A question about Ivory ...
- Thread starter WilleeCue
- Start date
Hmmmmmmmm interesting question? I remember when i had a custom Cue made in 96 with Ivory points, the Cue maker Larry "Larue" Haymes told me how much was involved with getting real Ivory and he was sad so much was wasted while working with it. I would say call it Ivory.
I guess you could call it, "reconstituted ivory". I think, calling it "ivory", would be misleading.WilleeCue said:
Tracy
I'm not sure what you're asking precisely so I'll give two answers. If you mean whether you can still call the ferrule (or butt end or whatever) ivory, I would say definitely. Just like your playing tip is made of leather, even though glue is used to keep it in place. Ivory won't stick naturally so you have to use something. If you mean the filling solution, I would say it is what it is, an ivory-epoxy filler.
gr. Dave
gr. Dave
WilleeCue said:
No matter how you look at it is just epoxy and filler regardless if you use ivory dust. The value is in the craftsmanship it takes to fashion the thin strips of ivory and inlay them. What you want to do is bogus and I would not go down that road. Cue makers live on reputation if it is too difficult to do or you think you can't do a competent job don't do it at all. Better you make a flawless cue within your abilities then something you have to sell with disclaimers as well as that cue will be representing you from now on. Make the best cue you can within the level of your competence and you can't go wrong. Searing and even Barry Szamboti make what are by today's standard very plain cues but their craftsman ship is flawless and that is what players pay for, fancy is not that important in my opinion.
Last edited:
WilleeCue said:
To the best of My knowledge most other crafts that use the method do consider it an inlay, but I think that the method should be emphasized to the buyer so there is no confusion. I would do the same with the use of reconstitued stone. You can however also emphasize the fact that real ivory was used in the mix.
PoolSleuth
Banned
Man Made/Reconstituted Ivory with an **Explanation...
TATE said:
I may be wrong here, but I think there is a misconception of what he is doing with his epoxy mix. I don't think he is using it to fill gaps between inalys and the canvas to like hide glue lines or such. Look at the picture next to his name. There are white triangles at the top and bottom of the sleeve. I think he is saying he completely fills those triangle pockets (or similar pockets/lines) with this ivory/epoxy mixture. IF that is what he is saying, I think those are inlays. They are purposefull lines/designs cut into the cue and filled with something. Is this correct Willee?
I would call it an ivory dust inlay. Anyone asks, explain you mix ivory dust with epoxy and fill the pockets and then it gets turned flush like other inlays after it hardens.
Kelly
Last edited:
Kelly_Guy said:
The problem is he is trying to incorporate in the word "Ivory" in there somehow to imply value, when there is less value then if it was just a strip of maple or Holly wood. Ivory is a buzz word when it comes to cues and he wants to use it without being too deceptive, see his original question. It is what you would expect from an import cue not from a good cuemaker. I hope that after some reflection he abandons the idea.
macguy said:
I agree, and I was aware of the original question, which is why I suggested calling it an ivory dust inlay. It would seem to me including the word dust helps make it clear what was done.
When I read Tate's post and the reference to spackling a hole in the wall, it made me think that perhaps there was a misconception about what he was describing, and some thought he was using it to fill voids or gaps. Apparently there was no misconception about that, so that was my mistake, my apologies.
I recognize what Tate says about it not being an inlay. When we have a cavity in our tooth, we get a filling, not an inlay. So maybe I was wrong in thinking it was an inlay, but I guess I was just hung up on the thought that he is cutting out designed pockets that would hold a different material when finished, so technically it was an inlay.
Kelly
TATE said:
Before this post I guess I never reflected on the idea that all inlays had to be done using a hard material at the onset, and all other materials constituted a filling and not an inlay. I guess I would have chosen to look at the application, purpose, and end result to determine if something was an inlay.
