Engraved before or after?

[longcruise]

My question is prompted by the cheekpiece inlay on this rifle recently introduced to the ALR Museum.

http://americanlongrifles.org/forum/index.php?topic=7357.0

This is probably a dumb question, but I'm curious.

Based on the pins covering part of the inlay, it appears to have been engraved before being pinned to the rifle or, was at some time re-pinned.  So, am wondering if the inlays were typicaly engraved before or after being let into the stock.  Did they possibly have a stock of inlays on hand either engraved in their own shop or by another?

[flintriflesmith]

Looks to me like the pins in the thumbpiece are first work and those in the cheek inlay are later replacements. If so the original silver pins in the cheek inlay probably had the engraving running right through the pin heads.

To answer the bigger question of whether inlays were engraved before being pinned in place depends on school, period, and the individual maker. Same is true of patchboxes--some were engraved off the gun and some on the gun.

Gary

[smart dog]

Hi Mike,
Gary's answer is dead on with respect to originals.  I asked myself the same question when I was developing my engraving skills.  To address the problem I asked myself a simple question: what if I screw up the engraving?  Certainly, a detached inlay is a lot easier to redo than one permanently attached to a gun.  Some inlays that are severely shaped or curved to conform to the gunstock probably should be engraved in place.  However, I think most inlays can be engraved before final mounting.  They can be fitted, shaped to the stock, and then removed for engraving and polishing.  Then they are permantly fixed on the gun and pins carefully filed off and heads polished.  Detached inlays are also easier to spin in a vise to engrave curved borders and scrolls. When well done, they are also a testament to your inletting skills because a good inlet will be tight but not have shards of wood to catch the inlay and splinter off.  Some folks fit a tight inlay by cutting the inlet and then hammering the inlay in.  You cannot do that if you want to remove the inlay for engraving.  The inlet must be clean.  While developing my engraving skills, I almost always engraved inlays before final mounting; however, now that I have confidence in my engraving skills I often engrave some of them when in place on the gun.

dave

[Jerry V Lape]

It is interesting that the pins in both the patchbox and cheekpiece seem to be the same form and not filed flush - but the Thumbpiece pins are filed flush.  Could it be the thumbpiece is a later addition done by a different hand and the others were original on inlays engraved before installation?  Maybe a later owner added the Masonic emblem thumb piece?

[Acer Saccharum]

I believe Jacob Kuntz had this patchbox engraved off the gun, but better than that, I believe he engraved the design on sheet brass, THEN cut the patchbox parts out!

Look at some of the cuts along the borders of the finial, they go off the brass, and then come back on again. It is not possible to get near the edge without the graver going off into space.


photo by TC, used by courtesy of the Met.

[rich pierce]

That's crazy talk.  Just kidding- a genius like Kuntz would do somehting like that.

[Acer Saccharum]

Rupp and Kuntz have so many similarities in their style. Kuntz was a silversmith, perhaps doing the engraving for Rupp. Did Rupp UPS the patchboxes to Kuntz, who engraved and sent back? Or did Rupp just buy ready to install patchboxes from Kuntz? I also wonder: did Rupp stock rifles up for Kuntz to decorate? Once he moved to Philly, his style changed. Maybe he found someone else to stock for him?

Not intended as blasphemy, but as a conversation provoker.

Oh, $#@*, off topic again.

[Jim Kibler]

That's good stuff Tom.  By engraving first, Kuntz didn't have to worry about the box outline working with the engraved design.  For a complicated pattern such as this, that would be a big advantage.  It would also, likely, be easier to file to an engraved line than to engrave a line border around an already established edge.  Especially if working fast as it appears Kuntz was doing.  Thanks for pointing this out!

[Dphariss]

The parts on the percussion rifle may have been purchased engraved.
In fact some Colonial rifle parts were likely engraved when the maker got the parts.

Dan

[Acer Saccharum]

Dan, I think that you are correct about the perc rifle parts. I think the cheekpiece was engraved and then installed. I suspect you could buy them like this from the gun supply stores.

I also agree on the pre-engraved parts trade. English and German hardware was imported already engraved, ready to be installed. Imagine the time savings? Pre-engraved hardware would be an asset if you weren't able to engrave very well, you could offer your customers engraved guns. This might help explain why on some guns some of the parts are well engraved and some are blank, or engraved by a less skiled hand.

[Acer Saccharum]

I had to go back and look at the cheekpiece art, and then try to see what the patchbox engraving looked like. It's hard to determine, because both are quite folksey. Without a good closeup of the engravings, I can't tell if it's the same hand or not.

