General Woodworking

In part one of this article I wrote about the difficulty of predicting the final color of wood without taking into consideration lots of things including the underlying species, the topcoat, and the lighting.

Figuring out the stain for a project, and in fact the entire finishing process, is something you should be doing before you cut the first piece of wood. It's as an important a part of the blueprint as is how long a stile is.

The basic questions of determining a finishing sequence are: Are you matching some actual existing sample or some theoretical idea in your head or in the head of a client ( a family member, or a paying customer). And if by the time you get all done and deliver the piece, will it match expectation?

Of course, there is a question of if the material, stain, and finish sequence will look the way anyone thought it would when installed in the final location under final lighting.

Wood doesn't just have color - it has grain and texture. If the stained wood is high up, in a dark spot in the room, you might get lucky and it won't be obvious - but it's really hard to get two pieces of wood standing right next to each other to "read" like the same species if they aren't similar in color AND in grain. For example supposing you are making a poplar dresser that has to look right in a room filled with nice oak furniture. There are three ways around this: Don't use poplar, use a wood with a similar grain pattern. Don't just stain the piece, also paint in some grain. Use a stain that conceals the lack of grain in the poplar and looks like some sort of very dark, dirty oak.

The matching problem is important to consider early on in the project. The question to consider is: "Given the final location of this piece, and what I/my family/ my customer want - given my choice of materials and my finishing sequence - will the piece look right when I am all done?". Because - getting back to the oak example - it may make a lot of sense to realize early on that maybe you need to use veneer instead of trying to match some oak with color alone.

Believe nothing you hear. Just because someone swears they want "a nice English walnut look" that doesn't mean you can show up at the end of a job with the piece dyed English walnut. Even if it looks like English walnut. I wonder how many cabinetmakers have proudly delivered something that's perfect except that when the client asked for "English walnut" they really didn't mean English walnut like the kind that grows in England, they meant the really dark brown wood that they remember from an antique store a bunch of years ago. What's also true and can't be blamed on anyone except the finisher is that when you carry that nice stained English Oak finish from your florescence lit workshop upstairs into a sun-lit dining room it will look totally different (probably too red).

These reasons are why the client has to see samples of what you are actually going to produce not just a photo of something similar. Even if you are the client, you need to make that sample, just so you can see for yourself how it will look outside the workshop.

Another situation is when the customer gives you a color swatch. "Match this". Same problem. A small swatch of material will probably look different than a big panel and your idea of a match might be different - You catch my drift - Test your finish. Makes sure the client (you, your family, paying customer, Uncle Fred) signs off on it.

Understand you have no clue. People who do this for a living usually have a pretty good idea what going to happen when finishing but the ones that are successful still do tests, produce samples, and in general don't try to guess at the result.

So here is what you do. If you are ordering stain from us - get a few samples and some mixing dyes so that you can experiment. You don't need to mix up entire packets of dyes, just keep track of the results. Read this article on how to tweak and apply dye stains. Test everything. Write down your entire finishing sequence from final sanding and grain raising to dyeing, to top coats, sanding between coats and etc. This way you can exactly duplicate or precisely make changes to the sequence later on. Then run a test. Use a bit of wood from the project that is representative of the piece, (not some sapwood destined for the fireplace). A piece that's big enough so you can tell what you have. Finish it exactly like you should (it's work) and then stick it on the wall at the location where it will be. If you are doing this for a living let the customer live with the sample for a little while and then sign off on it. "YES this is what I want!!!" This is doubly important if you work in a shop with typical fluorescent lighting. where the color you see in the shop has very little to do with how the piece will look in situ.

Good luck, more people run into our shop in a blind panic because they need to turn something from one color to another at the last minute than people who just ran out of Dominoes.

Note: I forgot in part one to mention that wood usually darkens with time. Cherry is a perfect example - just finished it is kind of pale and flat. A year later it's nice and warm. Lots of cabinet shops dye their cherry darker because even if it will go "cherry color" in a year or so you get tired of customers telling you that the piece is nice but the color is all wrong and not wanting to wait a year.

I went looking during lunchtime for stuff to make my epoxy black. I struck out trying to find lamp black and black food coloring in our neighborhood. I guess our neighborhood just isn't chi-chi enough to support people who make their own tires or bake high-end cakes.

However, at our local art supply store, I found Gamblin "Mars Black" powder, a synthetic black iron oxide used to color both paint and construction materials. And I found some India ink.

I mixed my epoxy product from Advanced Repair Technology, which was recommended by several readers who restore rotted wood (this is the stuff they use at Colonial Williamsburg). It is structural and has a 30-45 minute open time.

Then I colored it. I started with one drop of India ink. Then two. Then three. It stopped getting blacker after two drops. It looked good, but the epoxy retained some of its yellowness and translucence.

Then I sprinkled a wee bit of the "Mars Black" on a second glop of epoxy. It instantly turned jet, tar, coal, pit-of-Kurt-Cobain's-soul black. And it was dark, too.

I went with the "Mars Black."

I forced the epoxy into the cracks with my putty knife. It wasn't difficult at all. The stuff is just a little thinner than peanut butter. Then I scraped off the excess. Now I have to wait for 24 hours. Then I'll finish planing the top and see what it looks like.

— Christopher Schwarz

A couple weeks back, I wrote about the step-chair I was making for my niece, per a Fitzpatrick family tradition that began in the 1950s. The project plan was from U-Bild, which discontinued the plan probably in the early 1990s, said a company official who cited poor sales as the likely culprit. But I had a fair number of people request the plan, so I e-mailed U-Bild again, and they kindly gave permission for me to post it.

I've done so in the PDF below (compatible with Adobe Reader 7.0 and later) – and my apologies in advance for the image quality. This is a scan of a photocopy of a photocopy from a plan from the '50s, shrunk down to work on our server – it's the best I've got to offer.

Note: I did modify the plan a wee bit by trimming the bottoms of the base pieces so the sides would rest on the floor in the step-stool position. If I built it again, I'd simply shape the sides with more of a swoop, or move the dowel down (it seems to me important to have the sides rest on the floor; otherwise, the thing is tippy).

And I had to chuckle at the first paragraph under "Recommended Finish," which reads: "Use plenty of sandpaper. The beauty of the finished article depends largely upon the amount of time spent in sanding." My grandfather (the original owner of this much-used plan) didn't enjoy time spent in sanding. But to be fair, neither do I – which is why I love my No. 4.

By the way: We're working on our own design for a flip-stool; look for that in the August "I Can Do That." Glen's building it out of scrap tiger maple (natch).

StepChair.pdf (171.3 KB)

Bonner Hall stooped down and flicked a Japanese beetle off the barely open rose blossom. He paused to relish the fragrance and take in the beauty unfolding before him. Bonner was sixty years my senior, quiet, spent most of his time putzing in his rose garden and cleaning freshly caught bluegills, his wrinkled hands now struggling to keep a knife blade steady. He was a hobbyist woodworker with a tiny shop tucked away in his basement lined with baby food jars nailed to the rafters filled with screws and tacks. He had an assortment of 1950’s vintage Sears power tools. All underpowered and wobbly by today’s standards, but somehow he managed to turn out some beautiful furniture pieces. I remember the first time I stood in his shop in the early 1980’s. He was finishing up a doll bed for a very lucky great grand daughter. “Doll bed” is such a poor way to describe it. More like a wonderful miniature with a piece of nicely figured walnut highlighting the graceful headboard. Like that rose blossom, one of those pieces that begged you to pause for a closer look. Bonner took note that I at least had eye enough to appreciate it, and that moment somehow bridged the gap between our ages.  

On the wall above his workbench almost hidden amongst the collection of chisels and workshop flotsam was a small framed portrait. A pastel sketch of a young army officer with ruddy cheeks, a strong jaw and penetrating blue eyes.  Bonner tapped his pipe against the edge of his workbench and didn’t look up as he said,

“That was me in Paris on leave, right after the battle of the Argonne Forrest in 1918, hard to believe I was ever that young?”

Like most veterans he had few words to share about what he endured in the Meuse- Argonne offensive that claimed  thousands of  American soldiers, other than it was rough. He changed the subject by pulling down an old wooden bench plane from a cubbyhole and began loading me up with a box of hand tools and a small bundle of walnut cutoffs.  

Bonner’s generosity is one that I know so well amongst woodworkers. Passing along tools, wood, and freely sharing hard won knowledge. But Bonner passed on something more. Apart from being a fine example of a man, he unashamedly brought his love for the things he cherished into the furniture he created. It makes no sense to put so much labor into a rose that can only be appreciated for a moment, or a doll bed that may not be appreciated by a child until Bonner was long gone. Yet he had other reasons to squeeze life out of every moment - 14,000 of them buried in the fields of eastern France. It’s somehow fitting that when Bonner’s heart finally gave out, he crumpled to the ground out in his beloved rose garden. We should all be so lucky.  

George R. Walker

On one of my early workbenches (the $175 Workbench), a split opened at one end of its benchtop a couple weeks after assembly. It was about 1/8" wide and a few inches long, but it might as well have cleaved the top in twain.

Everyone in the shop gave me a good mock – it was my first benchtop using Southern yellow pine. And I wanted to see if epoxy could – as my grandfather claimed – fix anything except overcooked swordfish.

So I filled the split with epoxy. The adhesive shrank out a bit. Then I filled it some more. That was 10 years ago, and the repair is still as flush and sound as the day I made it.

