What constitutes 'handmade' ?

UKworkshop.co.uk

Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
'Handmade' is one of those words that is part of that guff and nostalgia that we like to wallow in, in our modern world - 'Artisanal' is another. It evokes a 'time before', when, supposedly, everything was more comforting and reassuring.

We all buy into it to a greater or lesser extent. But, can anything be truly handmade if, somewhere during the process of making it, a machine was used? The best any of us could claim is 'mostly' or 'partly' - 'wholly' might just be a claim too far.

As it's a word usually attached to something that someone is trying to sell us, it should best be treated as a marketing ploy - we all realize it can't be wholly true, but,, we like to hear it, anyway.
I think you have hit the nail on the head. As soon as you can attach a commercial value to any of these terms then there is a clear incentive to see how far it can be pushed, to the extent that it becomes largely meaningless. For me I suppose i would sum it up as having a connection to the person who actually made something. So when I am resoring an old clock dial I can see the brush strokes of the person, maybe 200 years ago, who actually painted it. Or toolmarks on an old case or piece of furniture. When things are largely made using machines you lose that connection to a great extent. I share your deslike for terms like artisan, what does that actually mean? A bit like classic car. I often find myself thinking classic in what way exactly?
 
If I make something it's hand made - mistakes all over it, if you make it and it's near as can be perfect then that's machine made!🤣🤣🤣
Funnily enough, I recall going to an exhibition where I saw an exquisite Chinese porcelain bowl with yellow chrysanthemums decoration. It was medieval - it was flawless - and it was handmade.
It's not strange that we equate this form of perfection with being machine made. After all, much of the furniture and cabinetry around us is chipboard or MDF , but with an immaculate finish - all fur coat and no knickers so to speak :giggle:
 
Hmm... the waters here are very muddy :)

I use a CNC machine to create all manner of 'things' - look back over some of my posts this year and you'll see the 'Giraffe' Clock and the 'Siamese Cat' box to mention just a couple. These were designed and made 'by hand' - ie. 'created' from my own thought processes and transfered to a finished article by me personally selecting suitable materials and processing them 'by hand', albeit with the aid of Power Saw, Pillar Drill, Milling Machine, Lathe, Router, Gear Hobber, CNC, Linisher . . . . etc.

I've no idea how you go about making or repairing clocks (never mind Watches!) but you may well have a Pinion Mill - would the use of such mean that the resulting clock could not be called 'Hand Made' ?

Programming a CNC machine is not a soul-less machine activity, it has to start with a drawing which will have come from some form of creative inspiration. It may then require 'adjustment' - often by hand or eye - to achieve the final desired effect.

As I said at the start - the waters are 'muddy'.
Have to agree with the muddy waters. Same applies to things like the difference between patina, to be left alone, and damage that perhaps ought to be repaired. Very often in the eye of the beholder.
 
Funnily enough, I recall going to an exhibition where I saw an exquisite Chinese porcelain bowl with yellow chrysanthemums decoration. It was medieval - it was flawless - and it was handmade.
It's not strange that we equate this form of perfection with being machine made. After all, much of the furniture and cabinetry around us is chipboard or MDF , but with an immaculate finish - all fur coat and no knickers so to speak :giggle:
I particularly liked an episode of digging for Britain, where the lovely Alice Roberts took an exquisite Saxon belt buckle to Garrards. It was solid gold with dozens of tiny sections cut out and inlaid with stones, each cut to perfectly fit its setting and, together with other enamel work, forming a complex geometric pattern. It was great to see how many youngsters there were in their jewellery workshop. But the chap who showed her around said that nothing significant had changed in their trade. He was saying that the person who made this object would be quite at home in their workshop, and would be immediately familiar with most of the tools and processes, as they really hadn't changed at all, everything still being done largely by hand. The only significant difference was having powered grinders to shape the stones, rather than having to rub them down against another stone, but the precise shape still being down to the skill and "eye" of the person doing it. And gas torches for heat. Their verdict having looked at the piece was that to replicate it today would take a craftsman about six weeks, and cost about £250,000 if my memory serves. His opinion was that if all the stones had to be ground as they had done it, it must have taken several months to make.
 
