How many professional woodworkers using no power tools? ....

[David Weaver]

How many professional woodworkers use no or generally no power tools? And by that, I don't mean guys who teach classes and give demos or have blogs. I mean not subsidized by that mickey mouse stuff or any other income.

This is triggered by warren's comment in another thread about a professional woodworker only needing 4 or 5 (bench) planes with one iron per. I've seen warren state before that he doesn't use power tools (even his lathe is unpowered). Warren is the only person I have seen who says this.

There are other bloggers who make stuff on blogs and run around to WIA, etc, but they are generally not selling their work, they're selling some kind of personality and books and classes, etc. When I see those guys work (at a slow pace), I wonder if they could build a piece in a full week in a shop - they are not comparable to the times warren provide for simple joints, turnings, etc.

The balance of most of the rest of the folks who even use hand tools as professionals seem to use them where power tools aren't convenient or to get a look.

Is there anyone other than warren? Maybe some chair makers? (most of those guys give classes if we've heard of them, too).

[Sean Hughto]

It's sort of an arbitrary line to draw - electric motors. Does Warren pit saw his planks? Use only an ax to fell trees? I'm not saying he should, mind you. But this a slippery slope on a rather arbitrary distinction.

Do you think you could tell the difference between a table leg I turned on an electric lathe or foot powered or wind powered etc?

[Bradley Gray]

I would not be able to make a living if I gave up the machines or the hand tools. 25 years ago I did a lot of craft fairs and got to know 2 guys who qualified - Spoon maker Tom Metz from West Virginia and broom maker Carlson Tuttle from Kentucky.

[David Weaver]

It's sort of an arbitrary line to draw - electric motors. Does Warren pit saw his planks? Use only an ax to fell trees? I'm not saying he should, mind you. But this a slippery slope on a rather arbitrary distinction.

Do you think you could tell the difference between a table leg I turned on an electric lathe or foot powered or wind powered etc?

It's not so much of an idealistic thing to me, it has more to do with thoughts of using the cap iron, light planes, methods of work, etc. If you're going to do what warren does, then you have to make the times on joints that warren describes, and I've seen very few people actually doing that, short of maybe ge hong from china. Most of the people who write books and talk about their hand tool use work painfully slow.

Sometimes when I bring up the cap iron stuff, since I play the role of pro wrestling heel with it to make a point sometimes, if I think about just smoothing wood, which is probably what most people do with planes, I guess it really doesn't matter what anyone does. everything works. I can't argue with the fact that the LN and LV planes are super nice pieces of gear, and most people who do nothing but smooth are probably going to like them better than they'll like something like a stanley.

I guess what I'm getting at is two unrelated things:
* how fast someone has to be able to work to make a living with hand tools (which usually equates to preferring lighter tools)
* whether or not I'm in the weeds regarding my tool preferences, and if the only reason they've changed is because I do less with power tools than I have in the past

I think if you showed me your table leg and warren turned the same thing, i could tell the difference pretty easily. Warren uses carbon steel tools and doesn't sand any of his work.

[David Weaver]

I would not be able to make a living if I gave up the machines or the hand tools. 25 years ago I did a lot of craft fairs and got to know 2 guys who qualified - Spoon maker Tom Metz from West Virginia and broom maker Carlson Tuttle from Kentucky.

Good point about the spoon and broom guys. I haven't seen a spoon guy here, but my parents (who do craft shows) are friends with a guy who does brooms and he does them unplugged and with a bunch of vintage tools. They sell like crazy, probably because people are transfixed at watching him make brooms while he's at the show. If he just sat behind a booth and said he made them by hand, I don't think he'd sell nearly as much. I sat across from his booth as a kid and he must've sold a couple hundred a day at one of the better shows (at the time, his price was about the same as a broom would've been at a department store).

[Sean Hughto]

I think if you showed me your table leg and warren turned the same thing, i could tell the difference pretty easily. Warren uses carbon steel tools and doesn't sand any of his work.

I think you missed my point, I didn't ask you to compare mine and Warren's lathe skills. I will concede that Warren no doubt far surpasses me. So assume away different turners, tools, etc - in other words, if Warren turned one leg on his treadle and another on my Jet 1642, could you tell which was which?

[george wilson]

For 16 years we used hand tools in the Musical Instrument Maker's Shop in the museum. They still did after I left the shop to become the toolmaker in 1986. Now that I am old and short of breath,that has changed.

[David Weaver]

I think you missed my point, I didn't ask you to compare mine and Warren's lathe skills. I will concede that Warren no doubt far surpasses me. So assume away different turners, tools, etc - in other words, if Warren turned one leg on his treadle and another on my Jet 1642, could you tell which was which?

I don't know without seeing them, but probably. Would I care about the differences that appear from a much slower stroke on a spring pole lathe vs. a higher speed modern lathe? Probably not.

it wasn't so much skill that I was differentiating between you and warren, it was the actual results from the process. But even that was not the point, necessarily, I'm not trying to get into something where you say that X is better than Y because Y was made with old tools and more of a cut vs. a scrape or sand.

It's the fundamental difference between working with hand tools vs. working with hand tools for everything and needing to have a depth of understanding with them and their aspects that doesn't exist if, for example, you're just writing a blog and books and making the pieces is sort of secondary.

It's interesting to me, because the aspects of tools that I appreciate now, having done probably 80% of the dimensioning I've done in the last three years with hand tools, are far different than the aspects that I appreciated when I used hand tools only to smooth and even out something like a dovetail joint, etc. It sort of makes me wonder if I give bad advice (really)!

[David Weaver]

For 16 years we used hand tools in the Musical Instrument Maker's Shop in the museum. They still did after I left the shop to become the toolmaker in 1986. Now that I am old and short of breath,that has changed.

Right, but the shop didn't have to be economically self-supporting. Presume it could've been if you were willing to work long hours, really focus on speed and get rid of the tourists. The guys who stick out in my mind that you described are the barrel makers (were they scottish?) who were literally living in a cold shed hand to mouth before they came to CW. Even then, I don't know that you specified whether or not they had significantly used power tools.

[Kees Heiden]

A guy in Holland Caspar Labarre tried hard to establish a business without powertools. I don't think he really managed in the end, and has a powerplaner now. he is a furniture maker. Last time I heard from him he was splitting some elm tree truncks and worked from there. He set me on the capiron path, even before the Kato video. I really needed the hard data from Kato to make it a real succes, but he sure is a source of inspiration.

http://www.casparlabarre.com/

[Sean Hughto]

See, I agree wholeheartedly that hand work and power tool work can yield meaningfully different results. To take a simple example - shaping a small round table top - on one I use an electric router with a circle attachment to get eh shape and then a round over bit to ease the edges - on another I saw out the circle with a bow saw and shape it with a spokeshave. I have no doubt that I could tell the difference and likely would strongly prefer the latter. And there are lots of operations wher this sort of thing matters - a ROS sanded dresser top versus a planed one etc. etc.

But there are also operations where it makes no difference other than muscle and time. My 1642 has a rheostat speed controller, like most modern lathes, and can go at any speed you want. I've never used a pole lathe or treadle lathe, so maybe there is some hitch in their gitty up or some such that makes for a different result. Interested to hear about it if there is.

Dimensioning by hand might make some difference in the final result in some circumstances. You choose to finish things differently for non-show sides - perfect uniformity of things like thickness are not always required or worth the sweat as you are hand fitting etc.

[Sean Hughto]

I think John Brown used very little power and seemed to make a living from his chairs. Welsh Stick Chairs is GREAT book.

For those interested:
http://www.amazon.com/Welsh-Stick-Chairs-John-Brown/dp/0854420835

[David Weaver]

See, I agree wholeheartedly that hand work and power tool work can yield meaningfully different results. To take a simple example - shaping a small round table top - on one I use an electric router with a circle attachment to get eh shape and then a round over bit to ease the edges - on another I saw out the circle with a bow saw and shape it with a spokeshave. I have no doubt that I could tell the difference and likely would strongly prefer the latter. And there are lots of operations wher this sort of thing matters - a ROS sanded dresser top versus a planed one etc. etc.

But there are also operations where it makes no difference other than muscle and time. My 1642 has a rheostat speed controller, like most modern lathes, and can go at any speed you want. I've never used a pole lathe or treadle lathe, so maybe there is some hitch in their gitty up or some such that makes for a different result. Interested to hear about it if there is.

Dimensioning by hand might make some difference in the final result in some circumstances. You choose to finish things differently for non-show sides - perfect uniformity of things like thickness are not always required or worth the sweat as you are hand fitting etc.

right, still, I'm not trying to get to any differentiation of the final result. I don't believe dimensioning by hand makes any difference in my final results, they may just be a bit less accurate. The issue is more about the rate that one has to work and whether or not it's even a feasible idea (one that I wouldn't undertake to begin with), and whether or not it dictates tool preferences.

I personally care about shapes and crisp lines more than I care so much about how one gets to them.

[Derek Cohen]

How many professional woodworkers use no or generally no power tools? And by that, I don't mean guys who teach classes and give demos or have blogs. I mean not subsidized by that mickey mouse stuff or any other income.

This is triggered by warren's comment in another thread about a professional woodworker only needing 4 or 5 (bench) planes with one iron per. I've seen warren state before that he doesn't use power tools (even his lathe is unpowered). Warren is the only person I have seen who says this.

There are other bloggers who make stuff on blogs and run around to WIA, etc, but they are generally not selling their work, they're selling some kind of personality and books and classes, etc. When I see those guys work (at a slow pace), I wonder if they could build a piece in a full week in a shop - they are not comparable to the times warren provide for simple joints, turnings, etc.

The balance of most of the rest of the folks who even use hand tools as professionals seem to use them where power tools aren't convenient or to get a look.

Is there anyone other than warren? Maybe some chair makers? (most of those guys give classes if we've heard of them, too).

Tom Fidgen

Peter Follansbee

Stephen Shepherd


.... but what is the point of this question?

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Dave Anderson NH]

I suspect that unless one started young with hand tools only and had years of experience it would be difficult to make any kind or reasonable living working only with hand tools except maybe in a museum setting where there is a subsidy. Years of experience day in and day out performing the same operations over and over again is necessary to learn to work efficiently and quickly. I think we wax nostalgically about the "good olde days" which in reality weren't very good at all. Craftsmen of the 18th century and up until the mid 19th century worked 6 days a week and incredibly long hours. Some of that time was locked up doing what we now do by machine. Stock prep comes to mind as a great example. Whether it can be done is less a question at the professional level than should you do it. I would venture that a lot depends on your personal definition of what is a good life. In other words, where do you want to be along the line stretching from bare subsistence at one end to filthy rich at the other end.

[David Weaver]

All of those guys have supplemental (or substantial) income that doesn't actually come from using the hand tools. Fidgen is one that I think of when I think of a slow work pace (and a bunch of modern tools). Peter Follansbee doesn't work slowly, but he's made a bunch of videos and is on staff at a museum. Could he survive off of just his work? I don't know. How many people really do?

The point is more whether working quickly by hand dictates that you'll have a preference for a different type of tool, along with a bit of curiosity of how many people are actually able to find paying clients for works done by hand (which doesn't mean making the same thing someone else makes with power tools).

To me, a LV BU is easier to use for a beginner than a stanley plane, and with a higher strike rate. There's not much to it - if you have tearout, increase the angle and it'll probably go away. If you don't want to use an increased angle all the time, keep two irons.

Does that mean that advice coming from people who dimension by hand is bad advice for people who don't? maybe it is? The average tuner (of favorable woods) might prefer a spring pole lathe and carbon steel tools, but they won't get there in all likelihood because the learning curve is very steep (sharper tools, more economy of a cut, demand for better stock, etc).

Sometimes when I direct people to use a cap iron, I think they'd probably be better off just buying a BU plane (LN or LV) and putting off all of the things that turn me on about the double iron because most of those things are pre-smoothing, and I doubt most people do most of those things in quantity. I certainly don't have the speed that it would take for someone to pay for anything I'd do (nor the design). I couldn't dimension as fast with BU planes but if I wasn't dimensioning, I probably wouldn't care.

I suppose this question is now growing branches. As an aside, I wonder if people who I've suggested something to afterwards go out and do something like buy a BU plane and then set it up and say "you know, Dave's advice was really stupid. It is a lot easier to do X instead". Would they consider advice from a professional the same if it meant a delay before they observed consistent success?

[David Weaver]

I suspect that unless one started young with hand tools only and had years of experience it would be difficult to make any kind or reasonable living working only with hand tools except maybe in a museum setting where there is a subsidy. Years of experience day in and day out performing the same operations over and over again is necessary to learn to work efficiently and quickly. I think we wax nostalgically about the "good olde days" which in reality weren't very good at all. Craftsmen of the 18th century and up until the mid 19th century worked 6 days a week and incredibly long hours. Some of that time was locked up doing what we now do by machine. Stock prep comes to mind as a great example. Whether it can be done is less a question at the professional level than should you do it. I would venture that a lot depends on your personal definition of what is a good life. In other words, where do you want to be along the line stretching from bare subsistence at one end to filthy rich at the other end.

In terms of the good old days, some of my relatives grew up in the good old days, and it's only been the last four generations that had anything (and those are people who grew up after the good old days), the rest lived on dirt except for one person who became a physician in the 1800s (which was unusual in a long line of farmers). I know it's not necessarily directly related to the topic, but that exact point is why I got in the weeds saying paul sellers decrying that we don't have
a craft economy being either misguided or just a sales pitch. A craft economy leaves most just existing with little money to spend on anything in the first place, and I didn't gather anything from my relatives to suggest that they resisted modernization and the ability to have some spending money and leisure time. Our family history (before 1900) has stories of people passing kids back and forth to families who couldn't have kids, etc, because there wasn't enough money and food to feed and cloth the kids they had. When there was some extra money, then the kids would come back. If they had been craft folks instead of farmers, I guess they would've been apprenticed to someone or lent as shop help in exchange for room and board.

[Sean Hughto]

Why do you fetishize speed? ;)

In a production environment, I suppose it's crucial, but other models exist. Suppose I make boutique/custom/studio pieces that well for $10,000 each and aim to produce and sell only10 per year. It may not matter at all if I take three hours to plane something you can plane in 20 minutes.

[David Weaver]

I don't know!! :)

But I like it. It's tremendously satisfying to work at something quickly and in rhythm by hand. I guess we all have our preferences. And how frustrating it was to dimension wood by hand without some experience. The myriad of little problems - tearout, overshooting marking lines, standing around in indecision.

I've noticed how much satisfaction George also says it with when he mentions how quickly he could make guitars 30-40 years ago.

[Pat Barry]

Isn't it really about using the right tool for the job? Not just hand tools for the sake of hand tools or power tools for the sake of power tools. Anyone trying to make a living at this sort of work needs to be efficient and productive and in order to get there, power tools are a great solution. Any professional woodworker purposely forsaking power tools either can't afford the power tools, doesn't have much work to do, maybe lives in a place without power, or is on some sort of personal journey. Otherwise, why would they not use a power tool? It really would be ludicrous

[george wilson]

Yes,back in the 60's,when I had to plane the rosewood and spruce tops,backs and sides by hand,and hand bend the sides(spent a lot of time scraping!!) I could turn out a classical guitar in 2 weeks. The only machines that I used were a bandsaw and drill press. Bending iron was a copper pipe with a propane torch inside.

My satisfaction was tied to the LOW prices I could charge back the. My day job was teaching shop. 2 weeks meant in the Summer. I could not have lived on what I made from guitar making back then.

Money was too tight to buy much stuff,and thickness sanders for the home shop were non existent.

[David Weaver]

Isn't it really about using the right tool for the job? Not just hand tools for the sake of hand tools or power tools for the sake of power tools. Anyone trying to make a living at this sort of work needs to be efficient and productive and in order to get there, power tools are a great solution. Any professional woodworker purposely forsaking power tools either can't afford the power tools, doesn't have much work to do, maybe lives in a place without power, or is on some sort of personal journey. Otherwise, why would they not use a power tool? It really would be ludicrous

Well, Warren could tell us why. I suspect a lot of it has to do with the work that he gets commissioned to do having no substantial advantage with power tools. If someone brings in a piece of furniture for repair and it needs a couple of new turnings that look genuine, as well as some moulding replaced, power tools wouldn't really help much. I'm sure there are legitimate reasons that aren't described just by someone doing work that should be done on power tools (for economy) but choosing to do it with hand tools.

[Keith Mathewson]

By "woodworkers" I'm going to assume you mean furniture makers. I've met quite a few, I've yet to meet one who could survive using hand tools only. That said, hand tool or power tools, they all had one thing in common- poverty. Most had a spouse how made it possible to do what they do. I can only think of one who made a living being a woodworker and her income wasn't much above what was needed to survive.

[george wilson]

Keith,most small "working" artists have a spouse's income to fall back onto.

[Jim Koepke]

Suppose I make boutique/custom/studio pieces that well for $10,000 each and aim to produce and sell only10 per year.

If that eleventh customer comes by, could you send them my way?

BTW, I wish I could get for my spoons what Peter Follansbee gets for his spoons.

If you have the name, you can make the game.

jtk

[David Weaver]

Money was too tight to buy much stuff,and thickness sanders for the home shop were non existent.

Based on what I've seen from some custom makers, the drive to be low priced just ends up getting pushed lower when something like a thickness sander becomes available.

In a shop here locally, there was a custom guitar maker from NC selling stuff (well, I should say he was sending it to the local shop to sell). Figure around 2005, they were sending 5A top guitars to the local guitar dealer with maple necks and mahogany bodies with archtops and two high $$ seymour duncan pickups as well as quality electronics and selling them in the store for $1345. They also had transtint type gloss finishes. I have no idea how they could make them in NC and whether or not they're still in business. The store is also not in business because the guy wanted to make money off of lessons and break even selling guitars. He told me after I bought a guitar from him that I had paid him $100 less than he gave another guy in trade (one of those weirdo godin guitars), but that was OK because he made both of us happy. He also sold me a heritage golden eagle $500 cheaper (direct from heritage) than anyone else would.

Anyway, it seems like there are always a couple of guitar makers who are willing to run a business destined for failure.

[Dave Anderson NH]

I know quite a number of full time professional furnituremakers in New England. It has always been a joke among them that the single most important prerequisite to living the life was having a wife who had a job with benefits, primarily health insurance. The vast majority of them make a significant amount of their income teaching classes, selling plans, writing books, and doing other things not directly related to making and selling a piece of work. Quite a number also do repairs and restorations on historic pieces which is quite lucrative for those with the skills, contacts, and reputation. I know of the case where a well known period furniture maker had a client come into his shop with a recently purchased at auction Chippendale (Rococo) chair that needed repair. He quoted and received the OK to do the $900 job. After the client left he fixed the chair in half an hour. All it took was the small amount of time and 30 years of experience and skill development leading up to it.

Generally speaking almost no one making furniture for a living is getting rich. Even the best who are also good at marketing themselves only make a comfortable income after spending years learning their skills and developing their reputation and following. Myself, I would starve to death because of my work pace. That's OK though since to me the journey is half the fun.

[Brian Holcombe]

If I were to do this for a living, rather than a hobby where I take on private commissions, the first tools I would buy are a very large Italian bandsaw, and a handheld power planer.

Certain procedures yield a much better result by hand, and for that reason I think it is very important to be well versed in using handtools.

If I were turning out 'handmade' slab tables around here, like a handful of people do, I would need to be able to compete in terms of pricing, which all but requires the use of power tools.

[David Weaver]

Myself, I would starve to death because of my work pace. That's OK though since to me the journey is half the fun.

Well, I wouldn't even be able to get to the starting line if it had to do with pay. The journey to me is all of the fun, and I guess like a lot of people do (and if they don't, they should), I try to figure out what feels the best to me in the shop combined with satisfaction of doing it.

As far as restoration goes, when I grew up in the 1980s, there were a few restoration guys near me who made a living doing restoration, and also picking up furniture at auctions and sprucing it up and then selling it out of their garages (I lived in an area that was zoned commercial, but most of the houses were residential, so if you wanted to hang out a shingle and run a business out of your garage, no problem). I grew up in an old area of PA, and there was plenty of good quality old furniture back then, and it was before the current wave of HGTV and throwaway/RTA chinese-origin furniture. I don't know any of those guys, but most of them are not around any longer.

I don't remember any furniture makers, except for a few people who tried to run shops where they made unfinished furniture, but that was all power tool work. I still have some bits and pieces from a couple of those shops, because my parents were keen to save a dollar or two and finish the furniture themselves.

Anyway, there's a ton of antique shops around me who were probably doing the same thing, buying furniture at auction and public sale and then fixing it and selling it in antique shops (New Oxford, PA), and they probably kept the garage finishers busy, too. There are still antique shops around there selling furniture that's very old with very tastefully and neatly done dovetails and good proportioned drawers with thin sides, etc. And cheap (compared to what we'd think we'd need to have to make the same thing). My parents replaced all of their earlier junk furniture with stuff made generally by hand, probably at the suggestion of some of their antique collecting friends.

I just said a lot without saying much - but I think restoration for the guy with a minimal tool kit was the way some folks were still making a few bucks when I was a kid - back in those days middle class people still hadn't gotten to throwing everything away yet, and people kept things from their childhood - when we travel to my parents, I'm still feeding my kids in the same high chair my grandfather was fed in, though it almost got used to start the coal furnace one year - my dad paid a restorer to put it back together from a pile of sticks in the coal storage room.

[Steve Voigt]

I think it's an interesting topic, even if it leads nowhere. A few miscellaneous observations:

- The very best example I can think of is W. Patrick Edwards. He uses no power tools, but he's in a sub-field, like chairmaking or luthiery, that is well-suited to handwork. Spend a little time looking at his marquetry and you will want to sell your tools on ebay and start drinking the proceeds.

- I'm surprised no one brought up Tony Konovaloff. He's about the only cabinetmaker I can think of who uses no power tools. He self-published a book a couple years ago, but he's been doing it forever.

- Edit: I forgot Geremy Coy, who was doing some very nice stuff in D.C. Not sure if he still is; his blog seems to have gone dead (but it has some beautiful pics and is worth a look).

- John Brown, who I admire (Sean is right about that book) wrote a somewhat self-righteous essay in FWW years ago about not using power tools, but it was "except I have a bandsaw." Which to me is a little like saying meat is murder, but I eat Turkey at Thanksgiving and Christmas.

- I'd call Tom Fidgen a professional blogger, not a professional woodworker.

- Follansbee left Plimoth very recently and went out on his own, so it remains to be seen if he can make rent over the long haul. I expect he will; he's the real deal. But working in a museum is not quite the same thing as "professional" in my opinion. That's not to knock it at all, but just to observe that someone is paying you to re-enact history, not necessarily to make product.

[Steve Voigt]

A separate point:

The discussion so far has been entirely focused on Western woodworking. On youtube, you can find plenty of videos of people in Asia making stuff, I assume it's professionally, entirely by hand. David posted a link the other day of the John Majors video of Japanese toolmakers. As far as I know, there are still a lot of independent toolmakers making planes, chisels, saws, etc mostly or entirely by hand. And furniture makers and temple builders, too. Maybe someone who knows their way around Japanese woodworking could post some names or links.
Wilbur Pan posted something on woodnet that I really liked. he said "But the ironic thing is this: if you are at all interested in traditional ways of doing things, then Japanese tools should be right up your alley. Although these days western hand tools are being made to a very high level of quality, they are not being made in ways that maintain traditional toolmaking methods. Japanese tools still are."

[David Weaver]

Yeah on Brown, Fidgen and Follansbee. Follansbee is capable at working at a fairly rapid rate, but he does sell videos and teach a bunch of courses. I don't think there's anything wrong with what he does, but it's not seemingly as rare as someone doing work and making money just off of the work.

You're right, it's going nowhere, but that's where most of my topics go. My original point, or one of them, was triggered by warren suggesting to rob that a double iron plane sounds simpler to use than the LV BU planes. I've never used an LN BU plane, so I can't comment, but when I had a LA jack and hadn't been woodworking that long, it was probably the easiest plane for me to use and not get tearout. I was lazy enough back then that I thought it was a pain to adjust anything or change irons - I just wanted to put a plane together and ram it across wood and get a shiny surface. I had stanley planes at the time, too but didn't use them for any final surfaces.

If you'd have asked me back then, I would've for sure told you that there was no reason to have stanley planes if you have the money to buy premium planes. That was the general gist most places online, too. Harder iron, close the mouth, steeper angle, squarer sides, higher grit to sharpen. Is my advice getting to be the same as I thought other experienced advice was back then? I'm not a professional and never will be, but I'm starting to prefer the stuff some professionals prefer, and I remember how unhelpful I though their advice was when I started, because it wasn't met with instant success.

And I guess the add on is still the same question, does the level of experience and desire for speed (efficiency) push you to use something different than "the best tools you can afford", or whatever other spiffy comment some blogger has made in the last several years?

Strangely enough, one of the things that changed my satisfaction in the shop the most was a comment that I saw made by the wife of an ailing japanese woodworker or tool maker (can't remember which). Someone had visited him to interview him, and his wife said (paraphrasing) when he left, that "no matter what you do, make sure you do it in rhythm. Rhythm is so important". I thought that was an odd comment at the time. There's fast or slow, etc, but what sense does that make? Now I make a conscious effort to set a pace in the shop and continue it and though it seems like I'm not working as fast (because I'm not hurrying), I spend a lot less time standing around staring at the project overanalyzing what to do next. I think it's a good tip. Maybe not a great one for beginners, though, because it could be confused with "just keep moving and don't worry about screwing up", and have people ruining nice stuff.

[Charles Bender]

David,

Up until the time I started a school 6 years ago, then took a job with Popular Woodworking Magazine a little over a year ago, I made my living solely from building furniture (a good 25 years or so). I did so with the use of both power and hand tools. Most of the woodworkers I knew to that point were full-time professionals as well and I don't know any that made a living working entirely with hand tools. Even the Windsor chair makers I know (some of which make amazingly accurate and convincing reproductions of period chairs) used some power tools. I always used more hand tools than most of the guys I knew, but for most it was a matter of economics. If you use only hand tools it's just hard to compete with those that employ power tools. The time value of money comes into play.

[David Weaver]

Wilbur Pan posted something on woodnet that I really liked. he said "But the ironic thing is this: if you are at all interested in traditional ways of doing things, then Japanese tools should be right up your alley. Although these days western hand tools are being made to a very high level of quality, they are not being made in ways that maintain traditional toolmaking methods. Japanese tools still are."

Well, to some extent they are. There are daiya still making stamped dais, but most of the entry level planes that are out there (in the $250 range) don't seem to have much similarity to the hand made stuff made by makers like mosaku or some of the earlier planes. A lot of them appear to be made from prelaminated stock, stamped out, given an identical design and then heat treated yielding an OK iron, but nothing spectacular like you will hear something like stan described. A lot of the higher end tools are still made with the same "old time" care, but there is also a lot of dressy looking expensive stuff that just ends up being ho hum. it's awfully hard for us over here to get good advice from a hardware dealer to tell us which is which.

There's a big leap made in wilbur's asssertion, though, and that is that people here want to do traditional japanese things. I still have some nice planes (fewer than I used to), but have cast them aside for the penultimate work on anything because they:
1) take more total sharpening time than western tools per square of wood thicknessed, dimensioned, whatever
2) are far less convenient to set the double iron on (far far) and then adjust as time goes on. That's important on a penultimate step if you want to keep rhythm going, and can only be cancelled out with familiarity with exactly what you're working with.

When I think of pace and speed, and subtle speed, Hisao on that video that i posted (Hisao is now deceased) embodies exactly what I was talking about. I doubt anyone could make a decent dai of similar quality level with power tools remotely as fast as hisao can make them. Watching him makes me want to "get good at something", and make something good rather than just making a lot of OK things and moving on to the next. The dumb thing is the only thing I really like to make is planes, but I have plenty of room for improvement there. I may just start making planes and give them away, or maybe sell them for the cost of the materials in them.

That will make my advice even more irrelevant!

[John Coloccia]

- The very best example I can think of is W. Patrick Edwards. He uses no power tools, but he's in a sub-field, like chairmaking or luthiery, that is well-suited to handwork. Spend a little time looking at his marquetry and you will want to sell your tools on ebay and start drinking the proceeds.


Bingo...this right here. For example, you could reasonable build a guitar, especially an acoustic guitar, with absolutely no power tools. It wouldn't even take that much longer than using power tools. For example, I'm having a hard time thinking what I use power tools for on an acoustic. Out of convenience, I use a bandsaw to make some rough cuts. I use a thickness sander to precisely thickness things like the plates and the sides. I use a table saw to cut my fret slots. I might use a router to make some cuts. Ultimately, though, there's nothing here that isn't easy to simply do by hand, and it wouldn't even take that much longer.

I see things like chairs being very similar. I think power tools are generally best suited for things which have lots of flat surfaces, or turning.

