Tips to successfully enter the 2025 Exhibition
The mandate of the SAWS Standards Committee is to ensure that all work exhibited to the public under SAWS’ name be of the highest possible quality in craftsmanship. This means that every piece that is included in the biennial SAWS Exhibition is inspected very closely by the four Standards Committee members. Based on what we see in each entry, we either accept it fully, accept it conditionally (with any issues noted to be rectified), or we reject it for a number of reasons that don’t meet the quality standard expectations. An external independent Jury is tasked with judging the entries from an overall design perspective.
What exactly do Standards look for? The “Call for Entry” document (see https://www.saws.ca/2025) lists over a dozen specific items we check for during the evaluation process (see pages 5 - 6). Please read them carefully to prevent any disappointments with your entries. A major flaw may exclude the piece from the exhibition, or several minor flaws may do the same. One minor flaw will usually not cause rejection.
There are basic construction details that we look at. For example, there are two schools of thought on scribed lines for dovetail mark-outs. One says leave them to show they were hand done, the other says remove them. We can accept either, but be consistent in your piece, not like the drawer to the right.
There are acceptable ways to hold drawer bottoms in – generally they are held in grooves on the sides and front and screwed to the back – not unfastened and kept in place by a staple as this one was.
Elements of a piece should align well when the design obviously call for it. This front has several elements that almost align, but not quite. The peak of the angle, the joint in the top and the joint in the veneer below it are all three misaligned.
Construction should keep wood movement in mind. If this box lid changes moisture content, it will put a strain on the hinges. The grain should run the long direction in this case.
Glueing wood cross grain should be avoided. In this box, the top was glued to the sides, creating a conflict at the glueline should moisture content change. Note the creep at the one end already as the top dried.
The fit of the joinery is also very important. If dovetails are used, there should be no noticeable gaps or filler showing. Mitres should be tight and properly aligned.
Another issue has to do with sanding. There have many pieces that we have accepted only conditionally – the condition being that some areas of the piece have the sanding scratches removed. These were obvious especially on some of the turnings. When held to a raking light, scratches stood out like a sore thumb. Getting rid of them involves some elbow grease and working through sequentially finer and finer sandpaper grits. Jumping ahead to too fine a grit (too soon) only prolongs the agony.
The following piece had sanding scratches; as seen in the first photo, as well as a poorly-glued break, a rather irregular wall thickness and shaping that had lost its crispness of edges (as seen in the second photo). In spite of its interesting shape, it was deemed to have too many issues to resolve and was consequently excluded from the exhibition.
Closely related to sanding scratches is the problem of tear-out. This often shows itself after the first coat of finish is applied and few of us are eager to go back to sanding or scraping at this point. Never-the-less, it must be done. A well sharpened scraper can make quick work of cleaning up tear-out, although it’s important to feather out this work so there are no apparent dips. Following up with sandpaper will solve the problem. A curved scraper is handy for the inside of a turned bowl.
Another area that caused a number of conditional acceptances was the finish. Applying a finish in a room filled with dust is a recipe for disaster as shown here. The only solution is to sand it down again and refinish in a dust free area.
An inadequate finish will leave an uneven sheen to the work as seen here. The solution is simply to add another coat or two
Spraying can sometimes leave a “shadow” area that gets missed due to an overhang such as the drawer pull. This drawer front was one of 11 that all showed the same dry area below the pull. Respraying while paying attention to this area made this piece acceptable.
Another problem seen on several pieces was too much finish, at least in some spots. Applying a finish too thickly can result in runs and sags. These need to be sanded flat. It sometimes helps to use a very sharp chisel to pare the offending bumps off, allowing the often-soft finish underneath to harden, then using very fine sandpaper to even things out before applying another thin coat.
As can be seen in this photo, applying a finish while the wood is spinning can easily lead to unsightly runs radiating out from the centre. If you catch this before you remove it from the lathe, they can easily be sanded out while the lathe is running. Again, work through your full range of grits and then refinish, this time being less generous. If you wait until Standards points it out, it likely will require much more hand sanding to get it right.
Applying a finish takes care. Brush marks do not enhance fine woodwork. When they do show up, they need to be sanded out before you try again.
Another issue that often shows itself after the first coat of finish is applied is excess glue that wasn’t cleaned up. Often appearing near joints, but sometimes showing up elsewhere, these light spots mean sanding or scraping off the finish and glue to bare wood, then refinishing. It’s important to keep glue off your fingers when gluing up your piece. It’s easy to leave a fingerprint that only shows up after the finishing stage. Note the whitish spots on the below piece – they are spots of glue.
Quality of hardware should match quality of woodwork. Use brass instead of plastic if possible. Hardware should be proportioned to the piece. Use smaller hinges for smaller boxes, larger hinges for larger doors. Hardware needs to be installed carefully with no gaps showing beside the metal.
All these observations made are not to run down the craftsmen that submitted these pieces, but to provide constructive criticism from which the maker can learn from. I’ve been careful not to mention whose pieces these were – that’s not important. It’s not about SAWS being an elitist group, but rather to encourage makers and to showcase fine workmanship to the public of what the woodworking craft is capable of creating.
The fewer pieces we need to reject, the happier we will be. We hope to see lots of great pieces submitted in June.
Herm Stolte, Chair, Standards Committee with thanks to fellow members Fred Coates, Bill Maniotakis, and Dave Ross for their editing and input.