Okay this question has been nagging at me for some time now. Probably about as long as I've been lurking on myArmoury.

We all no that Wootz/damascus steel and pattern welding can create some amazingly beautiful patterns. Pattern welding, as far as I can tell, was to one degree or another required- the bloomery would either create all-too soft iron, or all too brittle steel. the pattern is going to be there (as for if its attractive, or easily seen is another discussion.)

There would have been a number of ways to draw out this pattern that would be easily available- vinegar, or polishing to name a couple.

Then there's mail. One only needs to google mail armor to find 'those' sights displaying the nigh on infinite patterns of weaves. As to whether its historically accurate, is again another question, easily answered, (something about the lack of anything other than 4-in-1, and perhaps the odd 6-in-1 surviving).

So the question is simple: just how much experimentation was involved in the everyday manufacture of swords, and armor, and all the other good stuff? How common was it to see some simple aesthetic features, and finally why is it that there seems to be an incredible dichotomy between what the average fellow had and made, compared to those utterly beautiful pieces commissioned by kings (or otherwise particularly well off individuals) from a relatively small handful of smiths?