Dumb damaskeening

[Spike]

Here?s an example AMERICAN WALTHAM 18 SIZE (http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=890224194) in which the damaskeening seems to have been done with no effort to have it harmonize with the design of the plates.

Are there models of mass produced American pocket watches in which particular care appears to have been taken to make the damaskeening harmonize with and enhance the design of the plates?

[Spike]

Here?s an example AMERICAN WALTHAM 18 SIZE (http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=890224194) in which the damaskeening seems to have been done with no effort to have it harmonize with the design of the plates.

Are there models of mass produced American pocket watches in which particular care appears to have been taken to make the damaskeening harmonize with and enhance the design of the plates?

[Cary]

I think you just have to see the "frosties" in person first, then when you see a pic of one you know how really pretty it is.

Speaking as a "Frostie" owner...although it is awaiting a new jewel...or let me rephrase..the money to have a jewel replaced :frown:

Cary

[Barry G]

I like frosties!

http://barrygoldberg.net/watches/watch45d.jpg

Barry

------------------
My Online Pocket Watch Collection (http://barrygoldberg.net/watches.htm)

[Tom McIntyre]

In my humble opinion, the finisher of the original 83 model above was trying to make a skill statement by having the design be very simple, but cross a very difficult plate boundary at the corner of the balance cock and still stay perfectly in register.

This was not an easy thing to do since the tool has some size that needs to be managed when approaching the edge.

I often look at these plate decorations and think it was a little contest between the artists doing the work. Often the most difficult execution is very simple in appearance.

The winding wheels on the 88 Waltham American Grade are perhaps the best example of this. They are absolutely plain radial lines.

------------------
Tom McIntyre
Past President, NAWCC Chapters 174 and 87
Member Chapters 8, 87, 149, 159, 161 and 174
NAWCC: Crafts Committee, Web Committee
Pocket Horology Web (http://www.pocketwatch.org)
Tommy the JOAT's Web (http://www.AWCo.org)

[Spike]

What does "frosted" mean in terms of how it was made to look that way?

[Tom McIntyre]

I have not seen the process documented, but I believe that the frosting is an acid etch applied to the plates before the damaskeening. Waltham also made some very nice 1 size watches and other small watches that were only frosted with no damaskeening.

I would guess that the frosting process used a slightly warm acid bath and suspended the pieces above it for a calculated period of time.

------------------
Tom McIntyre
Past President, NAWCC Chapters 174 and 87
Member Chapters 8, 87, 149, 159, 161 and 174
NAWCC: Crafts Committee, Web Committee
Pocket Horology Web (http://www.pocketwatch.org)
Tommy the JOAT's Web (http://www.AWCo.org)

[lots of time]

Im going to have to look for a "frosty" I think both those scans are very nice. I have bought several 83 and 92 walthams simply because I liked the damaskeening. Silly reason? Maybe.

[Rick White]

Annie, frosting is as others have described,
I have seen a few walthams all 1883 models with the damaskeening and frosted plated. It reminds me of shiny acid etched glass in a way. I have yet to see a scan or pic that really does justice to compliment the frosted movements. If you should make it to the Denver regional the beginning of August I will show you one in person.

------------------
Rick White

[Rich]

Oh Barry! Once again the voice of reason, endeavoring to pour oil on trouble waters!

Thanks Barry: But even though you have raised the veil a tad, the true identity of this troubled individual is still a mystery to me. Clearly, he is a very naughty boy ? an attention seeker without doubt.

Before the unwarranted intervention by 'the watch police', this topic sought to discuss 'Dumb Damaskeening'. But as usual following these pointless interruptions, the thread is high-jacked, killing the hitherto lively discussions stone-dead. Therefore, with repeated apologies to the original author of this topic, I suggest that any further discussion of 'watch police' interference should take place elsewhere. The topic here, in case anyone has forgotten, is: 'Dumb Damaskeening!'

http://www.nawcc.org/ubb/cool.gif

============================
PS
This PS added on 07-01-2002in the hope of clearing up any confusion caused by the partisan surgery performed on this topic by an immoderate moderator.
The topic had been de-railed by two mischievous interventions from 'The Witch Police' that the moderator had chosen to ignore. Only AFTER I posted a complaint, were the offending 'WP' posts deleted by the moderator, who also arbitarily deleted other posts, of mine and at least two other contributors. This action ruined the thread's continuity rendering several of the following posts incomprehensible to new readers.
=================================
------------------
'Rich'
#149591

[This message has been 'edited'?.... by Howard Gunderson (edited 06-30-2002).]

