Legal definition of hand made

Of course my argument is ridiculous. That is the point. I apply the
same rigid logic to all processes that some use against casting a
hand carved wax. If my argument is ridiculous, then the argument
against casting is suspect.

There are 6 simple machines out of which all compound machines are
made. There is the inclined plane, the wedge, the screw, the lever,
the pulley, and the wheel and axle. A file is a compound machine. It
is a lever that is covered with a multitude of wedges. The size of
the wedges on your files determines the finish of your product. You
can’t make a fine finish with a rough file.

It is unfair or deceptive to represent, directly or by implication,
that any industry product is handmade or hand-wrought unless the
entire shaping and forming of such product from raw materials and
its finishing and decoration were accomplished by hand labor and
manually-controlled methods which permit the maker to control and
vary the construction, shape, design, and finish of each part of
each individual product.

Here, I must give credit to Nealthejeweler for correcting me. Raw
materials are exempted so wire and sheet do not have to be handmade
to make handmade jewelry.

Notice also that construction, shape, design AND finish must be
manually controlled. The “and” means that if everything except for
one aspect is manually controlled, it is not handmade. Of course,
when you use a file, your hands are not able to control the finish of
your work, the design of the file does.

For those who say that the interpretation of this law has been
determined as a “term of art” by precedent. There is no precedent if
no one has been prosecuted under this law. If anybody knows of a
prosecution of this law, please identify it.

The legal issue is not if there is a significant hand labor and
manual control, the issue is if the hands and not a machine
determined the construction, shape, design and finish. I used the
example of a millgrain, which makes a line of tiny bumps. Your hands
determine exactly where the line is placed. However the actual
positioning of each bump on the line is not determined by your hands.
That is done by the chance positioning of the tiny wheel when you
place it against your work. In other words, it is determined by the
tool (i.e. machine).

Really, my arguments are ridiculous because they are based on tiny,
petty facts. They ignore the overarching truth of the matter. The
truth has to do with the perceptions of our customers.

It has been said that casting a handmade wax does not produce
handmade jewelry because during the casting process, the flow of the
metal is not controlled by hand. But consider, the shape of the
casting was determined by the shape of the mold. The shape of the
mold was determined by the shape of the wax. Finally the shape of the
wax was determined by a handmade process. In other words, the shaping
of the metal during casting is not done by hand, but the shape of the
cast product is determined by a handmade process. It is interesting
that a process that might not be manually controlled produces a
product which has a shape that was determined by a handmade process.

Still, the important fact is simple: If you show a customer how you
hand carve a wax, invest it, cast it and finish it, the customer
will almost certainly conclude that it is handmade. If you show the
customer a wax that was one of a thousand that was pulled from a
rubber mold, the customer may conclude that the final product was not
handmade.

I think that this issue is like music... The same difference
between hearing an orchestra in a live concert and hearing a
reproduction of it even in the best amplifying systems. Some of Us
can argue that is the same, or even that the reproduction is
cleaner, mixed, mastered or what ever 
This is very good analogy, probably the best so far. I wish I
could come up with that" 

Actually its not a good analogy for the direction of this
discussion. I think everyone on both sides would agree that the
duplication of an original work would require molding or digitising
and be excepted from the “handmade” distinction. Compareing an
original and the reproduction of an original is not whats being
discussed. The method by which an original is made and defined is. All
through the course of this topic I’ve been trying to remember if
I’ve ever called what I do “handmade”. I’m 99.9% sure its never
happened, moreover I’ve never been asked to “handmake” anything. I am
however asked to make one of a kind or unique all the time, its
almost all I do. The vast majority of customers care about the
result, not the methodology. My point is, if you’r at the bench to
make money this “handmade/not handmade” distinction will probably
never come up.