Today I face some bigger splits in this cherry benchtop, so my strategy is different. I cleaned out the two large splits with a putty knife and then faired the walls with a thin paring chisel. Then I glued in tapered wedges that I scavenged from some offcuts from the benchtop.

Now I'm off to the store to buy some stuff to color my epoxy black. Knife makers have suggested the following colorants:

1. Toner from a photocopier
2. Pigment used to color oil paints from the paint store
3. India ink
4. Testor's model paints
5. Epoxy colorant from K&G
6. Ebony dust

I'm sure there are other options. But these are the ones that appeal to me. (Especially the toner dust. We have a metric buttload of that stuff here.) I'll keep you posted.

— Christopher Schwarz

Last week we offered free plans for the Skansen Bench I built for the April 2010 issue of Popular Woodworking Magazine. If you didn't hear about this, it's likely because you don't subscribe to our free weekly newsletter. You can correct that oversight here.

In any case, this bench was tremendous fun to build. It was $22 in yellow pine from the home center and a couple evenings in the shop. The sucker is stout, has some nice curves and exposed joinery as well. Read the whole article and download the free pdf here.

So what's stopping you? The legs?

We included a scaled pattern of the legs in the pdf, but scaled patterns put some people off. In fact, I have received quite a few calls about how to use these patterns. You have a few options. Here are four.

• The New Testament Option: Take the printout to a copying store and throw yourself on the mercy of the nice young people there. Ask them if they'll enlarge the leg pattern until each square is 1". That's full size.

• Old Testament Option: Get out your dividers and some posterboard. Set the points of the dividers to 1" and turn that posterboard into oversized graph paper with a 1" grid. Then gaze at the small drawing and attempt to replicate it on the big posterboard. It's easy.

• The Good News for Modern Man Option: Dude, you like take the SketchUp file (in our way-groovy 3D warehouse) and scale the drawing yourself. Print out the results on 8-1/2" x 11" paper and tape them together. Dude. Then stick them to your wood and go to town. Download the SketchUp file here:

Skansen_Bench.zip (12.56 KB)

Read a tutorial from Robert Lang on how to scale things to full size here.

• And the "Please Don't Teach Me to Fish" Solution: Download a pdf of the leg template here. Print it out. Tape it together. Forget about it.

Skansenleg.pdf (105.81 KB)

— Christopher Schwarz

While on the subject of the apparently impossible, here’s another teasing puzzle that woodworkers can make to annoy their friends. It consists of 3 pieces: a cylinder, a symmetrical double cone and an inclined plane.

Surprisingly, placed together like this, there is no movement in either cylinder or cone. Wouldn’t you expect them to roll down the inclined plane?

The cylinder does, of course, roll down the plane but to take the photograph, I’ve used a ruler as a chock to prevent this happening.

The cone, on the other hand, has an inexplicable tendency to roll up hill. Once again, I’ve used a ruler as a chock to prevent it doing so.

These still photographs don’t really convey the anti-gravity properties of the double cone. For a more convincing demonstration, have a look at this video on YouTube.

Or, in case the link doesn’t work, paste this url into your browser: http://www.youtube.com/finelystrung#p/a/u/0/g7dCCskRMUg

We sat down (metaphorically) with A.J. Hamler, author of the upcoming "Easy to Build Birdhouses" to get his take on the subject:

Q: Why birdhouses?

A: Birdhouses are among the most satisfying of woodworking projects. They’re fast to make, require only small amounts of materials, and can be made with just a basic toolkit. Besides, birds are sneaky. Leave your windows open for even a minute and they move right in. By making birdhouses you can keep those refrigerator-raiding birds outside where they belong.

Q: Can anyone make the birdhouse projects in the book?

A: I found that birds have a difficult time making them. It’s that lack-of-opposable-thumbs thing, I guess. For everyone else, the house projects are very accessible. Most can be made in just an hour or two. Even though the fancier houses take a bit longer because they have more parts and require some creative painting, all the procedures used in construction require only basic woodworking skills and tools. Opposable thumbs are pretty much a must, though.

Q: Are these good projects for kids?

A: With adult supervision, these are perfect family projects – they’re both easy and fun, plus a birdhouse project is a perfect introduction to woodworking for young people.

Q: How are the houses made for specific birds?

A: Like people, birds have preferences. By making the houses with dimensions they like and matching the entrance holes to the size of the birds, you can attract specific ones to your backyard. You still have to take the birds’ regional differences into account, though. I’ve had no luck attracting Amazonian parrots to my backyard, for example. But even if you can’t get one species to move in, you can still attract wrens – among the most desirable birds – with any birdhouse. Wrens will live anywhere, just like my cousin Cletus. But they’re cleaner and a lot nicer to have around.

Q: One of the most unique houses in the book looks like a spaceship. Was that difficult?