I particularly liked an episode of digging for Britain, where the lovely Alice Roberts took an exquisite Saxon belt buckle to Garrards. It was solid gold with dozens of tiny sections cut out and inlaid with stones, each cut to perfectly fit its setting and, together with other enamel work, forming a complex geometric pattern. It was great to see how many youngsters there were in their jewellery workshop. But the chap who showed her around said that nothing significant had changed in their trade. He was saying that the person who made this object would be quite at home in their workshop, and would be immediately familiar with most of the tools and processes, as they really hadn't changed at all, everything still being done largely by hand. The only significant difference was having powered grinders to shape the stones, rather than having to rub them down against another stone, but the precise shape still being down to the skill and "eye" of the person doing it. And gas torches for heat. Their verdict having looked at the piece was that to replicate it today would take a craftsman about six weeks, and cost about £250,000 if my memory serves. His opinion was that if all the stones had to be ground as they had done it, it must have taken several months to make.
Yes, the basics are pretty much the unchanged in lots of crafts. Added to this they would have worked only during daylight hours, with no jewellers loupes or magnification. Probably very much a young persons game
 
For me if electrons were used it’s not hand made. I do allow electric lights and acknowledge power might have been used in the making of the tools used but the materials from the moment I get them to the final product are not touched by powered tools. Even to the extent of using hand drills, brace and bit, dimensioning with hand saws and planes.
Most woodworking I have done has been hand made to this definition.
I’ve recently started using power tools like a track saw, router and sander for making cabinets because I'm just not fit enough any more. I have of course used power tools for DIY stuff and work metal with an electric lathe, mill and welder.
This definition of hand made is probably pretty extreme but it’s driven me to learn a lot of skills and provided a lifetime of enjoyment.
When I’m buying something I simply look at the quality of the work, not how it was done. Maxine work is often better than can be achieved by hand.
 
Interesting to look at the history. If you go back a couple of hundred years everything was hand made to a very great extent, and there were a wealth of skilled people making all sorts of stuff. Then you get factory mass production. One of the first to do this as we would recognise it today, making parts to a close enough tolerance that they are for all practical purposes identical, was the Springfield Armoury. If you think that the trigger mechanism of a gun has, for sake of argument, six parts. The traditional approach had been to have a gunsmith sitting at his bench with six boxes, each contains examples of each different component made by hand to a fairly rough specification. He would, by trial and error, find the six parts that were the closest fit and then spend time filing and polishing etc until they fitted together perfectly to make a working mechanism. A very time consuming process, and if course the resulting mechanism was unique. None of the parts could be replaced if broken without further fettling by a skilled worker. So they called in one of my favourites, Joseph Whitworth, to advise how they could overcome this. He worked out that each component had to be made to a certain tolerance, 0.002in, if I remember correctly. And he advised them how to achieve this, and sold them machinery and other equipment to do it, not least of all to be able to actually measure the parts that accurately, and repeat the process over and over with machines following patterns doing most of the work. As a result if we go back to the trigger production bench, we have a low skilled, and cheap, worker (often women) who only needs to take one of each of the six parts and assemble them in the correct order. No fettling required and every one works perfectly. This was applied to the manufacture of the whole gun, and enabled them to make them in greater quantity and less cost than ever before. In service they could be repaired easily using stock parts, something we take for granted now but a revolutionary idea at the time of the Civil War.
As this idea took hold, in the US initially, so there was less demand for the skilled workers that had previously been needed in all sorts of trades. Their skills were no longer required, or certainly not in the numbers they had been.
The more complex the product, the more attractive this approach was. Waterbury (the ancestor of both Ingersoll and Timex) and other American watch and clock manufacturers used this approach to produce watches and clocks in their thousands every week, mostly assembled by a small army of female workers, and sell them for around a dollar. Previously the cheapest traditionally made watch cost maybe $10. They exported them all over the world enabling millions to own a watch or clock for the first time. Waterbury were for a time in the 1880s probably the biggest watch manufacturer in the world, and their Series E pocket watch sold in its millions. Hand made goods quickly became the preserve of the wealthy, a situation which has largely continued to this day, and expanded across more and more industries.
 
I’m a traditional wood carver. When I took my kids to a museum exhibition of a Roman carpenter’s workshop they pointed to all the tools they recognised as having direct equivalents in mine. I don’t use guides, even for sharpening, don’t use power tools anymore. Did have a bandsaw and linisher but when I found I couldn’t cut straight and at 90 degrees and to a perfect tolerance anymore I threw them out as they had removed any skill from my process and that hurt. Didn’t take long to relearn my hand skills but I did actually have to do so. I reckon on my work as being hand made.
 
Last edited:
I've only made one thing that was entirely handmade. A small box, made from timber riven from a log into quartered boards, each dressed and thicknessed by chisel and plane. dimensioned by handsaw, Hand sanded with paper and a block.

