Carving suggestions please

[Bigmon]

I need a little help.  This needs a little something and I am stuck.  I guess I could just smash it off the corner of the house.
This is cherry and not very forgiving.  I am trying to keep it simple, but I think this is a little too simple.
Any help is appreciated.

[Mr. Bubbles]

A lot depends on the style of gun you are building. What is it?

[Jeff Durnell]

Laughed at the corner of the house thing.

I feel ya.

[Bigmon]

Sorry, It is a Kibler Colonial. I am thinking it needs those small grooves opened up.  The wood in that area of the stock is pretty stock and I am afraid if it just chipping out,

[Scota4570]

I have limited experience. I still struggle, so some pitfalls are fresh for me.   

I'd be afraid to put too much detail too.  A lot of cuts that is rough looking, is not a nice as a little done well, to my eye.  As far a opening up the cuts, getting down to the back ground level, it will probably chip out.  I would be more inclined to make a v-shaped tapered valley.  Try it on scrap material and see what you think first. 

Review Jim Kibler's carving photos on this website.  He can make minimal cuts look like more than the sum of the parts.   That seems to be a talent that great artists possess.  They can make a few brush strokes, or carved features, have meaning and purpose.  Your mind fills in the blanks to make a complete picture.

When I sketch I put in too much detail and it looks bad.  A good artist can do a portrait with a Sharpie marker.   A good oil painter can put no detail and it still looks wonderful, Monet for example. 

I hope that makes some sense.  Maybe some good carvers can comment. 

[Jerry V Lape]

Too symetrical and totally two dimensional.  Rococo art is non symetrical and three dimensional.  Model
some 3 D shaping to the side leaves you suggest with the cuts at the base of the main leaf and extend their stems along the side with maybe a cross over stem of a fiddlehead in the opposite direction.  Make the main leaf non symetrical acanthus and hollow it out into a 3D shape with rounded edges.  .   

[rich pierce]

Just pick an original rifle to emulate. With what you’ve got started, if you have Rifles of Colonial America volume 1, look at RCA 19, and 21-25. Berkshire County rifles tended to have symmetrical carving around the tang, as did the Christians Spring rifles (in the 40’s in RCA) and Shroyer-attributed York guns (in volume 2 of Rifles of Colonial America). But yours looks more Berks-ey than anything else to me.

[Bigmon]

Thanks for the advice.  It might help if I tell you that I got my inspiration from that great rifle that Ian Pratt had on here a few weeks back.  While not trying to copy him, I used the part around the tang but changed the bottom lobe.  His looks so perfect, mine, not so much.
But I am either going to improve it or ruin it today!
Thanks again

[rich pierce]

Well, good luck (chuckle). Ian can make the simple look elegant and the elegant look deceptively simple.

[jerrywh]

Anybody who thinks something is simple just don't know much about it.

[Chowmi]

Bigmon,

I looked at the Ian Pratt rifle, and again at yours, and I have a few comments.

First off, I'm not a Rococco artist, or expert or anywhere near any of those things, so take what I say with a grain of salt.  A big one.

The other guys are right, Rococco is typically not symmetrical which adds dynamics and life to the design.  However, I have seen numerous examples of Fluer de lis designs at the tang or rr entry pipe that are pretty much symmetric.  Albrecht seems to have done it, and by the looks of it, so did Ian Pratt. 

I think the static look of your design comes from the balance of it. Notice that your leaf starts right at the termination of your tang moldings (and the two spirals), and it is a long oval.  It feels like it comes from nowhere and is too long.  Notice that the leaf covers about 2/3rds of the design. 
If you look at Ian's design, he starts skinny skinny at the base of the leaf, like a vine, and the leaf grows from there.  His design is likely even longer than yours, but the leaf itself is probably a similar size, just separated by the vine and bounded by two tendrils.  I think that's what gives his design the balance and dynamic that yours may be missing. 

What do you do about it?  I don't think adding detail to the leaf will solve it entirely.  You can't add wood, but you might be able to take some away. 

You might try drawing on the raised portion of the existing design to either create a vine, or add some asymmetry to it by relieving/removing some of the leaf.  Depends on how deeply you stabbed in the design.  If you stabbed deeply, you will likely see the ghost of your old design. 

I know this isn't a ready made solution, but I hope it helps you think about it.

Also, see what other folks may think about my suggestion as well.  It's only my primitive thoughts. 

Cheers,
Norm