are machines really more accurate at duping or shaping boards than the hands of a master shaper? or is there some other advantage to using machines(besides cutting down the amount of "hands on " time by the shaper)??
Hi,
This is an old discussion, but I think everyone wants to put a finger on this cake. In my point of view, any master shaper (what does really define a master shaper?) can be accurate. This is a question of experience, tools, routine, and knowledge acquired with a hardworking. To me, machines are tools, and as tools they are here to help, not to do the job for us. Remember, the ancient shapers had stones, coral, and seashells to help them at that time. Today, I think it’s a matter of option or need (love for the art, high demands, etc). There’s no magic board as there’s no magic tools. In the end of the day, the man behind the process is that matters.
…I know of some master shapers that now are bored from mow foam so they sit down on a chair and tell a comp guy "move this cursor here, and oh no no move more…"etc and send the files to the machines…
Machines can make perfect shapes in no time.
That’s why I don’t use them.
Too easy.
obviously a board done by hand -say a copy of a favorite board- won’t be exact. small variances will happen.can a machine be exact or is it the variances are just closer to being exact as compared to hand shape?
If you’re using a CNC machine (Router table etc.) you can be very precise. If you measure carefully and shape things in the cad program to be an exact copy, that is about as close to an exact copy as you can get.
Any good shaper can make a surfboard accurately enough to be identical for all intensive purposes. Within 1/8" at every position over the board. Maybe his tolerance is 1 mm, or 0.040 inches.
Any decent machine can achieve a tolerance using typical cutting speeds and pass sizes of at MOST a quarter that, and if you use a lot of passes the machine will hit tolerances of 0.0005 inches or so. But, with the larger passes it is probably more like 0.010 in today’s world.
However, the machine does every board in 15 minutes, and doesn’t need to sleep.
ah, the majic board, they are sooooooooo hard to duplicate, even by the absolute best. The machine is the way to re-create the same item over and over again, but, even with minor flaws in gluing, an area of skin on the blanks results in it being different from the original.
Chris Hawk had shaped a Mike Tabeling board and it was nearing the end of it’s life, the customer brought it to me to re-do. I made an outline template, top and bottom rocker profiles and rail templates. I calipered it along the entire boards length, weighed it to come up with the same finished weight, he hated it. It rode nothing like the original, although it looked exactly like the original, felt like, all the above, it was a turd, beats the crap out of me?
Quote:
are machines really more accurate at duping or shaping boards than the hands of a master shaper? or is there some other advantage to using machines(besides cutting down the amount of "hands on " time by the shaper)??
Depending on the type of machine and techniques used to digitize said model. Not all scan/digitizing methods are the same.
Most all machines available today use a type of program or system of cross section or slices to create surfaces relying on mathematical algorithms to complete the missing data and fill in the missing surface. This method is the quickest and easiest form of scan but the least accurate. From my experience this method will result in a said smooth surface but isn’t accurate to the digitized model. This method is technically a 2d method of scan, when converting to 3d there is some data that is not converted accurately. What you see and design on the screen in 2d isn’t transferred accurately to 3d once the program has converted to 3d and the board is machined. There is something lost in the translation.
From my experience, an experienced shaper can duplicate a board as good if not better than the machine that uses the slice methods.
After working with some of the most reputable shapers that have used both methods have always noticed the accuracy of the tried and true method of a complete surface scan. Complete surface scan is the most accurate but is the most difficult and time consuming method, this ensures accurate and unlimited scaling ability to the digitized board.
One thing I have noticed of most of these “magic boards” is that there is always some type of surface subtleties that are almost virtually immeasurable in the foil. These magic wands are beyond algorithms and don’t have the cookie cutter look that slices produce.
I believe these surface deviations are essential in creating and maintaining the “magic” in the shapes. This goes totally against the algorithms method, as the nature of algoritms is to average out data.
These are just my observations and experience.
Read Parmenter’s fiction in the recent “big” issue of Surfer Magazine. He tells of a contest between an old shaper and a machine. It’s pretty funny. Both man and machine got to add one design element to a basic 7’. Man chose triple stringers, thinking that would throw off the machine. Machine chose double winger swallow (wings right where the stringers were). Machine won.
Quote:
I calipered it along the entire boards length, weighed it to come up with the same finished weight, he hated it. It rode nothing like the original, although it looked exactly like the original, felt like, all the above, it was a turd, beats the crap out of me?
Hi Jim, it’s one of those exact kind of mornings, so I have to object. . . . although it is perfectly possible that the customer hated the board reproduction, it isn’t possible that the board (which was so accurately copied) rode NOTHING like the original. . . there might have been some noticable differences between the two boards but they must also have had some similarities in their riding characteristics. . . being nearly the same shape and weight. . . .
Perhaps it shows that riders can detect very subtle differences between boards ?
Regards,
Roy
Quote:
In the end of the day, the man behind the process is that matters.
Hey Jeff!
Longtime, hey? Hope you’re doing well.
I couldn’t agree more. Rich Pavel, said in an interview with Jon from Rainbow Surfboards, that technology isn’t the enemy. Meaning that the machine’s purpose is to free the shaper from having to recreate the same magic design over and over, and allow time to experiment with other ideas. If you think about it, what would be the quickest way to burn out? How many times can you eat the same meal, even if it is delicious? Routine is a creativity killer when you are talking 1000-2000 boards a year.
