I think it’s important to keep in mind the distinction between hand made and machine made. Using a bench tool with guides to cut a part vs using the same tool to shape a part. There will always be grey areas and if you chose to go there then just be sure the results justify the risks. It’s supposed to be fun so worrying about winning or loosing points because of methods is contraindicated. Just do it, don’t let the rules stifle your imagination. In the hand made category it’s all about doing the most with the least and sharing creative ways to get it done.
DBCstm, ImA4Wheelr: You are right. The rules are a bit vague about those things.
We (Judges) will discuss about this issue and we hope we can come up with a clear list what's allowed and what's not.
Please allow a couple of days for all judges to respond.
The original categorization was based on what tools are commonly available -> hand made, and what are usually used only in machine shops -> machine made.
In my opinion hand made lights should look and feel hand made, not having too fancy "lathe-like" designs. But that's just me. Other judges might disagree..
^ Thanks _the_, much appreciated.
RBD,
I have nothing but big time respect for you and your above opinion. I, however, disagree with some of what you say
"think it’s important to keep in mind the distinction between hand made and machine made."
I have thought a lot about it. I think you and I just have different ideas as to what the differences are.
"Using a bench tool with guides to cut a part vs using the same tool to shape a part."
This is a pretty arbitrary line. Both activities change the shape of the part. I consider myself a pretty average joe with average joe tools. One of the things I like about this competition is that other average joe's out there show me new ways to accomplish things I didn't realize I could accomplished the same or other average joe tools. Restricting how tools are used limits the range of things that can be be accomplished. That reduces what I consider one of the "funnest" parts of the competition.
Yes, there are people with even more limited means than me. That is why I proposed that there be true handmade category with no electric tools allowed at all. That way, those people and people that want that type of challenge can compete on a fairly level ground. The current "hand made" category left that concept behind long ago. To invoke it now requires some arbitrary lines to be drawn such as the one you chose above.
"There will always be grey areas and if you chose to go there then just be sure the results justify the risks."
Agreed, but the grey areas don't have to be such large easy targets.
"It’s supposed to be fun so worrying about winning or loosing points because of methods is contraindicated."
This is a contest, right?
That being said, I have no illusions that I have a chance of winning this competition. I, however, would like to comply with the rules if I participate.
"Just do it, don’t let the rules stifle your imagination. "
Trying, but the rules combined with my desire to compete fairly is stifling my imagination. This is the planning stage. Trying to brainstorm and map the path ahead. It's a bit hard to do when you don't have clear boundaries to operate in.
"In the hand made category it’s all about doing the most with the least and sharing creative ways to get it done."
Here is probably the core of our difference in perspective. The rules would be much more restrictive if that was the case. To me, this competition is all about making the most with what you have available (and is permitted by the rules). It's great to see the amazing things people can imagine and make real. Vague restrictions will hamper that and cause the end products to be much more similar.
EDIT: Fixed some typos and clarified wording in a couple spots.
See, it’s all about imagination. If a guy happened to have an old foot cranked weaving machine he might imagine a way to mount a bar of aluminum on it. Then he could spin the part, like a lathe, with pedal power and no electricity at all. Then, if he again imagined a way to mount a screw shaft brace that might hold a carbide bit, he’d have himself a human powered lathe and could do most anything he desired, and still no electricity burned. So the application of the tools is what gives a professional result, limited only by one’s imagination.
Like Scott says, just go for it and see what you come up with. Judging panel be damned! 
(oops, sorry judges, y’all know what I mean!) At the end of the day it’s about the creation, not the win. 
They’re more like guide lines. I’m not a judge anyway and not on any rules committee just trying to keep things loose. I do stand behind each statement quoted since I carefully considered each one but those are just my opinions and embody my approach to, what I see as not so much a contest but a game of “WHAT IF?”
If I seem a bit cavalier it’s because I choose to be in this context. I understand that some are more comfortable with more of the nuances spelled out. I prefer a more blank slate with just a few limitations from which to bounce ideas. “Winning” for me is all about getting as close to what I imagined was possible rather than what I do compared to someone else. That is the main thing I look to see in the fantastic notions put forth here.
