Table critique (pics)

[Kirk Constable]

Comments/criticism solicited on this little 'lamp table'. This is probably the first thing I can remember making where Jean said flat out she didn't like it. Didn't like the top, didn't like the legs sticking up, didn't like the crossed pieces at the bottom.

This is a prototype, and I'm going to tweak it a bit... but I still think the general 'look' is fine. And I rather like it.

What I think is the legs are a bit 'heavy' for the diameter of the top (16-1/2")... but I already had the top notched so it was too late to change. On the next ones I'll make the top 17-1/2 to 18", and cut the legs down from 1-3/4 to 1-5/8". I'm not sure I'm completely happy with the 'no apron' look at the top, but I'm also not willing to fiddle with a round one... so I'm particularly interested in thoughts on this.

For what it's worth, this is mostly South American mesquite (Argentina) that I bought by mistake a while back. I think the cross pieces at the bottom may be honey mesquite (another mistake!).

[Mark Kosmowski]

I wonder how it would look with the tabletop mounted so that the grain is diagonal to the leg lines instead of parallel and perpendicular to as made.

There's too much pretty figure in at least that one leg to chop them down. Somethings some folks just aren't gonna like, that's why there's more than just maple trees used for lumber.

Best of luck if you try it again!

[Kirk Constable]

I wonder how it would look with the tabletop mounted so that the grain is diagonal to the leg lines instead of parallel and perpendicular to as made.

I thought about that, Mark... but I found the easiest way to cut the notches in the top was with a square blank (before cutting the circle). The square would have to be bigger to begin with to cut the same size diagonal out.

And Frank/Dan, my preference would also be a little 'less' in the cross pieces, but the Stickley piece I saw that was very similar was very 'heavy'... so I compromised a bit. I will go a bit smaller on the next one(s).

Sometimes it's hard to tell the varieties of mesquite apart... especially when everthing in the place is from Argentina. Didn't know that at the time... I thought I'd found a Texas mesquite bonanza. Color if the rough stock is close. Big tipoff was when I got home and saw the chalk writing on several pieces. There's some pretty figure in there.

Rob, unfinished it looks much like African mahogany. In the picture I have WATCO natural danish oil on it. I may or may not put lacquer over it (might leave it alone since it's a practice piece).

Thanks for the comments!

[Art Mulder]

Kirk,

First impression: I like it fine.

But after reading your email in depth I looked a bit closer.
1- it seems to me that the crosspieces are not flush. Is that an artifact of the photo or is one higher than the other where they meet? I'd make them flush.

2- the pegs. I think it might look better if the two pegs were one above each other rather than diagonal where they pin the crosspiece to the legs. I also wonder if the top peg - which pins the legs to the top - would look better if it were the same size as the lower pegs. (or is than another photo trick? It sure looks bigger)

If you make the legs smaller, I would still keep them thicker than the crosspieces.

I might also try out shorter (in the vertical dimension) crosspieces -- or just make the arch more pronounced?

These are all very minor points.

best,
...art

[Rob Keeble]

Art, those are very good points you make. I learnt something from your comments

[Kirk Constable]

Kirk,

First impression: I like it fine.

But after reading your email in depth I looked a bit closer.
1- it seems to me that the crosspieces are not flush. Is that an artifact of the photo or is one higher than the other where they meet? I'd make them flush.

2- the pegs. I think it might look better if the two pegs were one above each other rather than diagonal where they pin the crosspiece to the legs. I also wonder if the top peg - which pins the legs to the top - would look better if it were the same size as the lower pegs. (or is than another photo trick? It sure looks bigger)

If you make the legs smaller, I would still keep them thicker than the crosspieces.

I might also try out shorter (in the vertical dimension) crosspieces -- or just make the arch more pronounced?

These are all very minor points.

best,
...art

The cross pieces aren't flush on purpose. I like to use a chamfer on every edge of my A&C things... and that little offset is equal to the chamfer. I've done it on a few other pieces, but I'm pretty sure it's not an original idea. That detail also also takes the eye away from any sloppiness of the joint there (bridle joint?).

I made the pegs diagonal at the bottom on a whim. I offset them like that on purpose because there's really a dowel in there to pin the tenon and it lets me get the holes a little farther apart. Didn't think about the top ones until later. The top hole is bigger so I can get a screw in there. I'm not sure a screw is necessary... I may try one with just a dowel instead and use the smaller plug.

Good comments.

[Barry Richardson]

I think the design and craftsmanship is excellent, my only comment is I think it would look better if the wood garin was more consistent, instead if fairly straight and tame on one leg, then wild and figured in another. But I imagine that, like I usually do, you worked with what you had.

[Bill Simpson]

IMHO

The inclusion on the legs drew away from the whole asthetics of the project. I like the design and feel it would work better if the simplistic design was not cluttered with the wood grain ruining the flow.

I too agree that the top should be diagonal to the 4 legs, both in structure and in asthetics.

I like the design, just not your choice of wood.

Thanks for the post, keep them coming.

[Mark Kosmowski]

I thought about that, Mark... but I found the easiest way to cut the notches in the top was with a square blank (before cutting the circle). The square would have to be bigger to begin with to cut the same size diagonal out.

You don't need a bigger square. Start with the same usual grain oriented square. Then use a large protractor to inscribe the square with a circle. Then use a speed square to draw line tangent to the inscribed circle and at 45 degrees to the square sides. Then use these marks to cut the corners off with the radial arm saw and you have an octagon - and references for cutting the notches prior to cutting the circle.

[allen levine]

I hope one day I can cut a through tenon with that accuracy.

all of the work you post is so clean and precise.