It's also true that the things that have flat, or at least straight, surfaces are GENERALLY the things that actually pay the rent and keep the lights on. Cabinets, architectural details, etc. It seems crazy to me to build a business around hand tool work for the sake of hand tool work, unless you're trying to make a living by blogging and teaching.

I'd never heard of Tony Konovalov. Assuming that his book is not bringing in a significant amount, he's now the only one I know of that only makes a living building furniture and things like that by hand.

[David Weaver]

One other comment - it's interesting that if you dig up a japanese plane from the 1950s, they are considered vintage and fairly old. They look like current planes, but they are often a touch softer and with simpler steel - probably because they were sharpening on natural stones when they were made (alex gilmore had a rash of them and hardness tested all of the irons - they were all in the 60-62 hardness range).

What do we think of a traditional western tool from the 1950s? Marples planes from the 50s come to mind, we call them "modern". I don't consider even a plane made in 1850 to be that old, because they are mature in terms of development and have often lasted very well. My JT brown jointer is older than that, it could be as early as 1820, and I consider it a fine plane that could easily last another 200 years.

I've never seen or used a japanese tool that is remotely close to that age.

The japanese also have an advantage in that westerners seem to love the tools and razors. How many japanese woodworkers are buying our vintage tools? I don't know. As far as the razors go (kamisori), I remember someone asking if they could get a kamisori in japan (on a shave forum) and someone living there said "probably not, most of those are sold in foreign markets, not many poeple in japan actually buy them". We know that's not true of all of the tools, but we don't know which ones are popular in country unless we pry information from someone like stan or stu. Otherwise, we might be getting the tex-mex version of tools - whatever harima has found to sell well over here.

[Daniel Rode]

Along the lines you your question a similar one occurs to me. How many people would start a woodworking business now to support themselves using only hand tools?

For example, when I consider running a business to feed my family, I can't image how I would justify the time and effort to thickness stock with a hand plane. Even if my business model is authentic reproductions, I can make the final pass with hand tools and everything else with fast power tools.

It's a demanding way to make a living today even with the efficiency of power tools. Outside of some specific niche, I can't see how one would survive without power tools.

As a hobbyist, I'm under no pressure to be efficient or profitable, so I can choose to work how I want to. As woodworking professional, I would not have such freedom.

[John Coloccia]

One other comment - it's interesting that if you dig up a japanese plane from the 1950s, they are considered vintage and fairly old. They look like current planes, but they are often a touch softer and with simpler steel - probably because they were sharpening on natural stones when they were made (alex gilmore had a rash of them and hardness tested all of the irons - they were all in the 60-62 hardness range).

What do we think of a traditional western tool from the 1950s? Marples planes from the 50s come to mind, we call them "modern". I don't consider even a plane made in 1850 to be that old, because they are mature in terms of development and have often lasted very well. My JT brown jointer is older than that, it could be as early as 1820, and I consider it a fine plane that could easily last another 200 years.

I've never seen or used a japanese tool that is remotely close to that age.

The japanese also have an advantage in that westerners seem to love the tools and razors. How many japanese woodworkers are buying our vintage tools? I don't know. As far as the razors go (kamisori), I remember someone asking if they could get a kamisori in japan (on a shave forum) and someone living there said "probably not, most of those are sold in foreign markets, not many poeple in japan actually buy them". We know that's not true of all of the tools, but we don't know which ones are popular in country unless we pry information from someone like stan or stu. Otherwise, we might be getting the tex-mex version of tools - whatever harima has found to sell well over here.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I've watched a lot of videos on various Japanese crafts. Not just woodworking, by the way. Perhaps I'm over generalizing things, but a common theme seems to be that it's usual for multiple hands to touch a project before it's done. For example, when you make a sword, one guy alloys the metal, another guy forms it. Then another guy sharpens it, and yet another guy wraps the hilt. In many of the woodworking videos I see, the guy is always using chisels, planes and saws, but the stock always appears to be somewhat prepared and there's often some power tools mulling around in the background.

It's a different mentality than we typically have here. In the US, we seem to have a mentality that we should start from a tree, make lumber, dry it, surface it, etc etc etc etc. I think that's absolutely crazy. I even see it sometimes where people will spend all sorts of time and money making questionable jigs when they could just take the piece down to the local mill, pay $15, and have them crank it out easily and safety on equipment designed for it.

I think when you have the mentality that you don't have to do EVERYTHING yourself, it opens up a world of possibility, especially for hand-tool work. If you have to make some cabinets (not kitchen cabinets...an armoire, for example), and you start with reasonably straight and sized wood, then I'll wager that someone COULD reasonably scratch out some sort of existence doing things like this. If you're starting with big chunks of rough wood, as I think most are thinking when you talk about doing everything by hand, then I think it's crazy.

[David Weaver]

I think that's true for a lot of makers, maybe except for the largest (like Tsunesaburo, I believe, has a guy or guys in house to do their ledge dais). But for other makers, any stamped dai that I've received has been from a guy who is not making any metal tool parts. I've gotten several nimura dais even on run of the mill inexpensive ($250) planes, which is a little bit unusual, but I think it had more to do with the seller being a friend of the daiya (or whatever you call a guy who makes dais).

Chisel handles are available individualy, so are hoops and ferrules, so I'd assume a lot of chisel makers buy those from makers. Same with knife makers, most buy their steel prelaminated, and I can't imagine they're making the cheap traditional handles - it's not worth their time when they can make valuable knives. Maybe on the very expensive knives that have hand sculpted handles they are making them.

I have gotten into the mud with Larry before, but I have suggested that they might be able to make double iron planes if they didn't have to make the iron and cap iron, and they could use forged irons, too, instead of tapered modern steel. However, I have no clue who would blacksmith such a thing for a reasonable rate. maybe if there was enough demand to keep a guy with a power hammer busy full time, someone could do that (the last time that was suggested, it was either me or george and I think larry received it as our accusation that he couldn't make a double iron, but I don't think he could do it efficiently like someone who only makes double irons. It's maybe one of the most comical displays of discussion about whether or not it costs more to make a double iron plane, because nobody these days is making a vintage tapered iron for a reasonable cost. George mentioned that the blacksmiths were making them at CW, but that's a subsidized operation, and they were using 1070, which doesn't really make a suitable iron).

Anyway, that's a good point. getting the market is challenge number one, though. At least from what I'd gather, and like everything I've come across, except for a few well heeled clients, it seems like things always devolve into price discussions and corners would be cut very soon.

[Zach Dillinger]

I have other income, of course, but I do sell my work and speed / accuracy is my 100% concern because it dictates a lot of the look of the furniture I am interested in. If I didn't have any other income, I would probably starve even at my pace because I haven't the first clue how to market my work, or I would be forced to make a bunch of stuff I don't want to make to pay the bills. Being a good businessman is a completely separate skillset.

[Brian Ashton]

By "woodworkers" I'm going to assume you mean furniture makers. I've met quite a few, I've yet to meet one who could survive using hand tools only. That said, hand tool or power tools, they all had one thing in common- poverty. Most had a spouse how made it possible to do what they do. I can only think of one who made a living being a woodworker and her income wasn't much above what was needed to survive.

Pretty much what I was thinking. In 32 years of being in the business I've not seen anyone make a liveable wage off purely furniture making without any external subsidies of any kind, power tools or not.

[David Weaver]

There's more to make than furniture, though. carvings, architectural restoration work, etc. There have been a few furniture makers around here. About 10 years ago, someone had a big installation of modernish furniture made of curly maple and purpleheart (which is a combination I just can't take), though I don't know if they sold much. There's someone with a booth at the local tradesperson's show who is making 18th century stuff, too, but he's right out of school. I don't know if he's still going or not.

If anyone could do it, I'd think they'd have to be a jack of all trades type, and develop a pretty long client list with folks who have specific needs.

[Graham Haydon]

"How many professional woodworkers use no or generally no power tools?"

From a Joinery (Windows, doors, stairs etc) point of view I don't know of anyone who uses no power. With the larger sections normally employed it would be difficult to make a living unless you could find a willing patron. I have yet to meet one. From the point of view of planes all of us have a Bailey #4 and then there is the mix of a #5, a few block planes, shoulder planes etc. These are mainly used for adjusting. I cant recall ever hand planning an item to a finish apart from when I was at college.


I think it would be really tough to take the "hand tool only" approach when setting up a business. A realistic review of a business plan would be needed before trying it.

[Frank Martin]

I don't know anyone who does it by hand only. Also, other than some things where power tools don't add much value, I wonder why would anyone do it that way anyway in a business setting where every additional labor hour adds to the cost unless there is more value generated. I think there are other ways to add value, such as unique design, etc., than purely hand made. I do this strictly as a hobby, even then I doubt the best and fastest hand plane user can dimension and square a board faster than I can using power tools. I use hand tools as a supplement to power tools, not instead. Of course like using them as they are more fun and quiet, but I don't see them as a replacement in a business context in general other than potentially some super niche market (e.g., the marquetry example given above).

[Simon MacGowen]

Good point by Chuck here about the efficient use of time. I do know a couple of guys who would like to say they are hand tool only woodworkers...80 to 90% of the time may I say and they are not professional woodworkers. They build small things, spoons, small boxes, etc. To build furniture on a wide scale (cabinets, chairs, beds, and desk and tables, etc.) using hand tools alone to make a living is workable only to those who have other income or wealth to support them. Making a guitar all by hand tools is not the same as making three full size desks or conference tables on commission.

A one-time piece for a contest or what not (commissioned piece) is fine with using hand tools only; to do it for a living, there aren't many of them in today's world. All well-known furniture makers who are also contributors in FWM use power tools in their day job. Of course, Chris Schwarz -- a relentless promoter of the use of hand tools -- himself uses his tablesaw, cordless drill etc. freely...and so did Tage Frid, George Nakashima, Sam Maloof and James Krenov.

Simon

[John Coloccia]

A one-time piece for a contest or what not (commissioned piece) is fine with using hand tools only; to do it for a living, there aren't many of them in today's world. All well-known furniture makers who are also contributors in FWM use power tools in their day job. Of course, Chris Schwarz -- a relentless promoter of the use of hand tools -- himself uses his tablesaw, cordless drill etc. freely...and so did Tage Frid, George Nakashima, Sam Maloof and James Krenov.

Simon

If you listen to Sam talk, he basically considers the chair "done" once the rough shapes are cut, the joinery is cut, and the chair is in one piece. That's basically all machine work. Then one of his "boys" does some finish shaping with rasps, grinders, sanders, etc. It's funny to hear him talk. He doesn't strike me as someone who puts any particular value on hand tool use. I'm pretty sure that if he could have found a way to do the whole thing on a bandsaw, he'd have just done the whole thing on a bandsaw.

[Mike Henderson]

If you listen to Sam talk, he basically considers the chair "done" once the rough shapes are cut, the joinery is cut, and the chair is in one piece. That's basically all machine work. Then one of his "boys" does some finish shaping with rasps, grinders, sanders, etc. It's funny to hear him talk. He doesn't strike me as someone who puts any particular value on hand tool use. I'm pretty sure that if he could have found a way to do the whole thing on a bandsaw, he'd have just done the whole thing on a bandsaw.
Amen. I visited with Sam Maloof several times and he was absolutely not a hand tool worker. John's right - if he could have done everything on the bandsaw, he would have.

Sam was a pragmatic woodworker.

Personally, I view people who do all hand work as idealistic woodworkers, or woodworkers who just enjoy the process of hand tool work. But if you're trying to make money, it's hard to replace a good wide jointer and planer for preparing stock.

Mike

[Warren Mickley]

When you look at 18th century work, we don't seem to be able to match their speed, machine tools or not. It is hard to believe how much work they put out. Here is an example:

The single iron smoothing plane in the Seaton chest was bought from Gabriel in 1796 for 2s 1d. For a craftsman in that day that represented 10% of a weeks pay, maybe 6 or 7 hours work. (The double iron smoother cost 2s6d). That money not only paid the craftsmen who made the plane and the iron, it helped make Christopher Gabriel a wealthy man. A few years ago we could buy a smoothing plane from Old Street Tool for $350. How much did all the efficiency of an electric grinder, end mills, planer, saws, etc. help? The median wage for a cabinetmaker in Arkansas is 15.25 an hour; today it would take one of them 23 hours to buy the plane.

Somebody mentioned windows. A woodworker I know told me about making windows for an 18th century house. He made this jig and that jig "in no time at all". And set up a bunch of machines "in a snap". When I asked the price it was just about double what I charged for doing that work by hand. I bet Zach could undercut him also.

For someone who is used to doing machine work, handwork is slow. If you do it all the time, you get good at it.

[Keith Mathewson]

Keith,most small "working" artists have a spouse's income to fall back onto.

Then you would be an artist and not really earning a livelihood. This is something that I have told a lot of furniture makers or would be furniture makers I run into. If you enjoy your hobby and you're good at it that's one thing but it's very different to try and earn a livelihood at it.

[george wilson]

My wife,with some help from me,has been making jewelry for about 20 years now. She has never made as much money as she made as an apprentice in the Book Binding Shop in the museum,where we met. And,she has worked twice as many hours to make that!! It is very hard having your own business,for most people,especially if you are making stuff.

But,she wanted a creative job,and to be her own boss.

[Steve Voigt]

When you look at 18th century work, we don't seem to be able to match their speed, machine tools or not. It is hard to believe how much work they put out. Here is an example:

…

For someone who is used to doing machine work, handwork is slow. If you do it all the time, you get good at it.

While there is no doubt that power can save a ton of time in many situations, I agree with Warren's main point. The equation hand tools = slow is often just a product of people not having mastery.
Here is another example (https://logancabinetshoppe.wordpress.com/2012/07/30/do-you-still-think-hand-tools-are-slow/), via the Logan cabinet shop blog. Bob relates that the table is estimated to have taken 9 hours to complete. I think if you posted that pic in the power tools section and asked for someone to make the table in a day, you wouldn't get a lot of takers.

[Jim Matthews]

I would expand the question, slightly.

How many woodworkers can make a living, building furniture alone?
It seems to me that nearly all the reference materials we cite
are written by talented furniture makers that choose to teach and write
to supplement their shop earnings.

I suspect it's a rare maker that can just sell his furniture to eager clients and make a living.

[John Coloccia]

While there is no doubt that power can save a ton of time in many situations, I agree with Warren's main point. The equation hand tools = slow is often just a product of people not having mastery.
Here is another example (https://logancabinetshoppe.wordpress.com/2012/07/30/do-you-still-think-hand-tools-are-slow/), via the Logan cabinet shop blog. Bob relates that the table is estimated to have taken 9 hours to complete. I think if you posted that pic in the power tools section and asked for someone to make the table in a day, you wouldn't get a lot of takers.

I wonder if that includes all the work the apprentices do?

[Steve Voigt]

I wonder if that includes all the work the apprentices do?

I'm not sure…it was a very small family shop. I'm sure it's in the Charles Hummel book. I should get that back from the local library…I'm literally the only person who ever checks it out.

[george wilson]

Apprentices did a significant amount of the grunt work. We can't accurately say that 18th. C. workmen were faster. Often apprentices were not paid. They were kept.

In Holland in the 17th. C.,an apprentice harpsichord maker was paid nothing,unless the master gave him a few coins here and there. He lived with the master and his family. When he was at the end of his apprenticeship,he had to make a harpsichord that was judged to be good by the guild. He was then accepted into the guild. The master got to keep the harpsichord in return for the room and board of the apprentice. I am not sure HOW a former apprentice managed to get money together to open his own shop. Probably he worked as a journeyman. Possibly he could eventually open his own shop,or perhaps never.

[Simon MacGowen]

It is a fantasy to believe that the woodworkers in the 18th c. or hand tool only woodworkers today can compete with power tools, except when we are talking about very unique situations where power tools have not been created to handle them. Hands down, no one can dress 100 board feet of pranks faster than a jointer and thickness planer. That kind of grunt work is NOT what a skilled woodworker is trained for in the first place!

When it comes to mass production, no hand tool users, no matter how efficient or skilled they are, can come close to the productivity of using power tools. If my school's cabinet builder used only hand tools (assuming he could find the woodworker) to build all the cabinets in the school, the school would have no money left to hire the shop assistants.

Rob Cosman can cut a dovetail joint fast, really fast, I would say. Now he would tell you he can't make one hundred dovetail joined boxes as fast as someone who has a dovetail jig and a router. Nonsense if he says otherwise.

Paul Sellers sometimes likes to say that it is faster to do this or that than setting up the machine, but he admits he uses the jointer to the grunt work. He will tell you that it is faster to do something in some context, not as a general statement.

Ikea would have hired all the world's woodworkers and given them hand tools instead of making their products in China...as cheap as labor there is, using machinery of all sorts in the production.

Let's love hand tools, traditional woodworking techniques and enjoy them, but with our feet on the ground, not trying to send out the incorrect message that hand tool workers are faster.

Simon

[Warren Mickley]

I wonder if that includes all the work the apprentices do?

That particular table cost 3 pounds, 12 shillings in April 1796. Part of the cost was the mahogany and the tilt top mechanism with brass latch. I doubt it was made in 9 hours. At that time the Dominys valued their labor at 4s 6d a day.

A tea table without the tilt top was about 1L 14 s or 1L 4s. A mahogany stand (small diameter table) was 16 shillings and a cherry stand was 10 shillings, maybe 2 days labor.

In the 18th century furniture was usually priced according to the time it took a journeyman to complete the work on his own.

[John Coloccia]

That particular table cost 3 pounds, 12 shillings in April 1796. Part of the cost was the mahogany and the tilt top mechanism with brass latch. I doubt it was made in 9 hours. At that time they valued their labor at 4s 6d a day.

A tea table without the tilt top was about 1L 14 s or 1L 4s. A mahogany stand (small diameter table) was 16 shillings and a cherry stand was 10 shillings, maybe 2 days labor.

In the 18th century furniture was usually priced according to the time it took a journeyman to complete the work on his own.

I'm sorry for my ignorance. Can you explain what all the denominations are? Honestly, I don't know shillings from Shinola! :)

[Sean Hughto]

Two words: John Henry

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=o3Hdobado20

[Warren Mickley]

1 shilling is 12 pence (1s=12d)
20 shillings is 1 pound (20s= 1L)

The table pictured cost 3 pound and 12 shillings or 72 shillings. A days wages was 4 1/2 shillings. Mahogany furniture was quite a bit more expensive than walnut or cherry.

[Mike Henderson]

Perhaps what this disagreement is about is production furniture as opposed to custom furniture. In my mind, there's no doubt that production furniture HAS to be made with power equipment in order to meet the price points. While this isn't "furniture", there's absolutely no way someone can build kitchen cabinets by hand, heck even by machine, and compete on price with factory made cabinets. And the factory made cabinets are "perfect". Absolutely on size and absolutely square. But when you see them being made, everything, including the assembly, is done by machine (big machines).

For a one off piece of furniture, a lot of it can be made by hand, especially if you're getting "artist" prices for the furniture.

Mike

[John Coloccia]

1 shilling is 12 pence (1s=12d)
20 shillings is 1 pound (20s= 1L)

The table pictured cost 3 pound and 12 shillings or 72 shillings. A days wages was 4 1/2 shillings. Mahogany furniture was quite a bit more expensive than walnut or cherry.

Thanks, Warren. Wow...2 1/2 weeks pay for a small table. A barrel with a table cloth tossed over it doesn't seem so bad, though now I'm wondering how much coopers charged for a barrel!

[David Weaver]

Mike, you're right, I'm not conditioning this on beating power tools at production furniture. I'm more curious about how many people actually make a living and have pushed themselves to really be able to use hand tools as efficiently as possible, and then on top of that, whether it makes a difference in what such a person prefers for tools (and how that might affect advice to someone less skilled).

But I was genuinely curious, too, to find woodworkers who are making a living at hand tools, partly because I secretly hope that I'll get to see some span of their work so that I can learn from how they do work.

George's work in the CW video was a good example - he's doing super accurate work with hand tools and with a good rhythm/work rate. When we see some of these bloggers demonstrating tools, or the guys who are "make a few projects, write a few books" types working, if I had to work at the rates being demonstrated, I'd never have switched to mostly hand tools.

I wouldn't say it's so much of an idealistic thing, it's a tactile satisfaction or satisfaction of an itch and need to break a sweat kind of thing. The feeling you get when you leave the shop and your hands and shoulders and legs feel like you have done something. It's something I didn't get as a kid, because all of my jobs back then required breaking a sweat and getting literally exhausted, but I appreciate that combination of all things together working with hand tools. The ability to keep the work in front of you, to work the wood instead of setting up machines, to let elements of whatever's being made be limited by only what your eye can see or imagine, or what you can make tools to produce. If I were a power tool worker (which I was entirely when I first started), I'd have no tools in my garage by now - I'd have quit.

[Chris Fournier]

Woodworking with handtools may be a cult thing but it shouldn't be a religion. Look at the oldest of American woodworking shops, they had machines. Just because you like woodworking by hand doesn't mean that a patron or client is willing to pay you to indulge yourself to do so. That is the realm of the hobbiest - a sweet realm indeed - do what pleases you.

I have made a living using handtools, I've made musical instruments, custom furniture, built ins, fishing nets, and fly rods. I have never chosen to slave over a handtool for money when a machine tool could make me money. I have never shied away from using handtools when it made sense.

I am a woodworker, not a handtooler. Truth betold I am a fabricator which means I make stuff and employ any method that works.

[Derek Cohen]

David, thank you for starting another interesting thread. There are lots thought-provoking comments. However I think that "who" uses handtools professionally takes us down a blind alley. Questions such as that tend to polarise all into for and against. Not helpful.

The questions I would pose to all include .... Why use handtools? What do hand tools teach one that power tools cannot? Where is there an advantage in using hand tools? In other words, what can we learn from hand tool use to make us more accurate, more sensitive, more aesthetically-orientated woodworkers?

The issue of speed is partly relevant. I know that I would rather use a jointer to flatten a large, heavy and hard length of Jarrah than a scrub plane and jointer plane. I can do the latter - did for many years before I purchased the power tools - but I am not a masochist. Similarly, I'd rather resaw on a bandsaw to a desired thickness than scrub away with a plane, since that is such a waste of timber. Does working with hand tools limit the wood you can or will use?

I'd like to believe that working by hand has made me more aware and sensitive to the qualities of wood - preserving or highlighting the figure - but I doubt that a good machine-orientated woodworker should be any less aware than a hand-orientated woodworker.

There are indeed a number of delicate operations that are better executed by hand than power - and this is partly the reason many of us use hand tools. Beyond this it begins to become more of a life style event, a choice of method, which we justify. The related question here is, "which power tools would be grabbed by a woodworker if they could be transported back in time to the 18C?". Would they recognise that power would limit them in some important manner?

Regards from Perth

Derek

[John Coloccia]

The questions I would pose to all include .... Why use handtools?

I use hand tools when they make the job faster, better, or significantly safer. For example, when I make the scarf joint on my guitar necks, I straighten and clean up the joint with a block plane, free hand. Why? Because no matter what power tool technique I've tried, I haven't found a way to nearly approach the precision I can achieve by hand. It's just a difficult joint to precisely make on a machine.

Much like Chris, I never considered woodworking to be a hand tool vs power tool thing, and IMHO that's a truly bizarre way to look at it. I just go into the shop and make stuff.

[David Weaver]

Yeah, i don't think this is a hand vs. power tool question until it comes down to my personal preference for shop satisfaction. But that's a different matter, and why I separated professionals. Professionals work differently than amateurs due with power tools, and if there are any other than warren with hand tools, I'd suspect they work different than amateurs.

There is a reality, I was thinking about this last night since this topic has really become a bunch of pondering, and my thoughts had to do with folks I know as professional woodworkers here. One has gone to taking classes (l believe) and then teaching them here. I don't know that person that well. Another is a sibling of a restaurant owner we know. He bought a bunch of tools, probably on liquidation, and has hired a few employees and has been making a go of it for several years. The work looks like no hand tools work, it's coarse things like restaurant tables for bar type settings (complete with pour on finish). Nothing wrong with that work if it pays.

What I was more curious about, though (or maybe my thoughts are slowly evolving as this thread goes on - what is that, question creep?) is what it looks like when a professional woodworker is working on the clock, how is it different from what I do, can I learn something from it, and does it affect tool preference vs. what I call the tool show preference (that being showing a heavy plane on easy wood so that the user perceives the best tool as the one that seems the most effortless on wood).

What I didn't intend is for the hand tool woodworkers to be pigeonholed into doing something suitable for power tools (commodity production type stuff, etc). Warren, my apologies if I'm talking about you too much or supposing what you do - but you're it, I guess, until someone else comes up who fits the description - but anyway, I sense warren can do joiners work, restoration work, carving, mouldings, cabinetwork, turnings, ....many things where something specific is needed and it may not focus on the ability to remove several cubic feet of wood from something that is low value.

Derek, I agree with you about hand tools affecting wood selection. When I was power tool only, I wanted the wood that worked most like metal (that's how i'd summarize it), that had sharp corners - I bought a lot of hard maple. I don't buy much hard maple now. It looks OK quartered, but that's about it, and it's not that easy to find it quartered in quantity. Cherry is pretty much the local staple. I also used a lot of plywood early on and troubled over dadoes and such that just barely fit together. I don't care much about that stuff now, and I like joints that are closed just like everyone else, but I don't needle over it - they just need to be handsome. To me, it's put more emphasis on design because there is freedom to do anything you'd like to do. I really hated fiddling with dado blades on a TS and setting up jigs to try to get perfect fits to whatever the plywood thickness of the week was back then!!

So, anyway, niche oriented with hand tools and not adversarial vs. power tools.

[Zach Dillinger]

The questions I would pose to all include .... Why use handtools?

Derek

I use them because the tool itself and the techniques necessary for working quickly (yes, just as fast or faster than power tools when talking about one-offs and not having a power tool mindset when using hand tools) make a visual difference in the character of the project for the work I'm interested in. If I made something that was originally made by machine, i.e. A&C, modern stuff, etc., then I would probably use machines. When trying to make good looking, accurate period pieces, even the method for thicknessing (if you thickness the workpiece!) makes a huge difference in the overall success of the piece. Power tool surfaces and perfect fancy dovetails just look weird to me on period reproduction work.

[Zach Dillinger]

That particular table cost 3 pounds, 12 shillings in April 1796. Part of the cost was the mahogany and the tilt top mechanism with brass latch. I doubt it was made in 9 hours. At that time the Dominys valued their labor at 4s 6d a day.

A tea table without the tilt top was about 1L 14 s or 1L 4s. A mahogany stand (small diameter table) was 16 shillings and a cherry stand was 10 shillings, maybe 2 days labor.

In the 18th century furniture was usually priced according to the time it took a journeyman to complete the work on his own.

Warren, you mention the tea table without tilt is roughly 34 shillings, while the table under discussion is approximately 72 shillings. Do you know if the 34 shilling tea table in mahogany? Do we have a solid way to estimate material / hardware / profit margins for these pieces? Perhaps Kirtley's scan of the Philadelphia price book?

[george wilson]

Did you guys read my post #55? That's how apprentices were NOT paid. They were paid the cost of feeding them and clothes. At least they were for sure in the Netherlands. This is like getting your kids to work free for you.

[Kees Heiden]

Yeah my forefathers weren't afraid for a bit of slavery. But still they could do some astonishing work at reckless speed. I always like the example of the build of the "Zeven Provincien", a war ship, in 1665: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_ship_De_Zeven_Provinci%C3%ABn_(1665)
They build this ship in Rotterdam in 8 months! There were 100 man working on the warf. Of course, they got support from other companies in town who were supplying all kinds of stuff, but there were several of these ships under preparation at that time in Rotterdam, because we were at war with England. So the whole town must have been bussing with activity.

They are now recreating the ship, started in 2008 and they are far from finished yet, despite all the powertools they have. Nothing like the thread of war to get busy.

[Tom M King]

I don't think I've ever had a thought process that included an either/or option or power tool or hand tool. I have many of each, do this for a living, but just use what is most efficient for getting the job done with the best quality. For instance, when putting up wood siding, I'll use a handsaw. Marking the board with a preacher eliminates any concern about whether the corner board is plumb or not, and I can make the cut with a handsaw accurately enough so that there is no gap, but you can still move the board with a finger. It's too much trouble with a power saw to achieve this kind of accuracy at every joint the first time. A lot of people think you put the board in a wee bit long, but that will open up the joint underneath too many times, so it's better to fit perfect first go.

I'm not the one that Warren was referring to about making some 18th Century reproduction windows, but I did make a run of 43 sash about a year ago. Type of wood needs to be factored in too, as I talk about the time it took. The wood was Long Leaf Heart Pine milled in 1830 to start with, and remilled into the parts we used. If you haven't worked with this wood before, think Yellow Pine with case hardened cell structure. It is completely stable though, after having seen many seasons of movement. Every piece stays straight, when you get it straight. Grain was all fairly close quarter-sawn.

