Post a photo of the last thing you made

[Stigmorgan]

One simple podlet from green oak, really like this one

Followed by a bowl from some type of pine tree, smelt very sweet whilst cutting and sanding

 

[MorrisWoodman12]

@Stigmorgan Great work as usual Stig. You (I think twas you) said that the twig pots bend and twist around as the wood dries. I've never seen that so can you post a picture of one that has?
Have fun
Martin

 

[Fred48]

@Stigmorgan
I'm not a woodturner, but enjoyed watching the following on YouTube
BAW Breizh art wood.
His latest video is a cracker.
it may be of interest?
Fred

 

[Stigmorgan]

@Stigmorgan Great work as usual Stig. You (I think twas you) said that the twig pots bend and twist around as the wood dries. I've never seen that so can you post a picture of one that has?
Have fun
Martin

Probably was me, I would have been referring to the podlets rather than the twig pots, the pots tend to split rather than warp.
My podlets don't warp loads as I usually put an oil coat on and my maker space is very humid at 60% so today I turned a 6inch diameter green oak log into what started as a flat top podlet, I have left it bare wood.
Here it is after parting it off, the top is pretty flat and the stem is still straight

Here it is again after only 30 minutes, the top is starting to cup and warp, the stem is starting to lean over

And here it is after a couple of hours in the house which is around 50% humidity, the top has cracked and warped a little more and the stem has leaned over a little more

For a really good visual of how much wood can move go check this guy out, he creates some amazingly thin turnings that warp beautifully

https://instagram.com/plussoo_woodturning?igshid=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==
@Fred48 been following him for ages, some really nice turnings have come from him.

 

[robgul]

A plea to posters . . . . posting full size images really slows down display and eats bandwidth, especially where a post has 6, 7 or even more images.

There is an option to just post "thumbnail" images that can then be clicked to see the full-size image if the viewer so wishes - using that feature would be really helpful.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

... my maker space is very humid at 60% ...

Bone dry for here.
We've a hot sunny day today and it doesn't drop as low as that.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

A plea to posters . . . . posting full size images really slows down display and eats bandwidth, especially where a post has 6, 7 or even more images.

There is an option to just post "thumbnail" images that can then be clicked to see the full-size image if the viewer so wishes - using that feature would be really helpful.

That hadn't occurred to me.

 

[J-G]

A plea to posters . . . . posting full size images really slows down display and eats bandwidth, especially where a post has 6, 7 or even more images.

There is an option to just post "thumbnail" images that can then be clicked to see the full-size image if the viewer so wishes - using that feature would be really helpful.

When I created a 'Project' posting which needed many photo's, I was advisded by MikeK to always use [Full Image]. However, I always create my images in .PNG format - never ever in .JPG - and control their size to about 8 - 10 cm wide at 200 dpi which gives a final file-size less than 1.5Mb.

I'm sure you are refering to @Stigmorgan posts which always contain many images and I've just evaluated the last one he posted - - - - it is 34.9Mb!!! only 96 dpi but 80 x 106.68 cm -- converting that to 200dpi and 8 x 10.67 cm brings the size down to 1.51Mb and the compressed file as held on disc (and transmitted via 'tinternet) is 628Kb - about 1/55th of the size which directly equates to bandwidth needed.

So, - - - I suggest that rather than use [Thumbnail] images it would be preferable to always edit the original image to control it's size.

For a direct comparison, here is my version of the image . . .

Though I've also made it smaller in the forum software and in fact I would normally also crop most of the background which will further reduce the bandwidth needed.

The second image is only 302Kb on disc and 728Kb expanded.

What I'm saying is that it is incumbent upon anyone posting images to minimize the size prior to 'attaching'. There is no degradation in the quality of the information provided so (to me) there is no argument.

 

[mwinfrance]

Bandwidth is simple..bandwidth use gets too high..hosting bill ( plus cloudflare ) goes up..the site maybe has to charge everyone..and maybe still restrict bandwidth..

There is also the fact that many viewing will not be on unlimited bandwidth / data deals with their ISP ..so looking at some threads can give them a very nasty bill at the end of the month.

