circumference of the bowl.

DocAitch

[seamonster]

Doc's point that even the tiniest material removal makes significant changes in the overall design is an important one! Tyler once showed me a trick where you gently press the pad of your thumb onto a curve, and just that amount of change, a mil it less, you can easily see tweeks you need to make.

Sent from my bloopty-bloop using hooty-hoo.

[UnderShade]

I think this pipe is beautifully finished and considering it was carved totally by hand- well done. I see the same problems that have been pointed out. You are well on your way- now make more pipes!!

[Sasquatch]

Authors are hideously difficult. Hideously. Difficult. I thought the carving contest a few years ago where the shape was "author" absolutely sucked, I thought most of the winning pipes looked like a bloated sperm. And these were from people who make nice pipes. Authors are hideously difficult. (The pipe I submitted was lovely, but not an author, admittedly).

What should an author be? To me, it's a bent apple variant, and there's a few classic examples: The kaywoodie 13b is often cited -



But even the manufacturer can't decide on the shape.



The worst 13b shapes have a thinner shank yet and are really "ball on a stick" looking things.

I have two pictures saved that I consider to be authors, and which are super sexy....






These two pipes to my eye are authors - squat, not quite an apple proper, beautifully and obviously curved. Thick, stout, and gorgeous.


So my critique of the pipe presented is that it's a little too round, a little too big of bowl (compared to the shank), a little too brandy-ish for an author proper, although it's a very attractive pipe in lots of ways and will no doubt find it's way to a buyer shortly.

[Sasquatch]

One of my closer attempts shape wise, and I wasn't trying to make an author:




Close, but no cigar:



Better but again a little brandyish or something...





It's a hard shape, less well defined than a billiard, but maybe harder to hit because of that.

[Sickle]

Thank you guys for your critiques, advice, and encouragement. I will most definitely be making another author soon to try and improve on the design and execution.

I was hesitant at first, but now I'm confident in it enough that I definitely think I'll be selling this one on my site.

[LatakiaLover]

The gold standard for graceful execution:

[brownleafbeardsman]

The funny thing, is that every time I make a pipe, I feel like it looks almost perfect, then I learn something, and instantly see the pipe as ugly. The weight feels very far forward on this one.

This is something I struggle with as well. Something I have been told, and it is most definitely true;
When you are shaping a pipe for a while, your eyes play tricks on you. It seems as if something looks almost perfect. The tip I was given is to give your eyes a rest, sleep on it, look at it with fresh eyes in the morning. Chances are you will see something you could've sworn wasn't there the previous day. This is one of the things I am very glad to have employed. Good luck on the next author, my friend.

[seamonster]

The gold standard for graceful execution:

George, what's the make on that one?

Sent from my bloopty-bloop using hooty-hoo.

[LatakiaLover]

It's a Dunhill from 1927 or '28.

Someone was there at that time who understood "swan neck swoopy & graceful" better than anyone else in the history of pipemaking.

[Sickle]

I found a similar pipe: https://www.smokingpipes.com/pipes/new/ ... _id=156146

it isn't quite as "swoopy" as the example from the 20's, but it's close enough that it can give a good perspective.

[Sickle]

I've never noticed how big Dunhill's buttons are

[wdteipen]

Dunhill's buttons are horribly bulky; especially the newer pipes. Very uncomfortable unless you like the feel of a pacifier in your mouth when you smoke a pipe.

[LatakiaLover]

That started in the 70's, and they've been trending bigger ever since. Yuk

Easy to reduce/sculpt, though, while making a button larger is a PITA.