Fire Surround WIP and design advice needed.

[PeterBassett]

Hi all.

I'm taking a few days to build a new euro oak fire surround for my living room and it is starting to come together. The wife likes the chunky look and I've picked out some lovely figured wood.

Nothing is fied together yet, this is all held together with some clamps and gravity.

DSC_7275 by Peter Edward Bassett, on Flickr

Figuring.

DSC_7278 by Peter Edward Bassett, on Flickr

Side shot.

DSC_7272 by Peter Edward Bassett, on Flickr

I've still got to cut the pieces to fill the returns to the wall and marble, which'll be fun as the walls aren't plumb. Sigh.

So, to the question. Design wise it is currently a bit sparse. Chunky is good and my wife would be happy with it as it is, but I can't help thinking it could use something. I was thinking maybe a deep bevel on the underside of the mantle (the top bit, whatever it is called) and some 45 degree chamfers on the two uprights.

Thoughts? Something else entirely? Any ideas gratefully received.

Thanks

Pete

 

[AndyT]

Nice timber. Do you have any more of it? If so, you could add on a couple of 'plinths' at the feet of the uprights; they could be just square-edged blocks but I think would finish it off better.


Otherwise, I agree that chamfers on all four uprights would help (and make the long edges less vulnerable to knocks). I also agree about a bold chamfer under the horizontal - I'd do that along the long edge and also across the ends.

 

[No skills]

From my not very helpful point of view... I'd be tempted to go thicker on the top piece then add the deep bevel. This would keep the chunky feel and add depth - I think the top might look a bit skinny compared to the rest if you went straight ahead with the bevel on it.

JMO etc etc





nice figure in the oak btw

 

[PeterBassett]

Thanks both of you. That is a valid point about making the top look too skinny though.

More thinking needed.

 

[condeesteso]

Really nice pieces of oak, and all well on the way. Very personal taste all this, you understand. But I would go with Andy re the plinths under verticals. I also feel the top is a tads thin. You don't want to remake it and you don't need to, but a solid stock infill under would add visual mass and improve balance maybe. I am thinking about 1/4 of the top thickness, under, mitred and bevelled 45 degrees, and set back from edge of top. (Or maybe not mitered but inset, keep that cubist feel.)
The overall clean rectilinear lines are good and should be kept I think... otherwise you start to go all the way with chamfers, flutes, rosette carving centred in the top horizontal. Not what you had in mind I suspect. Very close indeed, give the top a bit more 'mass' is my vote. But very fine indeed, don't get me wrong :wink:

 

[Greedo]

My advice would be to burn it. Lol only kidding. It has been mentioned already. Your top is too thing in my humble opinion and would make it far thicker. Other than that. less is more so I wouldn't ruin it by carving things or adding things.

 

[Lons]

Similar to mine which I made a number of years ago.

The only thing that matters is whether you and more importantly "the boss" likes it


Bob
.

.

 

[PeterBassett]

Well, all complete now. The client (wife) decided against plinths. I did add slight chamfers to the uprights, the top and the underside of the cross member.

All finished from the plane, no sandpaper. Finished with Osmo poly oil.


DSC_7302 by Peter Edward Bassett, on Flickr


DSC_7303 by Peter Edward Bassett, on Flickr


DSC_7308 by Peter Edward Bassett, on Flickr

I'm happy enough with it, as some have said, some things could be done differently but the client is more than happy so I've put it to bed.

Thanks to everyone for their input.

Pete

 

[Lons]

Looks good Pete

if it's another "tick in the box" then that's all that matters

Bob

 

[monkeybiter]

the client is more than happy so I've put it to bed.

=D> Result. :lol: