Grinling Gibbons – Maine class 12

When the wood runs out beneath a flower, I change the flower. I had almost nothing left in the middle of this one, just some meat on the sides. Then I raised the middle and carved a different kind of flower.

Has a hole ever opened under something you were carving and made your stomach drop? Did you ever look at a drawing and realize the wood under it is a millimeter deep? Then this class is for you.

Class 12 of the Maine course opens with me saying I am not restricted on time anymore. I had a chance to study a little deeper what Gibbons did, and that day I wanted to concentrate on one particular area of the panel. That area had very little wood to give me.

What I did with almost no wood

• With so little wood, I drew my own version of that corner.
• An undercut of one millimeter or a little more was enough for a shadow.
• Where the center is gone, change the style of the flower.
• On a fragile petal, carving the wrong way on the fibers puts less downward pressure on it than going the easy way.
• Petals are usually concave in the middle, the way they unfold in nature.
• Dried stropping paste gets soft again when you use a little mineral oil on it.

Why was there so little wood?

The block is wider than the original. In the original picture it is narrow and long, but we decided to use the whole block of wood, and the school in Maine was able to get some wider stock. That is what we used, and I think it's good.

On the original there is a small parsley leaf in that spot with a flower right beside it. I have plenty of thickness for the parsley. The flower is the problem, and I have to be mindful of how much material I have, because it is not much.

So I drew my own version. It's not exactly what he had. This one is a bigger filler flower, like the ones below, just on an upper level. The flower sits hidden underneath the parsley, only a couple of petals sticking out, and the parsley gets subdivisions, partly visible.

How deep can you undercut with one millimeter?

About a millimeter, maybe slightly deeper than a millimeter, because I don't really have the thickness underneath for more. I took a number 16 V tool, three millimeters (1/8 in), a 35 degree one. My flute was slightly to the right, about one o'clock, and I started undercutting.

I still wanted some kind of shadow underneath, so then came a number 11, half a millimeter, a Two Cherries one from Germany. It does not have to be that brand. I went under that line slightly, not a deep undercut, so the parsley looks like it is lying on top of the future flower.

I will be honest with you. I kind of regret that I removed too much material under there. I got a little too close. Later in the same part I came back to it. It would have been helpful to think about all of these details ahead of time.

What happens when a hole opens between the layers?

It gives the three dimensional look, and I really like that. With an antique Marples chisel, three millimeters, an eighth of an inch, double sided, I went in, and a hole opened between the first layer and the second.

On a layered relief like this one, that hole sits between the two boards, and then I exposed the first layer, which I can clean and refine later.

I did not show you how to do the filler flowers around it this time. I already showed you before, and I don't want to repeat myself. That part is up to you, so you can be creative on that.

What do you do when the center is gone?

Change the style of the flower. I found another hole underneath, and when I looked under that flower from the back side there was almost no material left at the center. On the sides there was still some meat.

That is what I like about wood carving in general. You can change things and nobody is going to know, and it is still going to look nice. So the middle part became raised, connected all the way around, with an excavation on the side. A slightly different looking flower, and I think a better one.

If I don't like it, I'll take it completely off and do it the way it was supposed to be. A preliminary stroke with the same tiny number 16, no more than a millimeter, and then I blended it slightly inward. For me it is important not to take too much. The middle part stays raised, and it still gives me that feel.

Does grain direction change on a fragile petal?

On this petal it did. Normally you carve with the grain. Here, when I carved that easy way I was creating too much pressure, the petal moved, and it could break at the connecting point. Carving against the grain I do not put as much downward pressure on it, and with sharp tools it is still fine.

It was so fragile I could not press it. Earlier in the class, where the grain ran a tricky direction, my strokes had almost no pressure, really, really small ones. A few minutes later I said it plainly. Yes, I am working against the grain, breaking the rule, and I'm okay with it.

Why is the middle of a petal concave?

They grow that way. In nature those petals start out all folded up, and as each one grows outward it just opens up. Right in the middle there is usually a concave. Not on all flowers, but on a lot of them.

Does it really matter? I think it gives a little more natural look. I placed that small concave about sixty to forty along the petal, which puts it near the golden ratio. Being exactly in the golden ratio was not needed here, but it is okay.

The curl came from two concave strokes, one on each side, with the center raised between them. For those I used a small number 9 or number 8 by Dockyard, and made it a little sharper first. Especially when you work the wrong way on the fibers, I guess it helps a lot.

Before that, for the waves at the edge, I took a really tiny Dockyard gouge, a sixteenth of an inch (about 1.6 mm), more like a number 8 or 9, and used the tool upside down. The petal was moving too much, so I held it with my finger.

Which way should the petals move?

The same way as their neighbors. Every flower around this one moves in one direction, so it makes sense for me to follow that direction. It goes by the law of flow. Everything is supposed to be connected, and if you don't know what I'm talking about, watch my design course.