A: It’s actually one of the easier houses to make, because all the major components are standard PVC fittings from the home center. The hard part was finding some science-fiction geek with a spacesuit to pose for a photo with the finished birdhouse. Fortunately, I still had my old spacesuit up in the attic.

Q: The birdhouse made like an old-time box camera is great! How’d you come up with that?

A: Yeah, well, the first one I designed was made like a Web-Cam, but none of the birds would fit.

Look for Easy to Build Birdhouses this June from Popular Woodworking Books.

— David Thiel

My kids have been asking to hear the song John Henry over & over again lately. We have the Bruce Springsteen CD called We Shall Overcome: the Seeger Sessions. It’s pretty lively music. They are particularly interested in the part where John Henry hammered so hard that he broke his heart & died…

I have just told them that he laid railroad track (trains are a big deal…) but it’s difficult to run down the whole man versus machine thing for 4 yr olds. So I save that for later…

 But the John Henry story is important for me, in a way. Being a hand-tool enthusiast, I have no interest in machine woodworking. If other people want to spend their time that way, that’s their business. Just keep it away from me. 8 months out of the year, I work in front of the museum-going public, answering questions about the woodworking & furniture aspects of 17th-century England and New England. Some folks I meet are woodworkers, some are not. I often get the question “Did you use a router to carve this?”
I didn’t even know it was possible to do so, but if you live long enough, you see all kinds of things in this world. Last night, I saw video on the web of a guy carving a 17th-century style panel with a laminate trimmer…I couldn’t believe it. It was so horrible I couldn’t look away.  The video ultimately answered the constant question – how long does it take? And the fellow said he spends over 4 hours per panel. Works with the router first, to remove the background, then chops the edges of the outline with gouges…I didn’t stay to see the end. I had seen enough.

 The panel in question is one I know very well, having carved it many times; and seen about 5 original chests decorated with the design. I hadn’t timed one of these panels in a while, so I took out some white oak, some gouges & mallet, a clock & camera and carved one today.

 

I spent about 5 minutes laying out the grid for the pattern. (the video used a template, but the original work clearly used a pair of compasses, a marking gauge, awl & square. Perhaps a ruler, but not really necessary.) I scribed four half-circles to define the ends of the pattern. That’s where I was at 10:30 this morning, and it was nailed to the bench ready for working. Then I started carving. I won’t show you the blow-by-blow, partly because I wanted to just carve it, not produce a photo essay on carving it. (that takes a longggg time).

It took 25 minutes to carve the entire outline of the panel. Some of this was V-tool work, some was struck with gouges. Then fifteen more minutes to remove the background. And that was it. Forty minutes, and the panel could go in a chest, and be essentially just the same as the original work…

 

 

I intentionally tried to go as fast as I could. If I had taken my time, the panel would have been even better; and still under an hour. I didn’t have my notes & photos with me when I carved it, so was mostly going on memory. Mine has less background than the original; but its background is faceted, as it should be…

Score one for the John Henrys of the world. SO HERE”S MY HARSH OPINION – If you want to copy something made by hand, with hand tools – use hand tools. You learn more, have more fun. And get better results. BUT it takes one other ingredient – practice.

From the chicken vs. egg file: Many beginning woodworkers think you have to have a workbench in order to build a workbench. So they buy a cheap workbench and suffer with it for many years until they get around to building a "real" bench.

Truth is, you don't need a bench to build a bench.

Most of the workbenches I've built have been constructed on sawhorses. Start by making the top. Yeah, it's a bit wobbly on horses, but it works OK. When the top is built, flatten it and attach one of your vises.

Now you have a benchtop with a sawhorse base.

Build the bench's base on the benchtop. Yeah, it feels a bit like working on a car while the engine is running, but it's totally do-able. When the base is built, attach it to the top. Flip the puppy off the sawhorses, and you are ready to finish up work on your bench.

This is the exact path I'm following with this small-scale Roubo bench I'm building this week. I finished sizing up the top on Friday, which came out to 4-3/4" x 19" x 67". That's a little narrower than a modern bench, but I've seen older benches this narrow (and even narrower). I will be interested to see how tippy it is (or isn't).

Today I installed a vintage vise I've been hoarding for some time that looks like the vises in old French woodworking catalogs. Ooo la la. I like it. It's a mite fussy, but it's cool. Next I'll install a wooden chop on the vise, drill some dog holes and get to work on the legs.

And then the much-maligned epoxy.

