Pic of the Day pt.2

Jed, whether or not Dennis used caulk or lead, please elaborate on your prohibition against caulk w/bricks and mortar. I am assuming that you hold to the notion that both bricks and mortar are porous materials and so caulk would actually trap moisture in the groove and eventually separate from the masonry through wet/dry cycles. Is that the case here? If it isn't, I am all ears. If it is, I have to report that I have had outstanding success with caulk used in brick and mortar, although there is a bit of a demanding process I have to go through to achieve it.

As far as Dennis's workmanship goes, I truly can't imagine him touching anything that doesn't end up looking beautiful when it's completed. Amazingly talented guy. Otoh, I would very much like to see a shot of the corners looking up-slope because I just cannot quite picture how those two small shoulders have been handled. I agree in principle about the reach of the return, but somehow I presume it has been mindfully handled and will perform as hoped for.

As far as the expanse of the metal on the back goes, nobody will ever see it except us, we like copper, it matches the scale of the cricket, and simple is good. Except for my reservations about the way the corners interface (since I can't see them) I give it an A+

I was, like many of us taught old "school" egg. I hold firm that the chase in the mortar should raked out with a bolster, lead wedges applied and the pointing finished with sharp sand mortar mix. The chase on that chimney is recessed somewhat anyway so it would be an easy finish. Many times have I seen the masonry nail and caulk approach. I'm not saying it does'nt work, nor am I doubting Dennis's integrity or workmanship. I don't believe he would perform sub-standared work. I DO believe it is a less effective method of flashing a chimney

Back in the day, us young soldiers were informerd in no uncertain terms that NOBODY, ever gets an A+ because that would indicate perfection, whilst also putting us on par with the instructors. So it gets an A from me..

I see. (chuckling) I would have to respond that I must be showing my colors as a sensate modernist with just a smidgeon of new-age psychology peppering the surface then. In that spirit I'll go ahead and throw in an A+ for the consistency of your evaluation process. I have a slightly more 'liberal' way of grading, but true acceptance is probably just as demanding. Where I differ on the A+ issue is maybe kind of interesting or maybe not, depending on who's doing the thinking. Execution and function make up the A to F grades for me. Since I don't really acknowledge perfection as attainable, the '+' relates to something different. In school they would only give a plus for exceeding the scope of an assignment, which didn't relate to perfection but was something other. I mark down for flaws, commencing with A and running out of room with F, although there is in fact a purple zone (infra-red actually) that starts out at F and goes progressively lower until it reaches the unplumbed depths of wanting to nuke somebody. The plus is a non-linear extension, an imperfect 'A' that is also art. Something that not only has a function but celebrates its function. When I squint my eyes a little and view it not merely as a set of functioning parts but as an entity in its own right, beyond its intended use there may or may not be some extra side to it. Smudge posted up a piece of lead work once that had that extra quality going on.

Here's another that kind of illustrates my goal: