design review

[Paul Mattaliano]

front.jpgright.jpgiso.jpg
just throwing this up for any constructive comments/criticism on this design (proportions, etc.). The plan is for the top to be a bookcase and the bottom to hold miscellaneous junk. thanks!

[Alan Caro]

front.jpgright.jpgiso.jpg
just throwing this up for any constructive comments/criticism on this design (proportions, etc.). The plan is for the top to be a bookcase and the bottom to hold miscellaneous junk. thanks!

Paul Mattaliano,

I like the proportions, style, and detail in general very much. A couple of (unnecessary) enhancements. In my view this kind of traditional bookcase always appeals when there are glass, paned doors over the books- which also keeps out the dust. You know your books of course, but you can consider proportioning the height of the shelves- tall, medium , short- as small books on tall shelves can create an "empty", a kind of forlorn appearance. Looking into it, if the bottom cabinet is lowered a small amount and you use proportioned shelves, you might add another row of books. As users will stand quite close when reaching and replacing books, it might be desirable to cut away the kick panel at the bottom front and sides to, in effect, make "feet" at the corners. This prevents potential toe stubification, can help create an appearance of lightness and balance, and the detail of the profiles- or even carved legs is an opportunity to balance the level of detail of the top molding and display some artistry. If however, your intention is to have a kind of simpler, country style, you can keep it as is. In that case, the top molding might be made even one step simpler and use simple wooden knobs on the cabinet doors. I could imagine this in Oak or even being painted to good effect.

Very nice and excellent as designed. The "miscellaneous junk" will be very lucky! Well done.

Alan Caro

[Yonak Hawkins]

It has a pleasing, traditional style. I agree with Alan about increasing the height of the top a bit and decreasing the height of the base .. not by much, though .. to enhance the proportions. That's strictly a matter of personal taste. Also, have you thought about some manner of toe kick so viewers could get closer to the book titles ? .. just a thought.

It's going to be a fine cabinet. If it were in my house, however, the "junk storage" portion would have to increase by three fold.

[Pat Barry]

I agree with the thoughts from Alan and Yonak on top vs bottom proportions. What are the dimensions?

[Paul Mattaliano]

Thanks for the feedback. Rough overall dimensions on the base cabinet are 40" wide x 18" deep x 36" high. Top is 12" deep x 42" high (overall height 78").

The shelves will be adjustable. I evenly spaced them for simplicity when building the model.

I hadn't considered the base/lack of feet being a problem with it being only 18" deep. I may have to increase the depth of the top portion because as it sits now the depth from the inside of the back to the back of the face frame is 10.75. I know we have books closer to 12". If I do this I may increase depth of the base cabinet by a similar amount.

I will also look at reducing height of the base cabinet from 36 to maybe 34" while keeping overall height around 78"

[Pat Barry]

We have a country style hutch that is kinda similar. The base cabinet is 33 high. The upper is 43 high. Overall width is 56. T

[Mel Fulks]

Yeah , good basic design . Top should be taller, needs to be obviously a rectangle at first glance.