— Christopher Schwarz

Blade-braking technology is a vital part of the table saws from SawStop – the ability to stop a spinning blade in 1/100 of a second is what put the company on the map. SawStop table saws are the only woodworking machines with this technology. Is that about to change? Below is a link to a Boston Globe article detailing a jury-awarded verdict for a lawsuit that's the first of its kind. We're working on what this might mean to woodworkers and the woodworking industry. What do you think?

http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2010/03/06/man_wins_15m_in_first_of_its_kind_saw_case/?p1=Well_MostPop_Emailed5

What changes do you see springing from cases such as these? If you don't think changes are in the pipeline, take a look at this link.

http://tablesawattorney.com/index.php

For more background information, check out this article from INC. Magazine.

http://www.inc.com/magazine/20050701/disruptor-gass.html

— Glen D. Huey

 Growing up, Beech Creek divided two very different worlds. On one side, a post war (WWII) housing allotment. Ramrod straight rows of identical boxes each with a driveway attached to the street like teeth on a zipper. The Holloway family owned the adjoining bottomland where the creek meandered and a cluster of farm buildings up on the high bank on the far side. That was another world. Their 19th century brick farmhouse had high ceilings, old wide plank floors that squeaked under your feet, smelled of wood smoke, and the aroma of Southern cooking in the kitchen. It was there I learned about literature, art, old shotguns, hunting dogs, horses, and a culture with deep roots. I learned that our history is not something dead and old to be tossed aside, but something we are a part of.

 Maybe that’s why it wasn’t such a difficult leap for me to set out on a study to understand the classic orders. I see my heritage as a source of richness. As an artisan, my idea of creative achievement is not to run away from my history and culture but to add something to extend this great chain stretching back into our past.

 The Classic orders have played a central role in western design for over 2600 years. Over that time they have evolved from a primitive architectural form to a sophisticated proportional approach to organize a design. A little background on how this came about may be helpful. At its simplest the classic orders arose out of 6th century B.C. Greek culture as a stylized form of post and beam construction. The origins go back far beyond the Greeks but they are credited with elevating the forms into what we recognize today. To the Greeks the orders “were” the building. They were the primary means to support a roof over a temple. Remove them and the whole structure tumbles into a pile of rubble. The Romans adopted Greek architecture but began using concrete and brick in their buildings making solid walls the primary load bearers. Yet the Romans were not ready to dispense with graceful columns to organize their designs visually. Instead they began to use the orders not from a structural function but as an esthetic visual function. Half columns were carved into walls and flat pilasters representing columns began appearing yet having no structural role. So the columns dropped their structural function but still played an important proportional role. In fact designers found they could use the proportions from the orders to organize a design without using columns or classical elements at all. This is an important point as it means that proportions governing the classic orders can be used to solve design problems on a wide range of work including furniture and related decorative arts. A good example is the way the major parts of an order are divided.

The Pedestal marks the beginning of the form and is often sized by dividing the overall height by five parts with the bottom fifth defining it. The entablature above the column terminates the form and is usually one fifth or one sixth of the remaining space above the pedestal. This little simple self contained dividing into fifths and sixths creates this beginning middle and ending sequence that permeates much traditional work.

You can imagine how this could be readily applied to something like a table using the entablature on a classic order to size a table apron supporting a top. Period artisans were masters at applying the proportional lessons from the orders to their work in many varied and sophisticated ways. Much of it is hidden from the casual observer unless you are familiar with the orders and their underlying proportions.

 George R. Walker

I dislike writing about the magazine business because it's not useful for our readers, who expect us to write about woodworking instead of engaging in navel-gazing.

But because we have received a lot of questions and mail about the merger of Popular Woodworking and Woodworking Magazine, I'm going to make an exception, lift up my shirt and take a quick peek.

First: Thanks for your letters – both positive and negative – about the new magazine. We read them all and respond to every one that we can. In my e-mail inbox, the sentiment about the new magazine is about 2-to-1 in favor of the changes. The criticisms have mostly been about the addition of advertising and the amount of woodworking information we are now delivering. So let's take a look there.

The April 2010 Popular Woodworking Magazine is a 68-page issue with 19 pages that are advertisements. That's 49 pages of "meat," for lack of a better word. Let's check the "meat index" of an issue of Woodworking Magazine. There are 36 pages in each issue with only one page of advertising (the "Extras" page on page 35). That's 35 pages of meat.

What about Popular Woodworking before the merger? The February 2010 issue was 76 pages with 17 pages of advertisements. That's 59 pages of stories. (Note that we have averaged about 60 pages of meat in each issue during the last couple years.)

It looks like Popular Woodworking Magazine is smaller than Popular Woodworking but larger than Woodworking Magazine. Right?

It's not that simple.

The design of the new magazine is quite different. The paper is larger than what we used with Popular Woodworking, and we have less white space. We also have constrained the size of the photographs at the beginning of each article – no more full-page spreads. And we have tightened up the columnists. "Arts & Mysteries," "Flexner on Finishing" and "Design Matters" are all two pages each instead of three. We tightened things up with old-fashioned editing, by the way. Instead of removing information, we removed unnecessary words that weren't doing their jobs.

So counting pages isn't a good indicator. Why don't we count the words instead?

