Custom makers - outsourcing and assistants

Not being a collector grade knifemaker, I could probably get away with outsourcing some of what I do but I'm particular about everything that goes into the knives I make. I really prefer to do all the work myself. Even the sheath work. I have my own way of doing it and to try and teach someone else would be frustrating. Knifemaking is an art form. The maker is the artist so IMO, having someone else involved in the making of a knife takes away from the makers style. It would be like an oil painter having someone else finish a painting they started.
Scott
 
jdsmith02115 said:
Just as I imagined it might, this whole topic is getting nuts. It is my belief that for most of history "Joe Blow" indeed did not assume that Maker "X" did it all himself. His assumption was more likely that a division of labor was involved. If "Joe" did happen to find it was the sole effort of one individual the first question he would have asked himself probably would've been;"How the heck can he make it pay working that way?"
I certainly don't mean to denigrate the efforts of my former students in any way, but for the sake of this discussion, they were really little different than programable machines and as such did not add substantively to the final product in its essential qualities.
This is precisely where the Marxists went wrong; Their assertion that Muscle was of greater importance than Mind.
Click to expand...

Seems like a good discussion to me. What aspect of it suggests to you that it's "getting nuts"?

Roger
 
My 2 cts....I have more of a problem with makers, some of whom are very large makers that have all their parts made for say a folder.....made & shipped to them for assembly. Then put them on the table as a custom made knife. Im sure most here remember the MID-TECH debate.

I feel this is too much of a stretch.

The knife buying public needs to feel that we makers are honest , truthful folks. I am a proponant of full disclosure.....not the buyer beware...

I believe that its ok to outsource , or get assistants to help manufacture your product. Who am I to get into a mans pocket, Just disclose this upfront. The enables the knife buyer to make an educated decision.

The problem comes in the form of revenue. As it was previously mentioned...is a knife that is stamped with a popular makers name worthy of that names price ...if it wasnt made entirely by that maker, or worse...if all the parts were made by other companies and sent to the individual...only to be assembled by this person is it still worth a premium price as a full blown hands-on custom would be.? Hmm

Coop I hope I didnt stray from your topic........Im just very passionete about the knifemaking process.

Bj.
 
Thanks John. Valid points, indeed.

My example previously was a fairly extreme example. I did so to exaggerate my point.

All the 'acceptable' Joey's, and collaboration artists? That's a moot discussion, we probably all agree on. It's the 'Joey Newbie'--the grey area worker--who invokes the hard conversations.

JD, I have to agree with Roger about your concerns. I want to hear all sides. "Let's discuss" was my welcoming remark, not "Let's get consensus". ;) :thumbup:

Roger, I can't let you get away without giving pause:

First you said: "When you buy a Russ Andrews knife, you know that Russ Andrews made it. Period."
Then you said: "Not all buyers are as sophisticated as many of the participants on this forum. They see "Joe Blow" stamped on a knife and they naively assume that Joe Blow made it."

The implication is that Joe Blow is a maker with less-than-desireable ethics. What if Joe Blow was a maker of the highest regard, such as Russ, or Bob Loveless or....? Hmmmm.

My larger point that I wished to bring forward is: The partnership or apprenticeship or collaborations or even outsourcing of talents other than a maker's own, has already proven itself to be valid in all industrial arts. Are we ready to accept and even promote this aspect in the industry?

At what point is there a line drawn? I submit the line is drawn with our wallets.

Coop (Who is getting in a little over his head, but this is not unusual for those who know me well... ;))
 
One thing few people if anyone address's (other than the Guild saying it is ok) is outsourcing of heat treating. After all isn't this the process that allows a piece of steel to be crafted into an edge instrument?

Shouldn't this be done under the strict control of the maker. Some makers even go so far as to put the heat treaters name on the knife. Since there are two names on the blade does this mean it is now a collaboration knife?

If this is acceptable how does it differ from having the blades laser cut?

What many makers found is that by using the new technologies of today that they could generate enough knives using economy of scales to consider going full time. As utilizing current technologies would allow these makers to create an affordable knife for almost every collector. An additional benefit was that utilizing some of the same technologies that factories used allowed these knives to make a smooth transition from custom to factory copy. Gaining the maker additional dollar, free advertising and some new clients for their custom versions. In larger part these makers who adopted these new technologies in many cases saved the factories from elimination from the market place. Take Ken Onion and Kershaw for instance. Kershaw would not be in the position it is in today if not for some insightful person working for Kershaw who saw the beauty of the Speed Safe for mass production.

It was these very technologies that began to be utilized on a more broad scale in the early 90's that got the custom knife market back on track. For those of you who weren't around for the "Interframe" craze in the late 80's won't know that the custom knife market as you know it today almost ceased to exist.

90%+ of custom knife buyers don't care how the knife was made. Hell most don't even know what a RC 58-60 is. All they know is they like how it looks and they can afford it. Makers and some collectors would like to think that most custom knife buyers understand what goes into creating the work of art on the makers table. The fact is they don't. Using those collectors posting in this thread due to there immense knowledge of custom knives and what it takes to create them. Skews the "understanding" curve of this thread.

Currently, it is much more important to most buyers what the blade steel is. Hence the flavor of the month for steels (ok flavor of the year). For 2007 look for the Dura-Tech blades coming to a knife show near you.

I agree that makers should make a full disclosure on how the knives are made and who actually makes them..to include Mr. Loveless.

WWG
 
SharpByCoop said:
Roger, I can't let you get away without giving pause:

First you said: "When you buy a Russ Andrews knife, you know that Russ Andrews made it. Period."
Then you said: "Not all buyers are as sophisticated as many of the participants on this forum. They see "Joe Blow" stamped on a knife and they naively assume that Joe Blow made it."

The implication is that Joe Blow is a maker with less-than-desireable ethics. What if Joe Blow was a maker of the highest regard, such as Russ, or Bob Loveless or....? Hmmmm.

My larger point that I wished to bring forward is: The partnership or apprenticeship or collaborations or even outsourcing of talents other than a maker's own, has already proven itself to be valid in all industrial arts. Are we ready to accept and even promote this aspect in the industry?

At what point is there a line drawn? I submit the line is drawn with our wallets.

Coop (Who is getting in a little over his head, but this is not unusual for those who know me well... ;))
Click to expand...

Hi Coop,

It wasn't my point to suggest that Joe Blow maker would have questionable ethics, rather to emphasize that I believe the perception - or assumption - of the buying public is that the maker's name on the knife signifies that he or she is in fact the maker of the knife. [I think this is where J.D. and I part company, as he seems to feel that buyers would not make this assumption] It is all well and good to state - as all so far seem to agree - that there is nothing wrong with partnerships, apprenticeships, assistants or what have you as long as the person selling the knife is not misleading the person buying the knife. Keith makes an excellent point when he highlights the fact that it was NOT known to many a seasoned knife nut that Loveless had the degree of "help", shall we say, in crafting his knives. My point in the Joe Blow example is that if Joe does nothing more than stamp his name and sell his knives, the buyer will not assume - indeed, will have no way of knowing - that someone else ground and finished the blades. And that is a fact they may well want to know.

I wish to make it clear that I am in no way suggesting that getting help in making the knife - whatever the degree of that help - is a bad thing. Or that it makes the end result anything less of a knife. But it is my personal preference - and nothing more than that - to seek out blades from makers who have crafted the pieces on their own. (And no - I don't mean they have to have planted the maple tree from which the wood from the handle is harvested). This is part of the emotional appeal (to borrow STeven's phrase) of custom knives.

For what it's worth - the degree of "help" that J.D. decribed receiving from his students would not make his knives any less attractive to me (and they are damned attractive). But note two key points: 1) the nature of the help was minimal and not highly skill-oriented. 2) J.D. has given full and public disclosure of it.

Roger
 
WoodWorkGhost said:
One thing few people if anyone address's (other than the Guild saying it is ok) is outsourcing of heat treating. After all isn't this the process that allows a piece of steel to be crafted into an edge instrument?
Click to expand...
Personally, I apply different standards for carbon steel and for stainless. I expect a maker working non-stainless to have mastery of the HT of the steels they use. I know it isn't the case for many grinders (not all), and even some forgers. For stainless, I'm OK if the HT is outsourced. Admitedly, this is inconsistent, because there's an argument to be made that the HT equipment needed to extract the last few % of performance from a carbon blade (salt-baths, etc) is probably as sophisticated as the one used for stainless.


For those of you who weren't around for the "Interframe" craze in the late 80's won't know that the custom knife market as you know it today almost ceased to exist.
Click to expand...
What was the interframe craze, and why did it almost kill the market?

Thanks,

JD
 
If you've ever worked in a shop where stuff was "outsourced" you'll understand this thread completely. I've outsourced stuff and still do. Saves time AND money. I pass that savings onto my customers. win-win-win.

Some things like bandsawing, drilling holes, profiling, etc. can easily be done by an assistant. Just makes sense to farm the easier stuff out.


This is how it works in the business world in general...why should it be any different in knifemaking?

In an architect's office (my other job) the principal architects do most of the design work, project managers oversee the construction documents and the drafters do the drawings and details. Yes, one man could do it all...but when it comes time to bill your clients...they don't like to see the same rate for each of the above tasks. They expect to pay more $$$ for design and less for drafting. But if you do all the work yourself, you are paying yourself one rate whether you draft or design. Most prefer to farm out the drafting work and concentrate on the design/managing. Wouldn't you?


I sure-as-heck didn't make the steel myself...nor grow the wood for the handles...


That said, I do prefer to heat-treat as much of my stuff as I can...because I want to learn...not because I'm bent on sole authorship.

I'm always suspicious when I see "sole authorship" on a piece. Did anybody think to thank Mother Earth? :foot: It's just a way to make sales...everybody has their own personal hype...(myself included).
 
My apologies to this assemblege for saying things were getting nuts. That's not what I really meant. I tend to respond in that manner if I think momentarily some topic is being whipped to death, but that's certainly not the case here. This is a really good topic.

Other disclosures;
For the last five years NO ONE has touched my knives but me. This includes sheathes and scabbards as well.
But then again, I haven't made that many pieces in that span of time, as I've been focused on other projects.

My point here is that I don't require help now,but I might in the future at some point and when that time comes I will find some student in need of training and he or she will be stiching sheaths and taking out scratches from blades. They may even find themselves sand blasting billets between folds. Frankly, I feel hard pressed to feel as though disclosure needs to be made of these things, as they don't truly make any difference.

My significant other who happens to be Russian, pointed out to me that Europeans do not have this sole authorship issue owing to the fact that the craft traditions have long assumed and exploited the use of apprentices,for centuries, if not thousands of years.
They are considered as invisible and not at all important. With them it is ONLY the masters vision that matters and he signs his name to anything he has supervised regardless of his actual hands on involvement.

She also suggests that the American attitude towards sole authorship has it's genesis in the very American myth of the "Rugged Individualist" who conquers all obstacles on his own.
She seems to feel that this issue is born of what may be described as "Our national character". I tend to agree.

I was a professional musician for 30 years. In that itme I scorred and arranged lot's of original music. In that entire time, no one ever suggested that I, or anyone else doing similar work, list the names of the individuals we used to copy parts from the scores we wrote so muscians could sit down to read and perform that music. Yes, I could've sat there for hours copying parts,but my colleagues would have thought I had pretty much lost my mind.
 
I disagree JD. If I buy a Pierre Reverdy or a Wolfgang Loechner, I expect them to have done all the important work, and most of the rest - not gathering or precutting the raw materials maybe, but all of the forging, grinding, and assembling. This is coming from a European.
 
Joss said:
I disagree JD. If I buy a Pierre Reverdy or a Wolfgang Loechner, I expect them to have done all the important work, and most of the rest - not gathering or precutting the raw materials maybe, but all of the forging, grinding, and assembling. This is coming from a European.
Click to expand...

You are correct. I should not presume to speak for others.
 
Roger and JD: Great points to add to this discussion. As I knew.

Daniel: Well put, with a good example.

Les: I know it is off the thread, but I am ALSO really curious of your take on the history of interframes and tactical knives. Well before my involvement. Could you elaborate in a sidebar post?

Coop
 
This is a good discussion. It seems to me that a clear definition of terms is needed to be agreed upon by knifemakers.

"Custom" says to me that it is unique in some way and not a mass produced item. What if I bought a kit knife and assemble it using my choice of handle material and finish or else modified it in some other way. Would it not be a custom knife in that there would not be another exactly like it? Of course, I think anyone doing this should disclose that it is a kit knife but still I would consider it custom. As someone pointed out earlier, custom cars and motorcycles are not handmade but instead are mostly factory pieces with some modifications.

"Handmade" to me implies that not only was the piece assembled and finished by hand but at least some of the material (particularly the blade) was made and/or shaped by hand. Similar to custom, it also implies that it is unique in that no two handmade knives are likely to be exactly alike.

I think technology advances must be considered as any knifemaker is trying to make enough profit to stay in business. Not all can do their own heat treating or buy a $40k Flow Jet to cut their blanks. But what if you suddenly hit the big time and you consistently have more orders than you can fill using your current methods. It only makes sense to farm some of those jobs out.

After all, I don't think it makes a bit of difference in the resulting knife if the blank was cut by hand with a hacksaw or with a laser. Heat treating on the other hand make a huge difference. A good knifemaker might be a great grinder or a master at fit and finish but not an expert on heat treating. I would be more concerned that the knife was heat treated properly rather than who did the treating.

The Makers Mark tells me that a knife was designed and/or made by the person whose mark is on the item. This does not necessarily mean it is handmade. One has to think to the future. There are Randall knives out there that were handmade by Bo Randall and there are the Randall Made knives that were not made by Bo but instead made from his designs and/or to his specifications. Both are Randalls. The same holds true of several other names. There are handmade Hibben knives and there are United Cutlery Hibben knives based on his design but untouched by Gil Hibben.

So it seems to me that the terminology would be used in combination. There are "customs" and there are "handmade customs". There are "Hibbens" and there are "handmade Hibbens".

"Sole Authorship" implies that every step was done by hand by the maker. But as mentioned earlier, even that leaves some room for clarification. Did the maker forge the steel or cut from stock? Did he cut and stabilize his own handle material or buy pre-cut slabs? Did he make or buy the mosaic pins?

As far as sheaths, I think they should be marked individually with the makers mark.

I feel the integrity of the craft depends on honest disclosure. New collectors need to understand what they are buying but any serious collector of anything needs to, and in time will, educate himself about the items he collects.
 
RogerP said:
Hi Coop,

It is all well and good to state - as all so far seem to agree - that there is nothing wrong with partnerships, apprenticeships, assistants or what have you as long as the person selling the knife is not misleading the person buying the knife. Keith makes an excellent point when he highlights the fact that it was NOT known to many a seasoned knife nut that Loveless had the degree of "help", shall we say, in crafting his knives. My point in the Joe Blow example is that if Joe does nothing more than stamp his name and sell his knives, the buyer will not assume - indeed, will have no way of knowing - that someone else ground and finished the blades. And that is a fact they may well want to know.
Roger
Click to expand...

I believe Roger and Keith are right on the money here from the collector's point of view.
 
Disclosure is very important as we are in a unique industry. I tend to compare it to the high end gun industry more to illustrate the differences rather than the similarities. The Belgian and Italian guild system has worked well for both country's gun industry. They have barrelers, stockers, actioners and so on, all with individual shops. The name that ends up on the gun is more often than not, simply the designer, and more importantly, is the person who sets the standard of the finished product. How can you argure that a man who does nothing but barrels isn't better at his job than someone who does everything...With that thought, I find it a sound practice.

I don't follow that system. I am a sole authorship maker more out of my own anal retentive ideals than anything. I enjoy being able to do all the work on my pieces. I don't think it degrades a knife to be outsourced, but if done at high level, a sole authorship piece may have more intrinsic value. Afterall, If I didn't consider knifemaking an artform, it would be no different than maing screwdrivers, and at that point, who cares who made it as long as it works.

Bringin my post full circle, I am not concerned about outsourcing work. As long as the maker is up front on his practices, it's all in the final product as to whether it is worth buing.
 
Some of you guys talked about some maker named Joe Blow. I searched but could not find anything. Does someone have his contact information?;)
 
It is really simple who cares how they get made as long as there is full disclosure? The market will dictate the value of the process (as it already has). Falsely creating value by deception is illegal as well as dishonorable. Every effort should be made to advertise deceptive practices in any venue.

Which brings me to this staetment:

Kohai999 said:
Will chime in later with more observations on the subject, but I do consider sole authorship to be just that. It makes the individual piece that much more PERSONALLY valuable to me, not necessarily finanacially, but at an emotional level. I agree with Kevin's statement. It is the reason that a Denning, Cashen, Fogg, Fuegen, Hanson, Hancock, Delana or Warenski have a high level of desirability to me.

Best Regards,

STeven Garsson
Click to expand...

I agree with this statement.

In general, I don't think there is any value in defining different levels of knife manufacture any more than providing restrictive labelling on types of cheeses.

To whit: Greece gained a ruling from the EU limiting labelling of FETA cheese to only that cheese made in Greece. Denmark, which made serious inroads on the Greek FETA market now cannot use the term FETA to describe their cheese, which just happens to look, taste and smell suspiciously like FETA cheese from Greece.

Whether a knife designer / manufacturer runs their business with one or several or a hundred assisstants should not matter, as it does not inherently affect the performance of the tool - the knife - which is the whole point aquiring knives as opposed to guns, watches, coins, etc.

Like any enterprise, if the labor adds value to the final product, then it ultimately will be recognized. If buyers find value in the work of one versus the collaborative work of many, then a market will arise, as it has. The only issue in my mind is deception and forgery and false advertising.

I had the chance this weekend to purchase a "handcrafted" cocktail for $10 at a restaurant. I just wondered how they made them before...with robots? Funny how that "handcrafted" cocktail tasted the same as the old robotic cocktails I am used to, that used to cost about $6.25 not too long ago.
 
The consensus to this point seems to be that as long as there is disclosure then there is no wrong way to make knives (taking into account that the use of slave labour, etc., would not be acceptable to the majority of us).

It doesn't matter to me at all if the grunt work is done by someone other than the maker of the knife. I don't think that I need to be informed of this. If any of the major work is done by anyone other than the one that puts his/her name on the knife, I want to know about it.

When it comes to knives that I am planning on using, outsourced work will not be a negative. I want my users to be well made, tough enough to do the job they are intended for, and to have a handle that will be comfortable for as long as it takes to complete the task at hand. The blade finish is not important. Neither is the fact that the blade was water/lazer/assistant cut. Handle slabs can be cut and fit by someone other than the maker. Heat treat and the sheath can be done can be done by someone else as well. Anything that will end with a well made knife at a good price is what I would want. My goal is to support the little guy as often as possible. If I can get a good user from a maker for a price close to what I can get one from a manufacturer then I am going to get it from the maker. Whatever the maker needs to do to get me what I want is okay by me, as long as it doesn't involve having the complete knife outsourced.
 
A HANDMADE knife is possible. Wootz, Pulad, crucible steel or tamehagane are all examples of steel created from ore. Yoshindo Yoshihara, Ric Furrer, J.D. Smith and Al Pendray are have all, at one point or another done/still do this.

The billets are created from ore, forged to shape, and sharpened.

The semantics are NOT important for the vast majority of us, but they are important for beginning collectors or advanced collectors. Beginners need to know what is out there, and advanced collectors tend to have very specific tastes/requirements.

I don't believe that the majority of the hand CRAFTED knives out there are anything more or less than that.

Sole authorship, as stated above is very nice, and appealing on an emotional level, but that has honestly more to do with the maker than collector. Hand crafted screws are very cool, but how much time does it add to the crafting of the knife?

Full disclosure is ideal for the betterment of everyone, but if a maker chooses to make their own screws, pivots and bushings, they should not look down upon another maker who does not choose this path, nor should the collector.

CNC machines have a nice place in the shop that can afford them. RJ Martin recently crafted the Havoc, with a 3 bevel grind, and that would probably not be possible by hand, at least not to that level of precision.

Custom made knives are just that. They are custom, either to the collector/maker, starting with drawings, or something that the maker cooked up on their own.

What IS important, crucially so, is the communication between maker and collector. Makers MUST communicate HOW their knives are made(who made the damascus, who did the heat treat, who did what to what), and the collector MUST ask, and be educated to do so.

It is these differences that educate us all. Wolfe Loerchner uses files and sandpaper to make his knives, most makers use whatever equipment that they can, and some use as much machinery as possible.

It is very, very important for us to know if we have a one of one knife(ie, all Russ Andrews bowies are very different, same with Nick Wheeler) or we have an example of one of many(ie R.J. Martin Devestator, Darrel Ralph Gunhammer). It is important to have this knowledge so we can understand what we like and desire(as collectors).

A Tom Mayo TNT and a Chris Reeve Sebenza could look VERY similar to a newbie. Chris has a number of employees, and state of the art machinery to produce his lovely precision PRODUCTION knives. That is what they are, but STILL require a great deal of hand work to produce. Tom works in his shop, alone, AFAIK, with very few basic machines, turning out HAND CRAFTED knives, 1 at a time. This is a good comparison, I think, what about the rest of you?

It is important to determine what qualities are most valuable to you, and then figure out where the intrinsic value lies/meets with personal economic value. It takes a long time to understand.

Best Regards,

STeven Garsson
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top