For small timers like me it isn’t necessary, but if i was doing volume, it would be a useful tool. And that’s what it is, a tool. In fact, I use APS3000 to tweak templates and ideas before I cut the masonite, because it allows me to see what is happening. So, I guess I am using a machine to, right?
If the machines are the answer So why pay a shaper a shaping fee? Just go down to your local machine owner/ operator with some plot numbers( or find the software ), and have him replicate your favorite board, then sand down the cut lines and take it to a local glass shop and presto you got yourself a board minus a couple of hundred bucks. Its not that hard to believe there are people doing right now .
Hey Rob,
Where are you now? Still in Bahamas or not?
I’ve been reading all the inputs of this discussion and I’d like to say that it appears that the people are starting to talk about the subject “shaping machine” without that “aura” which used to involve this topic. Now, we see people talking about this without trying to sell the idea of a “wonderful new world”. I think, in general, they have realized shaping machines have their virtues and limitations, just like the human beings that have created them. Personally, I think machines are simply tools, but at the same time, I could not avoid to think on them like another attempt to standardize our procedures an kill the art of shaping boards. Who wants mass production? Go to a museum and observe a classic period statue, then walk around the block and stop to see those “beautiful” copies adorning the front yards of the bourgeois houses. Where’s the soul, where’s the art? Sorry, but I love to handshape all my boards…
scott,
you have an excellent point. if you want an off the shelf board, you can certainly do it off a machine. you can also design it yourself, and get it milled. what’s the difference between that and being a backyarder? same thing, different tools.
anyone can make a board that works, just look at all the close tolerance blanks.
the reason most people will/should go to a shaper is that even taking the lines down, you can seriously alter the shape. plus, and this would apply more to people shaping longer than me, there is still an understanding of the overall package that only experience can bring out.
jeff, yeah in the bahamas now. on to england on the 16 august.
hope you’re well
Quote:
Quote:One thing I have noticed of most of these “magic boards” is that there is always some type of surface subtleties that are almost virtually immeasurable in the foil. These magic wands are beyond algorithms and don’t have the cookie cutter look that slices produce.
And let’s not forget the psychological dimension, either: different colors on boards make them feel different. Or just a different deco pattern. I will go as far as saying that a very good surfer, presented with two “clone” boards shaped by the same machine, will still probably swear by one and dislike the other…
Machines don’t shape. Shapers shape.
Machines reproduce. Well.
I hesitate to say anything, but I don’t seem to be able to hold back.
- Machines are a combination of interrelated parts for using or applying energy to do work.
- Tools are simple mechanisms or implements used in manual work Insert power tool for the same manual work.
It is my opinion that it is impossible to make an exact duplicate of a surfboard. Whether a machine is used or the surfboard is shaped by hand. Molded boards excluded. Both man and machine can be quite accurate at duplicating a surfboard. However, there are other components to a surfboard beside the shape that can make an individual board unique.
Surfboards are glassed by hand. Is every board glassed exactly like the other without some variation? Glass cloth the same on each board without some variation? Stringers the same on each board?
Answer…no. Why? Because each process can have subtle variations. The stringer alone will definitely be different unless the original board and the replicated board have book matched pieces of wood.
Personally I think the hardest thing to shaping is what I call imaging, making the left side of the board the same as the right side of the board. It’s also my experience with machined blanks that the machines can have problems with imaging as well.
If a guy has more orders to fill within a certain time than he or she can shape by hand then the machine can pick up the slack. Shape a board by hand in 1 hr. or 2 hr. or…? Or clean up machined blanks in 20 min. or 40 min. or…? Will the boards one way or the other be the same? Most likely close enough.
D.R.
Quote:
And let’s not forget the psychological dimension, either: different colors on boards make them feel different. Or just a different deco pattern. I will go as far as saying that a very good surfer, presented with two “clone” boards shaped by the same machine, will still probably swear by one and dislike the other…
This maybe true to the novice. On the contrary, from my experience a very good surfer of the highest caliber will not be able differentiate between two clones if shaped accurately. If there are some subtle differences they are easily over come due to the accuracy between the two clones. The rider can easily compensate due to the familiarity of the overall shape. This is one of the main reasons why the top shapers to the best surfers require accurate repeatability of the machine. The ability to count on a shape when the chips are down. No room for guess work. Way too much at stake.
Even identical shapes may behave differently if you throw even a single variable into the equation. Just for example, I don’t think I’ve ever seen two wooden stringers that had identical grain. Resin to cloth ratios in the lamination and the amount of material a sander removes might add a tweak or two.
Even the most consistent factory will have some degree of acceptable variation. Most probably have quite a bit. What do factories accept as a tolerance window… +/- a few ounces in weight? What is an acceptable variation in fin settings… +/- a fraction of a degree in cant/toe-in ? +/- a fraction of an inch in placement? Do they even check?
Get out a precision micrometer or gram scale and I can just about guarantee no two boards are exactly the same - it’s just a matter of degree.