Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2019 15:55:18 GMT
Here is another excellent video from Tod, this time regarding the quality, or lack thereof, of Medieval period swords. Should the present day smith replicate historic swords, warts and all, or should they be perfectly clean to the point of looking "sterile," as Tod puts it? Should we improve these objects, or should we honor the hand-made qualities of the originals by duplicating them exactly? I think Tod has the right perspective here: make the replicas look hand made, include little imperfections, but improve upon the originals when necessary. He is correct when he claims he cannot sell replicas with major errors like the originals, although I would argue he can, just not for the asking price he would prefer.
Thoughts?
|
|
stormmaster
Member
I like viking/migration era swords
Posts: 7,651
|
Post by stormmaster on Aug 13, 2019 16:08:04 GMT
I think if u can improve it material and technique wise, why not if it looks the same? Unless u wanted to put it side by side with the original in a museum so people can hold it or something without damaging the original
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2019 17:14:42 GMT
What was the question? That it would cost more to exactly replicate the flaws? I could dredge up a quite old discussion from a buyer and patron receiving a sword that was quite exacting to the plate in an Oakeshott book. There it was in its entirety of warts and imperfections. The patron had asked for a sword that was as close to the photo as possible. Something must have been lost in the communication. The result was an unhappy customer. I can only second a lot of what Todd related but as far as costs and his intents, I see them as somewhat different topics. The quality and capability of his work is where value might be judged. There is a bit of semantic leeway between the words replicate and reproduce. Tod does bring up something seen most often with dressy early modern swords where hilts as well as scabbards have wear sides and show sides. Still, on higher end stuff in the 18th-19th centuries there was an effort to get everything just right. One of my nco level 18th century swords is in pristine condition but probably unused, as there is an extreme level of blade asymmetry. The evolution of the industrial age made things easier. Quality inspections becoming regular by then. I don't suggest that that there should be no expectations of exacting symmetry but this is not centuries ago. Tod knows he cannot sell absolute blems, even if they would truly replicate a museum piece but his mentions of appearance are spot on. I have yet to see someone demonstrating the gap of a blade opening in a guard from their perspective when using the sword. Nor minor fittings alignments but they can drive one nuts from across the room on some that might have been better reproduced/fitted. Going back to say, the 14th century English trade. There were common swords and expensive swords. Completed swords from the continent praised by nobles and barrels of bare blades entering London (as a port). Should we expect 19th century inspection quality work for all swords? If I ever order from A&A again, I'll ask for a good one.
|
|
|
Post by Siward on Aug 13, 2019 17:45:54 GMT
Interesting topic. The Polish smith Maciej Kopciuch adopts a traditional approach which results in imperfections for the exact reason i.e. medieval swords had such imperfections.
|
|
pgandy
Moderator
Senior Forumite
Posts: 10,296
|
Post by pgandy on Aug 13, 2019 17:58:05 GMT
I can’t thank you enough for that video. I had strongly suspected there were flaws and the swords, or whatever, were not as perfect as many people seem to think. I don’t know how many times I’ve laughed when I read a superficial complaint someone has made or blown out of proportion or even returned because of some minor imperfection, as they expect perfection like the item was made by today’s standards using today’s technology where each piece is identical the other. To me that video is a jewel. There were master craftsmen that could turn out a better than average product and be compensated but the vast majority of knives, swords, you name it were turned out by people that knew their craft well enough but turned out a tool that the average man could afford and would undoubtedly by used and abused more so than a piece that would be shown off and admired indicating a status symbol.
|
|
stormmaster
Member
I like viking/migration era swords
Posts: 7,651
|
Post by stormmaster on Aug 13, 2019 20:00:14 GMT
maybe if i word what i meant better is that I prefer the higher quality materials we get nowadays but I still like the handmade feeling and cosmetic imperfection of swords made in the past. Tho I also feel theres nothing wrong with computer perfection and the 2 styles can coexist in my sphere of interest
|
|
pellius
Moderator
Posts: 5,248
Member is Online
|
Post by pellius on Aug 13, 2019 21:06:13 GMT
Very interesting video.
As a casual hobbyist in Florida, I have never closely examined a museum sword, much less handled or measured one. It is very interesting to get insight from someone who has.