It took a long time, much sweat and a bit of blood(see those sharp edges :( ) and TBH I wouldnt ever do it again.

Sure theres a satisfaction from doing it entirely by hand, but in truth it is not economical.
 
To me what matters is the uniqueness of the item, the skill level required including creativity and the beauty of the object. That gets me such a blurred definition I could not justify where the boundaries fall.
 
Genuine question and I'm not expecting a definitive answer.. just thoughts and discussion.

Is it a question of power tools used in the creation of the piece.. ? If so, presumably a drill is OK but a CNC isn't?

Or it is question of what percentage of the process was done by hand ?

Or is there a different criteria ?

The question has arisen in my mind when I came across an item on Etsy which - to me - couldn't possibly be 'handmade' by any stretch of the imagination.
I see myself as a wordsmith too. These misstatements bug me. But OUR Reality is that we can not change how most people think or speak. And what used to be meant 60 yrs ago, might mean something very different today, ie being "gay". We just can't change society. Its a waste of time as well as frustration.
 
there is a fine line, for example I'm still going to use a power router to route a truss rod slot on a guitar that is still mostly handmade, I learnt with only handtools for the first few years of woodworking but it's good to use both hand and power tools, making electric guitars you'll almost certainly need to use a router and a bandsaw and it's not cheating, it's a different skill using the power tools, where I will draw the line is saying that CNC is definitely not handmade in any way at all, but that doesn't mean it's not skilled, it's obviously good for precision and repeatability and is ideal for manufacturing.
 
"handmade" hasn't been a literally accurate term for hundreds of years.
Back in the 1800;s, do you think they were sitting around the pub saying things like, "your planks were cut by a water powered mill, that's not made by hand"
The truth is, is that it's just a catch-phrase and a moving target. Anyone can use it as they see fit and therein lies the problem. A word with no real meaning is basically useless, unless your trying to sell something, then it's better off not having a literal meaning.
 
Once a machine has been invented and proven useful, then there is no way back from this, William Morris tried to row back - at least as far as not letting machinery dictate how something is made, or its look. And, it is said that Ernest Gimson didn't allow machinery in his workshops, but that after his death, his fore-man Peter Waals started to introduce it.
When the genie is out of the bottle there is no way of getting it back in., especially if it has shaped a new reality, that everyone has become accustomed to. So we are, where we are. And, nothing can be truly hand made , unless one goes to extraordinary lengths, and is prepared for the product to be uneconomic to produce.
 
To me, terms are important and I need to look at myself in the mirror. If I sell work as made by hand it IS hand made without power tools, if I use a rotary power tool, it is carved, chainsaw carvings are sold as such, but all 3 forms are created by the manipulation of a tool with my hands. I believe that this differentiation remains important to the majority of wood carvers. I also believe there should be a differentiation between hand made, hand assembled, hand finished and hand polished, to answer the OP.
 
Almost all commercial cabinet makers will use machinery to prepare and dimension material. In reality this still only accounts for about 20% of total project time but more like 80% of the finished project. The majority of the time is in hand cutting, fitting and finishing
To get the most out of any piece of machinery takes a lot of skill and knowledge. Take sawn veneers. If they are cut on a bandsaw would that constitute handmade or do they have to physically be cut by hand with a frame saw or similar
Even using jigs etc to cut joints etc, the craftsman still has to set everything up and manually do the operations
Where I start to lose this is use of CNC such as routing and shaping where I would say not handmade, but if that portion only constitutes a small part ogf the finished product/design then the overall end product could be handmade. Simple example could be a bought in machine made marquetry design or even inlay bandings
 
As low skilled and cheap as that, eh?
I didn't mean that in any derogatory way. The simple fact is that in those days women did not command the same wages as men, a stupid notion that was to persist for another hundred years or more. On the other hand companies like Springfield and Waterbury were some of the first to employ a largely female workforce in these sort of roles, and start to change attitudes in this respect. For Springfield a major consideration was probably that by employing largely women they freed up men to go and fight in the Civil war. But they found that women were actually every bit as good at doing the job, a rather startling idea at the time! Companies like Waterbury found that women were actually far better at the intricate work involved in assembling watches, and social conventions at the time meant you could pay them far less, a win win from the company point of view. Fast forward to the World wars and women became essential to production of all war materials, and took on every sort of job. Took a very long time before the recognition of their equal status in terms of ability to be reflected in pay, and still an issue to this day.
 
Well done reversing out of the potential deep hole you started falling into 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
 
Back
Top