Bil Peebles
www.williamjosephdesigns.com

Interesting that you finally admit that there are some things that
can't be done by hand ;-) 

It is a bit simplistic to use a division - made by machine and made
by hand. When it comes to precision lathe techniques both are
blends. Every lathe have tolerances larger then required precision.
Even the most expensive swiss lathes cannot provide with enough
precision for high end watchmaking, and it becomes up to the operator
to compensate for it. Proper sharpening of tools becomes of paramount
importance and it is done by hand. So it is hard to separate one from
another in this case.

Leonid Surpin

If I remember correctly, I read many years ago…

“Hand Made” made by hand with no mechanical means.
“Hand Wrought” made by hand along with mechanical means.

Or something similar?

Of course, when you use a file, your hands are not able to control
the finish of your work, the design of the file does 

I disagree. Anyone who has wielded a file long enough can get very
different finishes out of it. The platinumizers’ trick of circular
motion with a file comes to mind. Long swooping strokes gives you a
bright, linear look that in platinum is tough to further polish.
Circular motion gives a foggy look that can be further refined
without a big hassle, Or it can be left as is, no one would buy it
but that’s a different matter. You can use the flat, you can use the
edge, you can use the corner…you might even be slick and draw the
file sideways or texture your piece with repeated blows of the
tang…all of which is under manual control of the craftsperson using
hand labor and each of which will yield a different result. Heck, you
can even grab a different file, I don’t believe there is a tool
quantity limitation.

The guidelines do not specify that form, shape and finish be a
direct result of skin on gold. They do specify that results are
manually controlled using hand labor. Its an incredible stretch to
conclude that tools are disallowed. By that parameter nothing is
handmade. If nothing is handmade where is the purpose of legal
guidelines defining such?

If one asserts that one off castings are indeed handmade(with which
I agree within restrictions) please explain how they are made without
tools of any sort? One may have playdoughed the wax with fingers but
it does not get invested and cast and processed without a tool of
some sort.

Calvin,

Read David Pye’s The Nature and Art of Workmanship (ISBN
1-871569-76-1) especially the parts about the “workmanship of risk”
then you will have a better understanding of the issues of why a
casting is not hand made but something that is filed is. It is not
the use of a machine but how much the machine predetermines the
outcome that is relevant. It seems unlikely that we will ever agree
on this subject but Pye has a very elegant description of the
nuances of this.

James Binnion
James Binnion Metal Arts

Leonid,

If one ponders on this exemple, the true meaning of "handmade"
shall be understood. 

Or not at all ! It can actually make it more confusing…

I am not sure that I agree with the logic that a piece that is
carved by hand and cast by the same hand (no mold taken) then
cleaned, soldered and finished again by the same hand is not “hand
made” and that a watch made of only machine milled parts but
assembled by hand qualifies as hand made.

Could the definition of hand made in this country and Europe be a
very Western notion to begin with?

I am not debating the legal definition of “hand made” but the logic
or lack of logic behind it.

Just because a group of empowered white Western males decided that
it was so at some point in time and it stuck because it suited their
economic interests does not necessarily make it the undebatable
universal definition.

Of course I understand the great difficulty and complication of
watch making, the amount of time and highly qualified craftmanship
required. because I have visited and/or worked with some high end
watchmakers in Geneva and la Chaux-de-Fonds in Switzerland. I have a
tremendeous respect and appreciation for watchmakers and admire the
intelligence, patience and dedication required to spend sometimes
more than 5 years of one’s life conceiving and making a complicated
movement. My intention is certainly not to demean this incredible
craft but to show a lack of logic as for the hand made definition
when basically every element is milled or involves the use of a
machine.

If one wants to strictly define hand made, one could argue that
flextshafts, milling machines or other instruments not powered by
hand would disqualify any object from being called such. It would
make more sens except that only some Ancient technique would
qualify. Not so good for most modern jewelers!

I guess one could debate the “hand made” notion and definition
indefinitelyand no one would be right or wrong in the abstract.

Cyrille

Actually its not a good analogy for the direction of this
discussion. 

Au contraire mon ami!

