Page 1 of 1

Ambrose Maple NE Bowl- Winner TOTW 1-7-2018

Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2017 10:08 am
by Jim Seyfried
This natural edge bowl is 16"x11" and 5 1/2" tall. I put four legs on this one so it might be a rocker sometime. I did let it dry for several months before finishing it. On this one I used CA glue on the bark. It is finished with Danish oil and Beall buffed.
nemaple305.jpg
nemaple314.jpg
nemaple318.jpg

Re: Ambrose Maple NE Bowl

Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2017 10:53 am
by Mike Cruz
Beautiful curves and beautiful finish...what's not to like. Except the feet...if you don't like feet. :lol: I'm getting used to your turnings having feet, Jim. I'd actually be surprised to see them without feet at this point. One thing I do feel like I have to say about them, on this piece at least...the entire form seems very elegant and...flowy. Yet the feet seem a bit rigid and plain. I'm not sure how easily one/you could make them more elegant...by turning their profile in an ogee or something? I don't know...just thinking out loud. :1thumbup

Re: Ambrose Maple NE Bowl

Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2017 5:18 pm
by Curt Fuller
You sure have the touch for these natural edged bowls. They just seem to flow like no others I've seen. And you nail those feet in height, position, and size. What a beautiful bowl!

Re: Ambrose Maple NE Bowl

Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2017 7:46 am
by Bob Rotche
Really nice. Great idea to go with an ogee curve on a natural edge bowl giving it sort of a refined rusticity. Not sure why we don't see that more often. Will have to give it a try.

Re: Ambrose Maple NE Bowl

Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2017 5:11 pm
by Jim Seyfried
Mike Cruz wrote:Beautiful curves and beautiful finish...what's not to like. Except the feet...if you don't like feet. :lol: I'm getting used to your turnings having feet, Jim. I'd actually be surprised to see them without feet at this point. One thing I do feel like I have to say about them, on this piece at least...the entire form seems very elegant and...flowy. Yet the feet seem a bit rigid and plain. I'm not sure how easily one/you could make them more elegant...by turning their profile in an ogee or something? I don't know...just thinking out loud. :1thumbup
Thanks Mike! I agree with you on the feet. You should have seen it before I started carving them. :lol: Probably why it sat on my shelf for so long. I do like it more now that it's finished. I think an ogee or at least some curve in the transition to feet would have worked better. I have sketch books in both the shop and house and should draw up some different styles. Oh and I actually do have some recent bowls without feet. Honest.

Thanks Curt and Bob! I appreciate your comments!

Re: Ambrose Maple NE Bowl

Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2017 6:09 pm
by Wolfgang Schulze-Zachau
This is a beautiful bowl, and I do wonder how you managed to keep all that bark on the piece. Shows your skill as a turner, I suppose. As far as the feet are concerned: I do like them, and I don't think they need to be a different shape. I do think, though, that if they were a little less prominent, i.e. a little shorter, it would work better. And, if my eyes don't betray me, the first picture shows that they are not sitting equally on a flat surface. There's definitely one leg up in the air.

Re: Ambrose Maple NE Bowl

Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2017 7:44 pm
by Fred Belknap
I have recently been making several bowls mostly NE with feet. Some have 4 feet and some have 3. With 3 feet the problem of wobble is eliminated. Doing feet sure adds a lot of work to a bowl. You did a great job on this bowl and I do like the feet.

Re: Ambrose Maple NE Bowl

Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2017 8:17 pm
by Mike Cruz
Fred, I got in a string of 'footed bowls' for a while. I had to raise my prices because of the extra time associated with them. People really didn't seem to give a rat's rear end about the beaded foot, and didn't seem happy to pay for it, either. So, I stopped... That's not saying that you, Jim, or anyone else shouldn't do it. Rather, my customers just didn't care whether it was there or not...

Re: Ambrose Maple NE Bowl

Posted: Mon Dec 18, 2017 4:53 am
by Wolfgang Schulze-Zachau
I suspect that most of your customers don't buy your bowls to put them on display, they buy them so they can use them, and in that case their point of view makes perfect sense.
I have the very same issues with some of the more practical items I make (candle sticks, tealight holders, pill boxes, etc.) For those things I have a very clear policy: the bulk of what I make is strictly high-speed and simple finish, so that I can sell them for a reasonable price and still make some money. And then I make a few much more artistic pieces, where I don't look at the clock, and these sell for much more money, but there are only few people who appreciate the difference.
I suspect this bowl is in the latter category.

Re: Ambrose Maple NE Bowl

Posted: Mon Dec 18, 2017 8:23 am
by Mike Cruz
Many of my customers 'say' they want to be able to use it, but never do. My average bowl sale is $300 US. These are not 'intentionally' utilitarian bowls, but nothing says they cannot be. Yes, though, most of my bowls end up being display pieces, not used. But what is displayed is rarely ever the bottom. Now, if my pricepoint was $1000 US for my average bowl, maybe a beaded foot would be more welcome and appreciated. Who knows? But at this point, the majority of my sales range from $200-600...with most around the $300 range. Take that for what it is...numbers. I'm fortunate enough to have a market here that supports it, but I'm not getting rich on those numbers, either. Hell, it wouldn't be easy to just pay the bills with it, either!

Re: Ambrose Maple NE Bowl

Posted: Mon Dec 18, 2017 8:38 am
by Wolfgang Schulze-Zachau
Count yourself lucky. $300 equates to £225. You won't sell any bowl here in the UK for that money, never mind what size they are. Round here you are lucky to get £75 for a 12" bowl, and maybe £120 for a 16" bowl. Which goes a long way to explain why there are essentially no production bowl turners left in the UK.

Re: Ambrose Maple NE Bowl

Posted: Mon Dec 18, 2017 8:46 am
by Jim Seyfried
Wolfgang Schulze-Zachau wrote:This is a beautiful bowl, and I do wonder how you managed to keep all that bark on the piece. Shows your skill as a turner, I suppose. As far as the feet are concerned: I do like them, and I don't think they need to be a different shape. I do think, though, that if they were a little less prominent, i.e. a little shorter, it would work better. And, if my eyes don't betray me, the first picture shows that they are not sitting equally on a flat surface. There's definitely one leg up in the air.
I looked a few other bowls that I have with legs and I think it is a good point that shorter would be better. And your eyes are very good! I had also seen that, but thought it was just from my photo setup. Because I carefully made sure they were level a few days ago. However, I checked it out on the table before commenting and it doesn’t sit flat, possibly the difference in humidity between the shop and house? I’ll tune it up again and see what happens.

Thanks Wolfgang! Your observations are very helpful.

Fred Belknap wrote:I have recently been making several bowls mostly NE with feet. Some have 4 feet and some have 3. With 3 feet the problem of wobble is eliminated. Doing feet sure adds a lot of work to a bowl. You did a great job on this bowl and I do like the feet.
Fred, it seem on the more round bowls I put 3 legs on, but the oblong ones I have trouble deciding where to place them. I might have some OCD tendencies. :lol: Thanks Fred!
Mike Cruz wrote:Fred, I got in a string of 'footed bowls' for a while. I had to raise my prices because of the extra time associated with them. People really didn't seem to give a rat's rear end about the beaded foot, and didn't seem happy to pay for it, either. So, I stopped... That's not saying that you, Jim, or anyone else shouldn't do it. Rather, my customers just didn't care whether it was there or not...
Mike, I usually think of you when I'm doing a bit of decoration on the base or legs, especially if it is giving me trouble. :lol: If it was a business for me I would need a better market than is available to me to support the extra work. This is true with carving even more than decorating the base. And I do think that woodturners appreciate decorations on the base more than most people would. So I fully understand your position.

