Lately, I've been playing around with "antiquing" techniques, for more of an artistic expression. It could be argued that aging and antiquing are the same thing, but I feel there is a difference. If you look at a lot of Hershal House's work, he uses that rough bleached finish on his metal. It's doesn't look like anything that naturally aged, and it doesn't fit in with any traditional finish, but it does add a pleasing artistic appearance. I can handle doing that kind of work, But wearing off the corners of the barrel and dinging up the lock and trigger guard etc to age a piece, might make me cry.
Same thing with the stock. You can work away the stain with steel wool, add some dark here and there for effect, even scorch the aqua fortis in spots for some artistic appeal. It doesn't necessarily look old, just enhanced.
But purposely aging a gun to look old and worn does not appeal to me at all. It makes me think of a movie prop, and the owner is just an actor. These are real firearms, meant to do real work. If you want to put wear on your gun, get out and put some honest wear on it.
I may change my mind if a customer asked me to purposely add wear to a rifle. It would be a challenge in itself to learn to do it right. The problem is, you need to build a normal gun, not scrimping on craftsmanship, then tear up your own craftsmanship. That would be hard. I may not agree with the customer, but the customer is always right. Bill
