If the point of the exercise is to determine if there is a marked difference in the photos to justify the expense of the new camera as a tool to better show your work, I for one do not see enough difference to fulfill that objective.

The framing and distance seem a little different and I don't know if that accounts for the color difference, or if you care about the color difference.

You already have two reasons why returning the new one makes sense; are there two or more reasons for keeping the new one that make sense?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Talking to my wife, whose opinion weighs as much as 2 of mine or yours ;) , we notice that the depth of field on the focus is much better in #2. The detail in the ukulele's back, which should be the center of the shot, is finer in #2, and whether more accurate or not, the coloration in #2 seems more interesting to me.

My goal in taking these picture is to accurately represent my work, which either can do, and also to make the photos seductive to my audience. I am currently thinking that the new camera is the better tool overall, but have till end of day on the 27th to change my mind. Looking at eBay my old camera seems to be worth between 200 and 350, which would lessen the pain.

Meanwhile, back at the bench, I have put on the 3rd quarter of the binding.

http://mojoluthier.com/LP17/AcaciaUke/3rdquarter1.jpg

http://mojoluthier.com/LP17/AcaciaUke/3rdquarter2.jpg

http://mojoluthier.com/LP17/AcaciaUke/3rdquarter3.jpg

(a6000 and "new" editor)

I think the first pic has a better DOF as compared to the second. Compare the upper bout to the LB of the first pic and compare the UB to the LB of the second. The second pic looks more sharp as the exposure is brighter. I think equalizing the brightness in both and you would be hard pressed to say which is the better camera.

Bruce, in regards to the camera decision, are you shooting in auto mode or manual? And I'm assuming they are different lenses?

Cameras are in the pictures.

http://mojoluthier.com/LP17/AcaciaUke/1stquartera.jpg

http://mojoluthier.com/LP17/AcaciaUke/1stquarterb.jpg

Yes, I am shooting in full automatic. Both cameras have full manual and everything in between. The a6000 has quite a few more auto enhancement features, though I rarely dabble in such. Yes, different lenses, as pictured. The reason the frames are different is that one camera has a 50mm minimum and the other is 55mm, and I closed them both up. Unless I am shooting on a tripod, which I did not in this case, I have found the automatic setting works well for my purpose on virtually all modern cameras. The newer camera has a vastly more complex (and quicker) focusing algorithm, and is 20 something piggymixels instead of a mere 14. Of course I try to compress these images down to 50k, so that doesn't make the difference it might.

Binding's done, and I've glued on the fingerboard this morning:

http://mojoluthier.com/LP17/AcaciaUke/UkeFBgoeson1.jpg

http://mojoluthier.com/LP17/AcaciaUke/Ukegraft.jpg

I would encourage equal and optimum set ups when comparing results.

Tripod makes a huge difference in detail shots.

The other point of possible interest is being aware that individual monitors will vary in their color settings , and provide a nuanced version of reality. This may or may not important.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks for your assistance with the CameraDilemma, I have decided that I cannot rationalize the expense with the results. The results are not always superior, and even when they are, it required very close comparison. If i thought the difference would sell even one guitar, it would be worth it, but I doubt that would be the case.

Here are some NEX 5 generated pictures of the Ukulele with its sealer coats on. NOW you can probably see that is is a close relative of Koa acacia:

http://mojoluthier.com/LP17/AcaciaUke/NEXfront1.jpg

http://mojoluthier.com/LP17/AcaciaUke/NEXback1.jpg

I have ordered a set of Gotoh 4-1 planetary geared tuners.
http://mojoluthier.com/LP17/AcaciaUke/NEXheadfront.jpg

That's beautiful Bruce. I especially like the neck to body junction on the back. Great aesthetic and craftsmanship.

Beautiful Bruce! The Acacia really comes alive.

FT-000-C in Pernambuco and Italian spruce
 

This morning I went out and got what I expect to be the final 20 gallons of propane needed to keep my shop warm for what is left of the so-called winter here in California. Then I put the second coat of varnish onto the Concert Uke. In a few minutes a fellow is coming by to return one of the two guitars I loaned him a couple of weeks ago and settle up on the other. Always a good day when that happens!

But the real news is I am starting another commission today.

This will be my 000 guitar with a cutaway and a slothead rendered in my best Pernambuco and a fine set of Martin Guhl AAA German spruce. The customer visited the shop a few weeks ago and we spent a lovely afternoon working out the details and hand picking the materials from my woodlocker. We also picked the binding material, which will be the last of my (probable) D. camatillo.

Here is a photo just before I actually start the "Work":

http://mojoluthier.com/LP17/267P/chosen.jpg

If there were such a thing as "AAAA", it might look like this:
http://mojoluthier.com/LP17/267P/AAAA.jpg

Initially, I was not enamored with the looks of Pernambuco.

But after watching your build threads of guitars where you've used it, I've really come around. You've built some incredible instruments with it over the years--I hope I get to try one of your Pernambuco guitars in the future.

That is a beautiful specimen of tonewood, Bruce!

Forgetting Pernambuco's color (which I happen to really like), it is AMAZING tonally and sounds like no other tonewood that I have experienced. In Bruce's hands, it has a clarity to its timbre, but adds perfectly balanced supportive overtones throughout all registers. Below is the L00 Bruce made for me back in '014 before and after finishing.

http://i1238.photobucket.com/albums/...ps97f0hato.jpg

I like the look of that Pernambuco…
 

… and will confess to being the one who picked it out with Bruce.