Kelly
I have seen It refered to as an inlay as I mentioned, but ofcoarse I aggree there are many other ways to refer to it, altough the main issue would be one of deception IMO, and as long as that does'nt take place then it is what it is. Some silver inlay work is even done in a much simular way. Ofcoarse we all strive to use the best methods and materials at our disposal, and I'm not really sure Myself how I feel about the method when used in cues, but one thing I noticed is It's an excepted method in some other crafts, and there are several powders that can be used. It's just another type of artform to some. Personally, just to be clear, I'm not much different when it comes to a personal cue, If it were me, I'd go with the plain jane if I could'nt afford the solid inlay, but I know people that are all about the inlays with plain jane funds to spend, and I don't think they would have any issues at all with that If was between that and a plain jane, and within their budget.
The issues I see are- Is the maker comfortable with these representing his name? Is the buyer going to be satisfied, and what happens if the buyer sells it as something It's not? Is the filler/inlay going to hold over time?
It's hard for me grasp It any differently then just another method, because altough It may be casted to shape so to speak, It's basically made from resins like many other materials used in cues, some of which are even cut to be used as inlays. My concern would be more in the thickness, no use of weaves to hold the resin together, and any effects on hit or feedback.
Inlays for the most part are for looks plain and simple, rarely do they actually improve the play, so to me altough the value is different, It does'nt actually change the rest of the craftsmanship put into a cue. The issue as I see it is more in the value. As a collector that may be their main concern, but I honestly believe that not everyone would feel the same way. I guess I don't disagree with anyone, just possibly see some of It differently, so even if I don't use such a method Myself, does'nt mean I could knock anyone else that has, unless it was used to deceive or is of known bad quality.
Altough not always the case, I'm sure You guys are aware that some good restorations are aided by the use of fillers & pigments, and that It is an aquired art in It'self. That goes for woodworking in general as well, so are we to think that is less then quality work. Might be interesting info to a collector of old restored cues, because those are big money items in some cases, and often some have had restoration work done at some point in time.
I don't really disgree with anyone at all, so not meant to offend, just adding My 2 cents to the discussion for what It's worth. May not sound that way, but I really do see it with an open mind, therefore understand where everyone's view points come from. Just don't think everyone's emphasis is on value, and that this type of work is more in the art catagory, and has less to do with actual function.
Peace,
Greg
The issues I see are- Is the maker comfortable with these representing his name? Is the buyer going to be satisfied, and what happens if the buyer sells it as something It's not? Is the filler/inlay going to hold over time?
It's hard for me grasp It any differently then just another method, because altough It may be casted to shape so to speak, It's basically made from resins like many other materials used in cues, some of which are even cut to be used as inlays. My concern would be more in the thickness, no use of weaves to hold the resin together, and any effects on hit or feedback.
Inlays for the most part are for looks plain and simple, rarely do they actually improve the play, so to me altough the value is different, It does'nt actually change the rest of the craftsmanship put into a cue. The issue as I see it is more in the value. As a collector that may be their main concern, but I honestly believe that not everyone would feel the same way. I guess I don't disagree with anyone, just possibly see some of It differently, so even if I don't use such a method Myself, does'nt mean I could knock anyone else that has, unless it was used to deceive or is of known bad quality.
Altough not always the case, I'm sure You guys are aware that some good restorations are aided by the use of fillers & pigments, and that It is an aquired art in It'self. That goes for woodworking in general as well, so are we to think that is less then quality work. Might be interesting info to a collector of old restored cues, because those are big money items in some cases, and often some have had restoration work done at some point in time.
I don't really disgree with anyone at all, so not meant to offend, just adding My 2 cents to the discussion for what It's worth. May not sound that way, but I really do see it with an open mind, therefore understand where everyone's view points come from. Just don't think everyone's emphasis is on value, and that this type of work is more in the art catagory, and has less to do with actual function.
Peace,
Greg
I tend to think it is okay to call it ivory. I doubt it will look as nice and clean as regular Ivory inlays. But for some peoples taste it might look better. In Jewlery the crushed turquoise chips mixed with epoxy are still called Turquoise. My son when he was about 15 built himself a cue and put crushed turquoise chips into point and inlay pockets. It looked pretty nice and he always told people it was turquoise inlays.
Chris
www.cuesmith.com
www.internationalcuemakers.com
Chris
www.cuesmith.com
www.internationalcuemakers.com