Acrylic platter

Nandric, I may be wrong, but I think Richard is saying that different operators produce different quality results, even though the machine itself is computer-controlled, and presumably even though the program being used to control the computer may be the same for each operator. I share Richard's puzzlement, in that case. There are still some hands-on aspects of the work, including fixing the blank piece of metal into the cutting machine, and perhaps therein lies the source of the variable outcome.

Nandric and Lewm.
I have seen both David and Pieta and I was in awe at such beauty, such craftsmanship. Made from stone no less!

I remember The Arm, way back then I lusted after it, which was irrational since I never actually auditioned one properly. (Is one allowed to use the term lust in these PC days (daze)). But with my tiny take home pay, ownership was never going to happen. Even then it was hideously expensive here but this price was probably justified given that it was obviously made with great care by craftsmen.

Lewm, you are correct. Same program, same machine, same material, different result. And yes it is likely work piece set up, vice tension and all the other tiny "insignificant" little things that make the difference.

Dear Lew, I understood Richard in the same way as you. My
mentioninig of the chisel and hammer by Michelangelo and
(implicite) the old lathes by creation of the Sumiko 800,
FR-64 and Triplanar was not about the 'instruments used'
but about the masters who used them. I even try to explain
what 'talent' means. Well 'talent' is an expression or an
linguistic entity but the talent is something that can be
observed in the reality. Something that shows itself.
I hope that this is understandable English. Anyway it
seems to me that all three of us have similar thoughts
about the 'mastership' which, uh, produces the 'masterpieces'.

I agree.
That's why we have Stradivarii.