Trey and Lynne on sat 19 jul 97
Reading DonKopy's "jiggering justification" was very refreshing for me. I'm
not sure that you know just how arrogant some of you (studio potters) come
off sometimes. I entered the pottery and ceramics medium through the back
door, and have been bitterly dissappointed by the attitudes I sometimes
encounter. I'm a moldmaker. I was trained to reproduce hundreds and
thousands of parts in the furniture and accessory industry. I worked in
filled polyester, urethanes, silicones, tooling resins, and plasters. I
have helped more than my share of people who have no appreciation for the
insight and pre-production de-bugging involved in mass production.
Production is itself an art. Any potter will do well to gain these skills
and take them to new levels.
Most of my pots involve some casting / extruding / jiggering (jollying) and
handbuilding, and usually in combination. I believe you will find that most
potters use some tooling support, even if they don't think so out loud.
If more of you would take time to use these TOOLS then we could all take
this art into the 21st. century years before it will be here.
For example: I have been known to jolly (JIGGER) massive bowl shapes on a
large wheel and then throw the undercut on top of the part (still in the
mold), making a very large jug 20"tall/ 14"wide. I could not do this in one
go on the wheel alone, it would collapse, my throwing skills are just not
that good yet. Also, I have two shapes made in the same jigger mold, saving
me money, time, etc. all good things, eh? Just think what you "real
potters" could do if you took your skills to similar heights by using TOOLS
that can help you things NOT POSSIBLE using traditional methods.
If you buy your tools (molds) thats one thing. But if you make you own
tools (molds for whatever process) then you have truly kept your artistic
trueness and you are not selling out- you are working smarter. Thanks Don-
I'm new to the newsgroups and have only been working in clay for 3 years,
your note was timely and very refreshing.
Trey Pollard-
capiii@tecinfo.com
http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Lofts/2602
Vince Pitelka on sun 20 jul 97
Trey -
I appreciate the tone of your post in defense of "tooling support." In my
post about honesty concerning ones production methods, I should have
stipulated that when the studio potter uses jiggering, slip casting, or ram
pressing to make components which are then hand assembled into vessels or
sculptures, the end result is still very much handmade and can be
represented as so. Perhaps there is a fine dividing line somewhere that is
pretty hard to define. But I do maintain that those who make large numbers
of exact multiples of finished products by these industrial production
methods should not be calling themselves potters and they should not be
selling their work as handmade.
- Vince
Vince Pitelka - vpitelka@DeKalb.net
Home 615/597-5376, work 615/597-6801, fax 615/597-6803
Appalachian Center for Crafts
1560 Craft Center Drive, Smithville TN 37166
Don Jones on sun 20 jul 97
>----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>Reading DonKopy's "jiggering justification" was very refreshing for me. I'm
>not sure that you know just how arrogant some of you (studio potters) come
>off sometimes. I entered the pottery and ceramics medium through the back
>door, and have been bitterly dissappointed by the attitudes I sometimes
>encounter. I'
Jeez,
You guys always miss the point. Noone is knocking what you do or how you
do it. The small studio potters complain about venues, definitions, and
appearances to the buying public. Who can compete with you guys in terms
of price and volume? If you want to know how it feels, take your work to a
convention where your clients would be Hilton Hotels and Holiday Inn. The
guys in the booths next to you will be China importers and large companies
with massive car kilns. Calling your work "hand made" in this venue
wouldn't make a lot of sense because noone would care.
Don Jones
claysky@highfiber.com
John H. Rodgers on mon 21 jul 97
-- [ From: John H. Rodgers * EMC.Ver #2.5.02 ] --
This was a really interesting post for me because I too came to pottery via
the back road. I began in ceramic work not as a craftsman but as a salesman
of ceramic collectibles - you know, the kind so frequently put down by
potters complaining about off the shelf greenware being bought and finished
and sold.
I started up a business in 1986. My partner, a lady, used commercially
available molds from various mold companies and produced and finished the
goods and I was on the road selling the stuff. In time the need to be unique
was recognized, and over time I developed an interest and skill in
moldmaking..This later lead to doing my own sculpture work ( no pottery yet,
however). Simultaneously I was learning about slipcasting and finishing. So
there I was, sculpting, moldmaking, casting, finishing and selling. It was a
big job.
