Tweet
As a sculptor, it helps me to understand how a job is to be (1) shaped/formed/arranged/carved/cast/modeled/fabricated as an approved finished job/object and (2) the process or processes to be employed to achieve the desired result. One of my Master Sculptors taught me the value of observing the work and methods of others without passing judgment. Learn and do while understanding why. This requires critical analysis, usually stepping back to observe to deconstruct what is actually being done. Don't overlook the obvious. Most jobs require an order of processes that may not be mandatory but that will be beneficial. Many new craftsmen seek to produce an aesthetically pleasing aspect of a project quickly to demonstrate their growing skill to others and to themselves. In most situations, an advanced craftsman will have learned to delay such gratification in order to more efficiently produce a more accurate result. The pretty stuff comes at the end and you learn the result is worth the wait. Choose your Master(s) carefully,understand what their Masters taught them & why and practice the methods that may seem boring and mundane until the elegance is revealed by developed expertise.
In regard to metal shaping, a compare and contrast of Paper Pattern vs Flexible Shape Pattern is the subject of this thread. As a novice metal shaper, I hope to lend my critical analysis of the two from the different perspective of a professional stone sculptor. It is important as an apprentice to do as you are taught without question. Knowing why comes later. Time spent arguing is never regained.
It would very cool for this forum (imho) if appropriate threads and topics could become Fundamental Topic Threads, maybe in a separate category, sticky, locked, whatever. That's all up to admin....
Paper Patterns-
These came first, which is relevant because they were very likely the inspiration of later methods. More to come later about this.
The single piece of paper is monolithic, which is a direct equivalent to the single monolithic piece of sheet metal to be formed.
Paper Patterns provide a clear metaphor to the actual outline of the necessary metal blank.
Paper Patterns provide adequate information about the general 3D object/job.
By virtue of gathered folds, tuck and creases needed to make the paper tightly conform to the panel, Paper Patterns capture and relay instruction about areas of no action as well as form (simple bending) and shape (shrinking, stretching) of how to transform the metal into an equivalent result.
Because Paper Patterns clearly instruct where shrinking and resulting thickening of metal will need to occur to produce the desired job/result, placement of these thickened areas can be coordinated with planned welding so similar areas of either original thickness or thickened metal can be better matched. This may benefit movement of the joined parts during the welding process.
Combined repetition of processes provides positive reinforcement of instruction/method and results. From the perspective of Behavioral Psychology, such approach benefits the learning process and proficiency of the craftsman.
Paper Patterns are not aesthically pleasing to view during the work. Gratification is delayed while the craftsman works methodically and practices what is being taught. Speed and fluency come only with practice. There are no short cuts.
Flexible shape patterns (FSP)-
These are derivative of Paper Patterns. It was likely an effort to improve a dated method of patterning, such as Paper Patterning. This is important as as example of critical analysis and observation for a practicing craftsman.
The FSP is constructed of numerous separate pieces of material. This is in no way analgous to the single monolithic piece of metal to be worked. It is more analogous to a panel that is being fabricated from any number of strips of metal, joined together. It is also more analogous to why a complicated job, like an entire panel or car body, is divided into smaller pieces to be shaped and joined because it is too difficult or impossible to produce the job from a single monolithic piece of metal. From a Behavioral Psychology perspective, what is being inadvertently taught & learned is not consistent and such inconsistency interferes with the growth of the craftsman.
Becasue an FSP will not lay perfectly flat, it is less efficient in providing an outline of the necessary metal blank. Miscut metal may be wasted. The job may fail. Time may be wasted.
As an FSP is constructed to tightly conform the the desired object, manipulation and overlap of the individual strips eliminates the instruction of how the job is to be produced. Information about form (simple bending) is not clearly communicated because information about shape (folds/creases for shrinking and likely areas needing stretching) is eliminated. Without clear instruction about either form or shape present, it is more difficult for the craftsman to clarify which process is required and where to apply it.
with no clear instruction regarding shrinking or simple bending of metal, equivalent areas of thickness cannot be matched to facilitate welding. This makes subsequent work more difficult.
FSP provide a craftsman with a simple and quick way to create an aesthetically pleasing result while simultaneously providing only information about the overall composition of the job with no clear instruction about how to produce it. The craftsman may still succeed, but clear instruction and learning is more difficult to quantify.
I prefer Paper Patterns for a number of reasons. In the debates and discussions I've read, I've never seen any proponent or opponent clearly address some of the points above, especially the monolithic vs fabricated analogy. This, along with the information & instruction aspects of Paper Patterns vs the information-only aspect of FSP is also rarely clarified. If I were to produce and use an FSP, I would complete it with a top layer of adhesive or double-sided tape to which I would apply a Paper Pattern with all creases and folds present & held in place. This hybrid approach would employ the FSP to serve as a more durable support for the Paper Pattern. I've never seen this discussed or heard of it being done. No matter, this is analogous to the durable hard support (called a Mother) that I produce over flexible silicone molds used to cast models in my studio. But, since the Paper Pattern is now permanently adhered to the FSP, a duplicate Paper Pattern is now required to provide an accurate outline of the necessary metal blank.
To me, the Paper Pattern proves to be more valuable than the FSP or the FSP-PP hybrid approach. It's important to understand why a traditional method endures. There may be ways to improve upon the past, but true improvement should be obvious and substantial. If it isn't, I was trained and have learned to trust my Masters, my training and my ability to critically analyze what is in front of me.
Hopefully others can add more. Thanks, guys.
In regard to metal shaping, a compare and contrast of Paper Pattern vs Flexible Shape Pattern is the subject of this thread. As a novice metal shaper, I hope to lend my critical analysis of the two from the different perspective of a professional stone sculptor. It is important as an apprentice to do as you are taught without question. Knowing why comes later. Time spent arguing is never regained.
It would very cool for this forum (imho) if appropriate threads and topics could become Fundamental Topic Threads, maybe in a separate category, sticky, locked, whatever. That's all up to admin....
Paper Patterns-
These came first, which is relevant because they were very likely the inspiration of later methods. More to come later about this.
The single piece of paper is monolithic, which is a direct equivalent to the single monolithic piece of sheet metal to be formed.
Paper Patterns provide a clear metaphor to the actual outline of the necessary metal blank.
Paper Patterns provide adequate information about the general 3D object/job.
By virtue of gathered folds, tuck and creases needed to make the paper tightly conform to the panel, Paper Patterns capture and relay instruction about areas of no action as well as form (simple bending) and shape (shrinking, stretching) of how to transform the metal into an equivalent result.
Because Paper Patterns clearly instruct where shrinking and resulting thickening of metal will need to occur to produce the desired job/result, placement of these thickened areas can be coordinated with planned welding so similar areas of either original thickness or thickened metal can be better matched. This may benefit movement of the joined parts during the welding process.
Combined repetition of processes provides positive reinforcement of instruction/method and results. From the perspective of Behavioral Psychology, such approach benefits the learning process and proficiency of the craftsman.
Paper Patterns are not aesthically pleasing to view during the work. Gratification is delayed while the craftsman works methodically and practices what is being taught. Speed and fluency come only with practice. There are no short cuts.
Flexible shape patterns (FSP)-
These are derivative of Paper Patterns. It was likely an effort to improve a dated method of patterning, such as Paper Patterning. This is important as as example of critical analysis and observation for a practicing craftsman.
The FSP is constructed of numerous separate pieces of material. This is in no way analgous to the single monolithic piece of metal to be worked. It is more analogous to a panel that is being fabricated from any number of strips of metal, joined together. It is also more analogous to why a complicated job, like an entire panel or car body, is divided into smaller pieces to be shaped and joined because it is too difficult or impossible to produce the job from a single monolithic piece of metal. From a Behavioral Psychology perspective, what is being inadvertently taught & learned is not consistent and such inconsistency interferes with the growth of the craftsman.
Becasue an FSP will not lay perfectly flat, it is less efficient in providing an outline of the necessary metal blank. Miscut metal may be wasted. The job may fail. Time may be wasted.
As an FSP is constructed to tightly conform the the desired object, manipulation and overlap of the individual strips eliminates the instruction of how the job is to be produced. Information about form (simple bending) is not clearly communicated because information about shape (folds/creases for shrinking and likely areas needing stretching) is eliminated. Without clear instruction about either form or shape present, it is more difficult for the craftsman to clarify which process is required and where to apply it.
with no clear instruction regarding shrinking or simple bending of metal, equivalent areas of thickness cannot be matched to facilitate welding. This makes subsequent work more difficult.
FSP provide a craftsman with a simple and quick way to create an aesthetically pleasing result while simultaneously providing only information about the overall composition of the job with no clear instruction about how to produce it. The craftsman may still succeed, but clear instruction and learning is more difficult to quantify.
I prefer Paper Patterns for a number of reasons. In the debates and discussions I've read, I've never seen any proponent or opponent clearly address some of the points above, especially the monolithic vs fabricated analogy. This, along with the information & instruction aspects of Paper Patterns vs the information-only aspect of FSP is also rarely clarified. If I were to produce and use an FSP, I would complete it with a top layer of adhesive or double-sided tape to which I would apply a Paper Pattern with all creases and folds present & held in place. This hybrid approach would employ the FSP to serve as a more durable support for the Paper Pattern. I've never seen this discussed or heard of it being done. No matter, this is analogous to the durable hard support (called a Mother) that I produce over flexible silicone molds used to cast models in my studio. But, since the Paper Pattern is now permanently adhered to the FSP, a duplicate Paper Pattern is now required to provide an accurate outline of the necessary metal blank.
To me, the Paper Pattern proves to be more valuable than the FSP or the FSP-PP hybrid approach. It's important to understand why a traditional method endures. There may be ways to improve upon the past, but true improvement should be obvious and substantial. If it isn't, I was trained and have learned to trust my Masters, my training and my ability to critically analyze what is in front of me.
Hopefully others can add more. Thanks, guys.
Comment