I probably missing something here. Fractal computations on a computer might use.000001mm as a base, my Euclid geometry might use an integer size of.0001mm.
This is true, but we can always use a scaling factor. Fractals
operate in 0 to 1 region. To make practical use, we have to scale it
to whatever is applicable.
Leonid Surpin
Here’s how I see a lot of these arguments about CAD/CAM versus
handmade and four vs. six prongs (and a lot of the related types of
arguments). Making jewelry is a lot like cooking. Everyone starts
with similar types of ingredients (exotic foods could be compared to
lesser known gems and tomatos, perhaps, could be compared to
diamonds) and pretty much the same tools (CAD/CAM equals a cuisinart,
handmade equals a knife). Now there are “classic” ways of making most
dishes, like bouillabaisse for example. Classically it’s made with
leeks, fennel, celery and some herbs, fishstock, some tomatoes,
clams, fish and scallops with toasted French bread on top. Some
cooks, when they want to make bouillabaisse, will make it just that
way. However, some who are a little more adventurous, might throw in
some lobster, or change the toasted bread to a brioche. Some might
change all of the base ingredients, leave out the tomatoes, throw in
some other vegetables. Some might use a cusinart to prepare all of
the ingredients. Some might want it a little chunkier and will use a
knife. Ultimately it really doesn’t matter. Someone who doesn’t want
a non classical dish won’t order it. Someone who likes it chunkier
will try a different restaurant where they use knives instead of
machines. There will always be those people who say bouillabaisse is
bouillabaisse and has to be prepared THIS way. But then there are
others who throw caution to the winds and will try it in just about
any form. So some people want to make jewelry in the “classical” way.
Some want to make jewelry in a more modern fashion. Some just throw
out all of the rules and have some fun. No one is right or wrong.
They’re all just different approaches to the medium. As far as the
bouillabaisse goes, as long as it doesn’t kill you (and the
ingredients are properly disclosed), and you enjoy it, then who gives
a hoot. Same goes with the jewels, in my book. As long as it doesn’t
kill (or hurt) you, the ingredients are properly disclosed and you
enjoy it then who gives a hoot.
Daniel R. Spirer, G.G.
Daniel R. Spirer Jewelers, LLC
Margie,
It can no more make a beginner or inept designer a great one than you can by giving those same individuals a textbook and set of carving tools. No matter how advanced the tools they are still tools and they will require people like you with your artistic sensibilities and skill to operate them to give quality results.
As James Binnion pointed out, it’s possible to digitally sculpt in
great detail with a CAD program. His reference to the Z-Brush gallery
offers some good examples.
ArtCAM also has that potential and it’s happening right now for some
jewelry designers.
Some examples:
OK, I’ll admit the sound track is sort of ironic 
http://tinyurl.com/4yelx
I’ve just discovered a demo version of ArtCAM Express.
It seems the AC Express demo has drawing tools but doesn’t include
ArtCAM relief tools to make models. It’s intended use is to view some
examples which are also available for download. Just to note, the
working version of AC Express doesn’t have the capability toeasily
making rings, which JewelSmith does quite well.
To expand upon what James said, just as hand carving an exquisite
design takes a certain level of manual dexterity and artistic talent,
digital sculpture also requires skill; the difference being you’re
working with a mouse, a pressure sensitive pen tablet or the full 3d
tactile feedback of a haptic arm device, instead of traditional hand
tools.
Another difference is that if you don’t like what you’ve done in a
CAD program, you can hit “undo” and try a new approach. Working with
a 3D visual representation of a design idea and exploring a myriad of
variations in a relatively short period of time is a great
advantage… you can rotate and view a model on screen from all
angles and perspectives…and wax is cheap.
Say you cut a model on a CNC machine and it turns out that it’s not
exactly what you had in mind. All that’s lost is a few hours of
design and prototyping time, as opposed to using up precious
materials while spending a few days at the bench.
Re: exploring design ideas in a CAD program, the other day I took a
short test based on Howard Gardner’s examination of multiple
intelligences and learning styles.
I scored the highest in Visual and Kinesthetics, meaning I learn and
process nformation best by seeing, moving, doing and touching. So
it’s no wonder I gravitated towards a career that allows me to learn
and work in that manner…I just thought this was an interesting
thing!
As far as enjoying design work in a CAD environment, it may not be
for everyone, but you’d be surprised how addictive it can be once you
experience the creative potential and real-world results.
In the interest of full disclosure, I work with ModelMaster as a
consultant but I use a variety of 3d design programs and find them
all useful to my work and creative process.
Jesse Kaufman
http://jdkjewelry3d.blogspot.com
Classically it's made with leeks, fennel, celery and some herbs, fishstock, some tomatoes, clams, fish and scallops with toasted French bread on top.
We’ll be by around 7:00pm, Daniel - I think a nice Sauvignon Blanc
would go well - we’ll bring a good one. It’s my understanding that
classic bouillabaise has the bread on the bottom of the bowl, but
who cares?
I couldn’t agree more with Daniel’s point, though. Especially in the
“4 prong setting” thread, it’s important to remember that this is a
public forum, and thousands of people are reading it. I don’t really
have the faintest idea, but I wouldn’t be surprised if there are a
few hundred (if not thousand) lurkers for every poster. Whenever
somebody stands up and says, “The way I think things should be done
is actually the rule”, then I, for one, must protest. CAD has it’s
place - a friend of mine only makes shared prong rings, and does
quite well at it. Good setting is good setting, whether it’s 4, 6, 8
or 25 prongs…And I made a pretty decent bouillabaise once -
cost around $60 just in ingredients…
It's my understanding that classic bouillabaise has the bread on the bottom of the bowl, but who cares?
See, now there’s the problem. So many of the places I go to eat at
don’t do it completely classically and the bread has been on the
top. I guess, maybe they shouldn’t call it bouillabaisse then. {-;
John, I’m headed your way in January. Maybe I’ll come by and try your
bouillabaisse!!!
Daniel R. Spirer, G.G.
Daniel R. Spirer Jewelers, LLC