Suggestion for resources on form/aesthetics?

[Lee Alkureishi]

Hi all,

I'm interested in learning more about what makes for an aesthetically pleasing form, specifically related to woodturning. I thought there might already be some threads on this topic, but the search didn't turn up anything close.

So, apologies if this has been discussed before, but does anyone have any suggestions for resources on this topic?

Thanks,

Lee

[Mark Levitski]

Definitely the book The Art of Turned Bowls, by Richard Raffan.

[John Keeton]

I agree on Raffan's book, for sure, and you should review the website of Russ Fairfield (http://www.woodturnerruss.com/), now deceased. It contains a treasure trove of information on form, finish and a host of other topics.

[Jim Burr]

Dale Nish did a book about one of my hero's...Ray Allen. Not for his segmenting which is world renowned, or the size of the vessels, second to none. I liked the fact that no matter how many parts, how big the vessel...they always came out perfect in form. Worth a look.

[Jim Underwood]

+1 on the Richard Raffan book. I recently picked up a copy, and have been perusing that for a couple of weeks. I'm about halfway through it... Now if I can just apply that knowledge.

One book I have that I like to browse through is Woodturning Projects: A Workshop Guide to Shapes, by Mark Baker. It has some nice line drawings and dimensions as well as pictures. Another that is not quite as helpful, but interesting to look through and look at pictures, is one by John Hunnex.

Another one I continually pick up is 500 Wood Bowls. I've drooled over pictures in that book more times than I can count...

[Wally Dickerman]

I also recommend Raffan's book....hey, why wouldn't I, one of my bowls in in there.:)

I suggest a book called 500 Wood Bowls. No text on form but lots of inspiration and lots of forms to look at. Very good reading

[Lee Alkureishi]

Wow, thanks everyone for the quick (and thorough) responses!

"500 wood bowls" looks exactly like what I was thinking of - I'll check it out! John, thanks for the link also. I've come across Russ Fairfield's site before, but didn't realize just how much information is on there - it's a goldmine! Also, I bought another of Raffan's books (The New Turning Wood) as my "introduction" to woodturning, and enjoyed it. I'll look into the art of turned bowls too. Plenty to keep me busy :)

Thanks again,

Lee

[Doug Herzberg]

+1 more on Raffan. I've also started spending more time in the pottery section of history museums. Just got back from Shanghai and have a ton of photos to review. It's amazing how many of the current forms in vogue are actually centuries old. Others on this forum gravitate toward southwestern pottery.

Wally, I missed your bowl in Raffan - I'll go look it up. If I had to guess, I'd say it was one of the beaded ones.

[Jeff Nicol]

A very quick way to find many good pictures of forms are from the old Greek pottery styles and also all of the native or aboriginal pottery that exists in the world. For most all forms come from nature in flowers, trees, rocks, clouds, stars, the moon and so on, inspiration is all around us, all we have to do is really look at our surroundings.

One good way is to draw half an outline on a piece of paper from an edge then put the edge of paper against an edge of a mirror so you can see the exact "MIRROR" image to complete the form. Then slide the paper farther past the mirror or pull it farther out thus changing the width of the form, or slide the bottom in and the top out to change the angle and the shape.

I have Raffans book also and it is a good book to see real works completed.

Jeff

[Scott J Taylor]

If you're looking strictly at form, you can't got past the Golden Ratio (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio). It's an equation which I use when turning and derives it's formula from 'what's pleasing to the eye'.

[Kyle Iwamoto]

Am I too late to mention Raffans book?

[charlie knighton]

+1 on Jeff's
old Greek pottery styles and also all of the native or aboriginal pottery that exists in the world.

[Wally Dickerman]

+1 more on Raffan. I've also started spending more time in the pottery section of history museums. Just got back from Shanghai and have a ton of photos to review. It's amazing how many of the current forms in vogue are actually centuries old. Others on this forum gravitate toward southwestern pottery.

Wally, I missed your bowl in Raffan - I'll go look it up. If I had to guess, I'd say it was one of the beaded ones.

Actually, what is shown of my piece is the foot. It is signed. Back in the 80's it was acceptable to show the use of a screwchuck on the foot. Richard and I did a trade...one of my HF's for a Raffan platter, which I still have dispayed in my collection

[Rich Aldrich]

I agree on Raffan's book, for sure, and you should review the website of Russ Fairfield (http://www.woodturnerruss.com/), now deceased. It contains a treasure trove of information on form, finish and a host of other topics.