[This message has been edited by Rich (edited 07-01-2002).]

[HOWARD GUNDERSON]

Friends, a number of posts under this topic had to be deleted. They should have been sent as emails directly to the posters involved and did not contain information about pocket watches.
You may email me @ hwardrb@aol.com should you want to discuss my deleting your post if you feel it was a proper pocket watch post.
Otherwise please give some thought to finding the proper forum for your comments.
I appreciate your cooperation and am greatful that I rarely have to delete any posts.\Howard Gunderson, Moderator

------------------

[Charles Isham]

I am having trouble with the term "dumb"
damaskeening-could someone explain this to me please?

Charles

[Rich]

The Moderator writes:

"Friends, a number of posts under this topic had to be deleted. They should have been sent as emails directly to the posters involved and did not contain information about pocket watches.
You may email me @ hwardrb@aol.com should you want to discuss my deleting your post if you feel it was a proper pocket watch post.."


Sir:

Yet another example of the double-standards practised within the NAWCC in general, and on these message boards in particular. Certain individuals are allowed to run amok from board to board, without let or hindrance, their unwarranted interventions into other members' topics causing chaos and disruption. This topic, "Dumb Damaskeening" provides the perfect example. Before the provocative intervention by 'the watch police', this topic sought to discuss 'Dumb Damaskeening'. But true to form, the pointless interruptions high-jack the thread and kill the hitherto lively discussions stone-dead. When I protest, suggesting that any further discussion of 'watch police' interference should take place elsewhere, you delete my posts! Admittedly, you deleted the two 'watch police' posts, and others, including an inoffensive one from Barry G, and one by the topic's author!

Why did you not delete the 'watch police' posts, both clearly intended to be provocative, days ago? Had you done your duty at that time, this situation would not have arisen. But as usual, double-standards prevail, allowing certain 'inner-circle' offender(s), as always, to get away scot-free. In my carefully considered opinion, your arbitrary action not only dismembered the topic, but more to the point, provided a smoke-screen, to the advantage of those who caused this distressing turn of events.

You write: "You may email me @ hwardrb@aol.com should you want to discuss my deleting your post if you feel it was a proper pocket watch post.."

"Yeah.....R I G H T !" I have e-mailed you on two occasions ? in each instance, you neglected to respond.

Sir, I take great exception to this cavalier action: 'immoderate' rather than 'moderating'. I view the deletion of my posts as an insult (especially as you had neglected to respond to my appeal), and a personal attack on my integrity. By doing so, you have criticized me publicly, on a public access message board: I respond on the same platform. I have no intention of entering into a discussion elsewhere.


------------------
'Rich'
#149591

[Spike]

Charles Isham says, ?I am having trouble with the term ?dumb? damaskeening-could someone explain this to me please??

I regard the damaskeening in the cited example as dumb (my dictionary says ?showing a lack of sense or intelligence; uninteresting; trite?) for the reason I gave in my post: no effort seems to have been made to harmonize with or enhance the design of the plates.

For example the damaskeening might have been designed so as to frame the balance wheel. Instead of seeming to be heedless of the pivots it might have incorporated them as elements in its design. It might have avoided sullying two of the movement?s attractive features, the script American Waltham and the engraving on the balance cock.

My stated purpose was to find out about American pocket watch models in which the damaskeening is more complementary and more complimentary to the movement.

Thank you to those who've contributed!


[This message has been edited by Annie (edited 06-30-2002).]

[lots of time]

I am new to this forum and but not new to life in general.. It would seem that it depends on who you are in regards to what you post. This forum is getting so that it is not positive in attracting new members to either the NAWCC or the discussions taking place on this venue. I am not a butt kisser and never will be. I dont care how much experience someone has collecting, servicing, selling or buying.
I am here to learn. Posts that offend one particular individual seem to be deleted very quickly.

Beleive it or not, the sun does not rise and set on "the watch police" also known as another name. I am almost ready to give up on this whole thing.. Not give up on collecting, but give up on this forum. I dont think I have seen as much butt kissing on an internet forum in my life.
One certain individual could post a picture of a dogs hind end on here and get.. "wow!!! never seen one like that" "can you post more?"
I have respect for those who earn respect with me. No respect for those who inherently believe they are superior.

