My thought pattern must differ compared to others...my choice of grind is based on what provides the end user with the best combination of characteristics for their intended purpose(s).
This might be long winded, so indulge me. It's no secret that I consider "hollow" grinds to be inferior. I know saying that will get some folks up in arms, but let's look at it. What most folks call a "hollow" grind is really a perverted hollow grind. A true hollow grind is a set of arcs, beginning at or near the spine of a blade, and continuing on each side, intersecting AT the blade's edge. This produces a very fine, yet delicate edge, with great cutting ability, but very limited strength/durability. For it's intended purposes, the hollow grind is an outstanding grind....but was designed and intended for light, fine cutting jobs.
What many call "hollow" grinds today was brought about by a certain production knife company back in the 60s... Their engineers had determined that a specific blade, of a certain steel type would be produced at a particular Rc hardness. After producing and selling a number of these knives, people complained that the edges were brittle, with the company receiving many complaints and returns. Rather than rethink the blade material or the Rc hardness, the engineers decided to make a "quick fix" changing the way the blades were "hollow" ground with the express idea of increasing edge strength. The solution was to stop the "hollow" grind short of the edge, and produce larger edge bevels. It worked in the respect that the edges no longer chipped/broke. What they did not consider, was the impact the change would have on the cutting ability of the blade, and the end user's ability to sharpen the blade. Because of the action(s) of this particular company, it became the accepted norm for a hollow grind to have overly large edge bevels, and many custom knifemakers adopted the methodology, and passed it along. Over time it became the "norm" for custom makers to build their knives with this "perverted" hollow grind, because it was less work, and simpler to accomplish. Both are what I consider the WRONG reasons for choosing a specific grind. It eventually became known as a "Hollow grind" even though it holds little resemblance to a true hollow grind.
To be fair, there are those who still put forth the effort and time to create actual hollow grinds, but those folks are becoming fewer and fewer, and the fact that the true hollow grind is not an all purpose grind makes it even less evident in today's custom knife world.
Most of what I do is based on a flat ground blade, with a convex edge. It's not because I forge most of my blades, but because a blade that is distal tapered, then flat ground creates strength, with light weight. I can increase or decrease edge strength with the amount of convex I apply to the edge.
I guess what I'm trying to relay is that the knifemaker's thought process must go deeper than simply what looks good, or is easy to produce. If you're really serious about producing a custom knife that is superior to anything commercially available, you need to consider all the aspects that will make it so. Cutting resistance, geometry (both of blade and edge), weight versus strength ratios, and something I think is often overlooked by makers....the customer's ability to sharpen and use the knife. What we must do as knifemakers, is to put ourselves in the shoes of our customers...and not worry about what makes things easier on us when we are producing a knife, but rather think about what will give the customer the most usable, comfortable, easy to maintain knife we can offer them.