Personally I'm amazed that one can "switch off ads" in the member "console" ,and that uploading restrictions re max image size ( data ) are not already in place..also surprised that ISPs in the UK ( not usually known for their relaxed attitude to bandwidth uploads , if one reads elreg over the decades ) allow large uploads..they usually make uploads / downloads severely asymetric.Here it is different with our ISP, they are happy to let one "host from home" with all that that entails ( unlimited up and down is on my deal ) if one should be so silly. I'm not sat on a fast pipe ( 40 down 10 up, "out in the sticks" on the seashore, fibre in our village in 2 years ..maybe ) so have our sites on a server* in a private DC which is on an ultra fast very fat pipe in central France.

*Plus multiple back ups in multiple elsewheres with regular daily ( or more frequent for some sites ) updates. Not cloudflare.

 

[robgul]

When I created a 'Project' posting which needed many photo's, I was advisded by MikeK to always use [Full Image]. However, I always create my images in .PNG format - never ever in .JPG - and control their size to about 8 - 10 cm wide at 200 dpi which gives a final file-size less than 1.5Mb.

I'm sure you are refering to @Stigmorgan posts which always contain many images and I've just evaluated the last one he posted - - - - it is 34.9Mb!!! only 96 dpi but 80 x 106.68 cm -- converting that to 200dpi and 8 x 10.67 cm brings the size down to 1.51Mb and the compressed file as held on disc (and transmitted via 'tinternet) is 628Kb - about 1/55th of the size which directly equates to bandwidth needed.

So, - - - I suggest that rather than use [Thumbnail] images it would be preferable to always edit the original image to control it's size.

For a direct comparison, here is my version of the image . . .

View attachment 161397Though I've also made it smaller in the forum software and in fact I would normally also crop most of the background which will further reduce the bandwidth needed.
View attachment 161398













The second image is only 302Kb on disc and 728Kb expanded.

What I'm saying is that it is incumbent upon anyone posting images to minimize the size prior to 'attaching'. There is no degradation in the quality of the information provided so (to me) there is no argument.

Err, yes - it was the vast number of images to scroll through that prompted my comment - although he's not the only poster with multiple large images.

And to be blunt for a moment : I have less than no interest in turned/carved stuff . . . but do understand that other people do.

Anyway, if the image sizes can be reduced (both file size and displayed on screen) that would seem to be a good thing that will suit a lot of the members here. Short & sharp is the way!

 

[J-G]

Err, yes - it was the vast number of images to scroll through that prompted my comment - although he's not the only poster with multiple large images.

And to be blunt for a moment : I have less than no interest in turned/carved stuff . . . but do understand that other people do.

Anyway, if the image sizes can be reduced (both file size and displayed on screen) that would seem to be a good thing that will suit a lot of the members here. Short & sharp is the way!

I'm sure that @Stigmorgan just attaches the photo' he's taken on his phone and may indeed not have the knowledge to first save them to his PC and edit in something like Photoshop and although I can do such in moments (since I do have a great deal of experience in photo-editing) learning to use that - or similar free product such as Irfanview - is not trivial.

 

[mwinfrance]

Easy enough to run a script on the site server ( there are many free open source ones, and which are secure and regularly updated to stay secure and be compatable with site software systems, fora in particular , already plugged in to most hosting systems ) which would take care of shrinking etc any uploads, before they were inserted into threads. couple of clicks on the server interface and done.

Agree , highly likely what young stigmorgan is doing, lot of phones make it harder to do any other way.
Depends on the OS on the phone and or the computer as to what apps or programs would be worth suggesting for someone who is not IT experienced.

 

[J-G]

Easy enough to run a script on the site server ( there are many free open source ones, and which are secure and regularly updated to stay secure and be compatable with site software systems, fora in particular , already plugged in to most hosting systems ) which would take care of shrinking etc any uploads, before they were inserted into threads. couple of clicks on the server interface and done.

Agree , highly likely what young stigmorgan is doing, lot of phones make it harder to do any other way.
Depends on the OS on the phone and or the computer as to what apps or programs would be worth suggesting for someone who is not IT experienced.

Agreed, and it would be a useful 'long-stop' but also takes away any 'control' over the image - it certainly wouldn't be able to 'crop' the background.

I would strongly recommend that all images are edited by the originator to both minimize the size but also to present the prime object in the best light.

Personally, I would not even think about looking for a phone app to edit images but then I do have some 30+ years experience of Photoshop on a PC!

 

[sams93]

Made an urn on request by my grandfather for my nan's ashes. He wanted to keep them in the box that the crematorium gave to him, hence the rather unusually large size! I did check a few times that he definitely wanted it to be that large but you can only ask so much! It actually isn't as unwieldly as I was expecting after all.

