Opinion/critique please

[Mike Schwing]

Hi guys. Question, two of them, actually.

First - due to some rotten wood I had to shorten the apron down a few inches, so the overall base of this table is 3 inches shorter than I initially wanted. The top is what I'm wondering about. Before I cut it down an equal amount, I started looking at it and hesitating - is it too long or should it be shortened up some? What do you think?

Second part - is the top too thick? Its just under an inch right now. The entire table is made of antique american chestnut from a barn that fell down a 1/4 mile from here in our last big snowstorm. I hope I did it justice. I'm going to give it, I think, to the owner of the barn.


http://home.earthlink.net/~schwalden/halltable1.JPG


http://home.earthlink.net/~schwalden/halltable2.JPG

[Jason Roehl]

Here's my take on it. The overhang of the top at the ends needs to be proportional to the overhang on the sides, and both need to be related to the length and width of the base of the table. In other words, whatever the percentage of total width the overhang on the sides is, the overhang on the ends should be the same percentage of the length. Or something like that.

As for the thickness of the top, I am a believer in "there is no such thing as too thick." :D The only issue I see there is that the apron is quite large compared to the thickness of the top. My eyes were drawn to the knot in the apron rather than the tabletop, which should be the focal point of a table having simple base lines like yours does. Some sort of trim moulding around the apron, just under the top would help break up the width of that apron, or you could add some faux thickness to the tabletop by putting a 1" lip on the underside of the top at the very edges.

Hmmm...guess I rambled on a little bit...but you asked for it. :D Love the look of the chestnut, though, and that's great that you're wanting to give it to the owner of the barn.

[Lars Thomas]

They say 'every thing happens for a reason'.

I like the overhang the way it is. As for the top being 1". I think that might look better if bottom edge of the top was eased with something like a 30 degree profile (from vertical) or routed with some other substantial profile. A 3/16 ogree just wouldn't look right on a table this size. Just my 2 cents . . .

[John Miliunas]

Quite nice, overall there, Mike. To my eye, the apron looks just fine. But, I think you did hit it on the thickness. Again, just MHO, but in comparison to the legs, which invoke more of a "slim" look, I think the top is a bit "heavy" in both, length and thickness. I'm not sure I'd pull back by the same 3" you lost on the aprons, though. Maybe just hack an inch or so at a time and do another visual look on the base. I would probably do the top at closer to 3/4". BTW, that's some very pretty wood and a wonderful gesture on your part in giving back to the owner! I'll bet he's spent many hours in his former barn and now he'll have a tribute to that fact right in his own home! Nice job!!! :cool:

[Mike Schwing]

Thanks guys. It never occured to me to cut the apron in width to keep the same proportion when I cut it in length! Thats what makes me an amateur! I can live with that.

I'm planning on putting a 1/2" roundover on both top and bottom of the tabletop, that _should_ make it look a bit thinner, but I might take 1/16" or so off of it first.

I'm tending towards shortening the top a bit at a time as suggested, as well.

Finishing suggestions? I'm thinking just 3 coats of Watco Natural and then wax.

[Bob Lasley]

Mike,

I agree that the top needs to look a little lighter. I think that a chamfer on the underside of the top would compliment the taper of the legs while lightening the top.

Bob

[chaddhamilton]

I like it very much as it is. Only thing I would consider is the chamfer as mentioned above. Nice work and beautiful wood, Mike.

[Lars Thomas]

Mike, because of the linar lines (is that redundant?), I would stay away from a round-over. I think you'd be happier with a chamfer (on the bottom)

Lars
Maryland transplant

[Jim Becker]

I've come back to this thread a couple of times as it' hasn't been easy to put my finger on my thoughts...but here goes...

For some reason, when I stare at the picture of the table, I find that something is making it lose the "delicate" look that the tapered leg/Shaker style often affords to me. The apron is part of that; it's too tall for the length. It keeps the piece from looking "springy" as it should, IMHO. Secondly, I agree that the table top overhangs on the ends are too long. They need to be shortened in proportion to the rest of the piece. Thirdly, a subtle chamfer/bevel on the underside of the table top will lighten the look without compromising the solid feel. This is a typical Shaker technique and I used it on some nightstands with what I regard as success.

On another note, I also agree with Jason that the first thing I see is that knot in the apron--it draws the eye far too much. If you are planning on finishing the piece dark, it will probably work out fine. If not you may want to consider adding an overlay drawer or dutchman to eliminate it from the picture, as it were. Or turning it around, assuming the other side's apron is clear.

I don't agree with adding any form of moldings, etc., to this piece. The simplicity of the style speaks for itself.

[Mike Schwing]

Thanks again all! Here's what I've planned on doing after incorporating all of the great comments into my brain.

Shortening the table top to proportion with the width overhang, as originally measured, since the width of the base did not change when the length did.

Putting a chamfer on the underside of the tabletop as suggested by several folks, instead of thinning the top. (super idea thanks guys)

I may put a matching chamfer, of sorts, on the bottom of the aprons in an effort to make them look more narrow as well. In fact, its not out of the question that I may be able to simply cut them down somewhat.

Two of you have pointed out the knot in the apron. When the piece gets finish on it, it'll darken the overall effect somewhat, though I do not intend to add any color to the piece. The other option is to simply turn the table around - no knot on the other side!

This is a way cool hobby and a really neat way to get help with your work. Thanks.

[Lars Thomas]

Building on Jim's comment (and others), I wonder if you could rip and flip that front apron to eliminate the knot? Or maybe hide it under the edge of the table?