Personally, I think counting words is silly. No one will argue that Golden Corral is better than The French Laundry because the Golden Corral gives you more calories. But it is one indicator. Here are the numbers:

1. During the last year, Popular Woodworking has averaged 33,642 words of editorial coverage in each issue.

2. Woodworking Magazine has averaged 24,850 words of editorial per issue.

3. The April 2010 issue of Popular Woodworking Magazine has 34,254 words of editorial coverage – about the same as you would get in an issue of Popular Woodworking during the last couple years.

Second Complaint: Those tinyurls
At the end of each article in the magazine is a box that points you to online stories and web sites that are related to the article so you can dive deeper into a topic that interests you. In this issue we used "tinyurls," a long-standing Internet redirect service, so you don't have as many characters to type.

A fair number of readers don't like tinyurls. We don't particularly like them, either. But they are a stopgap until we get a new web site in place this summer. We won't use tinyurls going forward, and if you want to find any of the links listed in the print issue you can go to this page: popularwoodworking.com/apr10 (we're building out this page right now. Links are being added as I type).

Third Complaint: When Does My Subscription Run Out?
Some customers have been confused by the merger, especially if they had subscriptions to both publications. If you want to confirm the number of issues remaining in your subscription, check the line on the mailing label above your name; the last issue in your subscription is printed there. If you'd like to clear up a problem, send a message with your name and mailing address where you receive your subscription to Debbie Paolello, our subscription specialist: debbie.paolello@fwmedia.com.

But Why Did You Do It?
The other big question from readers is "Why?" While I tried to address this in my column in the April 2010 issue, I'll add some more details for you.

Many of my colleagues in the magazine business think we're all swirling around the toilet bowl to our watery grave. I'm not that grim, but it's hard to ignore the fact that a lot of my friends in media are out of work.

We know that big changes are coming. And instead of waiting to have it roll over us, we decided to sprint in front of this boulder. While both our magazines were profitable and stable, they consumed all our staff's time and energy to produce 11 yearly issues (those of you who get e-mails from us during nights and weekends can attest to this).

We decided that we had to put more energy into growing our quickly growing online business. And we knew there was no hope of expanding our staff in this time of dwindling corporate resources.

So that's what drove the decision to merge the two magazines. And it's the honest truth. Any speculation you might read on the message boards is simply not grounded in our world, which is based on raw number-crunching, decades of media experience and a desire to stay employed in the best job in the world – getting to write and edit a woodworking magazine.

It is indeed a dream job. But it's a dream that has to live in the real world.

— Christopher Schwarz

I dislike writing about the magazine business because it's not useful for our readers, who expect us to write about woodworking instead of engaging in navel-gazing.

But because we have received a lot of questions and mail about the merger of Popular Woodworking and Woodworking Magazine, I'm going to make an exception, lift up my shirt and take a quick peek.

First: Thanks for your letters – both positive and negative – about the new magazine. We read them all and respond to every one that we can. In my e-mail inbox, the sentiment about the new magazine is about 2-to-1 in favor of the changes. The criticisms have mostly been about the addition of advertising and the amount of woodworking information we are now delivering. So let's take a look there.

The April 2010 Popular Woodworking Magazine is a 68-page issue with 19 pages that are advertisements. That's 49 pages of "meat," for lack of a better wood. Let's check the "meat index" of an issue of Woodworking Magazine. There are 36 pages in each issue with only one page of advertising (the "Extras" page on page 35). That's 35 pages of meat.

What about Popular Woodworking before the merger? The February 2010 issue was 76 pages with 17 pages of advertisements. That's 59 pages of stories. (Note that we have averaged about 60 pages of meat in each issue during the last couple years.)

It looks like Popular Woodworking Magazine is smaller than Popular Woodworking but larger than Woodworking Magazine. Right?

It's not that simple.

The design of the new magazine is quite different. The paper is larger than what we used with Popular Woodworking, and we have less white space. We also have constrained the size of the photographs at the beginning of each article – no more full-page spreads. And we have tightened up the columnists. "Arts & Mysteries," "Flexner on Finishing" and "Design Matters" are all two pages each instead of three. We tightened things up with old-fashioned editing, by the way. Instead of removing information, we removed unnecessary words that weren't doing their jobs.

So counting pages isn't a good indicator. Why don't we count the words instead?

Personally, I think counting words is silly. No one will argue that Golden Corral is better than The French Laundry because the Golden Corral gives you more calories. But it is one indicator. Here are the numbers:

1. During the last year, Popular Woodworking has averaged 33,642 words of editorial coverage in each issue.

2. Woodworking Magazine has averaged 24,850 words of editorial per issue.

3. The April 2010 issue of Popular Woodworking Magazine has 34,254 words of editorial coverage – about the same as you would get in an issue of Popular Woodworking during the last couple years.