Personally, I like the high-quality hand-made look. While works by Tod Cutler, Peter Johnsson, and James Elmslie may sadly be out of my price range, I am privileged to own a few pieces by Wes Been and Lyndle Driggers. To me, each of their pieces capture the essence of craftsmanship; the symmetry and precision of their work testifying to the skill of each maker.
I own a wonderful, very high performance ATrim arming sword that is very clearly a computer-and-machine product. By contrast, its beauty is, to me, found in the deep clinical understanding of sword performance engineered into every aspect of the sword. Though the Gus-approved Tom Kinder fittings lend some warmth to the overall aesthetic, the sword is more "programmed" than "crafted."
Anyway, thank you for sharing the video. Good stuff.
|
|
thomasthesecond
Member
"I thought I was an architect, but I was just moving dirt."
Posts: 153
|
Post by thomasthesecond on Aug 13, 2019 22:02:47 GMT
I must apologize, I reposted this in my earlier thread after you did.. though my thoughts on the subject are pretty apparent in my thread.
|
|
|
Post by Rabel Dusk on Aug 13, 2019 22:37:51 GMT
I wish he had said something about how closely he followed the blade geometry of the original, but that's not what this piece was really about.
|
|
|
Post by Adrian Jordan on Aug 13, 2019 23:37:10 GMT
I've only seen two of his videos, but they are both great. Timely and thought provoking. I like his philosophy on this matter. Historical, but to a level that suits the improved manufacturing that current smiths/makers are capable of. If I was capable of affording something of his then I agree with him that if I spent that much money and got a sword with wildly uneven bevels, multiple flaws in the steel and gruesome casting work I'd be irate, despite having wanted a reproduction of a given sword.
I've noticed that the affordable production Euro side of the yard seemingly sticks more closely to historical examples than the production Japanese side that I spend most of my time on. That is, the Japanese style production side will have an "inspired by" piece, usually not looking anything like the original piece or style, whereas you'll find more production-level reproductions sticking more closely to historical examples. I understand some of the reasons for this, but still, it'd be great if they had production "Dotanuki" styled swords that actually represented what you'd get from a smith of that school during a given period, or a "Musashi" katana that is actually a reproduction of a sword that he carried.
|
|
|
Post by viece on Aug 13, 2019 23:59:33 GMT
Great video, thanks for posting. Personally, I am drawn to beat-to-hell antiques. I prefer warts. I would love it if Tod and other master craftsmen would do rough-and-ready product lines using lower-grade steel, stuff that they could bang out in 1/10th the time of their fancier, perfect stuff. Cheap makers like Deepeeka often get the proportions wrong, while I imagine Tod et al. would keep all of that right even if materials and finish were low-grade.
|
|
|
Post by nddave on Aug 14, 2019 0:30:26 GMT
I think it depends on a matter of 3 three important factors. Regardless if its a reproduction of a historical sword or a original design. Those being,
1) cost 2) craftmanship 3) material
I think when these three are factored into a item be it a sword, vehicle or anything else both value and quality can be adequately measured.
Cost is obviously the first thing we look at and base our measurement of the other two. If it costs a lot then we tend to expect more in regards to craftsmanship and materials used. If it costs less we tend to expect less or compensate for less in craftsmanship and materials. But what if there's a curve ball? For example something of high craftsmanship and materials sold for cheap? This can both benefit the market but also hurt it as well. Same goes for something of low craftmanship and materials sold high.
Craftsmanship is obviously the hardest one to judge and judgement tends to revolve around comparisons and competition. Just because something looks good doesn't mean it is good and the quality of craftsmanship kind of dictates perceived value and costs. But of course an item is only as valuable as someone is willing to pay for it. So even if a sword's value is a $1000 if nobody feels a sword is worth that it will obviously have to sell for less or stop being made at all.
Materials is touchy because materials used are completely dependent on the level of craftsmanship. Even if the material itself is of high value (like a solid gold sword) if the craftsmanship is poor then that will depreciate the material. For example all those Ebay katana made of lamianted or super steels that dont measure up in craftmanship. Of course if the craftmanship is high and the materials used are of high value (like a Nihinto) then you'll have a sword of highly appreciated value.
So in that regard, if a original design is made of quality materials and quality craftmanship it should be equal to or better than an actual historical sword or a reproduction of a historical sword.
|
|