'splain to me about 'band saws'

wrote in message
ups.com...

i asked for photos...not words...Moonraker sent me a recent piece he
restored..
yes, it's gorgeous...but it's NOT Tiffany...

Just to clarify....I never said it WAS Tiffany, nor did I intend to imply
that it was.

And as a further clarification, the lead in that panel was 5/32", not
1/8", making the tolerances even smaller.

Try reading what i wrote with a different (less antagonistic) tone to
your voice..
YOU never SAID it was Tiffany...i said 'it's not Tiffany'...

No one said it was Tiffany...the context is 'i like the look of
Tiffany...but as
gorgeous as this piece is...it's NOT Tiffany'...


why is everyone so contentious? why are you all waiting to
counter-attack
all the time? what's with this retaliation post after post?

it's like trying to talk to a bunch of third graders during recess!!

sheesh!!! again.

a.
Moonraker wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

i asked for photos...not words...Moonraker sent me a recent piece he
restored..
yes, it's gorgeous...but it's NOT Tiffany...

Just to clarify....I never said it WAS Tiffany, nor did I intend to imply
that it was.

And as a further clarification, the lead in that panel was 5/32", not
1/8", making the tolerances even smaller.

wrote in message
oups.com...
Try reading what i wrote with a different (less antagonistic) tone to
your voice..
YOU never SAID it was Tiffany...i said 'it's not Tiffany'...

No one said it was Tiffany...the context is 'i like the look of
Tiffany...but as
gorgeous as this piece is...it's NOT Tiffany'...


why is everyone so contentious? why are you all waiting to
counter-attack
all the time? what's with this retaliation post after post?

it's like trying to talk to a bunch of third graders during recess!!

sheesh!!! again.

Ummmm?

I just didn't want any misunderstandings. I knew it wasn't LCT, you knew
it wasn't LCT, but some of the less attentive folks might have gotten the
wrong impression.

Somebody please pass Arlene the bowl of Prozac.

Moonraker wrote:

And as a further clarification, the lead in that panel was 5/32",
not
1/8", making the tolerances even smaller.

Hey Moon,
4/32" is 1/8" so 5/32" is just a tad bigger. :-)

Andy

hey moonie...i don't need prozac...i don't want the world to go
bye-bye...
i love my reality...it may not be YOUR reality, but it's mine..and i
love it!!

:-))

and yes, there are LOTS AND LOTS of less attentive folk out there...
but Prozac sure won't help that...
sort of flat lines your personality...i've seen it happen too many
times.

is everyone back there on drugs??
here we get high on O2....

second highest oxygen levels on the planet..
yes, that's a fact!

arlene


Moonraker wrote:

Ummmm?

I just didn't want any misunderstandings. I knew it wasn't LCT, you knew
it wasn't LCT, but some of the less attentive folks might have gotten the
wrong impression.

Somebody please pass Arlene the bowl of Prozac.

wrote in message
ps.com...
Moonraker wrote:

And as a further clarification, the lead in that panel was 5/32",
not
1/8", making the tolerances even smaller.

Hey Moon,
4/32" is 1/8" so 5/32" is just a tad bigger. :-)

Andy


Please pass the Prozac...

What I meant was that the panel made ME less tolerant. ;)

michele wrote:
Not as often as churches do, they all use plexi or glass around here to
protect and they still need restoring every once in a while. It's been 30
plus years and i have yet to need to restore any of my work. I actually have
one large, heavy sucker that i did in '74, it has been more places than most
people, has a couple cracked pieces, but no bowing, no fatigue. I say we
should all agree to disagree as we'll never give up our own opinion over
lead vs. foil. (or top vs bottom posting ;) m

Isn't restoring your work after 30 or so years a good thing? Bad thing?


--
Jack

http://www.glasterpiece.com

Moonraker wrote:

"michele" wrote in message
...

Not as often as churches do, they all use plexi or glass around here to
protect and they still need restoring every once in a while. It's been 30
plus years and i have yet to need to restore any of my work. I actually

have

one large, heavy sucker that i did in '74, it has been more places than

most

people, has a couple cracked pieces, but no bowing, no fatigue. I say we
should all agree to disagree as we'll never give up our own opinion over
lead vs. foil. (or top vs bottom posting ;) m



Ya know? I think foil has it's place. Making silly little sailboats, for
example.

Seriously...I have foil panels I made 20+ years ago that are just fine. I
just would never expose a foiled panel to the elements. There's a guy
nearby that makes 4'x4' and larger bath windows with foil. I think he's
crazy, but people keep buying them. He installs them without any other
glazing......!!!!

I'm not "anti-foil", per se. I just prefer to work with lead. Foiling
aggravates me because I can't make the lines "perfect", as smooth and
straight and even as I can the lead lines. A lot of what I do has bevels
in it, and I just don't believe that 1.5mil copper is strong enough to
handle the extra weight of the bevels.

And I bottom posted this one just to show you I know how!!! ;)

PS...I just started back through re-reading all those magazines you sent
me. Thanks again.



Any stray thong pics between the pages?

--
Jack

http://www.glasterpiece.com

wrote:

Try reading what i wrote with a different (less antagonistic) tone to
your voice..
YOU never SAID it was Tiffany...i said 'it's not Tiffany'...

No one said it was Tiffany...the context is 'i like the look of
Tiffany...but as
gorgeous as this piece is...it's NOT Tiffany'...


why is everyone so contentious? why are you all waiting to
counter-attack
all the time? what's with this retaliation post after post?

it's like trying to talk to a bunch of third graders during recess!!

sheesh!!! again.

If I have to pull this car over you both are in big trouble.

--
Jack

http://www.glasterpiece.com

wrote:

Moonraker wrote:

And as a further clarification, the lead in that panel was 5/32",
not
1/8", making the tolerances even smaller.

Hey Moon,
4/32" is 1/8" so 5/32" is just a tad bigger. :-)

Andy


A tad? Are you calling .031" a tad?

Sorry. Thirty years as a machinist screwed up my idea of "tad". Doesn't
help in my glasswork.

Oh wait, I'm not sorry. That's 25% bigger.

--
Jack

http://www.glasterpiece.com