I had a short trip out to the Bay Area and had a half day where I was able to come up to the workshop. It was fun to talk to Bruce, play his instruments and see his various toys. We have overlapping interests in a few of life’s cubbyholes including guitars and human powered bikes. I am sure I would share Bruce’s interest in internal combustion engine powered bikes and that is why I don’t ride them.

Being the erudite craftsman that he is Bruce can doubtless describe the tap of the top as if you were there yourself. I will simply offer: that was one resonate piece of wood.

Needless to say: I will be following this thread ;)

I have liked the look of Pernambuco the first time I saw it. From the look of the set you picked out, dare I say it, it looks Master Grade to me.

I liked pernambuco before I'd ever seen it, just because everything I knew about it screamed "Great Tonewood". It took me 3 years to find my first set, which I have not yet used, and then it started coming as fast as I could afford it. The stuff is expensive; over twice the cost to me of BRW for the best stuff like I am using here.

Here are some shots of today's position on the current build:

http://mojoluthier.com/LP17/267P/backstrip.jpg

http://mojoluthier.com/LP17/267P/backstrip2.jpg

http://mojoluthier.com/LP17/267P/rosette1.jpg

I draw my bracing uniquely for each instrument, w/o patterns or templates. The idea it that I allow myself faster growth by promoting intuitive progress with each recreation. It is what I call the "art process", and I am very glad I threw myself off this particular precipice low those many years ago (about 20).
http://mojoluthier.com/LP17/267P/bracingpattern.jpg

I find this very interesting. I would have assumed that for a given size/shape, that one would strive for repeatability in the placement and then "tune" by the bracing itself. So how do you decide the pattern? Is it based on the tapping results of the soundboard or some other intuitive factor? Do you know if other luthiers follow this? Thanks.

I am not into repeatability, I am into incremental improvement. Repeatability is essential for the factory approach, I seek mastery and that is the other end of the spectrum.

I choose to believe that my understanding of the functional performance of a guitar educates my eye by appearing to be beautiful (form follows function), and that I can manipulate and improve a guitars performance by increasing its subjective aesthetics (function follows form). I gave myself over to this approach to mastery many years ago, and have been harvesting the fruit ever since.

I have never heard of another guitar luthier approaching the work from the same angle as intentionally as I do, but I believe many handbuilders incorporate this kind of "tool", whether they know it or not. My first conscious move in this direction was when I read about Violin luthier Guarneri del Gesu's use of paper templates. He reportedly said he used paper because they wore out after several uses requiring him to to recreate the templates on a regular basis and therefore rethink his designs. I consider him, or his myth, to be my ongoing inspiration.

Myth or not... I love that idea/story of using paper templates to force ongoing recreation and avoid stagnation.

Very insightful - thanks.

I wanted to send this pic to Jmat, but email's been down all day so I'm posting it here.

http://mojoluthier.com/LP17/267P/1sttier.jpg

The brace stock started out 11/16" high, which it is still close to the X and in the middle of the upper transverse, but it is now 7/16 at the peak south of the scallop, and 7/32" at the depth of the scallop. I measured the work rather than working to the measurements. I intend the top itself to be slightly sturdier than my last 000, which was the one I made for Schoenberg to take to the Santa Barbara event last October, but the braces are intended to be slightly looser. My goal is a similarly sensitive guitar, but with a bit more solidity, or "wood", or focus; not sure of the words, but I know what I'm after. I may take another swipe out of the scallop.

Here is my all but completed top for the new 000 pernambuco. The un-finished brace is glued in, and is 11/16" tall, which can give some perspective for the rest if any of you are inclined to think about it.
http://mojoluthier.com/LP17/267P/3rdtier2.jpg

Another perspective, if not as sharp:
http://mojoluthier.com/LP17/267P/3rdtier1.jpg

Hi Bruce - congealing nicely from the bits of wood we tapped a prodded!

- John

Looking great as usual Bruce.
If you don't mind sharing, When you are shaping your braces, do you go totally by feel on flexing or do you shoot for a certain deflection. This is one of the parts of building that I struggle with. Knowing just how far I can take the main braces down without going too far.
Travis

I brace in three tiers, and shape each tier before moving on to the next. If I feel I went a little too far, there is some recovery available in the next tier. At each stage I remove enough material from the braces to "free" the top. I doubt I could verbally quantify what I mean by that, though possibly I could demonstrate it if you were observing. Still, it is fifty years of experience speaking to you, and there may not be a short cut.

If you missed my explanation of "the top as a membrane", this is a good time to pick it up.

All the finish is on the Uke, and I have test fit the tuners. Having decided to stay with my "old" camera, it makes sense to me to more seriously explore its capabilities. These two pictures were shot using aperture priority and tweaking the focus by eye, a feature I had suspected existed, but only now found out where it is hidden. I hope to show improvement in my photog skills in short order.

http://mojoluthier.com/LP17/AcaciaUke/tuners3.jpg

These are Gotoh's 4-1 planetary Uke tuners. The binding, the headplate, and the fingerboard are Bocote'.
http://mojoluthier.com/LP17/AcaciaUke/tuners2.jpg