- Joined
- May 26, 2008
- Messages
- 202
- Reaction score
- 0
As I've re-entered pipe collecting after a long absence, I've grown to appreciate sand blasted pipes in addition to smooth. It seems to me that the surface aesthetics of smooth pipes are much easier to appreciate than blasts in that the natural grain is obvious; the blast finish, on the other hand, results from the intent of the blaster. While I understand that the blaster follows the grain, you see a lot of variation in the depth of the blast as well as the pattern. I think of Cooke's deep blasts as a prime example of intentionality in the carver/blaster. His pipes have really grown on me the more I look at them.
My topic is this: in considering a blast finish, what is aesthetically appealing? The depth or pattern? Or something else? Also, how does the stain factor in when considering a blast?
My topic is this: in considering a blast finish, what is aesthetically appealing? The depth or pattern? Or something else? Also, how does the stain factor in when considering a blast?