Music analogy is fantastically good. I especially like the metaphor
because it allows us to to come to grips with questions like: what
would you rather listen to - your neighbor practicing violin (live
performance) or cd of Rostropovish playing Bach (reproduction).

Handmade, when done by a master, simply cannot be matched by any
reproduction, but the point of this discussion is that quality of
jewellery should be the overriding factor, and not the method of
manufacturing. That said, to achieve good quality in casting, one
must possess skills to make it from scratch ( handmade ), and round
and round we go.

Leonid Surpin

When my original work is finished, whether it is cast, fabricated,
or a combination of both, it gets my signature on the back, and a
hallmark. I don’t cut the stones, and often don’t set the stones
myself. A potential buyer can examine the piece, and try to determine
how the piece was manufactured, and that is fine. It is still a
signed piece, therefore, it was made by me, by my hands. No gallery I
have ever exhibited in ever had an issue with any production method
used in my work. Has anyone else had problems like this??

Jay Whaley

Can the term ‘Hand Made’ is past it’s use-by date? Perhaps the buying
public are looking for a more detailed description rather than
another sticker with a green tick on it.

Discerning customers know the difference. If the customer is driven
by price then the wild claims by the manufacturer are of more benefit
to the manufacturer’s concience than to the decision made by the
customer. The price-driven customer will buy on price and then use
the wild claims for doubtful justification afterwards. Later on when
they become discerning they will remember and have just a little
antagonism towards the deceiptful. If they never become
discerning…there’s the reason for the wild claims!

Alastair

I’ve been staying out of this one, figuring someone else would
surely quote the book I’m about to. But so far, nothing. So, I’ll jump
right in… In the book SILVERSMITHING by Rupert Finegold and William
Seitz, on page 175, I quote:

HANDWROUGHT VS HANDMADE 

Silversmiths usually stamp one or more of three legally defined
terms on their work (Fig. 18-1). The first is sterling, if the
piece is made of sterling silver. The second and third are
handwrought and handmade. Handwrought means that the piece was
made by hand and no machine other than a polishing machine was
used. The handmade stamp includes pieces made by hand with the
aid of a machine, such as a spinning lathe, for example. A piece
cannot be designated handmade if it was formed entirely by
machine - either stamped out or cast from a mold." 

For what it’s worth, in the beginning of the book, the authors show
the minimum of tools needed, in a studio. There must be a couple
hundred hand tools, included in there are a bunch of files. So I’m
pretty confident files can be used, even when a piece is Handwrought.

I don’t know if it matters or not, but all the pieces I make are
Handwrought. Right down to the clasps, ear wires, jump rings, and
everything else. What would you take the time to make a beautiful
pair of earrings, just to attach them to a pair of sub-par- store
bought ear wires?

Sandra b

P.s. For some reason my posts take 2 days to get to everybody. So
chances are this will post after other people have already addressed
this issue. But just in case, I’m still going to send it. Sb

I am not sure that I agree with the logic that a piece that is
carved by hand and cast by the same hand (no mold taken) then
cleaned, soldered and finished again by the same hand is not "hand
made" and that a watch made of only machine milled parts but
assembled by hand qualifies as hand made. 

I am not a watchmaker, so I leave it to watchmakers to write an
expose on details of the craft. From what little I know, a pass on
milling machine may take 20 seconds, but a setup for the pass could
take several hours. Machines are used, but percentage of time is
miniscule.

Differences between casting and entirely handmade jewellery, that is
something I know. So why the distinction and why I am emphasizing
quality over the distinction. I am going to put aside metallurgical
advantages and the like, wearability, quality of finish, and etc.
Only process versus process:

Let’s take a simple setting which is intended to be used as a part
of more complex design. We can carve it in wax and cast it; or we can
make upper bezel, lower bezel and solder prongs. By going handmade
route, by the time we finish the setting shall have 10 solder
joints, if 4-prong setting is discussed. ( add 2 joints for every
additional prong ) Each solder joint should be able to withstand
subsequent solderings and retain it’s strength, which implies very
careful fitting and attention to details. Medium complexity piece has
10 to 20 such components. Every component increasing complexity
exponentially. I leave the rest for your imagination.

Casting has none of these issues so while casting does involve a lot
of handwork and quite difficult craft in it’s own right, as far as
complexity goes - it simply pales in comparison. A fair question at
this point is “why do it ?” The reasons are durability, longer
lasting finish, inside surfaces are polished which provides for
better stones appearance, and quite a few other reasons.

That said, the complexity of handmade process also means many
opportunities for screw ups. All these advantages over casting
disappears as snow in the middle of July, if goldsmith is not
properly trained. It would be nice to keep the quality in mind, when
discussing handmade versus casting.

To go back to watchmaking for a minute. The complexity of what
watchmakers do is way exceeds what goldsmiths have to deal with.
Watch movement is a device which takes raw power of compressed spring
and delivers is to escapement in minute precisely measured quants of
energy. All this accomplished by a relatively few parts. Machines of
no machines, this is an unbelievable feat of skills and engineering.
We really need a watchmaker here to educate all of us about it.

Leonid Surpin

but the point of this discussion is that quality of jewellery
should be the overriding factor 

I thought it was about nailing down the legal defintion so whomever
wants to label their stuff as such would hopefully be on solid
ground. Well, at least on on minimally ambigious ground.

Just to give the purists real ants in the pants. Check out this very
well made video on how a very expensive piece of diamond jewellery is
made for Chanel.

Cheers, Hans
http://www.meevis.com

Just to give the purists real ants in the pants. Check out this
very well made video on how a very expensive piece of diamond
jewellery is made for Chanel. 

You’re right, nice video. Not all that clear as to how the piece was
made, though. Was all cast, or just the settings sections? Was the
metal originally shown as being hand worked, merely the model from
which a mold was made? (I don’t think so, but…)

And the puzzler. What was that shot near the end with the diamond
cutter doing something to that pear shape? Were they taking a sharp
point off just to be sure the setter wouldn’t have trouble (?!?) or
because the mounting didn’t fit, or had the stone been chipped in the
first try at setting? Hmm. Seemed like an odd shot to include…

Peter

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uOBDUNfEkZo 

A bit vacuous, but entertaining. I enjoyed the melting, and stone
setting in the castings.

Regards Charles A.

You're right, nice video. Not all that clear as to how the piece
was made, though. Was all cast, or just the settings sections? Was
the metal originally shown as being hand worked, merely the model
from which a mold was made? (I don't think so, but...) 

The leaves are definitely cast, the supporting band looks to be
wrought, so I would assume it was a mix of techniques, regardless
it’s pretty nice.

Making nice pieces (that people want to buy) is the point for me,
and by any means.

Regards Charles A.

A bit vacuous, but entertaining.

The above comment on the Chanel diamond necklace is a perfect
example of why there will never be an agreement on any art or
design. Everyone has a different opinion, I think the necklace is
ABSOLUTELY STUNNING. I also suspect that there is possibly a
negative relationship with diamonds by some and they cannot see the
beauty of a piece because of it. I wonder if it was made by joe or
jolene jeweler with moonstones and obsidian if it would still be
vacuous.

Bill Wismar

And the puzzler. What was that shot near the end with the diamond
cutter doing something to that pear shape? 

I think just for effect. It is not actually the tip that was being
cut.

But the thing is, why would a company like Chanel remove the
potential to say “hand made” by casting simple, if somewhat
repetitive sections?

The necklace is a lot of work, but not really difficult to make by
hand, so why not make the ‘feathers’ and baguette links by hand ?

A good goldsmith and a setter and a polisher–one month-- hand made
and finished.

Unless you want to make dozens of them, of course

Cheers, Hans

But the thing is, why would a company like Chanel remove the
potential to say "hand made" by casting simple, if somewhat
repetitive sections? 

Perhaps because the customers do not care how it was made, only how
it looks when it is done.

M’lou