Numbering knives?????? Who does it? Why?

[Kevin Jones]

Originally Posted by betzner>

Hi Ray-

I don't think you will find that many people quote such dollar values online. This kind of puts a different "slant" to this thread on "numbering" knives, doesn't it?

Such a practice can backfire, when the value of the knife shown suddenly becomes subject to discussion, value disagreement, etc.

I personally prefer any discussion on knife values to be on a relative rather than an actual basis. Otherwise, it's a bit presumptive.

It's a beautiful Loveless, but $12K? The value is way up there (relatively), but definitely subject to interpretation by many.

Best,

Bob

Bob, I don't think I have stepped on any toes in using $12,000 as a reference point for a amber stag Loveless chute as I keep pretty close tabs on the Loveless market and have seen them go for more and less but 12K is a solid # for a nice example.

 

[T.A.DAVISON]

Curious?

So these Loveless knives would have been better off with out a number? Far as looks?
And the numbers them selves? Do not mean much to a collector? Far as such & such number knife in his or her collection?

Bob would have done better? Not numbering them? OR he should had done a better job at putting the numbers on the knives?

Opinions about this?


Todd



.

 

[Kevin Jones]

I undertand all the reasons not to. Good ones, too.

Still, others have a different set of reasons to include it. Here's the classiest numbering system I've ever seen. Rob Brown from S.Africa.

BTW, Bob Loveless legitimized green canvas micarta, chicken scratch numbers, and pen signatures on sheaths. Inch per inch no one's knives are worth more. Go figure.

Coop

Coop

I agree Coop. Rob Brown's marks look very well done. Would be interesting to know what his numbers represent.

Excellent point regarding Bob Loveless. He used brass guards too.
Too bad he never used giraffe bone. Or perhaps he did?

 

[irbailey]

I don't number mine, but I do keep a written list of what I've made...not sure why, it's just a habit I've gotten into.

Saying that, it has come in handy, as I now know that I'm currently making my 97th, 98th and 99th knife. Number 100 is a bit of a milestone for me and will be marked as such.

Personally, I'm not bothered by the Loveless style 'chicken scratch' numbering. If anything I think it adds a little individuality to a knife, whether the number means anything or not.

I like the way Marcus Lin does his numbers in the same style as Loveless, but the figure is the knife's 'birthday' (month and year). I'm sure this will be handy in the future for collectors who can see '510' for example and know straight away that it was made in May 2010.

I can however see Kevin's point that a hand engraved number might look a bit out of place on a knife costing five figures. Mind you, it wouldn't stop me buying a Loveless should I ever win the lottery!

Ian

 

[SharpByCoop]

I was asked to post this as another example:

Coop

 

[brownshoe]

Per, "So these Loveless knives would have been better off with out a number? Far as looks?
And the numbers them selves? Do not mean much to a collector? Far as such & such number knife in his or her collection? Bob would have done better? Not numbering them? OR he should had done a better job at putting the numbers on the knives?"

I never met the man, but from what I've read, he started out making using knives and always made a knife to be used. His excellence lies not only in the execution but in the useful design of the knife. He also often expressed a disgust of the collector of "safe queens" and all of the collector's bs, but would (most times) freely take their money. So putting a "chicken scratch" on a knife is no problem for a user, since it will get scratched up anyway.

For a collector piece, one can think of the chicken scratch as a reminder from the artist that knives are to be used, not just pretty objects. Would it have been better if it had been prettier, or meant something?...nobody can say, but you can say for sure with the chicken scratch you have a Loveless. He was brilliant, so he certainly was smart enough to mark them in a prettier way or in a manner that was removable after completion.

 

[Kevin Jones]

Per, "So these Loveless knives would have been better off with out a number? Far as looks?
And the numbers them selves? Do not mean much to a collector? Far as such & such number knife in his or her collection? Bob would have done better? Not numbering them? OR he should had done a better job at putting the numbers on the knives?"

I never met the man, but from what I've read, he started out making using knives and always made a knife to be used. His excellence lies not only in the execution but in the useful design of the knife. He also often expressed a disgust of the collector of "safe queens" and all of the collector's bs, but would (most times) freely take their money. So putting a "chicken scratch" on a knife is no problem for a user, since it will get scratched up anyway.

For a collector piece, one can think of the chicken scratch as a reminder from the artist that knives are to be used, not just pretty objects. Would it have been better if it had been prettier, or meant something?...nobody can say, but you can say for sure with the chicken scratch you have a Loveless. He was brilliant, so he certainly was smart enough to mark them in a prettier way or in a manner that was removable after completion.

Yes Bob, I'm saying (to me) the chicken scratch doesn't look good on a $12,000 knife, especially when beside a neatly etched and cool maker's mark.

I believe a maker numbering their knives can be beneficial if done subtlety and the #'s actually mean something or have a purpose.

For example, many Loveless knives have a hand scribed 3 digit shop #, which most Loveless knife experts will say the # doesn't really mean much, or more doesn't mean much outside the Loveless shop.
Those same 3 numbers could have been used to identify which maker (Bob Loveless, Steve Johnson, Jim Merritt etc) actually made the particular knife and the month and year the knife was made.

That would be very worthwhile information to have now and even more so in the future.

I'm certainly no one to tell the Loveless shop how to number their knives. I consider Bob Loveless a (if not the) pioneer of modern custom knives. However I think my suggestion above makes sense. Nor am I telling other collectors what their preferences should be in regard to how/why/if knives should be marked with numbers.

I did make a suggestion to knifemakers in my above quote as I feel many of us will agree that the Loveless Shop has been very successful doing some things which the vast majority of knifemakers could not be successful doing. IMO, one is haphazardly scratching numbers on their knives. Another would be the practice of multiple knifemakers creating Loveless knives in the Loveless shop over the years.

Many Loveless knives have shop numbers, many do not.
I most likely would not have purchased the two particular Loveless fighters I did over the last 12 months it they would have had shop numbers scratched into the blades. Just personal preference. I doubt there's many (if anyone) who would decline a Loveless knife specifically because it didn't have shop #'s, however I expect I'm not alone in not wanting them.

Was Bob Loveless the first or one of the first modern knifemakers to number their knives? Did Bill Scagel number any of his?

 

[brownshoe]

"I most likely would not have purchased the two particular Loveless fighters I did over the last 12 months it they would have had shop numbers scratched into the blades. Just personal preference.

That's one of the differences between the collector investor and the collector user. If I was blessed with a Loveless, it'd be the city knife and I'd be carrying right now, and it would be stamped, numbered with the sheath signed. Unfortunately all that I have is a loveless city knife folder by Lonewolf and it certainly is a user.

 

[ddd]

I believe a maker numbering their knives can be beneficial if done subtlety and the #'s actually mean something or have a purpose.

Edmund Davidson numbers all of his Loveless Design Full Integrals,
doing it usually on the reverse side of the bolster.

He always also etches an "Edmund Davidson - Loveless Design" etch on the blade
of these knives.
In the case of his 100th Loveless Design Integral he had the number engraved
on the blade by Jere Davidson.

All the best,
David Darom (ddd)