What Justin and I are doing is something he suggested some time ago that didn’t get enough traction to come about on any large scale. It’s both more restrictive in that we are starting with the same host and much less so in that there are no rules at all, but the competitive side for me will be no different than if it were a contest build: what can I imagine and how well can I pull it off? It will be fun to see what each of us can do and I look forward in exactly the same spirit to seeing what is done by everyone that joins the contest. Good luck with your build and everyone else with theirs.
As I said, I totally respect your opinions RBD. I appreciate them too. Not trying to change them either. Just want the judges, while they are reassessing the rules, to hear one participant's different perspective. I'm surprised other participants are not using this moment to provide input as well. It's OK for us to not agree on everything as long as we all have the maturity to respect each others' right to have a different opinion/idea.
You wrote:
. . . I understand that some are more comfortable with more of the nuances spelled out. I prefer a more blank slate with just a few limitations from which to bounce ideas. “Winning” for me is all about getting as close to what I imagined was possible rather than what I do compared to someone else. That is the main thing I look to see in the fantastic notions put forth here. . . .
I have to say that you are the one that introduced the nuances. I would also prefer a black slate. A rule like, "You can use x tool.", is what I would like. Not, you can use it, but it depends how you use it is introducing nuance.
You keep mentioning "Winning". I don't expect to win this competition. I would be amazed if I even placed in the top 5. I'm not in it to win or get prizes. I could have cut cut corners last year so that I could get a prize and maybe even place. I just want to compete honestly. The problem is my imagination is developing all kinds of ideas, but have to keep dismissing them because they may not qualify to a vague nuances that have been introduced in this year's contest. Perhaps if you were competing too, you would experience some of the frustration I am experiencing trying to plan this one.
EDIT: Reworded last paragraph.
Let me try this approach, part of what goes on in the contest is figuring out new ways to do things and since it’s not probable that the judges can anticipate everything the contestants might dream up it might be difficult if not impossible to come up with rules that cover every possibility. Laying out guidelines and allowing and even encouraging people to ask “is it ok if I do this?” seems a reasonable alternative. For example, when is a hand tool no longer a hand tool? When you clamp it in a vice and it becomes a bench mounted tool? When you add fences and guides to eliminate errors? I’ve read suggestions of building human powered lathes and indeed thought of similar ways to take allowed tools and turn them into disallowed ones so yes, I don’t think it’s possible to separate the tools from the methods. Keep to the spirit of the contest and if in doubt, ask.
^ I understand your concern about securing a tool or adding to it in a way that makes it capable of doing more (A). I personally like seeing that type of creativity. One has to use their imagination and ingenuity to do that. If I were a judge, I would vote for it to be allowed.
One could argue that the ability to hold a tool or the use of guides does not prevent something from being "hand made". For instance, a person can weave a large rug or something with a large loom. Although the loom isn't hand held and has guides, one would not deny that the rug was hand made.
(A) The earlier discussion before the above post did not cover such modifications. You cited using the fence of an approved tool to be ok for cutting, but not ok for "shaping". None the less, you bring up a very good new point.
It’s good discussion anyway, hopefully we’ve covered enough ground to give the powers that be some things to consider.
Agreed and I understand where you are coming from. I think it's just a matter of what direction they want the contest to go. I see neither your interpretation nor mine as right or wrong. Just different. Both have different good and bad aspects.
You MUST find a cave, then hammer out your design with a flint rock at night by the fire while wearing animal skins.
No drinking of the fermented fruit allowed. (it might give you ideas and woman would then become part of the equation and NOTHING would get done! Well, aside from the creation of a small team that likes hammering things with rocks…)
I’m being facetious, of course, all in good fun.
I thought and thought and thought and thought…
So, I came up with this potential simple definition of machine tools. Ready?