John - Thanks for the tip on Russ's site. He has some excellent information.

[Mark Levitski]

Am I too late to mention Raffans book?

Kyle, yes. :)

OK, after all of this I will add something that has been debated through the ages. What is aesthetical and beautiful, really? If I create some turnings that, over time, seem to be liked enough to sell at a gallery or a show do I stop creating those forms because they do not conform to the body politic's idea of what should be adored? Because the ancient cultures made certain forms, should we be imitating them because they must contain some fundamental and mystical truism of shape to be carried on to infinity? If I sell a lot of my bowls that do not, for instance, have a uniform curve that extends through the foot to meet at the center am I to think that my buyers are somehow not refined and lack the sense of the beautiful?

Sorry, but I will explore ALL shapes and find what others in the general population adore even though, for example, the downward curve in the shape of a bowl ends in a flattened bottom prior to the center. Raffan's book should be savored. It is rife with insight. But beware of making some so-called universal judgements about beauty and the like. There are various cultures on this earth that would repudiate one's claims to a common thread of universality in art and form. Much of what we in the contemporary West see as beautiful is not natural to, and must actually be learned, by some currently existing cultures.


Art, and turning, is exploration. Exploration in its essence is the antithesis of imitation.

[Roland Martin]

http://www.stwt.org/tompkins_design.pdf

Lee, I find this very helpful for general design of most forms.

[Robert Henrickson]

Raffan's book is a good source as are the other suggestions. Pottery collections in museums, or books on pottery on the library shelf, are also good. A lot of my inspirations come from my archaeological career as a pottery specialist in the Near East. I've worked in Turkey, Iran, Iraq, and Crete, handling pottery dating from 5000 BC onward (including Sumerian, Asssyrian, Minoan, Hittite, Phrygian, Persian, Greek, Roman, Parthian etc). A lot of the shapes were engraved in my mind by drawing perhaps 10,000 sherds and vessels. Sketching ideas can help you toward a design.

[Jim Underwood]

If I sell a lot of my bowls that do not, for instance, have a uniform curve that extends through the foot to meet at the center am I to think that my buyers are somehow not refined and lack the sense of the beautiful?



While I read, ponder, and enjoy Raffan's insights, I did observe that many of his line drawings did not follow this rule.

[Bill Wyko]

Google the Fibonacci numbers & formulas or the golden rule. I use the Fibonacci rule to design many of the pieces I make. It can be applied in many ways. It's also found everywhere you look in nature, a very fascinating mathematical anomaly.

[Jon McElwain]

I'll add another vote for Raffan's book - I am actually reading it as we speak! I just finished another book called Woodturning Design by Derek Hayes. Not the same caliber as Raffan's book for sure, but he goes through a lot of principals of design including wood, color, texture, shape, etc., etc. Lots of things really annoyed me about the book so I can't give it a two thumbs up, but if you see it in the store or something, give it a look through and decide for yourself.

[Richard Jones]

Lee,

Since you weren't specific about types of resources, I'll also suggest some museums. Go, browse, take pictures if allowed. Print the pics, take some measurements.

For books, Raffan's are great. He has a great eye for form, altho' I will admit I don't like everything he does (only 99.9%). Southwestern Pottery: Anasazi to Zuni by Allan Hayes & John Blom is also a great read for southwestern forms. For small hollowforms, anything Joe Landon does is great (I have lots of his HF pics near my lathe for inspiration, but don't tell anyone). He seems to always catch that ratio just right, at least in my mind's eye.

Remember that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and you have to please you. I am a golden ratio kind of guy and that's the way I'm wired, but others have different views. Don't be afraid to experiment, but it's hard to fight that ratio..............

Keep us posted on what you fine, I'm always interested in new ideas.

Rich

[Jason Ritchie]

This is a good thread. I don't have any books on wood turning so I picked up Richard Raffan's book tonight.

[Jim Underwood]

Google the Fibonacci numbers & formulas or the golden rule. I use the Fibonacci rule to design many of the pieces I make. It can be applied in many ways. It's also found everywhere you look in nature, a very fascinating mathematical anomaly.

Y'know, Raffan talks about this in theory, but I don't see the concrete application in his book... Instead I see him using the rule of thirds...