I have a thought. 

a few moments pass by......

I pulled the photos out and zoomed in on them. When I look at the side plate border and leaf shadings, the cuts are pretty close to the cheekpiece border and feather shadings. At the moment I lean toward the same hand that did the sideplate did the cheek inlay.

[Don Getz]

One problem I can see if you use pre-engraved inlays.   Whenever I do an inlay, I will get it "close" to the level of the wood, then file or sand it flush.   If it is pre-engraved this creates problems since you will be removing a portion of the engraving, but,
on the other hand, I'm not much of an engraver.   On some of the patch boxes that I have engraved, I did them "in place",  or
after it was installed on the wood................Don

[Acer Saccharum]

Don, I agree with you. It's much easier to install, file flush, and engrave in place. But this is a general statement, for it depends on the design and the intensity of the engraving.

Looking at the Kuntz rifle's patchbox, many of those curves could not be cut smoothly if you could not spin the work, or walk around it. This is MUCH easier to engrave successfully out of the stock.

The metal Kuntz used is very thin. You would not have enough metal to file it flush without the high spots becoming dangerously thin. Over time, I think the finial has lifted, finish and dirt has gotten underneath.  But I do not believe it was EVER inlayed completely flush. It is easier to partially inlay it, and minor variations in height will not be noticed. Try to get the brass completely smooth and flush with the wood, and you will drive yourself mad. (ask Taylor)

Note how the finial overlaps the sidepiece with little consideration for the design. The scroll on the finial is clipped but it is not continued onto the sidepiece, which convinces me further that the pieces were engraved first, then installed.

The finial does not appear to have much of an ilet under it, although the side piece is pretty flush. I know the finial has be off this gun, so maybe that is the reason for it's raised look.

[D. Taylor Sapergia]

I agree with Tom, that Kuntz engraved his inlays off the rifle, and then set them into their inlay beds.  I suspect that he completed his inly work first because I cannot imagine trying to get wood and brass close to the same curve and depth with engraving already finished.  Especially since he used such thin (.032") brass.  I used 1/32" brass on my Kuntz styled rifle too, just to be PC, but I can tell you that's the last time for that!  There is no room for error in any of the aspects of inlaying a large piece with brass that thin, for my ability anyway.  As it was, I inlayed completely, nailed it down, polished it, and then engraved right on the rifle.
On other rifles, when the inlay is 1/16" thick, I often inlay the piece, then pop it out, glue it to a mound of Bondo on a small wooden block and engrave it in my vise.  Thanks Jerry H.  The patchbox on my Chambers Virginia (2 piece) comes to mind. 

[Jim Kibler]

This is just speculation, but here's a thought.  I'm not sure the standard durign the flint period was perfectly flush inlays like some prefer today.  In looking at originals, the patina and wear may mask what would be perceived as mistakes in the inletting today.  Also I'm not totally convinced the inlays being proud of the stock surface is entirely due to shrinkage as many suggest.  Perhaps they were inletted slightly proud of the wood surface.  If this were the case, variations in inletting depth wouldn't be as noticable compared to a situation where you were trying to acheive a flush fit.  I get the feeling that smooth filed and sanded inlays is more of a later percussion characteristic.  Now, I'm sure many will disagree with this, but it's something to think about. 

[Acer Saccharum]

I agree with you, Jim. I have been thinking along these lines, but never really had it in the forefront of my mind. Topics like this help bring this stuff out.

[Pete G.]

Due to my skillful use of mistakes.........I have occasionally inlet an inlay that stood slightly proud on one part and was slightly recessed in another. The part standing slightly proud is no big deal, but the slightly recessed is an eyesore. Most of the time it all evens out with filing, but I think that Jim's observation has merit.

[Dphariss]

This is just speculation, but here's a thought.  I'm not sure the standard durign the flint period was perfectly flush inlays like some prefer today.  In looking at originals, the patina and wear may mask what would be perceived as mistakes in the inletting today.  Also I'm not totally convinced the inlays being proud of the stock surface is entirely due to shrinkage as many suggest.  Perhaps they were inletted slightly proud of the wood surface.  If this were the case, variations in inletting depth wouldn't be as noticable compared to a situation where you were trying to acheive a flush fit.  I get the feeling that smooth filed and sanded inlays is more of a later percussion characteristic.  Now, I'm sure many will disagree with this, but it's something to think about. 

I think they were put in flush for the most part. But this is going to depend on the standards the stocker sets for himself.
Leaving them high makes the whole thing seem 1/2 done.

