I developed the crossing joint as a possible solution to how conventional joinery results in a disruption of grain along the rails and/or stiles of a frame and panel door.
I cut one sample joint, then did some photo manipulation to see how it would look in a similar situation.
First, I looked at the fingers in a horizontal orientation.
Then I tried the fingers in a vertical orientation.
I liked this second orientation because I felt the inside finger of the stile that extended to cover the end of the rail provided the mental idea of an border and finished off the edge of the door. I suspected that this was because most doors opened horizontally – if this joinery was used where doors opened vertically (e.g. lifted upward), the first orientation might have been preferable.
What do you think?
Links:
Sculptural Woodwork by Chris Wong 
I definitely appreciate what you are going for with this joint (and agree with your preference on orientation for side sliding doors.) But…unless you can come up with a way to make a true basket weave pattern, your joint is directional, less so than with a butt joint or miter, but given the uninterrupted long grain in a strong grained wood like you show, it has a “flow” direction and an “skipping” direction. perhaps a recurved puzzlesqe knuckle bridle joint, might allow you to balance the grain in the overlap to be 50/50 (like a miter) but maintain the flow of both pieces. The challenge being to not draw too much attention to the joint itself. Of course curves may be totally wrong for your intent as well so YMMV.
Hi Chris,
The joint that you developed is a great idea depending on your uses that you intend for it. The lines are pleasing and do-able in a production run for a project. They don’t seem to require too much fussing with the equipment to achieve and the result seems attainable in good time.
Depending on the project you would use this joint in, it could bring a very clever visual bonus. There is one thing that I was taught young though and that was to try to keep joints and lines that one would want to keep visually neutral on a horizontal plane as much as possible. It seems that our brain has a natural tendency to cancel the visual impact of these lines or joints out or to tone them down some. This seems to be what Jeremy was referring too in his comment. The design being what it is though I would be inclined to see this joint as a joint that could be well repeated in sequence on a design with a good visual impact. I think that your design ideas are very original and that this joint is also very original in it’s conception. Seems to have the strength requirements depending where used also.
All in all. I think that you have designed a very original and unique joint that could be a great benefit to a cool project and the orientation of the joint would be a personal choice at the time of design. There are sure to be varying opinions on this one and the fact will still remain ” Cool Joint”. Keep up the Grey Matter Squeeze, Your ideas are both interesting and pleasing.
RR
Chris, I seem to like the vertical line better (that would be the bottom one) my eyes carry through with the design easier in that set up. I think you have a great concept to eliminate the “joint”.
nice work
Steve
I thought your crossing joint seemed interesting when you first presented it, but to be honest it seems *too* disruptive in these photos because the grain patterns adjacent to the joint produce an unpleasant optical illusion–the “crossings” seem curved. I think it would look better if the grain patterns were perfectly straight and the crossings were narrower on one end and thicker on the other, rather than consistent in width. I also wonder if, in this case, angling or curving the crossings to match the grain pattern would have been more pleasing to my eyes.
I agree with you Chris. I like the second one better as well. Even though both ways continue lines the first one gives a chopped off feeling. The second one gives a linear flow. Love your stuff Chris.
Jeremy, Roy, Steve, Rob and Judy,
Thanks for your comments. You’ve presented some interesting observations and I don’t feel that I can provide any kind of response without actually building four full doors on an actual piece. Until then, I will ponder this joinery.
One thing that I’ve observed from the second orientation is that even though 50% of the grain of the stiles actually runs right through, the grain of the rails appears to be more continuous.
Chris