The edge got a slight wave, two sides going one way and the center between them, almost like a clover shape.

Which petal goes on top? Logically the one sitting a little higher when you look from the side. That one casts its shadow on the lower one. The class 8 page is about which way carved petals overlap.

What does each problem need?

Problem	What I did	Tool
A millimeter of wood below the leaf	Separation only	Number 16 V tool at three millimeters, then a half millimeter 11
Center gone	Middle left raised, and turned into a different kind of flower	Tiny 16
The petal moves when you press it	Reversed direction	Sharp tools, made a little sharper first
A petal with no movement	Two concave strokes, one on each side, center raised	Dockyard 8 or 9, 1/16 inch
The center of the flower looks like a perfect circle	Wavy stop, then five divisions	A Dockyard gouge, then a tiny Dockyard tool for the divisions
Stropping paste that dried out	Mineral oil	None

How do you keep a flower center from being a perfect circle?

Make the edge wavy. I stood the same sixteenth inch gouge at about ninety degrees toward the flower, maybe a millimeter and a half deep or a little less, then made more strokes toward that first one. I don't want to see a perfect circle.

Then an even smaller Dockyard, claiming to be 1.5 millimeters but looking a little smaller, went right under the wall of that center, all the way around, for the shadow. You don't really see that shadow in the video because of the lights for the camera. In real life the shadow will look really nice.

Last came five divisions in the center, three big ones and two small ones, with a tiny Dockyard tool. Most likely I will spend a little longer on them off camera, with my magnifier lamp.

What tricks help at this size?

Three small ones. First, a tiny skew chisel made by Dockyard, a company in the United States that went out of business a few years ago, and somebody else bought it. It's one of the tiniest skew chisels you can get, and with it I can get underneath, blend everything nicely and refine it.

Second, a clay modeling tool with a ball on both ends, and I have several of those. A few strokes with it soften everything and leave a movement you do not really see, but it is still detectable by the human eye.

Third, the paste. I use Mirror Paste by Trend for stropping, and it is not cheap. It has a tendency to dry if you don't close it properly. When it does, mineral oil makes it soft again. Mine was already dry while it was almost full, the oil made it work again, and the compound is still the same.

And more stropping in general. When I work on details I spend a little more time stropping my tools, and I know I tell you that too many times. Sharp tools are really important, most of all when the strokes go the hard way on something this thin. The sharpening course is where the edge itself gets taught.

Why change tools when one works fine?

Using the same tool over and over becomes boring after a while. You could use a number 11, which is what I like to use, but sometimes you have to change the tools you are using. So for the separations between the petals I went back to the number 16, flute to the right at about two o'clock, maybe two thirty.

That separation stroke went right underneath and cast some shadow. I would love a full undercut there. With what is below it, I am not going to get one, and that is all right as long as it casts some kind of shadow.

Tool numbers do not always match between makers. For the overall shape of the flower I grabbed a number 5 by Ashley Iles, and that equals a number 4 on a European chart. That one is about 11 millimeters, not really 3/8 of an inch and not really half an inch, so about 7/16. Any tool will do on the edge. It must be sharp, and that is the only rule. There is a whole tools course if you want more.

Should you sand a flower like this?

You can. If you want to sand it, you could probably sand it even now. For me it makes no sense in this case, and I think it looks better without sanding.

To blend, a small back bent is always helpful. Mine is just six millimeters (about 1/4 in). With a few strokes it gives me a somewhat finished look. Maybe I change the angle of attack now and then, and the facets that are left will come off later. The class 11 page is about what a back bent is for on a carved flower.

One odd thing on this piece. While I was working the leaf there was some red stuff, and at first I did not know what it was. It came through from behind, marker that had gone right through the wood.

How does the parsley leaf get its movement?

By the same law of flow. The overall movement goes one direction, and the flowers move that way too, even at the micro level in this small flower. So I repeated that movement on the parsley leaf.

Those strokes are shallow. I used a number 3 at six millimeters for shallow concave indications. Then a smaller one, a number 4 by London pattern, which is a number 3 by European pattern, only an eighth of an inch, and the hard direction again.

In one spot I could see about a sixteenth of an inch of wood. Why don't I use it? I made a deeper concave there that drops almost to my first layer, and it blends really nicely together.

Then the V tool, number 16 again, for a few long strokes of about six millimeters each. They are not deep. They direct the eye and make the separation feel deeper than it is. Can I say that I like it? Yes, I do.

What is left for later?

The cleaning. I will clean all of it later, off camera, with a magnifier lamp. For filming it is not convenient, because the lamp blocks my camera so many times. It used to be easier for me to do it without one.

For that cleaning I will use a tiny knife and go right on the edge. Don't judge the mess you see in the video. It will look awesome once it is cleaned.

Every class of the Grinling Gibbons course is open with tuition. The next one is class 13, and the Hashemi flowers course is a whole course of carved flowers.

Shall we carve?