Shiny Instruments


Recommended Posts

I was looking through the inventory of a dealer and noticed all his instruments have some sort of shine around it. It does not look like french polish and I have attached a picture of a  Paul Blanchard in his inventory as an example. Never seen another Blanchard that looks like this. Can some luthier let me know what could be the solution or method he could be using to get his instruments to look like this ?

paul-blanchard-violin_f.jpg

paul-blanchard-violin.1_f.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Don Noon said:

A lot of the look in the photos I think comes from whaterver it is in the background that's reflecting off of the top.  

Yes, the lighting is a mess, but... we wouldn't see that much detail in the reflected scene if the finish weren't so glossy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

+carnauba wax finish on French polish..  for "mirror like" shinning. Especially wax finish products for guitars, make the surface like that. Nothing new. Very nice if you look a palisandre guitar back like that. With violins, there is always a question left unanswered. Or maybe 2 questions >too much glossy? Too much shellac? 

Shellac looses the brightness after some days of application (especially the waxed shellac). Bleached and dewaxed have better results. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, martin swan said:

I would say that it's generally better to post a link rather than copy the image, since that predicates transparency and also allows the owner of the photos to remain in control of them.

Posting a link will take it to a dealer site and any negative commentaries here might impact his business. The question was purely to understand a technique

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Yogic said:

Posting a link will take it to a dealer site and any negative commentaries here might impact his business. The question was purely to understand a technique

The other problem  with links is that they change over time and a lot of the good information on discussion boards like this become useless as the images disappear. 

2 hours ago, rudall said:

Oh I see. So if I take your car for my own use, not intending to sell it, then that’s ok?

Ever heard of copyright? Maybe the owner of the photos does not want them shared on the internet. 

With respect, the owners of the picture have already put them up on the net for everyone  see.  Yogic had a valid question to ask, and chose not to identify the dealer. I would agree with Rue that this is fair use of the image. @rudall seems to be having a bit of a grumpy afternoon. 

3 hours ago, martin swan said:

If that's meant to be a Blanchard I think the finish is the least of its problems ...

...and this is probably why a link would not have been appropriate

@BassClef would post a link to the  item he was asking about, and then add snips from the website to ensure the photographic information saved along with the discussion. This approach generally has much merit, but in a case like this where the question was simply about finish one might posit that not to include a link was the correct decision.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Yogic said:

Posting a link will take it to a dealer site and any negative commentaries here might impact his business. The question was purely to understand a technique

Seems a strange logic to me. The dealer has a web site with pictures on it in order to gain publicity and promote business.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, matesic said:

Seems a strange logic to me. The dealer has a web site with pictures on it in order to gain publicity and promote business.

Actually, not necessarily. Posting pictures on a website for discussion by anonymous posters without permission can be used nefariously.

For example, a dealer or individual could anonymously post a picture of a competitor's violin, and then anonymously trash it, erroneously question its authenticity, dispute the price, and/or impugn the seller's credibility. Comments can also be posted by well-intentioned users who pass judgements on instruments without the knowledge or experience to do so. Once posted, real material harm can be done to both the disparaged dealer's reputation and the value of the instrument.

The internet is forever.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In this particular case I think it's impossible to discuss the question posed without 1. seeing other photos using the same alleged polishing technique and 2. knowing if this is actually being sold as a Blanchard.

If is not being sold as a Blanchard then one answer to the OP's question might be that the violin just looks like that :D

The OP's question and the posting of an unidentified photo in this context sets off some alarm bells for me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, GeorgeH said:

Actually, not necessarily. Posting pictures on a website for discussion by anonymous posters without permission can be used nefariously.

For example, a dealer or individual could anonymously post a picture of a competitor's violin, and then anonymously trash it, erroneously question its authenticity, dispute the price, and/or impugn the seller's credibility. Comments can also be posted by well-intentioned users who pass judgements on instruments without the knowledge or experience to do so. Once posted, real material harm can be done to both the disparaged dealer's reputation and the value of the instrument.

The internet is forever.

It was Yogic's ethical doubts about sharing a link that struck me as illogical. Isn't that what the internet is for?

Link to post
Share on other sites

By the way, the intention of my previous post is not to impact anyone's business positively or negatively, but to show that copying photos from a dealer's website and posting them on a forum without a link is not the best way to 'not identify' the dealer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just goes to show that there is a broad range of opinions here and not all posts are safe from criticism. For instance if you were NOT a luthier and you posted photos of your violin repair work here....I can only imagine the response. However you might also learn a thing or two, the hard way. Anyway, just a little levity.

Link to post
Share on other sites

FWIW - I wish everyone would just get in the habit of adding an identifier, such as a name, or a watermark to a photo.  It's not hard to do, and I'm sure if became standard practice, some IT genius could find an even better way to do it.

That won't keep someone from editing the identifier out, if they really wanted to, but it would reduce issues, help with ID if theft does occur (still be easy to compare the two photos, even if one was cropped to remove the ID), etc.

 

20201117_Breakfast.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.