One final thought for one who seems to like the Canadian national anthem..... "Oh Canada"
OH SAY!!!!! CAN'T YOU SEE??????????

[Rich]

To Kirklox & other interested parties:
Earlier in this thread I posted as follows:

"But as usual, the pointless interruptions high-jack the thread and kill the hitherto lively discussions stone-dead. Therefore, with repeated apologies to the original author of this topic, I suggest that any further discussion of 'watch police' interference should take place elsewhere."

Now I intend to do just that ? anyone care to follow me...?


------------------



------------------
'Rich'
#149591

[lots of time]

sure

[Jerry Treiman]

As I understand it, most of the damascening on American watches was done by machine rather than hand tools. As a result the patterns are generally symmetrical about the center of the watch, or else as some variant of geneva striping. Although there are exceptional watches, most of the common movements were not damascened around other engraving or off-center parts. Among the exceptions that come immediately to my mind (I am sure others have their favorites) are the 18-size 1892-model Waltham where the "well" under the balance wheel was separately damascened and the later 18-size full-plate Rockfords that matched the ornamentation nicely to the plate patterns.

[Charles Isham]

Huh? Therefore, Waltham damaskeeners were dumb? Huh?

Wow, most collectors believe that Waltham produced some of, if not, the VERY best in finish, including damaskeening. Either the folks here don't understand finishing or have never seen any of these types of Waltham watches, especially 72 and 88 models which are coveted by serious collectors.

Or, maybe is it that you folks don't understand that the higher the grade generally the better the finish!

But dumb, hardly; it is an art form consistent with turning, if you are familiar with this.

Charles

[Tom McIntyre]

There were at least 3 different damaskeening machines used from time to time. I think the decoration on the Rockfords that follows the plate layout is yet another form that probably used very large design templates. However, Rockford also used the Stark machine below and the example I have seen supposedly was used there.

The 3 standard machines are:

1. The straight line machine used for geneva stripes and other parallel work.

2. The rose engine used for a variety of circular patterns including the engine turning on watch cases.

3. The Waltham/Stark Damaskeening Machine that used a combination of straight line and rose engine mechanisms along with close free hand attention from the operator.

The finest work on the Waltham 72 model and others was done with machine 3. I think most Illinois work was done witht machine 2. The 83 models pictured here were probably done with the rose engine machine also.

I made movies of these machines in operation for the Railroad Symposium at Rockford years ago. That was back before I could readily store and display pictures and I don't have the stills of the devices.

George Collord owns the only current example of the Stark machine that I know of. He bought it from the Rockford Museum quite a few years ago. George also has a watch rose engine, but there are many larger rose engines available since they were widely used in the jewelry trade up until WWII.

The watch versions are rather smaller than the jewelry versions. The Stark Damaskeening Machine is about 2 feet square with a horizontal mounting mechanism for the watch plates being decorated.

The decorating tool is typically an ivory rod charged with a light abrasive material. It is operated with the finger after setting up the cams, stops, etc. for a particular decorating pass.

I don't think there is anyone alive with the skill to operate the machine, but Richard Ketchen has been doing nice small rose engine work on the hand made clocks he has built over the past several years.

Even keeping track and finding the proper settings for a rose engive is very difficult. The Stark machine is at least 3 times as complex.

------------------
Tom McIntyre
Past President, NAWCC Chapters 174 and 87
Member Chapters 8, 87, 149, 159, 161 and 174
NAWCC: Crafts Committee, Web Committee
Pocket Horology Web (http://www.pocketwatch.org)
Tommy the JOAT's Web (http://www.AWCo.org)

[ron schneider]

now who is off topic now

doc ron

[Charles Isham]

Sam,

This "crowd" is too tough for me and it is too bad they missed all those watches on the 149 chapter "sideshow." Besides, I keep them all in the SD box.

Charles

[ron schneider]

why would common 83 walthams have the finest finish as these were cheap movements i will put up my 72 walthams against anything else in american come see me in fort wayne and ill show you a few

doc ron

[Charles Isham]

Horses eat hay-go back and read for the last several years; use the search function or just click backwards.

Charles

[ron schneider]

steam power with the dumb damaskeener manipulitating the patterns at least we dont have this problem with early gilt american high grades of waltham which in some ways are even more juicy in their simplicity

doc ron

[Douglas Romero]

Thanks to Tom for putting this topic back on track and providing some interesting knowledge on the equipment of 'yesterday' used to produce what few if any people could do today with that machinery (not to detract from what some of the really serious watchmakers accomplish for new LIMITED production timepieces -- that sell for BIG $$$$$!)

------------------
Doug Romero

[Tom McIntyre]

doc ron has it right on the power, of course. At Waltham there was a single monster Corliss engine that ran live shafting all over the plant. The shafts down the middle of the work rooms fed shafts above each workbench along the walls and these in turn came down to whatever equipment was on the bench. At Waltham I would guess there was at least 10 or 15 miles of live shafting and quite a bit more of flat belting.

There is a small piece of this set up at the Museum in Columbia. If you come to the Mideast Regional in York PA it is a very short trip over to Columbia to visit the Museum. The machine setup includes one of Charles Vander Woerd's wonderful automatic screw machines.

------------------
Tom McIntyre
Past President, NAWCC Chapters 174 and 87
Member Chapters 8, 87, 149, 159, 161 and 174
NAWCC: Crafts Committee, Web Committee
Pocket Horology Web (http://www.pocketwatch.org)
Tommy the JOAT's Web (http://www.AWCo.org)

[Jon Hanson]

Tom,

It is called overhead line shafts and each bench had their own "clutches" and, yes, the power was centralized with that monster Corliss engine.

I have some original period pictues of the various rooms and operation and will scan same when time permits.

Jon

[terry hall]

In this thread
http://www.nawcc.org/ubb/Forum13/HTML/000827.html

Greg posted images of a couple of damaskeening machines. The links are inactive now. Maybe he could re-post them?

[terry hall]

Do y'all recall the horsepower on the Corliss in the Waltham factory?

Just asking.... won't be in LA, but will attend Southeast Old Time Thresher's reunion. A gathering of old machinery, steam, kerosine, and horse power. They have as a permanent display a 350 horsepower Bates-Corliss steam engine. Flywheel weighed 42,000 lbs. It and other restored steam engines will be running July 3-7.
http://www.threshers.com/farmpark/

[terry hall]

SamW,
I would bet on it.
Most early factories were placed near a water source, independent of the end product.

I know around here research on Jamestown rifles has show many early shops to be near a water source. These were small shops.

[Tom McIntyre]

I am not sure, but I think Waltham used steam from the beginning in the Waltham factory. I am not sure what they used in Roxbury.

I worked in the old American Woolen Mills factory in Maynard MA. It still preserved all the power systems that had been used and some of the old shaft blocks were still in place in the various bays of the building.

They started with a barrel wheel in the basement of building 4 and later replaced that with a Corliss and eventually went to a big steam driven generator. When I was working there they still ran a supplemental generator off of the old barrel wheel and used the power to light the Christmas Tree each year.

Jon, I meant to use the term "live shaft" to indicate that the full length of the shaft was turning exposed. I agree it was called line shafting.

------------------
Tom McIntyre
Past President, NAWCC Chapters 174 and 87
Member Chapters 8, 87, 149, 159, 161 and 174
NAWCC: Crafts Committee, Web Committee
Pocket Horology Web (http://www.pocketwatch.org)
Tommy the JOAT's Web (http://www.AWCo.org)

[Dr. Jon]

To Annie's topic

I think the 72 Walthams had the most harmonious damascening but it is much in the eye of the beholder.

It has not been mentioned perhaps because it may be obvious but damasceening harks back to when people bought a watch for the movement. The invwestment in decoration of the movement was to attract buyers. From the perspective of the manufacturer the only dumb damascening was that which did not sell watches despite the higher costs incurred.

In figuring costs the amount of highly skilled labor a few cents would buy was astonishing. I would sumize that operation of the three machines was akin to programming today and in many senses laid the ground for it.

There used to be a toy called a magic designer that did a similar thing with pencil lies on disks of paper.

I do not recall seeing damascening machines at the Le Chaut du Fonds Museum but I did see engine turning machines. They were massive inspiring devices that could well have conferred prestige and satisfaction to operators. They were much more rigid that the mills and machines to shape plates and bridges. This was serious investment.

I doubt that harmonization of the parts was as important as attracting buyers and they have always been capricious.

BTW thanks for the beautiful scans