I made them to be exact reproductions of the one complete original we had. After I got into the job, I was able to repair about a dozen of the originals that had some pieces broken, by substituting the new pieces for any broken, or rotten parts.

It always takes a lot longer to do something the first time, than it does after you have a number of repetitions completed. At first, even after I had the machines set up to suit me, I couldn't complete more than one complete 9 light sash in a day. There are 22 mortise and tenon joints in a 9-lite, and each one needs to be hand fitted, even when using power tools as much as possible. Wood cost for each sash ended up to be about $75. The Foundation and I agreed on a price of $750 for a 9-lite sash. I'm including price, since the discussion is about doing this for a living, and I'm getting to the part about using only hand tools.

As I got into the job, I got the processes dialed in to the point that I could make 2-1/2 9-lights any day, and some days completed 3. The 4 and 6 lights went comparably faster.

When I got to the point of only having one left to build, a friend asked me if I had made any completely by hand. I hadn't even considered it, but decided to do it for fun. I had repurposed an old sash plane that I got off of ebay for 16 bucks to exactly match the ovolo profile of the originals. I had repurposed that plane because at first I thought I would need to clean up any milling marks left by the custom made router bits. As it turned out, the Whiteside bits cut so cleanly that it was not needed.

The wood had already been milled to rough length, exact thicknesses, and straightened. I completed the one handmade sash in a day. I had the handwork processes dialed in that were used in combination with the power tools. A couple of mortising machines, using the power tool method, saved most of the time for the 22 mortises, and there was some extra time running the ovolo, and rabbets with hand planes. Being my first time, I could have, no doubt, gotten some faster, but I'm pretty sure I could not have completed more than the one sash in a days work, or at least a normal length day.

So comparing the 2-1/2 sash on a slow day with power tools, and 1 sash with hand tools, it gives some sort of a time comparison for making sash. I have made them before out of White Pine, and Walnut, which goes a lot faster, and easier anyway, than with the fragile grained old Heart Pine. There is no making an interference fit joint with Heart Pine.

I expect the crew building the old ship today, could build a second one considerably faster than they do with the first one.

[Kees Heiden]

I expect the crew building the old ship today, could build a second one considerably faster than they do with the first one.

It is their second ship. The first one was the Batavia, and there was an aborted first attempt to build the Zeven Provincien. But you are right of course. The crew is completely different. Back in the 17th century it was a well oiled organisation, used to build ships and with the extra thread of the English to put some extra effort in. The modern crew is mostly learning stuff. They have a few professionals and a bunch of "apprentices", kids who are in college and who are learning trades, or jobless people looking for a new direction in their life.

[Frank Drew]

To Derek's question "Why use handtools?"... when Tage Frid was a young apprentice in Denmark (as George notes, this means he was subsidized by his master), for his first job actually working wood -- after months just doing scut work around the shop such as setting the woodstoves in the mornings and sweeping up in the evenings -- he was shown an enormous pile of rough sawn boards and was told to prepare them to specific dimensions, all by hand, ripping, crosscutting and planing to thickness. The latter operation took the longest: He'd plane one surface straight and true then scribe around the edges to the desired thickness, then turn the board over and have at it on the second face. He said the whole thing was backbreaking and took him months to do, he wouldn't ever want to have to do it again, but he did learn a great deal about working wood, its characteristics, etc., and that proved invaluable for the rest of his life, both as a woodworker and teacher.

I'd have to see that tilt-top table done in 9 hours start to finish, by one person, to believe it. The base alone with a turned column, profiled and shaped feet dovetailed to the column, tilt mechanism... well, I'd take my hat off to the craftsman who could do that, but I take the point that you get really good, and fast, at something if you do it all the time.

[Dave Anderson NH]

One thing to note here folks in addition to the preparation and simpler work carried out by apprentices, furnituremakers didn't always do the complete job. In the Uk where there was a well established coterie of specialized trade shops and in the larger colonial North American urban centers a large proportion of the work was subcontracted. On something like a pedestal table a turning shop might have done the pedestal and a carver done the claw and ball feet and the carvings on the legs and pedestal. Seating furniture was sent out to drapers (upholsterers) and gilders did the gold leaf on finials and cartouches. When it came to Federal style furniture, much of the banding, paterae, and other inlays were purchased from shops that specialized in this type of work. Baltimore was a huge center with almost a dozen inlay making shops. There were also specialized finishing shops.


Today as hobbyists we, and often the professionals too, do almost everything from start to finish. Rarely does anyone farm out part of the work except maybe for upholstery. I think this is often a mistake. I can carve, but not well, and I really don't take a lot of joy doing it, so on an important piece for my wife I should probably send it out. Unless your ego is involved and you need to say that it is solely you work I think this is a valid approach.

[Graham Haydon]

Nice post Tom, I remember seeing the photos of those windows, would love to try some of that pine!

[John Coloccia]

Today as hobbyists we, and often the professionals too, do almost everything from start to finish. Rarely does anyone farm out part of the work except maybe for upholstery. I think this is often a mistake. I can carve, but not well, and I really don't take a lot of joy doing it, so on an important piece for my wife I should probably send it out. Unless your ego is involved and you need to say that it is solely you work I think this is a valid approach.

I had mentioned this exact thing earlier on with regards to Japanese craftsmen. They have no problem sending out specialized jobs to specialists. In the guitar building world (not necessarily all instruments, but definitely guitars) there is a GREAT stigma to doing this. In order to be a successful builder, you almost need to master several different disciplines, each one of which could really take a lifetime to master. There's a little secret underworld in the biz from people farming out neck work, fret work, finish work, etc, and even ghost builders. It's all very hush hush, no one ever talks about it, and when they're caught it's a big scandal. LOL.

I'm not really sure when this sense of shame developed, but I'm pretty sure it's fairly recent.

[Kelly Cleveland]

A cabinet maker in my area made the entire casework for a recreated baroque pipe organ using hand tools. Of course he was given many years and lots of funds, otherwise I think he is a power tool user.

[David Weaver]

I had mentioned this exact thing earlier on with regards to Japanese craftsmen. They have no problem sending out specialized jobs to specialists. In the guitar building world (not necessarily all instruments, but definitely guitars) there is a GREAT stigma to doing this. In order to be a successful builder, you almost need to master several different disciplines, each one of which could really take a lifetime to master. There's a little secret underworld in the biz from people farming out neck work, fret work, finish work, etc, and even ghost builders. It's all very hush hush, no one ever talks about it, and when they're caught it's a big scandal. LOL.

I'm not really sure when this sense of shame developed, but I'm pretty sure it's fairly recent.

It's funny that it's that way in guitars, because in the world of banjos, there's all kinds of stuff being built by other people. Cox Rim, Tony Pass rim, Frank Neat Necks, Huber tone rings (or whoever else is making tone rings), and even aging being done on brass parts separately by someone other than the maker. If you get one of those tricked out banjos with all of the best parts sourced from different places, they cost ​more.

but when I think about guitars, I can't think of anything other than the tuners, pickups and electronics being of a known make.

[Simon MacGowen]

I'd have to see that tilt-top table done in 9 hours start to finish, by one person, to believe it. The base alone with a turned column, profiled and shaped feet dovetailed to the column, tilt mechanism... well, I'd take my hat off to the craftsman who could do that, but I take the point that you get really good, and fast, at something if you do it all the time.

+1 Seeing is believing.

It is always easy to say I finished project so and so in x hours when in fact a lot of prep hours were not counted. If someone says he or she can cut a half blind dovetail faster than Rob Cosman cuts a dovetail joint, I say show it live, don't just show the finished joint. I know several woodworkers who boast (including a few in some woodworking forum) about their work or speed, but few could really support their "achievements" with either pictures or videos. Paul Sellers can really get things done quick and he has shown that in person at tradeshows.... No one believes Tommy Mac or in the power tool arena, Norm Abram could finish their builds in half an hour but neither did they say they could. I find it hard to understand why people who choose to build using hand tools alone want to or try to convince others that hand tools get things done faster than power tools. They simply don't for furniture-makers who do that for a living. Visit a shop where Festool tools are used to build furniture and you'll understand why these people spend so much on power tools: speed, accuracy and efficiency.

Simon

[dan sherman]

The questions I would pose to all include .... Why use handtools?

To me it all comes down to choosing the best tool for the job at hand, some times its a power tool, some times its a hand tool. It's not something I'm conscious of, but if I had to make a list I would say any number of the following things play a part in choosing rather a hand tool or power tool gets used.

1. what tools are in my arsenal
2. how repetitive is the task
3. how safe is the task
4. what level of accuracy is required for the task
5. how long will the task take given the various methods

[Chris Fournier]

When it comes to discussing the efficacy of handtool only work vs machine tools or a combo of both, the raw materials inevitabley start as lumber and the purity the handtoolers espouse starts from there. The heavy lifting has been done. Not really that pure or courageous. The caviat being chair makers, carvers and spoon makers who if hardcore can start from a log.

I took the time once, actually a couple of times to break a log out by hand - for musical instrument purposes. Holy cow. That was some seriously sweaty work. Grain runout was almost nil so that was cool but certainly not a financially viable process.

I love handtools, I love machine tools but most of all I love woodworking and both are critical to my way of work and projects.

A good craftsman, regardless of tools used can produce a work that is free of tooling marks whether they are hand or machine tools. Most often I want my work to be flawless and machines do the heavy lifting so that hand tools can create "perfection". In the end the only thing that a handtool only piece brings to the table is the esoteric value of the exercise or the extrinsic value of the object.

My clients were willing to pay for a finely executed piece, not one of them was willing to pay for me to get there the long way round because I liked hand tools, alot.

[Jim Matthews]

This is like getting your kids to work free for you.

You can do that?
I mean - get your kids to do work?

Mine can't even put away laundry.
They consider the clothes dryer an enameled closet.

[Derek Cohen]

Chris, I can identify with what you write. Of course I am not a professional with the need to sell what I make to pay household expenses, nor do I need to meet a deadline and so efficiency in this regard is not vital. Efficiency and time constraints are still relevant for the amateur, nevertheless. I only get into my shop on weekends. My time there is precious. I will save time (and physical effort - of which I become increasingly conscious as I get older) doing some of the grunt work with machines. I dislike machines for the noise and dust (both of which are not only unpleasant but hazardous to health). I maximise the time I can spend with handtools doing the aspects I like best: shaping, joinery, and finishing. If I was a professional, I would approach woodworking in the same way. This is simply a matter of choosing where hand tools and machinery are best utilised.

One of the questions I ask is whether machinery has a place in building 17th and 18th Century designs? Would the integrity of the design be compromised? Would modern methods of surfacing the wood inevitably alter the final product regardless of the use of hand tools that come after this stage?

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Kees Heiden]

It's obvious I think, when you want to make a true reproduction from a piece of the handtool times, you need to put a good deal of handtool work into it. People weren't concerned with flawless in the less visible parts and the earlier you get the more obvious that is. In the work Follansbee does you find handtool marks everywhere straight down to the riven nature of the boards. They weren't too concerned about tearout either. Later all that became a bit more obscured but you can still find the toolmarks everywhere.

So it is all really about what you want. And it all becomes moot in a few years anyway when we are going to make wooden furniture with 3D printers.

[Derek Cohen]

Hi Kees

You can leave hand tool marks on surfaces that started life as machine-prepared. Personally, I do not finish surfaces that will never be seen or felt, or do not rely on a finished surface to function.

Let's say that you wished to reproduce a classic Federal cabinet, could you start with machine-prepared boards? The question is whether shortcuts with machines will affect the integrity of an olde piece?

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Kees Heiden]

Yes I think you would be hard pressed to see a difference between a machine planed board which is then roughed up with a jackplane, and a board that is prepared with handtools from the start. I also think that most shops in the 18th century got their wood from their suppliers in a quite advanced state of preparation. In the little booklet The Joiner and cabinetmaker, they talk about 1/2" deal. You would be hard pressed to find stock like that today. So i don't think you would be totally out of line when you start your hand tool odiseea after you cut the boards to aproximate size and used the planer to bring them down to an approximate thickness.

When you want to make stuff like these wainscott chairs, or for example a viking chest, or a 17th century warship, and you want to make it authentic, you really have to start with the log.

[Warren Mickley]

The wood had already been milled to rough length, exact thicknesses, and straightened. I completed the one handmade sash in a day. I had the handwork processes dialed in that were used in combination with the power tools. A couple of mortising machines, using the power tool method, saved most of the time for the 22 mortises, and there was some extra time running the ovolo, and rabbets with hand planes. Being my first time, I could have, no doubt, gotten some faster, but I'm pretty sure I could not have completed more than the one sash in a days work, or at least a normal length day.

So comparing the 2-1/2 sash on a slow day with power tools, and 1 sash with hand tools, it gives some sort of a time comparison for making sash.


Tom I would guess the results would be quite different if you made 42 of the sash by hand and then made just one by machine. I find that when I do 50 or 100 of something I can often double the speed over the course of the job. And making just one sash by machine would certainly take a quite a bit because of set ups.

Disability and workman's compensation are extremely expensive in the woodworking industry. In our area shops with high quality machinery usually charge more than twice as much for a worker's labor as they pay the worker. So a guy who could make sash by hand in twice the time as a factory would do just as well working at home. He would not have to drive to work or listen to the noise.

When a guy has invested in a large shop with decent machinery and has invested in machinery skills he has a lot of expensive overhead that is wasted if he sits around doing handwork, so the cost is high. You can't compare his hand work costs with a guy who has specialized in hand work and has a very small investment in plant and tools. And you can't compare the speed of a guy who occasionally does hand work with one who always does hand work.

[Pat Barry]

When a guy has invested in a large shop with decent machinery and has invested in machinery skills he has a lot of expensive overhead that is wasted if he sits around doing handwork, so the cost is high. True


You can't compare his hand work costs with a guy who has specialized in hand work and has a very small investment in plant and tools. False - you can compare - that's easy to do, simple business math, its just the results are skewed in this case in favor of the hand tool specialist


And you can't compare the speed of a guy who occasionally does hand work with one who always does hand work. Certainly true.

[Chris Fournier]

Chris, I can identify with what you write. Of course I am not a professional with the need to sell what I make to pay household expenses, nor do I need to meet a deadline and so efficiency in this regard is not vital. Efficiency and time constraints are still relevant for the amateur, nevertheless. I only get into my shop on weekends. My time there is precious. I will save time (and physical effort - of which I become increasingly conscious as I get older) doing some of the grunt work with machines. I dislike machines for the noise and dust (both of which are not only unpleasant but hazardous to health). I maximise the time I can spend with handtools doing the aspects I like best: shaping, joinery, and finishing. If I was a professional, I would approach woodworking in the same way. This is simply a matter of choosing where hand tools and machinery are best utilised.

