Why is it up to the traditional way to prove a statement? Well,
Bill, it's not just the traditionalists that have to prove what
Everyone on this list, when challenged, has to prove their point
of view, if they want to get their point across.
Saying "I've been doing X process for X amount of years, without
issue,... therefore it must be the best and only way to do it",
isn't credible these days.
This is obfuscation at its finest. This is arguing for the sake of
argument. So far I see no benefit from this discussion. I think that
those that are dissuaded from forging their ingots might be
influenced by someone who does not have the experience to be
questioning or doubting. Fine objects in precious metals are not the
same as iron, steel, bronze…
I would look at the work of an individual who has decades of fine
quality work that exemplifies the techniques used, and I would be a
fool to argue with the methods used or arbitrarily change procedure
to suit my mood or whimsy.
Because something has been done as a time honored tradition
sometimes does mean that the tradition provides the results desired.
I have a feeling that in Europe, traditional methods are taught and
there is no debate, there is respect for knowledge acquired through
Over the years, when people have trouble rolling ingots, certain
remedies keep being offered.
Wonder why, one is, forge the ingot…
I personally don’t have anything to prove, and would not waste my
time trying. I am a goldsmith, not a debater.
Someone said that for some work, forging is not necessary and for
some work it is preferred for the best quality of the metal. I cannot
see where 15 minutes of my time to forge is worth the time trying to
question process when process is the solution, not the problem.
If I was teaching and I was challenged this way about what I was
teaching, I would suggest that the person was in the wrong class.
It is not about which is better, it is about what works for you. Do
both, then decide which works. Do that.
Richard Hart G.G.