Dan

[Acer Saccharum]

Dan, I think the flushness of the inlays is right for some gun styles and periods, but not for others. I believe it certainly is the accepted 'norm' for contemporary work. This is what we have been accustomed to assume is correct, as contemporary builders. Many things we assume are 'right' are often repetitions of other contemporary work. There is nothing wrong with that, it's how style of work and design evolves within this longrifle culture. It's how the guns evolved and developed back in the day. Working for a master, you pick up his style. Looking at other men's work, you absorb details you wish to incorporate.

That said, to truly understand what building was back in the day, the smith of today MUST study original work whenever possible. One of the beauties of the web is that we get to view photos of original work and get to discuss it on line. Not as good as holding the gun in your hands, nor having an original for a bench copy, but it's a far cry from what was available to us out in the boonies in the 1970's.

This appears to be not inlet fully flush, from birth. This looks almost like applied decoration, rather than inlaid.

Note the profuse nailing of the inlay material. Probably needed to make the brass lay down. Got a high spot? put in another nail. You do not see this kind of treatment today. There is a certain casual approach taken by Kuntz to get the effect he wanted without resorting to a thick inlay that must be painstakingly formed and fitted to the wood.

Also note the nails going thru the middle of the inlay and the screw on the forward extension of the guard,. The ramrod hole must be to one side of the fasteners, or the rod ain't coming out of the hole!


A view of the finial. Looks raised off the wood. I think much of the raised effect is due to the inlay lifting and then dirt and oils getting underneath the finial.


A closer look. The eagle appears very nearly flush. I imagine that originally the parts were not inletted any deeper than this, slightly proud of the surface. Note the area inside the eagle's bill is brass that has been cut down and blackened, rather than cutting the contour out and inletting. Kuntz certainly made an effort to simplify the inletting.


Photos by TC, and used with permission from The Metropolitan Museum for educational purposes. Not to be published or printed without permission from the Met.

[Acer Saccharum]

Oh, $#@*, my last post is really, really off topic.

Sorry. T

[Tom Currie]

Tom, I would say that maybe the topic is just evolving a bit. Much in is same that that out understanding of was was accepted practice was 200 years ago evolves. I would say if Kuntz' work was accepted as high end work , we would have to accept that it would not have been questioned by his 18th century clients. We live in a much more exacting world today, we've talked about 20th century expectations for quality before, maybe that "layered or applied " look created a feeling of depth or dimension to his work. An excellent post .

[Acer Saccharum]

Tom, I believe it has everything to do with expectations and what is acceptable as standard high grade work. These qualities are intimately tied to the time period. What flew as 'the best' 200 yrs ago, would be crude in many ways when compared to the technical perfection we have achieved today.

But when you look at the soul of this Kuntz rifle, ah, it a rare bird that can exceed this piece for sheer beauty and grace. Kuntz nailed those attributes right on the head. It's the artistry that is so compelling on this gun. Yes, you can pick it apart on technicalities, but you cannot touch it for its creative mastery.

As always, in my 'umble opinion.

Tom

[Dave B]

Tom,
We really need you to focus and stay on track. So while we are off track..... I have been amazed at how thin the inlay metal is on many of the originals I have seen. I have gone to using thinner metal on my last couple of projects and its very difficult to get the stuff to stay down. I have two original rifles that use this thin inlay approach and the inlets on one who's inlays have gone away are extremely shallow and were never flush even when new it would seem. That being said it is possible that the wood shrinkage could account for a portion of what we are seeing. The nails on the first photo may indicate it was engraved off the  the rifle no cuts across the nail heads the other is an example of how not to restore the front end of a rifle. I wanted to stick with the theme of getting off track at the end of our posts






This is a better photo of the opposit side of the inlay that has been left hanging with out wood under it.

[Brian]

Not off topic at all Tom.  Great post, and fantastic pictures.  That should be a tutorial.  Not because it shows "how" to do something, but because it so perfectly illustrates (in detail) how the old masters worked and thought - how they perceived their work.

[Acer Saccharum]

Brian, I don't know how the old guys thought, but I can see what they did by the details in their work. Some of their work methods  are obvious, and others are not.

Look at the photo below. The nail heads are engraved. They look like they have backed out and then have worn round. From this picture it's hard to tell, if not impossible, if the nails were set into a pre-engraved inlay, or the inlay was engraved once it was in place. Since it's not obvious from this photo, I think we have to look at other areas where there might be some clues to the answer. The nail in the wingtip certainly looks like the nail was entirely flush when engraved, but has now backed out.
 

this post is making an effort to get back on topic.