One of the questions I ask is whether machinery has a place in building 17th and 18th Century designs? Would the integrity of the design be compromised? Would modern methods of surfacing the wood inevitably alter the final product regardless of the use of hand tools that come after this stage?

Regards from Perth

Derek

I am not much of a professional right now as I am doing other work for bread and water these days.

Now free of the profit motive I totally agree with you and I too see the hand tool work as the most enjoyable work in a project. Even when making $$$ in the shop I was pretty hand tool intensive - guitars especially but that's no surprise. As soon as I learned to use hand tools, they were my fave!

Perhaps more than most in this forum though, I really enjoy using my machine tools as well and truthfully when I am hewing away and it sounds like industry and processed parts are being stacked I see an old line shaft shop in my head, the leather drive belts slapping and the sound of slower speed cutters being used in a dim light to process stacks of parts. I feel a connection to the ingenuity and productivity of these old shops, I like that. Google Ben Thresher's Mill for a really enjoyable time checking out an old shop and some projects - machine and hand tool being made. Utilitarian pieces made for farm use.

I think that there are many ways to make reproductions and still use machines in some phases of the project - you could just never let the machine have the last pass on a wood surface. I also think that careful lumber selection would play a great role in the authenticity of the final piece.

[Zach Dillinger]

Yes I think you would be hard pressed to see a difference between a machine planed board which is then roughed up with a jackplane, and a board that is prepared with handtools from the start. I also think that most shops in the 18th century got their wood from their suppliers in a quite advanced state of preparation. In the little booklet The Joiner and cabinetmaker, they talk about 1/2" deal. You would be hard pressed to find stock like that today. So i don't think you would be totally out of line when you start your hand tool odiseea after you cut the boards to aproximate size and used the planer to bring them down to an approximate thickness.

When you want to make stuff like these wainscott chairs, or for example a viking chest, or a 17th century warship, and you want to make it authentic, you really have to start with the log.

I agree that you can probably fake the toolmarks of a truly handmade piece of early work. But the hand tool process changes more than just the tool marks left; it changes the whole composition of the piece, especially the early stuff. It's really difficult to simulate the "economical" nature of 18th c. stock prep with power tools. Boards are rarely the same thickness, almost never four-square, and most of the time the faces are not remotely parallel except where needed, if needed. So, yes, you can fake plane marks but you can't really fake the "look" without essentially ignoring everything you know about machine stock prep. It's like the difference between effectively aging a piece and someone just beating the bejeesus out of a new piece with a chain and house keys without regard for realistic wear patterns... you can fool some people but not the people who really know what they are looking for. So, my answer to Derek's question is that power tool usage does fundamentally alter the composition, though perhaps not the "design" of period work and that it really has no role in accurate reproduction work. That is my opinion and I do not expect anyone to share or endorse it.

I have been known to buy pine 1x12s from my local woodworking store and plane them for quick and dirty projects. I don't think this is too far off from period practice, especially in the bigger cities where stock could be bought in almost-usable thickness. For a piece where historical accuracy requires it, I start with rough sawn stock and proceed from there. I wish I had a source for pitsawn stock so that the saw marks on the rough wood could be more easily left and I wouldn't have to plane them away to avoid leaving an ugly anachronism on the inside or back of a case (yes, that bothers me). That is my preference and that is all that matters to me. Others do things differently and that is totally fine as long as they aren't trying to mislead the customer. There is more to "handmade" furniture than hand-cut or hand-adjusted joinery...

My bottom line is that I think about the Keno brothers and their colleagues and try to make a piece that would cause them to take a second look, not something that is obviously modern. Power tools make this nearly impossible. Again, this is my opinion.

[Kees Heiden]

Glad you chime in Zach. You know a thousand times more about this then me. I though that the stuff from later dates was a bit less rough on the inside, stuff like federal furniture Derek was mentioning in the post I answered. The couple of pine antiques I have in my house which are late 19th century would be possible to make with modern rough sawn stock in thin diameters if you could find such wide boards. they are planed both inside and out, just a lot rougher planed on the inside.

When you're looking for some pitsawn stuff, may I point you to Inle Lake in Myanmar?

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-FJ4QI35LMiw/U_nvZ4FfbDI/AAAAAAAABfU/ZpC47YrfSgE/s1600/5-8%2B1%2B071.JPG

[David Weaver]

They have a tip box!!

Those boards on the ground look like nice stuff. I'll bet they don't waste much time sawing junk wood like we do here in a lot of cases (since it costs little to cut it here, and lots there).

[Zach Dillinger]

Thanks Kees... I suspect the shipping cost might make buying lumber from Myanmar a little cost-prohibitive ;). It would probably be easier to pay the guys down at CW to make me some.

From what I have seen, later work is a little less rough (though still not to modern aesthetic standards), especially by the late 19th century pieces you mentioned. By then, machines were doing most of the work. My interests lie in early 18th century work, pre-1730ish. That is what I have studied in-depth and that is all I can meaningfully discuss. When I referenced 'early work' in my first sentence of post 91, that is what I meant. Perhaps I should have been more clear.

[george wilson]

I would not say it is impossible to make a real accurate job of faking anything. I have been making parts for 18th. C. mechanical devices for many years. My main customer is the sharpest eyed and most particular person I have ever met. She really deserves curator status more than many of the curators I have met.

Thus,it is pleasurable when I hand back to her the original and the parts I have reproduced for her,and she studies them,and has to ask "Which is the original?"

Also,do not forget the fellow who faked the Brewster chair years ago. He was peeved with the arrogant attitude of some curators in the Wadsworth Anthenium. They were saying that it was just impossible for a modern person to EQUAL the original work. His chair,which he never said was original,was sold fairly cheap in a small antique shop. The buyers thought the owner did not know what he had,and they had taken advantage of him. After some time,and changing hands,I think it made it to millions,and ended up in the Henry Ford museum. That is when he called them,and told them to x-ray the chair. They would see that he had drilled the holes with a modern drill bit. He had done that on purpose. He fooled every big time curator who had carefully examined that chair. They were so sure of themselves,they had never x-rayed the piece. He could not be prosecuted because the chair was never represented as an original piece.

[Zach Dillinger]

I would not say it is impossible to make a real accurate job of faking anything. I have been making parts for 18th. C. mechanical devices for many years. My main customer is the sharpest eyed and most particular person I have ever met. She really deserves curator status more than many of the curators I have met.

Thus,it is pleasurable when I hand back to her the original and the parts I have reproduced for her,and she studies them,and has to ask "Which is the original?"

Also,do not forget the fellow who faked the Brewster chair years ago. He was peeved with the arrogant attitude of some curators in the Wadsworth Anthenium. They were saying that it was just impossible for a modern person to EQUAL the original work. His chair,which he never said was original,was sold fairly cheap in a small antique shop. The buyers thought the owner did not know what he had,and they had taken advantage of him. After some time,and changing hands,I think it made it to millions,and ended up in the Henry Ford museum. That is when he called them,and told them to x-ray the chair. They would see that he had drilled the holes with a modern drill bit. He had done that on purpose. He fooled every big time curator who had carefully examined that chair. They were so sure of themselves,they had never x-rayed the piece. He could not be prosecuted because the chair was never represented as an original piece.

George, I did not, nor would I ever say, that it is impossible to fake anything. I know for a fact that it is possible to fake furniture of any period. My point is that to effectively fake, or to use the less problematic phrase "accurately reproduce", any piece of furniture you need to use the correct tooling to get the correct result.

[george wilson]

But,I use my modern lathe to make ivory,wrought iron,and brass parts. The hard part is ageing them properly. Of course,I leave properly filed,hammered,etc. surfaces on these things. But,they were made on my Hardinge HLVH lathe. Here's an original,and my repro of a bobbin and flyer from a sophisticated type of spinning wheel. It was used in the 18th. C. by wealthy women,more or less as a toy. Part of a woman's education back then was learning how to spin . Even Queen Elizabeth I spun.

[David Weaver]

Also,do not forget the fellow who faked the Brewster chair years ago. He was peeved with the arrogant attitude of some curators in the Wadsworth Anthenium.

It has always seemed to me that people getting an "expert opinion" about whether something is authentic always think that they are getting a definite answer. All they are doing is improving their odds.

Some of the provision of opinions for pay remind me of a con man and his mark, the con man knows they know more than the mark, they can say whatever they want. I wouldn't doubt that quite a few well faked items have been sold as original intentionally because someone has figured out that they're in a situation where they want money and they can play the con man role, just the same as it's not uncommon for an appraiser to low ball an appraisal if they have an interest in buying the item being appraised. I would never get appraisal from a person who is buying.

[David Weaver]

I get what zach is saying by the boards, though. One could snuggle up to a bookshelf with a caliper in hands and measure a few shelves at different places and get a pretty good idea of whether or not something was thicknessed by hand, even if it was done relatively well and you weren't able to see the back side. On many pieces you can tell just by looking.

One of the benefits of working by hand (to me) as a hobbyist is that you get out of the mode of trying to make things geometrically perfect, and joints like rabbets on the back of a case as tight as you could do with a dado blade set and plywood, and you think more about the proportions of your work, the profile of the mouldings, etc.

[george wilson]

It all depends upon the skill of the reproducer. I won't say I fake things,because I do work commissioned by those who need parts. Those parts cannot be bought,and must be made.

Here's a lock case I made for a historic building(I can't remember what one). The old lock on the door was a replacement that was too short. I made a longer case,and elongated the old parts to work within it.

The piece of brass was dinged up from being in a pile of metal for many years. I just polished it enough to be polished,but left the dings in the brass. It looked quite naturally old,but cared for.

Unfortunately,because of light reflection,you can't see the hundreds of little dings in the new case. You can sort of see some over to the left side. So,my purpose is a bit defeated here. The doorknob covered the large hole,so I didn't bother to make circular gouges in the new case. Similarly,no need to make marks where the screw heads would cover them in the small holes.

[Kees Heiden]

They have a tip box!!



Yes sure! They are on the tourist track, otherwise I wouldn't have found them either. Still nice to watch though. They were making fisherboats, from teak they say.

More pictures on my blog. I can't post a link, but when you search for woodworking in Burma, you'll find it easy enough.

[Zach Dillinger]

But,I use my modern lathe to make ivory,wrought iron,and brass parts. The hard part is ageing them properly. Of course,I leave properly filed,hammered,etc. surfaces on these things. But,they were made on my Hardinge HLVH lathe. Here's an original,and my repro of a bobbin and flyer from a sophisticated type of spinning wheel. It was used in the 18th. C. by wealthy women,more or less as a toy. Part of a woman's education back then was learning how to spin . Even Queen Elizabeth I spun.

First, beautiful work as always. I aspire to have the skill to make such things some day. You know I have nothing but the highest respect for your craft. Your lock was, I suspect, made much in the same way as the original. Perhaps I am wrong.

I guess the conclusion one can draw from your bobbin, in this particular application, the tooling used didn't make an impact on the overall success of the reproduction work. I might hazard a guess that this would be the case for most lathe work, since the fundamental skill / operation of the tool is the same and the overall goal is the same; the only thing that changes is the source of the power that spins the work. I suppose even a CNC or duplicator lathe could be used and could easily make proper reproductions, although there are some indicators of such usage that can differentiate such work. I will also stipulate that mortise and tenon and perhaps panel (not including raised panels) and groove work can be done by machine and not be spotted in the finished, assembled piece. But the first person to repair the piece would spot it immediately.

For case furniture (which is really my main area of knowledge / interest), I think that the tooling used does make a noticeable impact on most visible things. As David said, hand planed stock is fundamentally different than machine planed stock, and the way the tooling is used is fundamentally different and easily differentiated. Moldings made on a router table are fundamentally different and easily differentiated from moldings made by plane or scratch stock, no matter what is done to them to disguise them. Exposed machine cut dovetails are fundamentally different than hand cut and the two are easily differentiated. These are the things that contribute to the overall success of a truly handmade reproduction and the composition thereof.

I would rather not sell something than make an reproduction piece that is not wholly accurate because I consider myself more of an amateur experimental archaeologist than a furniture maker. I realize that others do not have that luxury because they have to sell to eat. Perhaps that makes their work the most period correct of all, at least in spirit if not at all in detail.

[george wilson]

You do beautiful and realistic work,Zach. I guess we just go about it by different means. At my age,with several things wrong with me,I'm not going to hand plane wood from the rough,like I did in the instrument shop. And,like you pointed out,wood was available in man thicknesses back then. Today,we are stuck with just a few. I can process machine planed wood to look old,well enough to fool the "experts". It's in the knowing how to do it,and in having the eye for the subtle details to pull it off.
It is the skill of the worker that the finished product depends upon. I have made parts for harpsichords on order from the curators that fooled every one of them as to which was the original. Then,they got all exercised about it,and wanted me to SIGN each part I made. I did so. They are going to have a great time of it if my main patron dies and leaves her collection,full of parts I made,to the museum. She did not want me to sign them.

About the lathe: modern lathes feed the cutting tool extremely evenly. 18th. C. lathes were like wood lathes: The tool was moved over the metal by hand. So,a lathe is not just any lathe. After I process a part,I still have to go back over it and apply a properly worked surface,be it filed,irregularly turned,chatter marks,etc.,and age it. 18th. C. threads are different looking too. I won't get into everything here,though.

I'll tell you one thing that is difficult to do: properly age boxwood; the effect of sunlight on boxwood turns it that wonderful brown color with no darkening in its pores. Stain it,and the stain gets into the grains. I haven't done boxwood ageing enough to have figured out how to age it completely realistically. Ivory,I have pretty well gotten nailed. It doesn't have open grains in it for stains to get into.Most of the time,old ivory parts have a thin layer of soot that has gotten into the ivory. This from being in old houses heated by wood,or coal. It really gets incorporated into the ivory. If you can't put it onto your new ivory,plus the yellowing,the part just will not look right. I have done this for many years,and have worked out ways to add this nearly imperceptible layer of soot.

I ought to take down the picture of the lock: The picture does not show the surface very well. Guess it's too late.