Perhaps you could give us examples?

[Mark Levitski]

Yeh, Jim, I noticed that he displayed some drawings of both the "wrong" way to design and the "correct" way. At least it seemed to me that was his goal. Or should I say "good" and "better" designs.

My comment came fresh off a visit to my shop from another turner who is sort of a local guru. He saw one of my flatter-bottomed bowls almost finished on the lathe and used it as a lesson in bad form. I listened but began to think of all the bowls of that design that I have sold. I did show him the Raffan book that I keep close to the lathe in case I need inspiration , or should I say imitation :). We all use some well-beaten paths to get to the dead-ends and beyond.

One other funny thing: as we went into the house to talk some more, sitting on the kitchen counter was a big glass bowl with basically the same design, though it was purely a utility (salad/mixing) item. Hmmmmm......

Point is, there is a multitude of forms. There are as many judgements about how beautiful they are. Let's not have judgements about the judgements.

[Barry Elder]

The respected authors mentioned are just putting into words what Mother Nature has given us for free.........the Beach!

[Curt Fuller]

http://www.themintmuseums.org/mason/masonsite/artistindex.html

This site has some very inspiring work.

[Rick Markham]

500 bowls is a good resource for what other turners are doing. Sawmill creek is an excellent resource :) We all generally have to remember that form and beauty are completely subjective to the viewer. It doesn't take much searching to realize the pinnacle in 3 dimensional art of other cultures is often very different compared to what we see currently in woodturning. Take a quick search on Ming dynasty vases and other Chinese examples in fine porcelain, a whole lot of them will probably challenge your concept of proportional beauty. Many of those "priceless works of art" were created for the emperor, a living god, their only purpose being for beauty. Roman and greek vases, amphora, urns, and other earthenware, often reveal that most were created as utilitarian devices, some are downright "ugly".

This is my, personal opinion, turners often aren't the "best" people to receive critique from. While I agree it's important to have other turner's to review, and comment on our work, it is often more important to listen to what your customers gauge as beautiful, their likes and desires. You have to remember that often times we look through "rose colored" glasses, we are passionate and interested in our art, we focus on entirely different aspects of turning than the "lay" person does. (We get too close to what inspires us, and have a hard time seeing past it, step back from you work often, gain a new perspective, your work WILL improve simply doing that.) That being said, neither critique is more important than the other, both are valuable in their own rights. A careful assessment of both is probably the best course of action. Just because a turner says something is "wrong" or "bad form" doesn't mean your customers that buy your "wrong" bowls are poor judges of beauty.

Standards in art (what has been done before) exist as timeless examples that have outlived "trends" and "fashions" they are SAFE examples. Exploration is always a good thing, sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. Taste and beauty will always be subjective. Take my "old lady" for example, for some reason she thinks my ugly mug, is beautiful, if that's possible then I think anything is :D

The golden rule of thirds and the Fibonacci numbers do produce beautiful pieces, and yes they exist in nature. But nature also doesn't strictly follow these guidelines either, chili peppers generally are one of the closest examples of precisely matching these numbers, mathematicians often consider them the perfect example, and if you find a perfect looking chili at the store, you can measure it's nearly perfect proportions.

Part of this exercise also depends on how YOU design. Do you plan and design on paper or do you "see" the form in the wood? Does your execution expose the form in it's intended design? That last one is the catch, if you plan the perfect form, if you can't execute it then your focus should be on improving your technique, not the design. I think there are clear advantages to both designing on paper, and free form design, some of us favor one or the other, some of us do a little of both. It's art, sometimes it should challenge the concept of beauty!

[Mark Levitski]

Take my "old lady" for example

No thanks, I already have one. Apologies to Henny Youngman.

By the way, I have just finished a chili pepper vase. OMG, it's beautiful!!!

[Jim Underwood]

Mark,

I think you are correct. It was also my understanding that Raffan's line drawing examples were of poor, better, best (or some similar progression). However.... I was speaking of those bowls that were in the "better" category. If you look at many of those line drawings you will notice if you follow the lines of the curves, they don't meet in the foot, they meet far under the table.... I'm thinking mostly of the flat bottomed bowls, as of course the lines in the concave bowls will by definition NOT meet at all... The lines in the ogee bowls and the simple curved bowls usually did follow that rule.

