Mathieson Coffin smoother with unusual rosewood sole

[ED65]

Oh dear! Throw it away!

It's burning on the fire as we speak.~

Honestly this was a candidate for the firewood pile when I found it, I bought it solely for its I. Sorby iron truth be told. It's only my deep-seated stinginess that made me even try to save it and following a very unconventional treatment (I assume, haven't read of anyone else soaking a plane in water for a couple of days) it might have been brought back from the brink.

 

[D_W]

Not stupid at all. We can all pick fault, if we look closely enough but of course in the case of Krenov you didn't have to look closely at all!. It just becomes a matter of what one finds acceptable. There's a whole difference between the confident cut of an experienced craftsman who is working quickly and the attempts of the unskilled trying to find their way. I don't do perfect work and I'm not going to waste my time trying to. If it doesn't match your standards (or others) I'm not going to worry about it. I don't force anyone to buy what I make. It is what it is.

Have a look at one of my planes (before it got oil and wax).

http://s8.postimg.org/6e6o6otkl/IMG_201 ... 00_682.jpg

It is neither perfect nor crude. There is no diddling or dawdling over any part of it, and someone with a sense of design who had made some planes looking at the eyes would say exactly what I've been saying. The bottom line is a little off. I didn't fawn over them for an hour, they are a couple of minutes each.

And another pair:

http://s18.postimg.org/txyxi8eu1/P1080390.jpg

(the eyes on the plane in the front are actually quite fine, I had forgotten about those).

Do you really think I need the remedial extrapolation? I don't. A plane is by no means an F style mandolin, I am not contending there is anything special about the above, but I am not approaching this from the standpoint of an amateur who pores over the smallest things for hours and takes 5 times an acceptable amount to get something done. The goofy extremes that discussions go to are far beyond me.

Since it seems otherwise impossible to have a discussion about something reasonable without being accused of either making a million tiny cuts as a rank amateur, or whatever else...I'm baffled, really. Typical forum stuff, I guess. Make something out of pallets, and someone will accuse you of not being able to make anything worth having. Make something finely, or be particular, and then criticism goes the other way "chasing perfection is amateurism", even when it's chasing something less than perfection. As I said, the downing of a desire to do something properly by holding up sloppy scroll work is just pointless - looking out the rear window and cherry picking something to argue about.

 

[MIGNAL]

You seem to be getting upset. I don't recall accussing you of anything. I was writing in general terms. For some odd reason you seemed to take exception to the 'wonky scroll'. I've no idea why. They were made 350 years ago by someone who had to feed the family and themselves. It had nothing to do with lack of skill. Hastily made for no other reason than the time/money factor. But the object works and in this case it works very extremely well, just like ED65's plane might work extremely well if it's restored. Just as with many other things it has to be seen in context.

 

[D_W]

It's probably a matter of nobody knowing anyones intentions on the internet, story of forever.

For what it's worth with planes inaccurately made, I had an american made plane (those went downhill in terms of cosmetics first) that was obviously cut without any markout. It was a try plane and the front of the mortise was somewhere between 5 and 10 degrees from being perpendicular to the sides of the plane.

I cut it up, but not because of that, just because it was worn out. Of course, it worked fine, but someone was in an extreme hurry making it (and it was a professionally made and marked plane).

In fact, I cut up a lot of planes - an ugly plane with a great iron set over here will sell for pennies. The great iron set, however, wouldn't. What's not common over here is later planes like the mathiesons and griffiths where everything is crisp and the plane was taken care of.

The wonky scroll I take as an exception because it's not what someone would shoot for now if they were hoping to do swift professional quality work. I don't know that much about violins, but from talking to George Wilson a fair amount, I know some of the famous makes went through stations in life where they used subpar materials in their violins. It's either amati or guarneri (or both) who have pictures of their violins floating around with knotty wood.

I'm not looking to do that equivalent, and I'm not looking to spend 30 hours making a plane, either. I'm looking for somewhere in the middle.

You can't tell so much from the picture, but the plane in the back of the two jack planes is one I made for myself. It's not well finished, but, of course, it works well. It's hard to make one that doesn't unless you ignore what's going on when you're making them. You couldn't sell it to someone unless you made up a story about rustic unfinished details or some BS.