Second Complaint: Those tinyurls
At the end of each article in the magazine is a box that points you to online stories and web sites that are related to the article so you can dive deeper into a topic that interests you. In this issue we used "tinyurls," a long-standing Internet redirect service, so you don't have as many characters to type.

A fair number of readers don't like tinyurls. We don't particularly like them, either. But they are a stopgap until we get a new web site in place this summer. We won't use tinyurls going forward, and if you want to find any of the links listed in the print issue you can go to this page: popularwoodworking.com/apr10 (we're building out this page right now. Links are being added as I type).

Third Complaint: When Does My Subscription Run Out?
Some customers have been confused by the merger, especially if they had subscriptions to both publications. If you want to confirm the number of issues remaining in your subscription, check the line on the mailing label above your name; the last issue in your subscription is printed there. If you'd like to clear up a problem, send a message with your name and mailing address where you receive your subscription to Debbie Paolello, our subscription specialist: debbie.paolello@fwmedia.com.

But Why Did You Do It?
The other big question from readers is "Why?" While I tried to address this in my column in the April 2010 issue, I'll add some more details for you.

Many of my colleagues in the magazine business think we're all swirling around the toilet bowl to our watery grave. I'm not that grim, but it's hard to ignore the fact that a lot of my friends in media are out of work.

We know that big changes are coming. And instead of waiting to have it roll over us, we decided to sprint in front of this boulder. While both our magazines were profitable and stable, they consumed all our staff's time and energy to produce 11 yearly issues (those of you who get e-mails from us during nights and weekends can attest to this).

We decided that we had to put more energy into growing our quickly growing online business. And we knew there was no hope of expanding our staff in this time of dwindling corporate resources.

So that's what drove the decision to merge the two magazines. And it's the honest truth. Any speculation you might read on the message boards is simply not grounded in our world, which is based on raw number-crunching, decades of media experience and a desire to stay employed in the best job in the world – getting to write and edit a woodworking magazine.

It is indeed a dream job. But it's a dream that has to live in the real world.

— Christopher Schwarz

Along with updating the look of the magazine, we've been busy working on some new ways to share knowledge. We're big fans of the free modeling program SketchUp and in the next week or so you'll have the chance to join me in a two-part online class. And a few weeks after the classes are available online, you'll be able to purchase them on DVD. Later this year, we'll have more "Shop Classes" available on a number of topics, by some of the best teachers around.

Each part of my SketchUp class is two hours long, and you'll follow along onscreen as I explain how to setup and use the program specifically for woodworking tasks. Part one covers the basics, and part two delves into more advanced topics. If you've tried SketchUp and given up in frustration, or are struggling trying to learn on your own, I will show you how to model efficiently and accurately. You'll be making dovetailed drawers and cabriole legs before you know it.

We've recorded and edited these classes in short three to five minute long segments. You can watch a segment on your computer, then switch over to SketchUp and try the techniques at your own pace. When you're ready to move forward, the next segment will be waiting for you. I used these techniques to teach Megan, Glen and Chris how to use SketchUp, and they've all become accomplished 3D modelers. Believe me, if it can work for them, it can work for anyone.

Watch the blog and the newsletter for more details. You can subscribe to the RSS feed for the blog up and to your left where it says "Free Updates" and you can subscribe to the Popular Woodworking Magazine "Weekly Wood News" by clicking here.

We have a short sample of the video available to give you an idea of what the class will be like. The video is in HD format, so you will need to download the QuickTime player for the best results. Like SketchUp, QuickTime is free, and you can download QuickTime here.

Click Here to watch a sample of the SketchUp Shop Class Video

Click Here to download the free QuickTime player.

–Bob Lang

 

I assembled this joined stool the other day; it’s a slightly smaller than usual stool – I guess if I keep it I need another. But for now, what I wanted it for was to photograph the steps in trimming the feet. As you see, the rake of the sides results in feet that don’t sit even.

 

So the first step is to shim the feet until the sides of the stool are plumb. This is done with some small wooden wedges and a framing square.

 

Once I am satisfied with the way it sits, I scribe with a compass around the feet. I open the comass up so that I am about 1/2″ above the highest point on the foot; it’s easier to saw off a thicker chunk than a thinner one. So this consideration goes all the way back to when I turned the foot; I try to leave it a little longer than what I want to end up with.

 

I lean on the stool to keep in wedged in place, then run the compass around all four feet to mark where I want to trim them.

 

I then secure the stool to the bench with a holdfast, and saw the feet to the scribed line. If all goes well, it sits just fine off the saw. Sometimes a chisel or spokeshave is used to correct some mis-deed with the saw.

 

Now it sits nice & even, depending on the flat-ness of the bench, and the floor it might go on…but it’s close enough.

I'm to the point with this workbench that I cannot see the concrete floor any more because of the shavings. I hate that floor, but I am starting to feel a bit like a hamster.