Re: Ambrose Maple NE Bowl

Posted: Mon Dec 18, 2017 8:45 pm
by Marc Himes
I've looked at this several time and really like it. Very thin, nice form and really cute feet. Well done, Jim.

Re: Ambrose Maple NE Bowl

Posted: Fri Dec 22, 2017 8:56 am
by Jim Seyfried
Marc Himes wrote:I've looked at this several time and really like it. Very thin, nice form and really cute feet. Well done, Jim.
Thanks Marc!

Re: Ambrose Maple NE Bowl

Posted: Sun Dec 24, 2017 9:05 am
by Steve Schlumpf
Late to the party but wanted to say how much I like this bowl! Part of that is due to the ogee and part to the lift provided by the feet. Overall - a winning combination! Speaking of winning - I just saw that this piece won the cover honors over on WOW! Congrats! :clap:

Re: Ambrose Maple NE Bowl

Posted: Sun Dec 24, 2017 10:31 am
by Curt Fuller
Steve Schlumpf wrote: Speaking of winning - I just saw that this piece won the cover honors over on WOW! Congrats! :clap:
I'll second that!

Re: Ambrose Maple NE Bowl

Posted: Wed Dec 27, 2017 11:10 am
by Jim Seyfried
Thanks Steve and Curt! Good think I have a stocking cap! :roflmao:

Re: Ambrose Maple NE Bowl

Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2017 11:07 am
by Tim Rinehart
Beautiful bowl, love the shallow ogee shape. The feet don’t bother me at all with shape, though you’re probably right that some tippiness may develop over time. Probably easily tweaked if it does.

Re: Ambrose Maple NE Bowl

Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 8:03 am
by Mike Cruz
Jim, my wife saw this one last night. She ooohed and aaaaahed over it! If she makes me start to do feet, be expecting a road trip from me to your place for good old fashion butt whoopin'!!!!!!!!!! :roflmao:

Re: Ambrose Maple NE Bowl

Posted: Sun Jan 07, 2018 9:51 am
by Michael Gibson
Jim, this really is a beautiful bowl. The ogee form, you nailed it, at 16' in length a pretty good size and appears to have a consistent thickness throughout. I don't mind the feet, it gives it some lift, maybe just a tad shorter, and l would stick with just three legs in the future. All this makes it my TOTW, congratulations on a wonderful piece.

Re: Ambrose Maple NE Bowl- Winner TOTW 1-7-2018

Posted: Sun Jan 07, 2018 12:58 pm
by Mike Cruz
Congrats, Jim! I'll let my wife know... ;)

Re: Ambrose Maple NE Bowl- Winner TOTW 1-7-2018

Posted: Sun Jan 07, 2018 5:46 pm
by Jim Seyfried
Thank you, Michael, for this honor! Having such a nice piece of wood sure was a good start to make this bowl. I know that there are fewer problems by having three legs. But, being somewhat OCD I have a hard time deciding where to place three legs on natural edge, somewhat oblong bowls, round ones are no problem. I guess I should study how others place legs on them.

Thanks, for the comments, Tim and Mike! Mike I'm pleased your wife likes this! And if you head this way bring your golf clubs, you can whoop me on one of our beautiful golf courses. :roflmao: Besides, I might be doing you a favor, with the deep pocket customers you get, some feet on your small burls might pay off! :shrug:

Re: Ambrose Maple NE Bowl- Winner TOTW 1-7-2018

Posted: Mon Jan 08, 2018 1:35 am
by Les Symonds
Hi Jim....firstly, congratulations....and secondly, it came as no surprise because this is a stand-out piece. In a line-up of a hundred bowls there would be many that we wouldn't give a second glance to, but this one is going to grab attention wherever it is seen.
Les

Re: Ambrose Maple NE Bowl- Winner TOTW 1-7-2018

Posted: Thu Jan 11, 2018 8:03 am
by Jim Seyfried
Thanks Les!