Finished bottoms

[Deane Allinson]

Wally Dickerman mentioned something in the thread on forms/aesthetics that I had been thing about for a while. He said "Back in the 80's it was acceptable to show the use of a screwchuck on the foot." I am always looking at forms in general, especially ones that really appeal to me, to figure out exactly why they are so appealing. I really admire Bob Stockdales work and was intrigued by seeing 4 small plugs on the bottom of a very fine quaility bowl. Thoughts?
Deane

[Jerry Wright]

Dean - when I was a kid (50-60 yrs ago !@#$) and my Dad was a shop teacher, most things were faceplate turned and often covered with green felt on the bottoms. Then with the advent of multi jaw chucks, tenon turned or recess turned bottoms became the rage. This not only is a bit more appealing, but allows signing the piece. My guess is that Stocksdale's plugged holes are somewhere in between. I think what you do on your turnings is a personal choice. Just like "thin is in", "you are not turning unless you use a gouge" and "wop and buffing is the only finish", there are many opinions of the day that are not for everyone. A beautiful form is a beautiful form, no matter how you get there.

[Richard Madden]

Very well said, Mr. Wright...I couldn't agree more.

[Thomas Canfield]

I have heard that ideally the bottom is such that you cannot see how it was attached, meaning no recess or tenon for faceplate. A lot of people are now using a vacuum chuck to hold a piece, but jam chucks, donut chucks, cole or jumbo jaws, and other methods are available for us simple folks to remove our holds.

[Michelle Rich]

back in the wagon train days, faceplates was all we had. The holes we were pretty much stuck with. most filled them. Many used the 4 holes as part of a design. Today we have other ways to hold, so this has pretty much gone away. When I see holes, especially unplugged at a craftshow, I know the maker is a a poor craftsperson. Usually the bowl/vase/box is poorly turned to go with the poor finish work on the base. We are lucky today to have options to clean the vessels up and give no hint to how they were held & turned

[Rick Markham]

The bottoms of vessels have intrigued me. I'm in the leave no sign of how the vessel was made camp. I also do my best to utilize the entire height of the original blank as possible, so that means the tenon becomes part of the form :) My greatest purchase for turning the bottoms of vessels was the Rubber chucky "reverse chucky" (I'm just a super happy customer.)

[Steve Schlumpf]

I like how things have changed over the years and that now we have the option of not showing any means of mounting the piece on a lathe. I know an old-time turner that still uses a faceplate for his larger turnings. Not a big deal as he does beautiful work... until I see the filled holes at the bottom of the turning. Just a personal preference... but I like everything to be finished and without any indication of how the work was held.

[Reed Gray]

The coastal myrtle wood turners still tend to use the screw chuck for fixing their bowl bottoms on the lathe for turning, and cover the hole with a sticker or felt. The bowls just don't feel right to me as the bottom is too thick. I leave my recess on my bowls. See any tool marks? Well no. See any sanding scratches or tear out? Well no. It is signed and has finish applied. That is a finished bottom to me. There is no mystery to attaching bowls to the lathe so we can turn. Removing any trace of how we did that may be a mystery to those who don't turn, but not to the turner. For me, it is an extra production step, takes extra time, and I can't charge more for ones that I turn the bottom off of. Besides, some of my bowls warp so badly that I could not turn the bottoms off.

robo hippy

[Dennis Ford]

I own a couple of chucks but use face-plates a lot also. It is not difficult to turn the bottom off and remove the screw holes (as long as I left enough wood to do so without making a funnel).

[Scott Conners]

Properly planned, it's easy to turn a bowl with a clean bottom, using only a faceplate and live center for your tailstock. I just friction chuck (pinch between padded faceplate and tailstock) the bowl to remove the foot, extremely simple and works on most forms.
There's no need for tool marks on the bottom except hurried work.

[Deane Allinson]

Removing any trace of how we did that may be a mystery to those who don't turn, but not to the turner. robo hippy

I was kinda' thinking that I liked to see some of the "how it was made". Like seeing the plane marks on a drawer bottom or scribe marks left on a set of dovetails. I guess that is the neander in me. Stockdales' elegant form wasn't diminished with the plugs on the bottom, it was sort of enhanced. The sculptured figures on the Parthenon are not finished on the back, not a sign of poor craftmanship. Lots of tool marks up there.
All a matter of taste and what is important to the maker.
Deane