On 9/5/03 6:51 PM, in article j78ilvob48fea7ilm...@4ax.com,
http://www.shopsmithhandson.com/archives/nov_dec00/html/money_maker.htm
--
Marshall Gorrow
Hogansburg, NY USA
http://mgorrow.tripod.com/
"fipster" <phip...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:j78ilvob48fea7ilm...@4ax.com...
Speaking as a chessplayer... the knight in that set sucks.
>On Sat, 06 Sep 2003 00:34:00 GMT, Nick Silva <stud...@swbell.net>
>wrote:
>
>>Well this doesn't entirely answer your question, but have you checked out
>>the new chess set pieces that Woodcraft has in their new catalog. You turn
>>the bodies using the pen mandrel and pen barrels. I just thought it was
>>interesting, and there was no carving involved. I wouldn't mind doing one of
>>those myself someday. Peace.
>>
>>
>>On 9/5/03 6:51 PM, in article j78ilvob48fea7ilm...@4ax.com,
>>"fipster" <phip...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Does anybody know of any web sites dealing with chess piece designs for the
>>> lathe. I would like to
>>> make all the pieces entirely on the lathe (no carving)
>
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)
> Speaking as a chessplayer... the knight in that set sucks.
When I play all of my chess pieces suck. ;-)
--
Jack Novak
Buffalo, NY - USA
"Doug Miller" <spam...@milmac.com> wrote in message
news:bbk6b.19430$Ih1.7...@newssrv26.news.prodigy.com...
Moreover, if you're playing in a USCF-sanctioned tournament, you have the
right to refuse to play with a non-Staunton set, and insist on a Staunton. I
certainly would never agree to play with that set, in any game that meant
anything -- the knight looks *way* too much like a bishop.
Good luck!
Ron Williams
Minn-Dak Woodturners
Moorhead, MN
"fipster" <phip...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:j78ilvob48fea7ilm...@4ax.com...
Bob Darrah
West Linn, Oregon
"Doug Miller" <spam...@milmac.com> wrote in message
news:t3n6b.19468$Ih1.7...@newssrv26.news.prodigy.com...
I think that the reason some of us mentioned the Staunton set is because
it's the standard in chess. If you want something out of the ordinary, why
not create your own set? If you're not interested in the standard, then
there's not much that anybody can do to provide you with plans. Maybe *I*
should have mentioned that I've done weeks of search engine research, only
to find that I couldn't find a set of plans for STANDARD chess sets. So I
just picked up a standard, cheap, plastic set of Staunton's and am creating
a set using that as the standard. I happen to be doing everything by eye, no
duplicators here, so there's bound to be some variation. Again, if you don't
like a standard set, I suggest you use your imagination and creativity and
come up with something unique. That, in my humble opinion, is the true mark
of an artist.
And next time you decide to mistake others' opinions as attacks of
criticism, think twice. And don't be so defensive. I've found most of the
people on RCW to be nothing less than exceptionally helpful. When they state
opinions without providing the help that you so desperately seek, it's
generally because they simply can't provide it.
'Nuff said.
-ali
-----------------------------------------------------------------
"Bob Darrah" <bobdar...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:4tGcnXDqpcc...@comcast.com...
Bob Darrah
West Linn, Oregon
"Ali T. Borahan" <wood...@alisails.com> wrote in message
news:sQh7b.144589$xf.136981@lakeread04...
>> I certainly would never agree to play with that set, in any game that meant
>> anything -- the knight looks *way* too much like a bishop.
This was not a criticism of anyone's craftsmanship. Rather, it's a clear
statement that the plans are unsuitable for their intended purpose. A chess
set in which knights can easily be confused with bishops may perhaps still
have some artistic merit, but it's absolutely useless for playing chess.
do a google search on either split-ring or ring turning. there are a few
sites with much info about that. Seems to me that a fairly simple blank
could be setup using dark and light woods, turn the knight in the ring,
then slice them out. You may wind up with a dozen instead of just 4, so
plan on making a few extra sets for your chess-playing buddies.
There's a book out by Diana Thompson (I think) for cutting 3D sets on a
scroll saw that might be an alternative if you're so inclined although
no one set really inspired me either.
> There was an adequate response at the beginning of the thread with a
> ShopSmith set, although I too don't care for the knight. I've
> considered turning the set and the base for the knight but cutting the
> actual horses head on the scroll saw and attaching to the base. Not
> sure yet though if it'll look funky. I've searched the web for hours
> and only run across 2 or 3 at most but none of them inspired me.
More typical approach, and bound to look better than an "attached" head
is to turn what you can of the head, and then carve/saw/etc the rest of
it. Similar but more complex version of how you can turn a "tophat" on
the king and then cut off the round sides to get a cross, if you want.
Turn the rim on the rook and then cut crenellations in it, etc.
Many commercial designs (above the molded plastic level, anyway) have
done away with any non-turned details (generally excepting the horses),
presumably for speed of production. Those details, done well, can make
the set, and I speak as a dedicated turner.
BTW, I also think the Shopsmith set is an awful design.
--
Cats, Coffee, Chocolate...vices to live by
As for sources of ideas, I believe I have seen ideas and/or plans in Bill
Jones' books, in Mike Darlow's books and in "Woodwork" magazine, among
others.
Joe Fleming - San Diego
=========================
"fipster" <phip...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:j78ilvob48fea7ilm...@4ax.com...
Joe Fleming wrote:
<snipped>