"Bellerby says it takes around six months to complete just one of the globes, which range from £999 ($1440) for the smallest to £59,000 ($85,000) for the Churchill."
William Morris was a socialist and paid decent wages and provided good jobs. He did it by making furniture and wallpapers that only the seriously rich could afford. I suspect we will see more of this craft production of nice things at costs a large multiple of the cheapest mass-produced items.
(OA lead me to a teaching idea..., and it turns out that gore projection is full of compromises and trade-offs )
Have a look at Catchpole and Rye, for instance. They make absolutely beautiful bathroom fittings, handmade in Kent:
That’s pretty much the business model of several european countries even – high tech, and nice things manifactured.
A nice thought. Experience tells me it will remain remarkably difficult to find skilled craftspeople.
Businesses such as this, although frequently making things I want to buy, seem exceptionally vulnerable to recessions, so there's regular attrition.
Even now will often have little idea of this new-fangled internet thing - presumably too busy at the lathe or forge!
I wish there were easier ways of finding these folks. Google is no help most of the time.
Really the kind of thing you only think about when you have to physically execute it.
It's a great example of obliquity in action. He's not interested in doing it for the sake of making money ... he's making globes because he has always wanted to make globes perfectly. The money is coming in because of his method of making the globes. Rare quality and workmanship are conspicuous aspects of his products. The price and demand are byproducts.
Would just be a cool niche to have scientifically more accurate globes.
Stack Exchange about the earth's compression:
Scientific American article about the earth's true shape:
I don't think anyone would notice, especially on a "bumpy" globe. It might be less than manufacturing tolerances.
It would be for those of us who like to apply a fairly big caliper to our globes...
On a 30cm globe, the Everest would peak ~200µm above the globe's average surface (though it would possibly/probably be too small to even represent), the tibetan plateau would be ~100µm above the average surface. It seems detectable but would require a pretty ridiculously smooth globe, I don't think a plastic-and-paper globe would work.
> The smallest pattern that could be distinguished from the non-patterned surface had grooves with a wavelength of 760 nanometres and an amplitude of only 13 nanometres.
I wonder why it weighs 700 pounds if it's hollow
And then, not even a single close-up photo of a globe.
Not the clearest, but better than nothing!
Looks like their blog might be the place to check.
Edit: Found some pictures of a topographic print [http://mcortechnologies.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/10603...] No globes though.
I wish these things were more the rule. There's a lot of planets around past and future.
Along with ditching the euro centric north is always up top. You learn a lot by looking at a globe sidways since you loss the pre conditioned bias you'll have from standard flat maps.
In the second-to-last picture, a relatively large globe seems mounted in a double gimbal, so it doesn't really have an up/down.
With a roar of frustrating you hurl your desk globe into a ravine. Should've brought a map.
PS: I wouldn't hurl any of those babies =)
I wonder how much it will cost to make a 3d printed one.
And while searching i found this: https://scandy.co/welcome. They are too small...