The work naturally divided itself. I had the skill and ability to sculpt
new designs and make the molds, my partner couldn't do the sculpture design
and moldmaking, but really knew how to cast and finish the work. It worked
into a nice division of labor. At that point most of my work was being done
in slip-cast porcelain ( that's CLAY, folks). In time I began to feel
constrained by the limits of the slip-cast medium and inevitably begain some
work in the plastic clays. Included was wheel thrown pottery( I have a Brent
CXC that I really like), some press-mold work, some slab work. Mixed in
with all of this was a good working exposure in the area of lost wax
casting with gold, silver, pewter, brass, and bronze. With my expanded clay
skills, and the skills in lost wax, the possibilities are exciting and
endless.
The mold-making has been a foundation skill for me over the years, and has
allowed me to bring some unique things to production. Figurines, which I
have been heavily into all these years, has been my specialty, and require
the use of molds. Yes, you can make one-of-a-kind figurines strictly by hand
, but I have never seen one come out as beautiful as one which has been
sculpted, molded, then cast in a finish medium such as slip-cast porcelain
or bronze. I sculpt in a drab gray wax or a brown microcrystaline wax - I
can just see some of those pieces sitting on display in some show somewhere.
They would be considered a joke. Process them through to porcelain and they
become show stoppers. In my own mind, the medium of the finished piece and
the quality of the execution is the only thing that counts. All else are
just the materials and tools used by the artist to produce the finished work
..
One of my best, but most frustrating works was a 19" tall figurine
depicting an angel in a struggle with the forces of darkness. It was done in
gray wax. A plaster mold set comprised of 52 sections was cast. It weighed
100 lbs. The mold set produced 13 slip-cast porcelain pieces..... arms, legs
, heads, wings, etc., which had to be assembled into the finished work. To
do this and have no cracking either in drying or firing was a real trick.
The finished work, when removed from the kiln, caused everyone in the studio
to gasp. Before us, in stark white, translucent, sonorous porcelain, tall
and saintly, stood an Angel. It was beautiful.!
This could not have been done any other way than with molds.
Treys comments about debugging for production are good points. This piece of
work was made as a limited edition. I made that 52 piece mold twice before I
got one that (1) gave me the quality of end product that I liked, and (2)
was workable on the production casting tables. It's possible to sculpt
something that is impossible to produce in the target medium, at least at
reasonable cost. It's possible to produce molds that are workable but not
suited for a production environment. That is, the artisans have to spend too
much time to get the pieces out of the mold, thereby increasing costs.
Just a comment here about moldmakers. They are worth their weight because
these are the people that make the bridge between the artist /sculptor and
the production line. The moldmaker has to understand the problems of the
artist in creating the design, and the problems of production and assembly
in order to make a mold that works.
I think it would be an advantage to every potter to learn some of the skills
of the moldmaker. There are plenty of applications for molds in pottery.
Pressmolds for pattern and designs are one area of good use. Who gives a rip
if you incised all the pattern into the pot with your pen knife or if you
used your pen-knife to carve the pattern into a small plaster block and then
pressed the pattern in. To get some good insights into mold applications
check out Donald Frith's book titled "Moldmaking for Ceramics". The door is
wide open for innovative use of molds.
One of the most exasperating experiences of my career as an artist was the
rejection of my angel from a juried show by the juror - a painter and artist
of considerable renown in Alaska. He was terribly upset by the fact that a
slip-cast piece of work had not been rejected in the screening process, in
spite of the fact that members of the art guild sponsoring the show assured
him it was my original work.( I always make the first piece personally
before I release it for production). In his mind, anything slip-cast had to
be made by "someone else" and didn't qualify to be in the show.
I tried at a later juried show, and this time the Juror was a man of the
clay(pun). Department head from the art Department of a University, and
artist in his own right, He selected my angel for entry. I didn't place. At
the Reception and Jurors Critique, he reviewed his selections and his
reasons for selecting those he did. And he included my work in his critique,
which I initially thought very unusual.
