Paul Hinds bowl #N010

N10 --- $110.00 --- this is the orientation view --- more pics down below

diameter: 9 1/4"
height: 2 1/2"

finish: one application of natural stain then two coats of high gloss spar polyurethane (with UV blocker)

WOODS USED: [SEE DISCUSSION ON THE MAIN PAGE OF THIS SITE IF ANY OF THIS IS UNCLEAR]

base: mahogany

view 1:bubinga, machiche, maple veneer, purpleheart, BOX

view 3: mahogany with canary on the left and elm on the right, all backed by canary, bloodwood, bocote, BOX

view 4: padauk with aromatic red cedar to its left and then backed by green-tinted tulip poplar, ebony veneer, padauk, BOX

view 5: aromatic red cedar on the left and on the right is a wormy wood (I've lost track of what this is)

view 6: maple burl, mahogany, osage orange, BOX

view 7: purpleheart, light mahogany, dark mahogany, padauk, mahogany, then a partial cirle of mahogany that actually sits under the woods to the right of it, BOX

BOX: left to right; light mahogany, walnut, aromatic red cedar above paela, walnut, douglas fir. Above all that is, left to right as it slants upwards; canary, thick dark mahogany veneer, thick light mahogany veneer, padauk veneer, thick light mahogany veneer, aromatic red cedar with a lot of sapwood, holly veneer, and then the padauk of view 4.

flaws/issues:in the very middle, there is a lamination of paela and aromatic red cedar that has an almost invisible hairline crack.

The purpleheart strip in the bottom middle has some very small chipping at the left edge. It is both visible and tactile but minor.

The worm holes in the wood to the right of middle in view #5 are character, not a flaw, as far as I'm concerned; I realize you may not agree, which is why I point it out.

In the upper middle, the red aromatic cedar in particular shows some very light circular scratch marks if you catch the light just right. This indicates that I did an inadequate job of final sanding on that area. If you continue the circle indicated by these scratch marks you will find that the other woods that fall on the circle are much harder than the red aromatic cedar, and this sort of thing is one of the problems I face because I use both hard and soft woods in the same bowls. See the discussion of this on the main page in the section "A note about mixing woods of different characteristics".

comments: very attractive bowl; excellent selection of woods. The very middle has an interesting combination of aromatic red cedar / paela where the cedar was UNDER the paela but the paela turned off in the very middle but not just outside the middle, producing a nifty circular edge to the remaining paela.

The osage orange in view 6 is nicely chatoyant as are both the bubinga and the machiche in view 1.

view 6b showing the worm holes

view 3b

views 3d and 5c

view 8a

view 1c, first as a bowl blank, then as the finished bowl with polyurethane