Today I took the clamps off the Roubo benchtop we glued up Thursday and I scraped off the excess hide glue squeeze-out. The seam is tight. Nice.

Then I dressed the front edge of the benchtop. It was straight from the sawmill, so it was as rough as a cob. So I started out planing the edge with a jack plane to get it straight and square to the bench's top surface. Then I dressed the front edge with a jointer plane with a 50° pitch – the reversing grain is a bear on this piece because of the knots.

With the front edge in shape I marked out the final length of the benchtop. I was going for 72", but by settling on 67" I was able to remove a nasty low spot, a knot and some big checks. This bench won't be as long as I prefer, but sometimes you have to let the material dictate the design.

Then I sawed off the ends (yes, I did it by hand). I used a standard crosscutting stroke to make an accurate kerf. Then I used an overhand stroke (as shown) so I could bring the saw almost vertical. This is fast. And it uses different muscles. By switching back and forth between these two positions I was able to cut off the two ends without a break (except for one glug of water).

Then it was back to the jack plane to dress the benchtop and make it true. To do this, I put the benchtop on some risers on my sawhorses to lift it up to a comfortable working height. I clamped four f-style clamps to the risers in order to fence in the top and prevent it from moving.

Traversing the top with the jack was quick work – about 15 minutes worth to remove the rough-sawn fur. Then I went to lunch and started typing this. And I'm still typing, as you can see. Now it's time to stop typing.

— Christopher Schwarz

P.S. Next week I'll be filling the checks in with tinted epoxy. Might look good. Might look like holes filled with black snot.

Wow that’s gorgeous! How much time did it take to build that? Do you get asked this? How many hours do you have wrapped up in your latest furniture project? I’m always skeptical about the pieces in the gallery section in the magazines where it states that “Archie Kleptack took 700 hours to build this armoire”. I’m sloppy about keeping track of time building in my shop. Maybe it’s a backlash from all those years in industry where an army of accountants tracked costs out to three decimal places. That doesn’t stop people from asking the inevitable. The answer is, I don’t know. I enjoyed reading the comments by Larry Williams and Don McConnell from Clark and Williams in the latest issue of Popular Woodworking Magazine about making wooden hand planes.  

“The honest answer is: We don’t know how long it takes to make a set,” Williams says.

“The truth,” McConnell adds, “is that we really don’t want to know”

 The real time it takes to build something is the actual build plus all the investment of resources it took to arrive at a place where you have the capability to bring it about. How do you quantify that? It’s inescapable though, especially for those brave souls actually trying to eke out a living building with their hands. Being able to quantify our time and turn that into money is the age old question artisans have been battling with since the first cave man invented a better club. Do I just charge for time and materials or do I account for my uncle Thag who got eaten by a saber tooth tiger testing out the first prototype?

One nugget I see often repeated from historical design texts is that it seldom costs any more to build with pleasing proportions than it does to slap something together irrespective of design. This is especially true when it comes to one off furniture production. In a world of shifting sand where so many things may be out of our control, design is one skill we can use to place our mark on our work and set it apart. It may be your goal is just to please yourself and posterity. Or you may be fighting to stay afloat in a very hostile economy.

 At its simplest level, I have just a few maxims I try to stick to:

1. Do good work.

 2. Strive to make something that will be appreciated generations from now, perhaps even inspire others.

3. Keep that delicate balance of beauty, function, and sturdiness.

George R. Walker

 

A few weeks ago, Maureen & I were at the MFA to see the Durer prints; and while wandering afterwards, saw this cupboard on loan…today when I delivered my cupboard, I took some time to shoot some photos. (no tripod, no lights; so less-than-ideal; but the cupboard makes up for it…)

I forget what date they gave it, but I figure early 17th century about nails it. The carving of course is out of this world; but the joinery is quite nice too, and the moldings are many, and crisp…the whole thing is made of the best-quality oak you’d want. Accented here & there with ebony it seems. It’s about 7 feet tall. Thus it won’t fit in my house, really.

The patterns and handling of this piece are reminiscent of the best work done in Exeter, Devon about the same time.  That work is seen in a church in Totnes, Devon today…also similar work appears in the Bromley-by-Bow room at the V&A. I have examples of both of those on the blog… I think this Netherlandish stuff is the source for those English works.

So here are a bunch of photos. I have little to add to the pictures. click them to enlarge. A little grainy, but worth it. I hope to see it in detail some day.

 

 

 

 

 

And here’s Abraham & Isaac out on highway 61:

 

And just in case the Rembrandts and other Dutch master paintings aren’t enough in this room, from the same collection is a great draw table, also oak & ebony. If you are not familiar with these tables, the bottom layers of this top “draw” out each end, and what is now the top section drops down between them to give you a table top twice as long as it is now…they can be pretty big. You don’t want to move them much. See the iron bolts to dis-assemble the frame.