I had to make a very large lock,about 9" x 12",for the state capital in Richmond some years ago.(Or one of the buildings in that complex. I can't remember). No pictures,sorry. I used a really old,beat up sheet of brass,polished it a bit and left it full of little dings. They had the RANDOMNESS that only natural years of being in a pile of other metal could bring. Fakers most often fall way short of properly distressing surfaces. That is a main short coming(among many others!) So,if I can get a piece of dinged up brass to make a lock,I'll use it.

On another occasion,I fixed up a lock for Bruton Parish Church. Old locks get too worn out to work after 200 years. I've done a fair amount of messing around with old locks. Lots of original old buildings around here!And,the available reproductions do not fit the old place on the door,worn from the lock being there. I think it looks horrible to put a different size lock on an old door. They were going to buy a Williamsburg repro lock of a smaller size,until one of the church members brought me the lock.

Actually,my lock cases just look good on the outside . The old ones were cast,which I am not prepared to get back into. And,it would be very expensive for me to make a unique wooden pattern,cast it,and work the surface down. They'd be paying well into 4 figures. The fabricated ones look just fine,and that is all that is needed in this application. Besides,it keeps future curators from thinking my repro is an original. I used to cast brass,but really do not have a convenient place to do it.

[Mike Holbrook]

Green wood, bowls, spoons, chairs....I find it a revelation to watch Curtis Buchanan's videos. Curtis starts out at a sawmill picking out logs. Yes, I believe he cuts the logs into workable lengths with a chain saw. The interesting thing to me though is he obtains most of his stock or blanks by splitting logs not by sawing them. Well maybe not seat blanks, but there are not a large enough number of cuts to make a huge time difference. I suspect that Curtis splits out blanks for chair spindles, slats, chair arms & backs as fast or faster than it could be done with a saw. Certainly the blank that is produced is a different animal in terms of grain direction.

Another interesting thing I found out at the Windsor Chair class I took with Peter Galbert. At least in Galbert's case, he wants his final product to both reflect that the work was done by hand and make the observer wonder how the work was done. Peter and his assistant could create finished surfaces on chair seats, backs & arms using just a very sharp drawknife that I doubt could be improved on with machines or fine grit papers. It is very hard to improve on the cut a very sharp blade makes, moving in the proper direction to wood grain.

Working seats, I find a point of diminishing returns in the precision of the work. A spokeshave or travisher, obviously, does not leave a perfectly flat surface when working those concave & convex surfaces. There is a point at which the object seems aesthetically pleasing and as comfortable to sit in as one can make it even though the surfaces are not "perfect". I am hesitant to sand paper or scrape away all those faint marks that reflect the work that went into making the pieces by hand. How much furniture gets made by machines and "antiqued" after it is made to "improve" the appearance? Is more "perfect" always more beautiful or functional?

Machines do not care which way the grain in the wood moves, hand tools do. Working with split wood in which the grain direction is more consistent, at least to my mind ends up creating/inspiring a different result. This discussion has a whole new set of factors if we move away from a flat board, flat surface mentality. Are we letting machines define the playing field or are we just agreeing to compete on a machine made playing field?

[dan sherman]

Exposed machine cut dovetails are fundamentally different than hand cut and the two are easily differentiated. These are the things that contribute to the overall success of a truly handmade reproduction and the composition thereof.

I have to disagree with this statement as it's to broad in my opinion. I have seen several examples of hand cut dovetails over the years that look exactly like machine cut ones because the craftsman was very skilled and precise. Now if you bring the size of the pins into the equation then yea, you can definitely weed out dovetails made with a router. However you still have the hybrid bandsaw method, and that muddies the waters a bit.

like everything else in life its all shades of grey, and circumstantial.

[Zach Dillinger]

You do beautiful and realistic work,Zach. I guess we just go about it by different means. At my age,with several things wrong with me,I'm not going to hand plane wood from the rough. And,like you pointed out,wood was available in man thicknesses back then. Today,we are stuck with just a few.

But,I will say that it is the skill of the worker that the finished product depends upon. I have made parts for harpsichords on order from the curators that fooled every one of them as to which was the original. Then,they got all exercised about it,and wanted me to SIGN each part I made. I did so. They are going to have a great time of it if my main patron dies and leaves her collection,full of parts I made,to the museum. She did not want me to sign them.

I ought to take down the picture of the lock: The picture does not show the surface very well.

I had to make a very large lock,about 9" x 12",for the state capital in Richmond some years ago. No pictures,sorry. I used a really old,beat up sheet of brass,polished it a bit and left it full of little dings. They had the RANDOMNESS that only natural years of being in a pile of other metal could bring. Fakers most often fall way short of properly distressing surfaces. That is a main short coming(among many others!) So,if I can get a piece of dinged up brass to make a lock,I'll use it.

On another occasion,I fixed up a lock for Bruton Parish Church. Old locks get too worn out to work after 200 years. I've done a fair amount of messing around with old locks. And,the available reproductions do not fit the old place on the door,worn from the lock being there. I think it looks horrible to put a different size lock on an old door.

Right on, George. I appreciate your kind words.

No one has the qualifications to question your methods or your results and I am certainly not doing so. Your body of work speaks for itself and no can disagree with that. And you are 100% right, at least in my experience, that fakers fail to get the surfaces right. I think that they most often trade in fantasy and "it is what I want it to be" syndrome in the head of the buyers. If they took the time to study the work, most fakes (and most reproductions too) stick out like a sore thumb.

[Zach Dillinger]

I have to disagree with this statement as it's to broad in my opinion. I have seen several examples of hand cut dovetails over the years that look exactly like machine cut ones because the craftsman was very skilled and precise. Now if you bring the size of the pins into the equation then yea, you can definitely weed out dovetails made with a router. However you still have the hybrid bandsaw method, and that muddies the waters a bit.

like everything else in life its all shades of grey, and circumstantial.

For the record, I've never seen such things but I'm willing to stipulate that it is possible in theory. Practically, I don't see it happening but that is just my opinion. I've never seen a hand dovetail that was so perfect and precise that it made me think they were machine made. Even Frank Klausz's dovetails are clearly handcut. I'm sure glad I don't have the skill (or at least the desire to show it if I do have it, which I probably don't!) of making dovetails look machine cut. I'd rather make authentic pieces. If my goal was make dovetails that mimic those made by machine, I would just use a router. There is no merit badge for hand cut dovetails, at least in my book, and no reason to do it unless authenticity is the goal or it simply gives you pleasure (which I don't understand, but to each his own).

[dan sherman]

.

Dan, you may be correct, but I'm glad I don't have the supposed skill of making dovetails look machine cut. I'd rather make authentic work. If the goal is make dovetails that look like machine cut, just use a router. There is no merit badge for hand cut dovetails, at least in my book, and no reason to do it unless authenticity is the goal.

I don't think the craftsmen where intentionally making the dovetails look like machine cut ones. It's just that the proportions they used could be duplicated by a machine. For sure there is no merit badge, but in many cases hand cut dovetails are faster than machine cut ones. Setting up a jig takes time, sometimes a lot of it.

[Zach Dillinger]

I don't think the craftsmen where intentionally making the dovetails look like machine cut ones. It's just that the proportions they used could be duplicated by a machine. For sure there is no merit badge, but in many cases hand cut dovetails are faster than machine cut ones. Setting up a jig takes time, sometimes a lot of it.

I'm with you 100% on the speed, but even if the proportions are perfect, there will be subtle clues to differentiate the two. That is what I was getting at with my admittedly broad statement. Cheers Dan.

[Jim Matthews]

To me it all comes down to choosing the best tool for the job at hand, some times its a power tool, some times its a hand tool. It's not something I'm conscious of, but if I had to make a list I would say any number of the following things play a part in choosing rather a hand tool or power tool gets used.

1. what tools are in my arsenal
2. how repetitive is the task
3. how safe is the task
4. what level of accuracy is required for the task
5. how long will the task take given the various methods

Well said.

I went with handtools, so I could work in my basement without raising dust in the house.
Shavings are easier to contain, when they're straight out of my plane.

[Simon MacGowen]

"but in many cases hand cut dovetails are faster than machine cut ones. Setting up a jig takes time, sometimes a lot of it."
- You are comparing apples with oranges. Yes, a skilled handcut dovetailer (Paul Sellers, Rob Cosman) can cut one or two joints much faster than a power-tool guy who uses his jig occasionally. Have you seen those guys at tradeshows demonstrating their jigs? Give Paul, Rob or Frank 10 large drawers each (not ten joints) and give the same to one of those jig show people (do you know how many joints they cut each day for the demos?), you can bet that when Paul, etc. are still cutting their 3rd or 4th or 5th (!)drawer, the power tool guy is already sipping his cup of coffee he buys from Starbucks from across the street. Humans don't beat machines in speed.

Your generalization is not right; it is not in many cases but in some cases only.

Also if someone can cut a dovetail joint in perfect proportion like a machine, it is not called skill, it is luck! No dovetail teachers or users in this world can claim that they can reliably or in a repeated manner cut dovetail joints like a machine...they are not woodworkers if they can, they are magicians.

Simon

[David Weaver]

I have heard budget times on drawers of 20 minutes (that's what klausz says with hand cut through dovetails on all four corners, sides cut to size, grooved and the bottom fit).

There is room for a skilled worker to make much nicer looking DTs than a machine can make. When I visited my parents last year, I took pictures of all of the dovetails in their relatively common furniture (it is old, though, all are hand done). They were handsome in proportion, the drawer sides not overly thick and the pins were small and thin. All but one drawer has lasted well over 100 years, and none of the dovetails were particularly sloppy (all looked better than any machine made dovetails I've seen).

I personally would pay whatever difference there would be in price, and I'm sure there wouldn't be much difference.

[Jim Matthews]

I find it hard to understand why people who choose to build using hand tools alone want to or try to convince others that hand tools get things done faster than power tools. They simply don't for furniture-makers who do that for a living. Simon

Most of us would be considered weekend woodworkers.
There are some in that group that have very fine skills,
and resulting builds that attest to that.

I'm not in that group.

For those of us that will only make one dining table, a few chairs, several end tables and the occasional cabinet -
working by hand is faster. I suspect that is down to setup errors, and fewer recuts.

It is important to note that for many of us, that speed could be better measured with a calendar or analemma.

[Pat Barry]

For those of us that will only make one dining table, a few chairs, several end tables and the occasional cabinet -
working by hand is faster. I suspect that is down to setup errors, and fewer recuts.
This is simply not correct. You make just as many errors doing things by hand as you do with machines. This is a person problem not a tool problem. If you have to make re-cuts then a power tool is always faster than a hand saw - also more precise. I can go back to my table saw and trim a tiny bit more off - something you cannot do by hand sawing. Regardless, there is no way you can make a few chairs, a dining room table or the occasional table faster by hand tools alone than you could using power tools. Its simply not possible.

[Sean Hughto]

Regardless, there is no way you can make a few chairs, a dining room table or the occasional table faster by hand tools alone than you could using power tools. Its simply not possible.

To my mind, the more important thing is that you could not make the same furniture. The handtools and power tools will yield pieces that look and feel significantly different. Try to make spokeshaved spindles with a power tool. Try to make kerf entry pins with a power tool. And on and on.

[Pat Barry]

To my mind, the more important thing is that you could not make the same furniture. The handtools and power tools will yield pieces that look and feel significantly different. Try to make spokeshaved spindles with a power tool. Try to make kerf entry pins with a power tool. And on and on.
Its important to note, as you have here Sean, that there is likely a proper tool for each task at hand and that often a hand tool IS the right tool for the job. I don't have a power spokeshave for example. I do also agree that the results may have different characteristics between hand tooled and machine tooled.

I have been looking for flooring lately. I am astounded at the quantity of 'hand scraped' flooring on the market. Where exactly is the internment camp where all that hand scraping is done?

[Zach Dillinger]

I have been looking for flooring lately. I am astounded at the quantity of 'hand scraped' flooring on the market. Where exactly is the internment camp where all that hand scraping is done?

Same place where the Amish have their "handbuilt" furniture factories.

[Dave Anderson NH]

Sorry guys, but I am becoming amused. What on the surface seems to be disagreement and argument about hand vs power is not. Almost all of you are saying the same thing in different ways. There is a place for both and both hand and power are faster than the other given the variables of quantity and setup time or lack thereof. I am no speed demon, but rarely have I had to make more than 4 drawers at a time and quite often it is only one. For me dovetails using hand tools are the answer because of the versatility and the number of options I have for sizing, style, and spacing. I also need little more than a saw, something to mark with, and my chisels. Everything else like a bench etcetera I already have for other uses and operations. This means I don't have to buy special router bits and an expensive jig and then read the manual, and do setups until I get things right wasting time and lumber. To me this means hand cut dovetails are both more cost effective AND efficient. If someone is doing a dozen drawers, it is a whole different situation.

[Frank Martin]

Sorry guys, but I am becoming amused. What on the surface seems to be disagreement and argument about hand vs power is not. Almost all of you are saying the same thing in different ways. There is a place for both and both hand and power are faster than the other given the variables of quantity and setup time or lack thereof. I am no speed demon, but rarely have I had to make more than 4 drawers at a time and quite often it is only one. For me dovetails using hand tools are the answer because of the versatility and the number of options I have for sizing, style, and spacing. I also need little more than a saw, something to mark with, and my chisels. Everything else like a bench etcetera I already have for other uses and operations. This means I don't have to buy special router bits and an expensive jig and then read the manual, and do setups until I get things right wasting time and lumber. To me this means hand cut dovetails are both more cost effective AND efficient. If someone is doing a dozen drawers, it is a whole different situation.

Completely agree... I am primarily a power tool guy and do my dovetails using a WoodRat (recently upgraded to Router Boss), which is a ton faster than other dovetail jigs, requiring very little setup. Still though, if I had the skill and had only one drawer to make, I would probably do hand cut. Until I am able to invest in the time to learn to hand cut, it will be all power tools all the time for me. But, if I had the skill, for the occasional 1-2 it would certainly be hand cut for the fun of it, if for nothing else provided the time difference is not huge.

[ron david]

it all depends on ones training and efficiency. it also depends on what you are making. some items are designed to be made by hand while others are designed machine work and there are separations within that context whether CNC or conventional.
there are also the priorities of how one wants to lead their life(lifestyles) and personal satisfaction in what one wants to achieve
there use to be an ignoramus on knots who use to bring this subject up continually about money and making, but he never lived the life( he spent his working career in a non productive role in a government sponsored role). he made a few things that were not that great
ron

[george wilson]

I am starting developmental work on a power spokeshave!!! I'll sell it to LV when it's ready.:)

[John Coloccia]

I am starting developmental work on a power spokeshave!!! I'll sell it to LV when it's ready.:)

Actually, George, I've been fiddling around with the idea of attaching an ultrasonic transducer to things like spokeshaves and chisels to see if they'll cut better and with less force. :)

There, now I've let the cat out of the bag.

