opinions needed

[Lionel Mercier]

ouch ... I come back to the problem of the base
in the gallery, I posted a piece that (again) does not have feet
I have attached two pics here:
with and without base

I'd like your opinions on this
what you think is best (in this case)
many thanks

 

[Lionel Mercier]

oups...I did forget
and with the base upside down

 

[Mike Peace]

without base

 

[john lucas]

Normally I would say without the base but on this piece I like the base in the top photo. It gives the piece some balance and turns it into more of an "Art" piece kind of look. Takes it away from the functional. The stand on the bottom photo does not fit with the piece at all.

 

[Fred Belknap]

I'm with John on this one. It looks unfinished without the base.

 

[hockenbery]

My preference is without a base among this shown.

I would like to see it on a support that shows it on it long side.

Something like a platter or plate stand.

 

[Bill Boehme]

The photo of the piece on the pedestal gives the piece a feeling of motion -- as though it is climbing towards the sky. I like that presentation and the photography is very good with shadows that give the image depth. The image's white balance is off a bit, but that can be fixed easily enough.

Without the pedestal, the piece looks odd -- perhaps off balance and unstable. For some odd reason it makes me think of my dental visit yesterday when the doctor said, "open wide and stick out your tongue". Same comment as above about the photography.

I don't see anything good about the photography in the third image -- just shows that a bad photo can kill a really nice turning. The lighting appears to be the culprit and as a result the image is flat without any shadows to define its depth. The little plastic tabs are the stakes in the heart that deliver the coup de grâce.

So the bottom line is that I really like the one on the pedestal, but then I am seeing a photograph so that is what I am really judging more than the turning itself. However, I believe that I would like the piece if I saw it displayed on a table with the pedestal. The one thing that I see in all three of the images is an inconsistent thickness along the rim. That would be difficult to achieve on a piece with such an odd shape, but such things like that are what woodturners actually enjoy worrying about.

 

[Harry Robinette]

+ 1 with Hockenbery.

 

[Breck Whitworth]

which pic.

What a beautiful piece that just flows. In answer to your question I prefer the pic. with the base in the first pic. much better! I think it shows off the wood turning better than just sitting flat on a table. With the base upside down it looks ok but I like the first because it appears to be floating on air. More of an art piece, great idea for the base.

 

[Pete Blair]

Base?

I'm sort of with the group that likes the base but I think it is just a little small and I get the feeling of unbalance but do think it looks better elevated than not. Just my 2c worth.

 

[Mark Mandell]

Try hanging it on a wall with the concave (left lobe in the photos) down. Piece seems to be about the "liquid" grain. Divorce it from a horizontal surface and let it flow.

 

[Tom Beatty]

my opinion

I like it raised off the surface. But in line with otHer posts, with uneven rim thickness, and the names tural flow if grain, would think it would look better if the right side with thinner rim were angled down aboUt 30 degrees. Also woild pr3fer a light, airey wooden stand.

 

[Lionel Mercier]

Many thanks for your comments and advices.

Personally, I can't choose between baseless and with the base (normal position)

Yes Bill, the white balance is a bit off (I did set it on "cloudy" because I shoot with the daylight, but indoor, flash off)
and the third photo is a trial to adjust this on the PC.
A trial and horror...
Yes, the thickness of the bark is inconsistent. Because the odd shape, like you said, but I'm not worry about, just I'll try in the future to correct (maybe by hand carving a bit ? )

Mark,
your suggestion is appealing, just I have to find a jig to hang the piece without damaging...(will follow)

Tom,
no problem to angling the thinner part down. I'll shoot some pics when I have a solution to hang the piece following Mark's suggestion

I will thus continue my tests
I will keep you informed of my trial and error
Friendly,

 

[Raul McCai]

without the base.

 

[Mark Mandell]

Lionel,

Sent you a PM on how to wall-mount your piece.

 

[Lionel Mercier]

Following your suggestion :

Yes Mark, the plate hanger is a safe solution. Safe about the piece.
That can be self made out metalic thread with three points
I also thought to stuck a thin metal wire in a crack which is at the rear of the

workpiece (in order to hang or support)
I'll try... is to follow.

until I start to work, here's another way for another piece
I do not have the merit, I copied a presentation by Lynne Yamaguchi

 

[Malcolm Zander]

Base or not?

Lionel, it needs a thin pedestal-type base to lift it and make it float. It has wings and it flies. Does not sit on the ground. However I am not wild about the base that you have because the wooden base disc is competing and draws attention away from the piece. I would have made a simple all-acrylic base of some kind, which would be less conspicuous.

Malcolm