George, I think you are confused. Warren is saying that the ORIGINAL 300 year old pilgrim table included in Sacks' book was distressed/fake.
Member
George, I think you are confused. Warren is saying that the ORIGINAL 300 year old pilgrim table included in Sacks' book was distressed/fake.
~ Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the men of old; seek what they sought.
Member
He and David and now others are asserting that antiques don't really suffer significant wear, apparently no matter how old or how used, say many times per day for decades in a tavern, for example.
~ Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the men of old; seek what they sought.
Member
Well,Sean,the table in Mr.Sack's book does show the foot worn areas as polished looking. Maybe It's the picture that is confusing me. They show shiny light reflecting off of them in a few places where the foot wear is. How is that possible if the piece has the original finish(and has had no varnishing over those areas.)
Sorry about the confusion.
Whether an old piece shows significant wear is obviously related to how well it was taken care of. For example,I have books with early fire arms or musical instruments in them that look like the day they were made. Others get completely worn out. The collection of objects in the Williamsburg collection runs the full gamut of pristine to completely worn out.
Last edited by george wilson; 10-25-2014 at 8:34 PM.
Member
Great, George. You and Warren probably owe it to Mr. Sack's heirs to let them know so at the next reprint they can make the correction. I'm sure the present owners of the piece would appreciate your assessments too.
~ Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the men of old; seek what they sought.
Member
Well. I'm no freakin Hardy Boy, but I'll take a crack at The Mystery of the Shine and suggest we test for furniture oil or polish or wax. In my limited experience all of these materials can impart shine to wood, and yet are not varnish! Much well-cared for furniture has been known to suffer such applications, I think. But I'm just speculating; I don't have the expert eye to judge from this tiny photo reproduction like some can.Originally Posted by george wilson
~ Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the men of old; seek what they sought.
Guest
My comment was in reference to the corner cupboard. I don't know what tables in taverns look like, they're probably more subject to wear and tear because they are a business item and not a reflection on the owners. I stand by my comment about the corner cupboard, it looks like fake wear to me.
I'll defer to Warren and George on the tavern table.
Contributor
I think the problem is that many want to associate age wear with use wear. A piece of furniture that has been subjected to daily heavy use in a pub or restaurant will accumulate wear at a rate of knots that may have taken several hundreds of years in the average home. In a business setting, where the owners are not fastidious, this may go unchecked. However, in the average home I do imagine that wear just does not happen this way.
How much painted furniture went over good wood? If the designs were intricate, it is likely to have been looked after, as with furniture made of decent hardwood. The type of wear would reflect years of upkeep. I recall the last Studebaker my father owned (he was a Studerbaker guy until they went out of business). He bought it new in 1958 and polished this car every weekend. After 10 years the baked on enamel had thinned and worn at the peaks of the fins and on certain areas of the body where he had lavished extra love.
Anyone who ages furniture to give it that well loved look needs to be a good furniture psychologist. To ask "how was this piece used", and "who used it". The rubbing of a person's back on the splats of a seat back and arms on the rests, or knees under a table edge, elbows on a desk leather, years of polishing brass that have taken off detail and left behind resudue in the crevices, colours changing with reaction to the environment, the effects of wax and other polishes ...
I do not see much painted furniture but assume that wear should be the same.
For some years fashion has been led by many designers with little knowledge of furniture, per se, and more interested in the effect they might achieve. The rise of Shabby Chic appears to have confused many - and may, in fact, have encouraged some to age their furniture the same way.
Regards from Perth
Derek
Last edited by Derek Cohen; 10-25-2014 at 8:57 PM.
Member
I said that my first impression was that the table had added wear. I have not seen the table in person; I have only seen one picture. I can't imagine what could be wrong with stating my impression on a forum.
Member
I don't believe anyone is suggesting that there is anything wrong with you stating your "impression" that he table in that picture has had wear added. Are you suggesting that there is anything wrong with me expressing my impression of your impression?
~ Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the men of old; seek what they sought.
Guest
All of these impressions are causing me to experience depressions, or is that distressions?
Last edited by David Weaver; 10-25-2014 at 10:11 PM.
Member
Sorry,Sean. I did not say I thought the table was a fake. I just wondered why there seems to be shine on the shoe worn areas. It is hard to judge something by just a picture. Even with waxing,it would SEEM difficult to make the abraded surface where shoes have rested shiny. That's my impression. I am on a new med for sleep these last few days that has affected my head anyway.
Last edited by george wilson; 10-25-2014 at 10:10 PM.
Member
Sorry, George. Think what you want. Warren too.
My thinking is that there are such things as experts. Scientists, doctors, art historians, etc. I'd imagine you think of yourself as an expert in many things. If you published a book about one of those topics - I dunno - harpsichord building maybe, should I respect your statements? Rely on them? Would you think it sort of offensive and suspect if some folks on a form who are not as expert as you in the field expressed impressions suggesting you were wrong about some basic fact? At the least I would think you would be rather amused.
~ Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the men of old; seek what they sought.
Contributor
Warren's point about the wear being even up to the corners of the legs is a valid observation, but I remember being a child and "fixing " uneven wear with my shoes. Even museum standards have changed considerably in how pieces are
conserved,waxed, etc. The Elgin marbles were drastically altered for display purposes ,alas there is not a better set to be
had.
Member
Sean, don't get too riled up by your detractors from the peanut gallery. Predictable and pathetic. You actually made the piece that you posted, not for a paying patron or the State, you did it because you are, well, crazy. Sorry, an enthusiast craftsman. Damn fine job too, of course I would have done things differently and quite a bit better.
Shame on you for sanding in and varnishing over the "patina" points, you'll never fool the Smithsonian with this sort of work. Wait a minute, you were trying to fool the Smithsonian right?
You have never come across as anyone vying for any sort of seat on this forum. You have come across as a guy with a boat load of talent and ability who actually works wood for his own pleasure. You have never said, "I am an expert, I am talented", but your work supports this! Don't let the detractors and deferrers get you down. They are habitual and have little to show for themselves.
Quick note, your stool lacks the smell of horse piss, the scuff of shoe leather and the surface coefficient of spilt draft, no wait, cider.
[OP]
Member
Not so touchy guys. No reason to become angry, this is just a forum after all.
Personally I am more interested in the how then in the why. As I see it there are two distinct aspects. First, the wood ages. The trick now is to do 3 centuries of change in a couple of days. Cherry seems to be not the worst kind of wood in that respect. Actually, a lot of woodworkers use aging tactics to get a better color from cherry, for example with UV light or with chemicals like Lye or Potassium dichromate. I am a bit reluctant to resort to chemicals like that, so I will first experiment with UV light. There are plenty of cheap second hand ones available, so that's a good start for some experimentation.
Other parts of the aging of wood are cupping and splitting. Often you see boards that aren't very flat anymore in antique furniture. I am not sure if I want to try that or how I would do it. Wood can be quite erratic in that respect. It bows and cups only when you don't want it to.
The second aspect is wear. And that's where I am also looking for practical ideas. How to make scratches? How and where to make the usual dents and broken bits that result from using the furiniture or moving it around? How about corners and edges, they rarely survive intact and sharp over 300 years. Indeed this seems to be a psychologic question. Just watching old pieces is going to learn me more then anything I presume.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote