On 2010-03-10 14:34, Thomas Wayne wrote:
Bill,

I'm quite sure if someone posted a video of the "Charlie Miller move" (with C&B) and referred to it as "The galloping post move" you'd be the first to jump in with a correction.

Or if someone quoted Bill Herz as the originator of the line: "I'm a magician, I'm going to magish for you... aren't you glad I'm not a wizard?" I'm sure you'd have something to say about that as well.

Ask Brett Sherwood anything you like, but ultimately take my word for it - his cups aren't "engraved". Don't take it personally, but that's just how it is.

TW

On 2010-03-10 15:28, spatlind wrote:
I'll have to defer to the experts on it. Should I ever want to flog either set, however, I don't think I'll be referring to them as "embossed"

On 2010-03-10 15:41, Bill Palmer wrote:
He also claims that the gold plated silver cups are hand engraved.

On 2010-03-10 16:11, DDecae wrote:
[...]
Can we please stop speculating about what I consider a fellow craftsman's trade secrets?

On 2010-03-10 14:34, Thomas Wayne wrote:
Bill,

I'm quite sure if someone posted a video of the "Charlie Miller move" (with C&B) and referred to it as "The galloping post move" you'd be the first to jump in with a correction.

On 2010-03-10 22:06, Thomas Wayne wrote:

Quote:

On 2010-03-10 16:11, DDecae wrote: [...] Can we please stop speculating about what I consider a fellow craftsman's trade secrets?

Well, to be fair, every step and every process of manufacturing the Sherwood cups is technology that has been in practice long before Brent Sherwood ever decided to become an entrepreneur. Nothing about the manufacture of these cups is a "trade secret" owned by him - or by any other individual on the planet.

TW

On 2010-03-10 22:06, Thomas Wayne wrote:

Quote:

On 2010-03-10 16:11, DDecae wrote: [...] Can we please stop speculating about what I consider a fellow craftsman's trade secrets?

Well, to be fair, every step and every process of manufacturing the Sherwood cups is technology that has been in practice long before Brent Sherwood ever decided to become an entrepreneur. Nothing about the manufacture of these cups is a "trade secret" owned by him - or by any other individual on the planet.

TW

On 2010-03-10 23:09, Bill Palmer wrote:

Brent Sherwood hasn't made any statements that would have indicated that any of the processes used on BRETT Sherwood's cups are secrets.

On 2010-03-11 13:13, BCS wrote:
My goat won't work...

On 2010-03-09 20:47, Thomas Wayne wrote:
You know how sometimes you hear someone use a word over and over and you know they're using it incorrectly, but you just don't say anything... until one day you finally feel like speaking up?

The process used for adding design to the Sherwood cups is not "engraving". They aren't "engraved" - they're embossed. The two processes are very different from each other. Embossing is very much like metal stamping, and the dead giveaway with these cups is that the design on the outer surface of the cups can also be seen (in "reverse") on the inside - a natural result of machine embossing.

True engraving of a design as elaborate as these cups would be done by hand and would be VERY expensive. The method used to embellish these cups is almost certainly automated, and has - in my opinion - been seriously overvalued by the C&B aficionados. They're cool looking, no doubt about that, but I think if the actual process were known and understood you guys wouldn't be quite so impressed.

"Every profession is a conspiracy against the laity" [George Bernard Shaw]

TW

On 2010-03-10 23:09, Bill Palmer wrote:

Quote:

On 2010-03-10 22:06, Thomas Wayne wrote: Quote: On 2010-03-10 16:11, DDecae wrote: [...] Can we please stop speculating about what I consider a fellow craftsman's trade secrets? Well, to be fair, every step and every process of manufacturing the Sherwood cups is technology that has been in practice long before Brent Sherwood ever decided to become an entrepreneur. Nothing about the manufacture of these cups is a "trade secret" owned by him - or by any other individual on the planet. TW

Brent Sherwood hasn't made any statements that would have indicated that any of the processes used on BRETT Sherwood's cups are secrets.

On 2010-03-10 13:11, kentfgunn wrote:
Thomas,

My next-door-neighbor is a jewel and sculptor. I asked her what she thought of my engraved Sherwood cups. She said,

"Kent, those are not engraved." The two words she used to describe the technique were chased and repoussé. I got the same explanation you give from her. "If metal removal isn't the primary technique it isn't engraving."


She saw the serial number, 119 on my set and also told me they either applied the outline via a transfer method and did the chasing by hand, or far more likely a press was used to stamp the initial design and some hand work, (with mechanically assisited tooling) followed that up.

I told her what I'd paid for them, (1095 U.S.). She hefted a cup and said, "Hmm . . spot price of silver is 17bucks . . . You've got about 20 ounces of silver here . . . they're worth about 340 dollars in raw silver. Add the chasing and spinning, you got a great deal."

That input was from a non-magician. As works of silversmithing or craftsman-imbued folk art they'll probably hold the value of what I paid for them. I know Brett has raised his prices since I bought mine.

I'll bet he refers to them as engraved for simplicity's sake. He knows how they're made. I seriously doubt he meant to mis-represent his product. I wasn't upset or distressed when I learned real craftsmen (or women) don't call the technique used on the Sherwoods as engraving. I just learned some extra cool stuff.

KG

PS Summing up. TW is right, as is generally the case.

On 2010-03-10 12:15, Thomas Wayne wrote:
Automation and symmetry are not mutually dependent on one another. If I was trying to create the Sherwood cup effect I would consider using a roll die method, with an inner mandril and outer embossing die(s). Asymmetry - intentional or otherwise - could very easily be an integral part of the outer die(s), and different dies, applied in subsequent operations would almost certainly ensure more asymmetry.

Here's an example, albeit far lesser quality than the Sherwood cups, of the process having been used:
http://cgi.ebay.com/Embossed-Metal-Beaded-Votive-Candle-Holder-w-Glass-Cup_W0QQitemZ120424595572QQcmdZViewItemQQptZCandle_Holders_Accessories?hash=item1c09dd8074

Here's another example - note the reverse impression left on the backside: http://cgi.ebay.com/Little-Victorian-Dust-Pan-Toy-Embossed-AAFA-NR_W0QQitemZ220553025732QQcmdZViewItemQQptZFolk_Art?hash=item3359fc18c4

"Shavings" around embossed metal designs are not uncommon and do not contitute "proof" of engraving; metal is being moved with force here, and the granular nature of the material can easily result in such tiny flaws. However, engraving specifically involves the removal of metal to produce a design. To insist that engraving is the process to produce the Sherwood cups - which I have examined very closely - is to insist that huge volumes of metal were removed in order to leave behind the raised designs the the cups display. More importantly, the engraving process will not leave behind the tell-tale reverse impression on the interior of the cup. These cups are not engraved, and such an assertion borders on the ridiculous.

There may be some metal chasing involved in the background detail of the Sherwood cups, but it is not the main process used and is very unlikely to have been done without the used of a pneumatic chasing "hammer" and perhaps CNC guidance of that tool. Again, inconsistencies in the design do not constitute "proof" of hand work on these cups.

I agree that the Sherwood cups are very nice looking, and I understand their desirability within the magic community. Multiple steps and processes are obviously involved in their production. But the design is not engraved, by hand or otherwise.

TW