[Brian Holcombe]

it all depends on ones training and efficiency. it also depends on what you are making. some items are designed to be made by hand while others are designed machine work and there are separations within that context whether CNC or conventional.
there are also the priorities of how one wants to lead their life(lifestyles) and personal satisfaction in what one wants to achieve
there use to be an ignoramus on knots who use to bring this subject up continually about money and making, but he never lived the life( he spent his working career in a non productive role in a government sponsored role). he made a few things that were not that great
ron

By hand and by CNC are likely the only way to complicated forms. I have a set of stools made by CNC, the legs rather than being round are an elliptical shape that tapers evenly in thickness and width over the length of them. They would really only be able to be made by spokeshave and by CNC. There is no lathe or tablesaw/router turning these out without a lot of specialized jigs and so forth.

[ron david]

By hand and by CNC are likely the only way to complicated forms. I have a set of stools made by CNC, the legs rather than being round are an elliptical shape that tapers evenly in thickness and width over the length of them. They would really only be able to be made by spokeshave and by CNC. There is no lathe or tablesaw/router turning these out without a lot of specialized jigs and so forth.
glad to see that there is someone who isn't living in the dreamland of mechanized spokeshaves!
by hand and by CNC. the workmanship of uncertainty and the workmanship of certainty - David Pye defines the two.they are really 2 different ways of doing it; they(the product) may appear to be the same to the untrained eye. the sensitivity of the handmade piece vs cnc would be quite apparent to the trained eye. they can both fully due the job that they were made to do, but this is not about that
ron

[Larry Edgerton]

Interesting discussion, I just read it all through. Thanks to all that shared their point of view.

Me, I love hand tools but there is a direct link from my power tools to my refrigerator that requires that I be plugged in. Even if I want to make that choice it would not be a possibility. I do admire the few that can make it work.

Again, Thanks

Larry

[Greg Berlin]

I find that for one-off pieces of furniture, hand tools might be close in time in regards to joinery if you consider set up time of a machine, test cuts, etc, but milling the wood is another story. I can mill every piece I need for a project in the amount if time it takes me to hand cut and hand plane 1 of those pieces by hand. Nice for the experience and I enjoy doing it time to time when I don't feel like the sound of planers, jointers, and saws running and dust flying, but I highly enjoy doing joinery by hand and tbh find it much easier to wrap my head around than using a machine. The machine requires adding and subtracting fractions and number and test cuts and jigs and extra thinking to figure out. Hand tool joinery is just layout, cut with a saw a chisel to those lines. The end. I just find it much simpler in my simple mind to figure out how a piece is going to go together. The fact that I have to design and make jigs for most joinery tasks on power tools turns me off. Sorry got carried away there. My point is, if I'm mass producing the same table over and over again, then machines win by far. If I'm making special to order furniture of different sizes every time and having to create special jigs and machine setup a the entire way, then hand tools might win out.

[Greg Berlin]

I also wanted to add one more thing: I'm a member of Paul sellers woodworker masterclasses he does online and in the videos he skips through every monotonous detail (like doesn't show him cutting 16 mortises after he's shown one) but I'm still astonished how fast he can make the projects. He will sometimes have a prototype made to show, a finished piece, and working through the project again to show. He also hosts live classes for weeks and travels to promote his classes and it always gets me thinking that I'm amazed how quickly he can finish a project from start to finish (granted the milling is done by machines). Projects that take me months to finish sometimes he can do is a few days. Just an observation.

[Jim Koepke]

I also wanted to add one more thing: I'm a member of Paul sellers woodworker masterclasses he does online and in the videos he skips through every monotonous detail (like doesn't show him cutting 16 mortises after he's shown one) but I'm still astonished how fast he can make the projects. He will sometimes have a prototype made to show, a finished piece, and working through the project again to show. He also hosts live classes for weeks and travels to promote his classes and it always gets me thinking that I'm amazed how quickly he can finish a project from start to finish (granted the milling is done by machines). Projects that take me months to finish sometimes he can do is a few days. Just an observation.

After you have done it a thousand times like Mr. Sellers you will likely be able to knock them out quickly.

Part of getting it done is doing it for 8 to 10 hours a day every day. I may get a couple of hours into a project before something else needs attention.

Sometimes focusing on the technique helps. One of his videos on spoon carving gave me some ideas that helped speed up my spoon carving.

jtk

[ernest dubois]

"Professional", does that mean someone who enjoys the benefit of, among other things, meals and a somewhat ordered, at least functional living environment, provided for them, constructive, consistent and continuous blocks of time exclusively reserved for his/her pointed woodworking activity, and holidays and weekends free to themselves?

[David Weaver]

Professional just means making a living, and the implication here is enough of a living to not be struggling and not be working 100 hours a week. Also, making a living off of your work only, and not teaching classes, writing books about every project you make or some such thing like that. So far iirc we've got Warren and a guy who makes chairs.

[ernest dubois]

It's no wonder you have so few. I'm reminded of what Krenov wrote, though maybe he falls outside your categorization as a writer and teacher, but we can maybe assume he was referring to the time in his carrier before that unfortunate turn, when he said to the effect, "there was always someone carrying the other end of the board…"

I find a certain angle of the topic at hand real interesting, I'm just not sure if anything I could add is related, on top of coming to it at this late stage of page 9. So, I was just looking for clarity beforehand.

[David Weaver]

I can't remember what I thought I'd see when I posted the topic (in terms of numbers), but I expected to hear about a few guys, even if they had names we never heard of. Guys who do restoration or who build period pieces or chairs, but only two so far.

I selfishly want to see those people work, those who have made a living doing what they're doing, because I think (well, I know) they work fundamentally differently than the guys who write books and teach classes.

[Joshua Hancock]

I would think that, based on their videos Wolfe and Douccette use primarily hand tools. However I have seen a power jointer and band saw in some videos. For the most part it seems that their joinery is done by hand.

[dan sherman]

Based on the criteria given for this thread, I can see very few people(if any), making what I would consider a real wage ($25+/hr) using just hand tools! Dimensioning lumber, specially harder species would take to long.

[Warren Mickley]

Based on the criteria given for this thread, I can see very few people(if any), making what I would consider a real wage ($25+/hr) using just hand tools! Dimensioning lumber, specially harder species would take to long.

I think you are living in Fantasyland or Disneyland or something. Less than 25% of workers in the United States make the kind of money you are talking about, Dan. The median wage for workers who operate woodworking machinery in Illinois is 11.96 per hour. 90% make less than $21. If everyone made a "real wage" maybe it would not be worth very much. I get a chuckle out of amateurs who fantasize about running a woodworking business.

[Brian Holcombe]

I can't remember what I thought I'd see when I posted the topic (in terms of numbers), but I expected to hear about a few guys, even if they had names we never heard of. Guys who do restoration or who build period pieces or chairs, but only two so far.

I selfishly want to see those people work, those who have made a living doing what they're doing, because I think (well, I know) they work fundamentally differently than the guys who write books and teach classes.

This reminds me of the video of the Japanese guys building those tall cabinets. They used many machine tools and many hand tools, but they were flying through those full blind dovetails.

[David Weaver]

Yeah, and I'm sure that if they had to do coarse work that they've done enough in their life that they could do it efficiently.

what always baffles me is when people who are amateurs talk about how "they couldn't use hand tools only because their output is far to great", and then they say they build something like 4 or 5 projects a year.

I want to pay attention to what professionals using only hand tools would do because I only want to use hand tools. I want to learn to do that as efficiently as I possibly can. At the outset of my hand tool foray almost 10 years ago now, I figured that working wood with only hand tools was impossible. And then I read a lot of stuff on the internet about how if you did it, you needed to leave the non show faces rough because you had to save time.

At this point, I probably work about 2/3rds as fast with hand tools only as I do with power tools, partly because my power tools aren't fantastic, but the point being that I like the things that I build better with hand tools. So I can't imagine anything more satisfying, to me, than just using hand tools, especially if I want my furniture building to improve to include carving and inlay. AT the rate that I've seen a lot of the blog-cowboys working, I can see why people think that work is too tedious for hand tools only. I don't think that, though. But there aren't many people doing a significant amount of genuine work (work that has economic value itself and not because you can write a book about it or something) with only hand tools.

[Sean Hughto]

So as I understand it, you want to work only with hand tools as a hobbiest. This is relatively straightforward to pull off assuming you are making typical stuff. You want to know about professionals who use handtools exclusively because they might tell you that with enough experience, it can be as fast and efficient as power? Maybe you could find some, and maybe they would even have some tips, but my sense is that any super speed and efficiency they have comes mostly from the thing hobbiests will never have - hours and days and years spent doing it so much you can't help but get fast.

On the one hand as a hobbiest, you have the luxury of time (the piece doesn't have to be done at any particular time and can take as many man hours as you see fit), on the othere hand as a hobbiest, you may only have limited time in the shop and little patience with a snails pace in completing projects (or a desire to spend that limited time doing certain aspects of the project (e.g., cutting joints as opposed to four squaring stock).

There are lots of activities that really make little sense to do by hand unless time is unlimited and you feel like a work out. For example, saw my 5 foot long by 1 foot wide 8/4 birdseye maple plank into 1/8th veneer. I could do this in fairly short order with my bandsaw. I would hate to imagine doing it with a hand saw. Sure, it can me done. Why you would want to if a bandsaw was to hand I cannot imagine. Even just straightforward stuff like ripping long (say 8') sticks to width are so much more efficiently done with a basic table saw that I can't imagine bothering to cut that stock with a basic rip saw. And the list goes on and on. There are activities that might yield different results if done by hand - fer sure. Other things, there should be no difference. For example, four square is four square.

[Steve Voigt]

I selfishly want to see those people work, those who have made a living doing what they're doing, because I think (well, I know) they work fundamentally differently than the guys who write books and teach classes.


This reminds me of the video of the Japanese guys building those tall cabinets. They used many machine tools and many hand tools, but they were flying through those full blind dovetails.

This reminds of something I wanted to mention before. I think it is limiting to the point of uselessness to talk about people who use *only* hand tools. If the purpose is really to see how the most expert hand tool users work, and to learn from them, I think it's far more productive to look at people who *mostly* use hand tools.

For example, Curtis Buchanan goes through 40-something videos building a comb-back Windsor, and IIRC the only power tools he used on the entire job were a chainsaw to cut the log in half, and a bandsaw to cut the seat and crest rail. And he even talks about what he did before he had the bandsaw. If he's disqualified from this discussion, that a missed opportunity. It's not like he goes to woodworker purgatory for making a couple bandsaw cuts!

There's a great post on Peter Galbert's blog that I think about a lot. He says it was never his goal to become a chairmaker. It was his goal to work in a quiet, dustless shop making beautiful objects out of wood. And he does. 90% percent of the work on his traditional chairs is done with froe, drawknife, spokeshave, adze, travisher, etc. The fact that he roughs out a seat blank on the bandsaw, or drills some holes with a drill press, doesn't detract from what he does, it just makes the handwork economically feasible. If he insisted on total purity, he probably would've folded a long time ago.

[Brian Holcombe]

I've had a similar goal, I found working with mostly hand tools has driving my result to a much higher standard. It's also much more enjoyable to work with handtools, I get a greater satisfaction out of the process.

I dont mind bandsaws or planers, but spending the day leaning over a tablesaw is not for me.

[David Weaver]

This reminds of something I wanted to mention before. I think it is limiting to the point of uselessness to talk about people who use *only* hand tools. If the purpose is really to see how the most expert hand tool users work, and to learn from them, I think it's far more productive to look at people who *mostly* use hand tools.

For example, Curtis Buchanan goes through 40-something videos building a comb-back Windsor, and IIRC the only power tools he used on the entire job were a chainsaw to cut the log in half, and a bandsaw to cut the seat and crest rail. And he even talks about what he did before he had the bandsaw. If he's disqualified from this discussion, that a missed opportunity. It's not like he goes to woodworker purgatory for making a couple bandsaw cuts!

There's a great post on Peter Galbert's blog that I think about a lot. He says it was never his goal to become a chairmaker. It was his goal to work in a quiet, dustless shop making beautiful objects out of wood. And he does. 90% percent of the work on his traditional chairs is done with froe, drawknife, spokeshave, adze, travisher, etc. The fact that he roughs out a seat blank on the bandsaw, or drills some holes with a drill press, doesn't detract from what he does, it just makes the handwork economically feasible. If he insisted on total purity, he probably would've folded a long time ago.

Well, and a lathe from buchanan - he does a fair bit of that. But those lathe efforts could be duplicated by a skilled pole lathe user. Not someone playing billy big-rigger in the woods making rough bowls, but someone skilled like warren, who uses actually sharp tools and no sanding. Curtis is good to watch, though, the work is genuine and I know he gives classes or some such thing now, but he executes building chairs in a way that a blog-jockey would not.

[dan sherman]

I think you are living in Fantasyland or Disneyland or something. Less than 25% of workers in the United States make the kind of money you are talking about, Dan. The median wage for workers who operate woodworking machinery in Illinois is 11.96 per hour. 90% make less than $21. If everyone made a "real wage" maybe it would not be worth very much. I get a chuckle out of amateurs who fantasize about running a woodworking business.

As I said, I would consider $25/hr a real wage, perhaps a "good wage" is a better way of wording it. It equates to $50,000 a year before taxes, assuming a person works 40 hrs a week, 50 weeks of the year (assuming two weeks of vacation). In most part of the country, it's a wage that provides a decent standard of living, for an individual or small family.

David can correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure he wanted know how a skilled craftsman who use nothing but hand tools, works. Skilled is the keyword, and $11.96/hr does not sound like a skilled workers wage, it sounds a lot more like an un-skilled workers wage.

Plumbers are usually considered skilled workers, and I found the following national salary info fairly easily.
http://swz.salary.com/SalaryWizard/Plumber-I-Salary-Details.aspx ($41.7k)
http://swz.salary.com/SalaryWizard/Plumber-II-Salary-Details.aspx ($50.4k)
http://swz.salary.com/SalaryWizard/Plumber-III-Salary-Details.aspx ($52.9k)

[Tom M King]

I don't consider 25 a good wage even. Certainly not for self-employed. I remember paying carpenters 25 sometime around 1990. I was on a job a week ago with some independents, and there was a discussion at lunch about what people were charging by the hour. Typical for a carpenter with enough tools to fit in the back of a pickup, by himself, was 50 bucks.