levels of copies

[490roundball]

just a curiosity question about replicating an original rifle.

many times a new rifle is in a general style of a school or specific maker.

but in the new issue of Muzzleloader there is a piece about a Sheetz rifle that was used at the battle of New Orleans


In the article the copy made of the original is referred to as a "documentary" copy.   It says the modern maker has made bench copies before, but this is the first documentary copy he has made.

so here is my curiosity question,   I thought  a bench copy was an exact as possible copy made with the original right there to study,

what takes the reproducing to the level of documentary?

[rich pierce]

Good question and folks may use these terms differently.  I think a documentary copy would use castings from the original, maybe other custom parts such as a custom or customized lock, profiled barrel, etc. to be as indistinguishable as possible from the original.  A bench copy might be more likely to use casings, lock and barrel that were quite close in style and proportion.

[Kermit]

I think we need a museum person..............

[B Shipman]

No, Rich has it about right. A documentary copy is an exact copy of the original with the original in hand. It has to be. It could be made new, but other than that, it's exact. A bench copy is a rifle made with the original in front of you. Everything is dead on for that particular rifle, not just the maker , but that rifle. You may have little variations in engraving, for example, so the maker can put a little of himself into it, but the style of the original remains. You might change the length of pull, the barrel weight or caliber, but not the style of the barrel. The bent trigger guard is now unbent, and so forth.

I have a couple of bench copies on my website that I'm proud of.

[whetrock]

So, with a documentary copy, it could be "made new" as you mention, but is that the normal way of doing it?  I've seen photos of some documentary copies that seem to have tried to reproduce damage, as well. Do documentary builders try to bend that trigger guard so as to match the damage on the original? Do they try to scratch the stock in the same places the original was scratched, etc? What do you think is the most common practice?

[Acer Saccharum]

There are no published standards that I know of. You'll beat around the bush for miles, and still not have a definite answer, since so much opinion enters the discussion.

In my opinion (see, there he goes again), you can't go too far off with Rich and Bill's assessments.

[T*O*F]

There are no published standards that I know of.

OK, then.  I'll publish one.

A copy is a copy.  Anything else isn't.

That wasn't so hard.

[Lucky R A]

    Interesting set of opinions.  I have always operated on the assumption that a "Bench Copy" was the very closest thing to the original being copied, as you had the original before you for instant measurements and all the little itsy details.  To leave the resultant copy "New" or "Antiqued" to reflect the same wear and damage as the original was up to the builder or his client. 
     A documentary copy was a copy made from extensive measurement, photograph and other resource material, but the original was not available on site of the build. All other considerations would be pretty much the same the bench copy.  Both copies would use barrels, locks and castings that duplicate the original to that extent possible, preferably exactly matching.  A documentary copy would be one step down from a bench copy.   I hope this isn't all a matter of what the meaning of the word "Is, Is."   

Ron

[D. Taylor Sapergia]

I agree with you Ron...that is my understanding too.  The 'documentary' copy is made from documents, whereas the bench copy enjoys the luxury of having had the original on the bench during the build, and thus is THE most accurate 'copy'.

[Curtis]

There are no published standards that I know of.

OK, then.  I'll publish one.

A copy is a copy.  Anything else isn't.

That wasn't so hard.

While I do not disagree with any of the opinions put forth here on this subject,  I would have to say TOF's statement really captures the essence.  All else is simply semantics.

Curtis

[bama]

Darren and I co-built the Sheetz rifle. As I stated in a earlier post, this was a bench copy build. I am not sure who came up with the term "documentary copy" but I bieve it came about because we photographed each step of the build. Thus documenting the building process.

I have made a 2 CD set of these photos that Darrin and I will have for sale at the CLA for $15 if anyone wants a copy. These were not intended to be how to photos but they do show the building methods used to fabricate every step of the build. It will also have many detail pictures of the original rifle.

I hope this helps with the term "documentary copy".

[490roundball]

Thanks Bama

[Darrin McDonal]

Here is how it was explained to me at the beginning of this project because I too needed a clearer definition. A bench copy would be a gun built very similar to the first piece but not exact, for example, the next gun off that bench. Very very similar but not a copy. The next one in line. Does that make sense? A documentary copy is as close to exact as is possible. That is the way these articles are useing the terms.
Darrin

[rich pierce]

It's probably best given the different understandings to actually describe the approach to building each gun rather than shorthand (bench copy, documentary copy, fantasy gun etc).

[Acer Saccharum]

I think same term is being used to describe different concepts.

I'll use the longhand description, then. If I feel the need to explain what I've done, that is. 

[Long John]

From the posts thus far there is no consensus regarding the meaning of these terms.  I think we all have to explain exactly what we mean when describing our product. 

Best Regards,

John Cholin

[Lucky R A]

    It is probably somewhat of a regional thing as well.  Look at how many on this forum reference a "stepped wrist" as a "stepped toe"---even though the "toe" of a gun is clear down at the butt plate, nowhere near the wrist.....  It certainly is confusing at times...

Ron

[Dr. Tim-Boone]

Jim Parker said it.

[shortbarrel]

folks, i have done them both ways, with the old gun on the bench and photographs of guns i made using a large flat screen camera that i had access to. i also used a camera to take pictures of the rifle in the kings mountain. all these guns were made. they would look the the same on the outside,but the bench gun would be only one to be original.