Anything that is designed to work automatically (without direct human control). The word “designed” is the trick here. If I go to Harbor Freight and buy a lathe, it is obviously a lathe, which is a machine that is designed to be automatic. Easy, right? If I instead go to Harbor Freight and buy a large electric hand-held drill, then I build a bracket to hold it into a position and a framework for tooling and then use it as a lathe, what have I done? I’ve designed a lathe (and subsequently built it). What if I build a lathe from scrap-wood out of my burn pile? It’s still designed to be a lathe, so it is a machine! Get it? What if I fasten some pieces of angle iron to my table saw so that it can be used as a lathe? Well, if it is designed in such a way that anyone who knows how to use a lathe can easily use this thing as a lathe, then it is obviously a lathe, even if a bit unconventional. The design which makes things automatic is the measure by which you could say that it is a “machine”.
What wouldn’t be a lathe? Using a table saw with only the push bar and a steady hand to make something that looks like it was cut on a lathe wouldn’t make it a lathe. So the separation then is not the creativity of the person using the tool, but the intent and purpose of the design of the tool. And that would include the design from the factory, as well as the design of any modifications that are made to the tool. That, to me seems fair. It can be objectively measured, so that everyone can know and understand what is expected, and nobody has an advantage or disadvantage.
What do you think? Is the word “automatic” sufficient to separate machine tools from other tools? Is the word “designed” sufficient to describe the difference? Just trying to help. Obviously, it is ultimately up to the judges.
^ That's some impressive thinking there. Seriously.
I'm not sure about "automatic", but the "design" concept sounds pretty darn good. The reason I think "automatic" might need some adjustment is I don't think lathes are automatic. I think they still need a lot of manual interface, unless part of a CNC. Maybe the concept you are thinking is that neither the part nor the tool are not held to operate. So the the feeding and such is done by the machine. I can't think of a better word at the moment though.
I’m sure glad I signed up for the machine made category, this is making my head spin.
From the Merriam Webster dictionary - online:
handmade
adjective hand·made \ˈhan(d)-ˈmād\
: made with the hands or by using hand tools
Full Definition of HANDMADE
: made by hand or by a hand process
So, the original thought, when I started this 3 years ago, was to have a hand made contest. Using only hand tools. It did not take long to discover that the enthusiasm for hand made has gone with the Dodo bird. Many love to watch someone do something hand made, but very few want to try it themselves.
As a result of this, the contest evolved, because if it did not, there would have been no contest, since not enough members would even try.
The contest evolved into using a rotary tool, then a drill press and now into even more powered tools.
Is that right? If you want to stick strictly to a loosely defined definition that started in the 1600's, then it is not right. If you want to adopt the word into the 21st. century, then it becomes a gray area, as it has this year.
It does not matter what I think, since I gave it up, but there should most likely be 3 categories:
Hand Made - using the hands or hand tools only
Home Made - using the hands, hand tools and small, manually operated power tools designed for the home handy man. Power tools that need to have a person operate them and tools that do not run in an automatic mode, such as lathes or end mills.
Machine Made - using anything available to individuals or machine shops. Any hand, manual, or automatic machine or combination thereof.
That still leaves gray areas for some people. So be it. Let the judges decide. That's what judges are for. If they think a person stepped into the machine made area, then judge them with the other machine made contestants. The judges should make those decisions, not the contestants.
Perfect! Thanks, O-L!
OMG, stop the bickering and just make some damn lights!!! :bigsmile:
^ I know you are saying the above to lighten the mood and that is cool. Just in case, it's not bickering. Some of these builds require a serious commitment of time and money. They can put a strain on your family and other obligations too. One doesn't want to do all that, just to be told later they were not totally compliant. That is why a few of us care so much.
I just realized a stupidly easy solution for just my case. It was right in front of me, but I didn't realize it. Here it is:
Please reclassify my entry to the machine category. I only have average home owner tools, but I would like to use them in any way I dream up and not risk being accused of bending the rules later.
If the above is possible, I would appreciate it very much.
Not bickering, procrastinating, so your half right. Besides, it’s been very polite bickering.