When katchushi were knocking out kabuto that were destined to be lacquered they cut corners, often the lines are horrible. The ground process of sabi nuri corrects this. The lines are built up using kokuso and egawa, the surface is thickened with jinoko and tonoko sabi with the urushi layers to follow. Only once the surface is completely smooth can the tetsu sabiji nuri be applied.
Pauls kabuto has good iron work that was never intended to be enhanced or corrected with sabi nuri.
Dave, would higher quality armor makers cut corners on their kabuto that were going to be lacquered as in Saotome etc, in other words if you were to strip the lacquer off a high quality kabuto would it be apparent that the kabuto was ment to be lacquered or did high quality armor makers put the same amount of detail into all of their kabuto whether or not the finished product was qoing to be lacquered.
Eric, that's something I can't answer easily. The reason being that I've seen many items that contradict the rules. The issues are that the value of armour is not always dictated by the owner/s wants. Also the longevity to which such items lasted, or were refurbished can sway their final appearance.
What I can say is that I've seen russet that's old and as rough as a bears arse. Also I know of some outstanding Tetsu items that had been lacquered over for maybe fashionable reasons. My opinion is that armour has one use, and that's primarily protection. When we see fabulous metal work it often reflects wealth as added value.
What I can say is that Tetsu is honest in terms of wysiwyg, whereas armour covered in urushi can conceal a multitude of sins.
Post by Alessandro Tornese on Jan 19, 2016 11:44:04 GMT
Hi Dave, you are right and of course agree with you, some times the urushi could hide the imperfections of metalworking, but urushi as you know very well was and is also a expensive material for armors, could give to items a more elegant style, and it was a protection for iron