The room was full of potters and other clay artists. After a review of all
others selections, - speaking of colors, textures, form, moods, methods, etc
, he turned to mine, the only slip-cast piece in the place, and which stood
out like a sore thumb. He asked if anyone could guess why he had this piece
in the discussion when it didn't place. There was silence. No one had a clue
... He finally said -" Potters, be not proud, for the wheel is only a tool
which aids to form and shape the clay.......and a mold, from which this
piece came, is only a tool which aids to form and shape the clay." I
thought" Right on, Bro." There was, needless to say, a lively discussion
that followed. That evening many went away enlightened to new possibilities.
Now I have my pots I make on the wheel, and my masks which I make in press-
molds, and there are the little slab built things I make. But to this day, I
still work with molds. I have new sculptures under way, all of which will be
molded and finished in slipcast porcelain.
Trey is right. The use of molds as tools opens the doors to all kinds of
possibilities. Your imagination removes any limitations.
Sorry if this is a bit long, and a bit rambling but it needed telling for a
long time.
By the way, the third show the angel took Second Place in clay. A hand
carved Emu shell took Best of Show.
John Rodgers
The Alaska Sourdough sweltering in the heat of the south
-------- REPLY, Original message follows --------
Date: Saturday, 19-Jul-97 09:38 AM
From: Trey and Lynne \ Internet: (capiii@tecinfo.com)
To: CLAYART LIST \ Internet: (clayart@lsv.uky.edu)
Subject: Re: Jiggering (and other tooling)
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
Reading DonKopy's "jiggering justification" was very refreshing for me. I'm
not sure that you know just how arrogant some of you (studio potters) come
off sometimes. I entered the pottery and ceramics medium through the back
door, and have been bitterly dissappointed by the attitudes I sometimes
encounter. I'm a moldmaker. I was trained to reproduce hundreds and
thousands of parts in the furniture and accessory industry. I worked in
filled polyester, urethanes, silicones, tooling resins, and plasters. I
have helped more than my share of people who have no appreciation for the
insight and pre-production de-bugging involved in mass production.
Production is itself an art. Any potter will do well to gain these skills
and take them to new levels.
Most of my pots involve some casting / extruding / jiggering (jollying) and
handbuilding, and usually in combination. I believe you will find that most
potters use some tooling support, even if they don't think so out loud.
If more of you would take time to use these TOOLS then we could all take
this art into the 21st. century years before it will be here.
For example: I have been known to jolly (JIGGER) massive bowl shapes on a
large wheel and then throw the undercut on top of the part (still in the
mold), making a very large jug 20"tall/ 14"wide. I could not do this in one
go on the wheel alone, it would collapse, my throwing skills are just not
that good yet. Also, I have two shapes made in the same jigger mold, saving
me money, time, etc. all good things, eh? Just think what you "real
potters" could do if you took your skills to similar heights by using TOOLS
that can help you things NOT POSSIBLE using traditional methods.
If you buy your tools (molds) thats one thing. But if you make you own
tools (molds for whatever process) then you have truly kept your artistic
trueness and you are not selling out- you are working smarter. Thanks Don-
I'm new to the newsgroups and have only been working in clay for 3 years,
your note was timely and very refreshing.
Trey Pollard-
capiii@tecinfo.com
http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Lofts/2602
-------- REPLY, End of original message --------
Carl D. Cravens on mon 21 jul 97
On Sun, 20 Jul 1997 12:09:49 EDT, Vince Pitelka wrote:
>pressing to make components which are then hand assembled into vessels or
>sculptures, the end result is still very much handmade and can be
>represented as so. Perhaps there is a fine dividing line somewhere that is
>pretty hard to define. But I do maintain that those who make large numbers
>of exact multiples of finished products by these industrial production
>methods should not be calling themselves potters and they should not be
>selling their work as handmade.
I draw the line at whether or not there were any artistic decisions made
in the process. If all the decisions made were technical ones, then the
process was simply reproduction and not production of art.
--
Carl D. Cravens (ravenpub@southwind.net)
Contentsoftaglinemaysettleduringshipping.
| |
|
