Relief carving on Jaegers

[conquerordie]

Well I'm re- stocking my jaeger. It was my first stock from a plank, and even after I reworked the stock, I'm still not happy. So a new stock it is!
My question is about relief carving on these guns. Seems like 1/32" is common for rifles and fowlers, but in several early pieces in looking at have very deep relief carving around the tang and cheekpiece. Am I seeing things or did the Germans relief carve more aggressively? Im nowhere near this phase in the build, just curious if anyone else sees this. The pieces In looking at all date to the last decade of the 17th century to the first decade of the 18th. They seem to very as to area too. One is from the Palatine the other is an eastern German piece. Didn't know if this was a trait of certain schools or not. Thanks for any insight into this question,
Greg

[t.caster]

Your eyes don't deceive you. Many of the German guns had lively, bold and complex 3 dimensional carving.

[jerrywh]

 Actually most caving on German guns was no deeper than 1/32" , however a lot of of it was multi level or looked multi level but wasn't. If you want to see correct jaeger wood carving look at some of Ron Scott's work. you better do some more research 1/16 is way too deep.

[conquerordie]

Jerrywh,
Changed my first post, it was a mistype. I've seen Mr. Scott's work in person so  understand what our saying. I'll see if I can get one of the pics from the website as an example of what I mean later today. I'm confused as to carving that is or looks multi level but isn't. Thank you for your thoughts,
Greg

[Ron Scott]

I have some castings of some Jaeger Rifle carving derived from original rifles. Will you be at the CLA show? If so I could bring something to measure. If not, perhaps we can get something to you later. Feel free to contact me
at 541-941-0395.

Ron

[Jim Kibler]

During the time period you are asking about, baroque decoration was primarily used.  In my experience this type of carving tended to integrate much more with the stock architecture and tended not to be "applied decoration" after shaping.  So yes, some areas could be very high.  The key with high carving is modeling.  High flat carving is aful and simple rounded over carving is just as bad. 

As with all things there was a fair amount of variation in depth for sure.  The notion of a particular relief carving depth has always bothered me.  This always seems to be something easy to grab hold of, but in reality it's more complicated.  Some areas were carved much more heavily and deeper than others.  True for German guns and longifles.

[James Wilson Everett]

Guys,

Also, note that many of these Germanic rifles had a separate piece added to the cheek piece to build it up higher than the stock.  This does seem weird, but there it is.  I think that you can see this on the cheek piece of this one.

Jim

[jerrywh]

 In carving as well as engraving there are three things that I and most traditional artists try to accomplish.  Flow, and dimension, and definition.  Flow is to try and make the design so that it does not conflict with the direction of the design.
 That takes some explanation and study.The carving must be well defined that means nice clean borders on the carvings with no elbows on the scrolls and a nice clean background. Dimension is created by using different techniques to make ethe carving appear as though one leaf might go beneath another etc. In doing so it makes the carving appear deeper than it really is. In the Jeager book that chambers sells there are many good examples of great German carvers. The French were also very good at creating the effect of dimension.  In many complex carvings the bakground is checkered of given some sort of texture because it is impossible to make it smooth. The example that James Wilson shows is not a good example of the best carving. No offense intended. It is too deep and has an elbow in the design behind the cheek piece. It is simple and clean though. There are not many real good wood carvers in the USA today. Ron Scott and Wallace  Gusler are two of the very best.  I do not profess to be a great carver. Knowing your wood is very important. You cannot carve bad wood .

[Jim Kibler]

I'll add another characteristic that many don't seem to understand...  Make the carving, engraving etc. have an origin and come from some place.  Often this is part of the feature you are decorating.  I've seen some very good technical engravers that seem to plop a series of scrolls down in the middle of something and it looks terrible, at least to my eye.

One more...  Consider the object you are decorating and design your carving / engraving to fit with it's shape.  Consider the negative space between the object and decoration as well.

Enough pontificating.  Been doing too much lately.

[conquerordie]

Jim and jerrywh,

Thank you for the reply's and your insights.  I was going to copy some of the pics from Hermann Historica to better show what my words probably do not convey.  But I'm not sure if it's a copyright thing or not, so I'll play it safe.  But some the examples that I'm interested in are on auction 73 numbers 3092 and 3097.  Like Jim was saying, look at the cheek piece on 3092.  The carving is not applied as a decoration afterward but seems to be the structure of the cheek piece.  I think 3092 is the coolest jaeger I've ever seen.  I know this style of rifle is not everyone's taste, but man I wish I could copy that!  3097 is what I am thinking of doing.  Its a simpler gun, that I want to focus on the architecture of the stock, and not be distracted by too much carving.  This gun has for me the perfect amount of both.
Greg

[Elnathan]

Jim and jerrywh,

Thank you for the reply's and your insights.  I was going to copy some of the pics from Hermann Historica to better show what my words probably do not convey.  But I'm not sure if it's a copyright thing or not, so I'll play it safe.  But some the examples that I'm interested in are on auction 73 numbers 3092 and 3097.  Like Jim was saying, look at the cheek piece on 3092.  The carving is not applied as a decoration afterward but seems to be the structure of the cheek piece.  I think 3092 is the coolest jaeger I've ever seen.  I know this style of rifle is not everyone's taste, but man I wish I could copy that!  3097 is what I am thinking of doing.  Its a simpler gun, that I want to focus on the architecture of the stock, and not be distracted by too much carving.  This gun has for me the perfect amount of both.
Greg

Post links.