[Mark Levitski]

I think Raffan and other more experienced turners are less dogmatic about things, whether it be form or tool technique. It is the more impressionable novice who is searching for answers that clings to some of the rote rules and the associated taboos. Although I have little involvement with the local woodturning club, I have glimpsed a sort of group think develop. There IS only one way to look at or do things, and if you don't participate in the group think you are at least not taken seriously and at most an outcast.

Yeh, I certainly do not look at Raffan as being snooty or arrogant with aesthetics. That's why I like and recommend his book. My point was that his suggestion of the curve meeting at the foot has been taken by some and made into a rule written in stone.

I just snapped a cell phone photo of two of my partially finished bowls. The one with the flat bottom is the one that received the soft critique from my friend that I mentioned further back in this thread. The other one loosely meets the criterion of the lines flowing through to the center of the foot.


230905

[Rick Markham]

No thanks, I already have one. Apologies to Henny Youngman.

By the way, I have just finished a chili pepper vase. OMG, it's beautiful!!!

Sorry it's our little joke (she's 11 years younger than me :D)

"I take my wife everywhere... She finds her way home!" -Henny Youngman

[Richard Raffan]

This has been an interesting read. A couple of comments. First, Wally Dickerman's work is in Turned Bowl Design which is no longer in print. The new version of that book is The Art of Turned Bowls.
Second: In those books I was not intending to lay down laws, but rather make a few observations on stuff to consider when making bowls. I myself don't follow rules when turning bowls — I trust my eye and work in series so I can pick the best of a bunch for exhibitions and as a benchmark to compare with previous 'best-of-groups'. I find rigid adherence to the classic rules often renders a form less than it might be and that often, strangely, near enough is better.


I propose people should should look long and hard at what they like, then go away and make their own version without any visual reference to what they've been admiring. That way you can't copy and your own style/voice develops. I wish turners would look more widely for inspiration when making bowls. I take the view that very form you can possibly imagine has been done before in metal, clay, glass, fiber, and wood and usually hundreds and often thousands of years ago, so it's a good idea to visit museums and see what's been dug up or otherwise collected.

[John Keeton]

The master is among us!!! Thanks, Richard, for joining the creek and for contributing. I thoroughly enjoyed your demos at OVWG, and the couple of meals we shared in the dining hall. Great to have you here.

[Steve Schlumpf]

Richard - Welcome to the Creek!! Looking forward to seeing some of your work!

Seriously - I have been a big fan ever since I started turning! Looking forward to your input here on the Creek!

[Thom Sturgill]

In addition to the books/sites/places mentioned, I would like to point out that there are TWO '500 Bowls' books. One is wood and the other clay. Both are good inspiration for turners,
As a group, we seem to like the southwestern Native designs, but I have been researching Mississppian and Cherokee (which are closer to home). Many of their forms do not lend themselves to turning, but some do and are fairly nice, though not as refined as the SW forms. Mainly I've been looking for patterns that would lend themselves to burning or carving. Many of us have also tried turning Amphorae (Grecian) inspired forms and the classic Mediteranean produced many fine forms and designs worth attempting.

[Jim Underwood]

Welcome to the creek Richard. I'm glad you've chimed in.

I've recently been given advice by Nick Cook to do exactly as you describe - make several in a series, not so much to choose the best among them, (although that's a good idea that I use when turning furniture legs) but to practice the cuts, and to experiment with, and refine, the form.

I also am glad that you caution us not to take the ideas set forth in your book as immutable laws, but to learn from them and use them as a starting point. I've long been adverse to the seeming opinion of many that bowls should have no feet....(no foots?) If it looks good, or improves a form, then a foot is no crime.

[Bernie Weishapl]

Richard welcome to SMC. I have been trying to do the very thing you talked about. When we talked at lunch at the Richmond Symposium with Bill Grumbine you pretty much told me what you have stated and it has stuck with me. I look forward to your input here.

[Wally Dickerman]

Hey Richard...nice to see you posting here. I always always look forward to your infrequent posts on WoW. Your comments and advice are much appreciated by everyone.

Thanks for the mention.

[Lee Alkureishi]

Thank you all. This discussion was exactly what I was hoping to prompt with my question - the resulting suggestions have given me a lot to think about, and plenty of inspiration for my next piece!

Best regards,

Lee