Made from oak (the panels 19mm english oak), with some american black walnut for the corners and trim.

I made the box first whole, did the 3/8" roundover all over, then cut it in half to make the lid on my bandsaw. I trimmed the two halves with some 9mm walnut with some brass inlayed, then mitred to give a continuous edge, I put a chamfer on the trim to soften it up, I suppose I could have used a roundover again but it didn't feel right.

Hinges are solid brass from ProKraft (£15), I was quite pleased with the quality of them for the price, but they were a tad small for the box retrospectively. I struggled to find anything bigger in solid brass. I think they will be fine as the box is unlikely to be opened many times in it's life, and they would be simple to replace or upgrade if needed one day.

Finished with some rustins quick dry satin varnish.

I wanted to line it so bought some 'velvet' with self adhesive backing on amazon (£12 for 20 sheets - I only used 5). I was impressed with the stuff as it was only cheap so wasn't expecting much but it looks really good, I cut with a scalpel and very carefully set them in place peeling the backing off as I went.

I'll give the box to him when I next see him, I am sure it won't be without emotion. I had been putting off making it for a while, but it has actually been quite a nice thing to make.

 

[sams93]

Some of the in-progress photos

 

[robgul]

Easy enough to run a script on the site server ( there are many free open source ones, and which are secure and regularly updated to stay secure and be compatable with site software systems, fora in particular , already plugged in to most hosting systems ) which would take care of shrinking etc any uploads, before they were inserted into threads. couple of clicks on the server interface and done.

Agree , highly likely what young stigmorgan is doing, lot of phones make it harder to do any other way.
Depends on the OS on the phone and or the computer as to what apps or programs would be worth suggesting for someone who is not IT experienced.

I don't begin to understand the ins and outs, but several fora that I have been on in the past had automated limits on image file and display sizes (i.e. they change them to fit and, presumably, control bandwidth use) . . . the s/w that works this forum may have that feature, or something similar.

 

[mwinfrance]

Simple to use image size shrinkers .
https://squoosh.app/https://www.uubyte.com/blog/the-bes...ly-shrink-your-images-without-losing-quality/https://alternativeto.net/software/image-shrink-lite/https://alternativeto.net/software/image-shrink-lite/about/ I favour free and open source ( so programmers can see what it is doing and where it may be talking to ) apps and programs.

@robgui ..this forum software undoubtedly has that ability, but ( if that is the case ) it is not "switched on"..by admin's ( @Dovetail 's choice one supposes.
However.. look at the links I posted just above..there'll be something in there to suit every "platform" ( Operating System )..choose the one(s) that appeals to you..I used to use photoshop, but since going linux only on my online machines years ago ,now do it in Gimp if I need to.
HTH Mike

 

[Jameshow]

Err, yes - it was the vast number of images to scroll through that prompted my comment - although he's not the only poster with multiple large images.

And to be blunt for a moment : I have less than no interest in turned/carved stuff . . . but do understand that other people do.

Anyway, if the image sizes can be reduced (both file size and displayed on screen) that would seem to be a good thing that will suit a lot of the members here. Short & sharp is the way!

Shocking, up the pallet wood I say!!

 

[robgul]

Simple to use image size shrinkers .
https://squoosh.app/https://www.uubyte.com/blog/the-bes...ly-shrink-your-images-without-losing-quality/https://alternativeto.net/software/image-shrink-lite/https://alternativeto.net/software/image-shrink-lite/about/ I favour free and open source ( so programmers can see what it is doing and where it may be talking to ) apps and programs.

@robgui ..this forum software undoubtedly has that ability, but ( if that is the case ) it is not "switched on"..by admin's ( @Dovetail 's choice one supposes.
However.. look at the links I posted just above..there'll be something in there to suit every "platform" ( Operating System )..choose the one(s) that appeals to you..I used to use photoshop, but since going linux only on my online machines years ago ,now do it in Gimp if I need to.
HTH Mike

The resizing of images etc is not a problem for me - been doing that for 25+ years with lots of different progs - it's the forum s/w that I was referring to as not knowing how it worked.

 

[mwinfrance]

The resizing of images etc is not a problem for me - been doing that for 25+ years with lots of different progs - it's the forum s/w that I was referring to as not knowing how it worked.

Maybe those links will be useful to others , young stig perhaps..as to the forum software being set up to allow huge upload files, have to wait for @Dovetail or @MikeK to elucidate, unless one of the other mods knows the why ?