Violin Forum/Message Board

[rs]

I spent much of the past three years trying to improve the form and appearance of my work. When I first started making, it was after years of reconstructing existing work until I could be fairly comfortable producing the tone and level of play that instruments deserve. I was under the false impression that tone and playability were the pinnacle of violin making. They are not. Only PART of the pinnacle. There is no denying that the ART and FORM are every bit as important. Perhaps I have let the pendulum swing too far the other direction, but I am of the impresion at this point in my life that most players would rather have a violin that looked like the Soil and played like a C. A. Testore than the other way around.

This leads me to this post. I used to spend a lot of time at the St. Louis Art Museum when I lived in St. Louis. One thing I liked to watch was throngs of art students from St. Louis University and Washington University (these colleges each have very prestigious art programs) who would occupy their afternoons lounging on the floors and sketching the work of previous masters. Their goal was simple: Look at the work the way the artist who had made the work standing in front of the student had. Taking a cue from this, I began an obsession a little over two years ago of sketching work of others, particularly of AS and Carl Becker. I chose these makers as there exists little argument that each was equal to the best of their time. Finding extensive photograph studies of AS is relatively easy. Carl Becker photographs are much harder to come by, but they do exist. My goal was to find as many different angles of some of my favorite work (the Mendelssohn, Lady Blunt and the Tivador Nachez for example) and sketch what I saw; particularly paying attention to the head, corners (although the corners are about gone on some of these) and ff's. Once I did this in earnest, I was pleasantly surprised how this technique alone DRAMATICALLY opened my mind and eyes to see what I had not before.
_________________
Randall Shenefelt

[DonLeister]

That's a good idea.
When I get chances to see good instruments I often go away with an impression and usually forget the interesting details. I might get a photograph, but really the poor quality makes it hardly usable.
Now that I think about it, most all of my references are from images on paper or computer screen.
I'm going to be in NY during the holidays and I think I will make it a point to sketch some instruments at the Met.
Rs, what is your preferred medium?

[rs]

Hi, Don. I like pencil and paper. I work entirely from photographs and internet photographs, but the Met idea is a great one, I think. You cannot beat actually seeing the item up close. The photo cannot be "turned" to give the slight angle nuances needed. This is why I try to get as many angles as I can.
_________________
Randall Shenefelt

[rs]

Here is an example of a violin I worked on last month and just finished last night. When cutting the head, I kept a series of sketches with me that I did last year of the Mendelssohn Strad. I was not trying to copy that instrument, just get a feel for what AS might be seeing that I was not. It helped me alot, even if the level of work is not where I want to take it yet.


[img]
PB120001 by violinsbypaco, on Flickr[/img]

Here is the finished instrument. It is an orange blond. I just photographed it this afternoon:


[img]
PC170070 by violinsbypaco, on Flickr[/img]
_________________
Randall Shenefelt

[Chad48309]

That is one sexy scroll.

PS: also consider using sanguine and sepia-toned compressed pastel chalks. I've had great luck using layers of them to replicate nuances in finishes.
_________________
-C.S.

[rs]

Thanks, Chad. I think the color idea is a good idea. I have been struggling with "perfecting" color, and pastel work might help, too. There are some Beckers that have incredible orange red varnish. The problem with color is that I can completely notice the level I want to achieve, but simply developing skill is not enough to replicate it. My chemistry has to get better, too. There is a lot to think about!

On an unrelated note, one thing I am going to do on my next instrument is to thin the width of the purfling. The Messiah has very noticeable, delicate purfling. The bulky look of the heavy black lines just isn't capable of conveying this. I was looking at my studies of the Molitor done earlier this year and the difference is night/day between heavy (mine) and delicate (his).

Thinner black lines and probably paler as well. Just a thought.
_________________
Randall Shenefelt

[Chad48309]

I like your thinking. Purfling in many instruments of the last 3 years tends to be ... somewhat heavy-handed, and often bulbous-looking. It's something I've seen crop up a lot, and it's a very bad trend. You know the sort of purfling I mean; the stuff that looks like it's been done by a machine and practically has an absence of bee stings. It most often comes from China, but there's just no excuse for it, in my opinion.
_________________
-C.S.