Pipe #0000...002

[Lowpockets]

I learned with posting my first pipe that a proper critique would require something to measure by. This pipe was nearly done when I got that advice and I don't think it falls into any "classic" categories, so a critique is not requested, however any comments are welcome.

But for those that enjoy artsy-fartsy different looking pipes, here is my second pipe. Eventually, after I get some tools, I'll try something that falls into a classic shape, but honestly, I got into pipe making to dramatically diversify my pipe rack. ...well, that and I don't have the balls or skill to do something that can be scrutinized well!

[Lowpockets]

...

[The Smoking Yeti]

I would say that just because a pipe is more out there doesn't mean you can't critique it objectively. Look at Alex Florov's work for instance- why do his pipes looks so good when other people who try to make things artsy fail? Because he knows how to apply critique to his work. Here's a pipe of his just to get you thinkin' http://www.smokingpipes.com/pipes/new/f ... _id=113377

Now, as far as your pipe goes, I think there are some good critiques to be had. Here are some things that draw my attention:
-As far as the overall shape goes, I have to ask "why?" There doesn't seem to be any cohesion in the bowl and shank. The band of briar bridging the two feels equally random. Just because something is organically shaped doesn't mean it can be randomly shaped.
-mixed texture and staining. The partial rustication and staining feel incomplete and awkward on this pipe. It happens a lot when trying to mix rustications with smooth finishes. I myself also have trouble doing that well- most people do. I think rusticating the whole thing would've served you much better. The stain itself on the smooth portion feels a bit odd. When you over-sand a black stain and leave the bare briar under it, it looks a bit dingy- this is just a common effect. Usually when staining I put a topcoat of some color on, or don't completely sand out the understain.
-The stem itself feels goofy on this pipe. When making free-hand/sculptural shapes, how the stem fits in with the design is VERY important. And also very tough to do

Overall these critiques are pretty rough- especially since this is only your second pipe. Honestly, I'm posting these so you have an idea of what to look for- don't take them too hard, you haven't been at this very long. Trying out some classical shapes will help you out a lot. The critiques will be good for you- critique is good for all of us.

Cheers!

Yeti

[Lowpockets]

Yeti, I certainly don't think you're being too rough! You have a lot of good points.

The link you provided is excellent! I think I am going to spend quite a bit of time studying this guy's stuff.

As far as the overall shape ...it did have a lot more flow to it -but the dremel got away from me a few too many times (drinking and dremeling don't mix!). I drew inspiration from three different pipe designs and I wanted to combine aspects from all of them. But I think the result is the randomness. Perhaps I was eager to try a lot of things when I should have been more patient and made three pipes.

The rustication was a last minute decision. Without it, I would have been sanding for a life time between staining. It was at this point the bowl lost it's plateaux finish. Which, I think, is where the unity between the bowl and shank were lost. I kind of liked the way the rustication turned out, it's different. I think a little more practice will make it look more intentional. And yes, a top coat would have been smart.

All of your comments are spot on. Thank you very much for your advice, and for the link!

[Ocelot55]

....I would have been sanding for a life time between staining.

Welcome to being a pipemaker!

[Lowpockets]

Sanding, I get is part of the process. Sandin 1000 pipes for the rest of my life is fine, I don't have an issue that.

Sanding my second pipe for the rest of my life is where the issue is!

49 right-angle inside corners. Some of which in successive 1/16" steps in spots that were tricky to get at with carving tools ...time to find a short cut and move on!

[Alden]

That pipe has the potential to be pretty damn neat !

[mightysmurf8201]

Being a noob myself, I don't often offer critiques as I don't feel I have much to offer yet, but I think I'll weigh in here. Looking at your first pipe, and then this one, I can tell that your style is not exactly traditional, and that's ok. I get that, because I tend to be the same way, especially with my pipes. A few of the guys have mentioned that you should try a more classic shape, and although as a noob I am guilty of not practicing this as much as I should, I recommend that you give it a shot, even if it's an uncomfortable prospect. It will pay dividends, I promise. I have been forcing myself to at least do some semi traditional shapes, such as Rhodesian churchwardens and Dublin churchwardens. That way I satisfy my desire for something a bit more flashy, but still getting some practice at shaping some traditional shapes, and for me, I think it's a happy medium for now. I recommend doing the PITH if you haven't signed up yet. Just my 2 cents on that. You've definitely got some talent and I look forward to seeing what else you come up with.

[Lowpockets]

That pipe has the potential to be pretty damn neat !

*had!

-Mighty:
Thanks. I am taking the advice that I was given. I've got a handful of blocks that I am going to dedicate to a traditional (albeit less common) shape. Hopefully I get some good experience and guidance through those. After that I'll mix it up with traditional shapes that I can continue to learn from, and shapes that satisfy my eccentric side.

I had to do a little reading to figure out what a PITH was. Maybe I'll play along in the background without the consequences of participation. ...unless they rename the activity to: "who is the poor schmuck that ended up with a 'LowPockets' pipe?" Perhaps that could be the next theme?