mel jacobson on wed 30 nov 11
i often think (blaspheme) that many over sieve.
in many cases when using modern well refined chemicals
we over refine even further.
i never go into that 100 mesh range.
keep down in the 60.
that just pours through nicely. takes out junk.
a few wisks with a brush at the end and
away we go.
of course i use a lot of taconite and iron filings in my
glaze so it would be useless to take it out. and, i fire at
high temp and most everything melts like mad.
i do use the rock polisher for some color.
often cobalt gets clumped and will cause blue
spots.
i know some have a need for very careful glaze
production, and i do not put them down for what
they do.
but, in a general sense most things that come in a
bag from your vendor is pretty damn well refined.
and hours of tedious meshing at 90+ range will not
do much for it. it is like how some measure in grams
and worry over a ten gram error...never matters a bit.
i use all pounds. a great old scale. works like magic.
i often think that many pots i see in galleries, sales venues
and shows seem to be right on the edge of being fired...like the
kiln was closed down about a half hour early. i tend to
like that tiny bit of over/fire...it sure adds interest. if i shut
my kiln down at cone 10 just bending the load would look
like crap. then the hammer would come out. for sure.
i was at the `grand hand` the other day...a high end craft
store in st paul..they do a great job for hand made pots and
other hand made art...but,
i saw some wood fired tumblers...nothing much, in fact a little
bit punky...sort of bisque sounding `thup, thup`....$90 each. i almost pee=
'd
my pants. i really thought they were done in a ninth grade class.
sharlene and i take a tour just before our christmas sale.
check prices, see what others are doing....and, that sets
the plate for me. pricing? i want to sell pots....lots of pots,
and i really like that $30 bucks a pot average..then folks buy
4-5 items. i know, i know...the big stores sell at $100 for
a simple bowl...but, that is not me. i get customers in the
100's because i price right. if i asked $90 for a tumbler they
would bale on me forever....`who does mel think he is?`
(warren taught me that trick 40 years ago. it still works.)
i love the personal touch...folks on my deck, in my studio
and home. i like that `audrey` comes and sets up tactile
textile art in my kitchen and living room. i like the cement
bird baths my daughter makes...on a table on the deck.
paintings all over the place.
it is fun, festive and people feel like they just beat the
christmas madness. it is about feeling at home, no rush
and pick what you like. take it home, use it or give it away.
it works.
i know.
i do books and banking.
mel
we are all set up for the sale this weekend. i must have
400 pots out there. god it is crowded with stuff...and the
sales this week have been brisk. you know: `mel, we are
going out of town next weekend, ok if we come early (wink, wink)?`
sure...who cares...now i go into the weekend ahead of
expenses. post office for stamps is paid, kinko's is paid,
and coffee and cookies are paid. before we open.
colleen had her sale at the bar/high end burger place where
she works. sold a ton. and, she will get her orders started
next week...and have a sale in her kitchen just before the
holiday. i will do a second sale on sat. 17th one day only...only folks in
my ten mile circle. send out 250 cards...and it is `buy yourself
a gift.` i always get a crowd at the second sale.
it works too. this is all `sure fire`, been done, know it
works. it is like family.
from: minnetonka, mn
website: http://www.visi.com/~melpots/
clayart link: http://www.visi.com/~melpots/clayart.html
Hank Murrow on wed 30 nov 11
On Nov 30, 2011, at 4:54 PM, Steve Mills wrote:
> Mel, I'm with you in the 60 mesh zone except for my ash glazes. I have =
=3D
a home made ball mill I use for them. 3 hours in the mill, and they run =3D
through an 100 without stopping, sit tight on the pot without dusting, =3D
and melt really well. Very important, as few of my recipes contain any =3D
clay, but boy do they sing!
And I align well with you, Steve;
I use 35-mesh Kyanite in my Tea&Sake body for the texture it =3D
provides(among other qualities) when trimmed with a stick. I use Custer =
=3D
rough grind(5-mesh and smaller) which I then custom grind with a =3D
Mini-Mill hand grinder for Tea or Sake depending upon the body(porcelain =
=3D
or stoneware). And of course, my 'wild' porcelain body is ground and =3D
then milled to get the particle distribution that I desire. Not for =3D
everyone, but essential to my 'ware vision'.
Cheers, Hank=3D
Stephani Stephenson on thu 1 dec 11
I am right in the middle, I use one family of glazes that I do not sieve.=
=3D
they are wild glazes, responsive to variations in thickness, producing
uniformly un-uniform results which I like and am able to work with easily=
=3D
.
The glazed results are rarely exactly the same, but always 'between the=
=3D
goalposts'. i can use one glaze on a field of tiles and get a lovely
variation. i can also blob the glaze on without too much perfection and g=
=3D
et
an impressionistic and textural effect I just love.=3D20
I just hit them with a mixer or mix them fresh. i don't use suspenders fo=
=3D
r
these glazes . they are easy to re mix. sometimes I use them thin as well=
=3D
.
they are my casual glazes and work under all circumstances and I must adm=
=3D
it
I love them for that.
Then there are the other glazes I mix . specks of foreign material, glob=
=3D
s
or undissolved crystals, glaze too thick or thin, can really foul the
result, so sieve away I do. i also started with an 80 mesh, then found th=
=3D
is
tedious and ,like Steve, couldn't bear having material left in the sieve,=
=3D
and didn't like slaving away trying to rub it through so one day I though=
=3D
t,
poppycock! , and moved to a 60 mesh and that is still the standard for a=
=3D
couple of my most used glazes, though I notice on many of them I am just=
=3D
as
likely to grab the 40 mesh.. GAD how lazy can I be! :) i also have the bi=
=3D
g
kitchen sieve too.
Never ever thought about a toilet brush. the image does make me chuckle,=
=3D
but great idea!
one word of caution about those plastic bristles. they can rot. maybe it =
=3D
is
u/v ray rot. one of mine shed a bunch of fibers into a couple of buckets=
=3D
and I am still finding the darn things.
can't remember why selling was part of the topic, but hopefully selling i=
=3D
s
something i will be doing this weekend.......
Stephani Stephenson
Steve Mills on thu 1 dec 11
S'funny isn't it; you motor along on default (taught) thinking for years, a=
n=3D
d then one small happening knocks you out of the groove and wakes you up.=
=3D20=3D
I had "Sieve to 120" engraved in my brain for years until I started to use =
a=3D
glaze with a lot of Dolomite in it, and saw more than a third of it sittin=
g=3D
on the mesh at the last run-through.=3D20
OK I'm mean.=3D20
I objected to throwing away stuff I'd spent money on.=3D20
That begged the question why sieve so fine, and I was off.=3D20
I now make up tests first time in a blender and fire the initial ones sans =
s=3D
ieving, working on the principle that at ^9/10 most things melt enough to g=
i=3D
ve you a clue what's happening.=3D20
Steve M
Steve Mills
Bath
UK
www.mudslinger.me.uk
Sent from my Ipod touch
On 1 Dec 2011, at 02:27, Hank Murrow wrote:
>=3D20
> On Nov 30, 2011, at 4:54 PM, Steve Mills wrote:
>=3D20
>> Mel, I'm with you in the 60 mesh zone except for my ash glazes.=3D20
> And I align well with you, Steve;
>=3D20
> I use 35-mesh Kyanite in my Tea&Sake body for the texture it provides(amo=
n=3D
g other qualities) when trimmed with a stick. I use Custer rough grind(5-m=
e=3D
sh and smaller) which I then custom grind with a Mini-Mill hand grinder for=
T=3D
ea or Sake depending upon the body(porcelain or stoneware). And of course, =
m=3D
y 'wild' porcelain body is ground and then milled to get the particle distr=
i=3D
bution that I desire. Not for everyone, but essential to my 'ware vision'.
>=3D20
> Cheers, Hank
Snail Scott on thu 1 dec 11
On Dec 1, 2011, at 4:26 AM, Steve Mills wrote:
> I had "Sieve to 120" engraved in my brain for years until I started to =
=3D
use a glaze with a lot of Dolomite in it...
> That begged the question why sieve so fine...
I seldom sieve anything. If a glaze has problem=3D20
ingredients, it had better be one fabulous glaze
for me to justify the effort of sieving it! Whiting is=3D20
the material that seems the most contaminated=3D20
with chunks that won't melt, so I just avoid using it.=3D20
If my work were dependent upon certain specific,=3D20
very fussy glazes for its value, I might look upon=3D20
the effort differently, but I don't have any such=3D20
glazes in my repertoire of regular use, and I've=3D20
never yet encountered a glaze so marvelous that=3D20
I'd put up with sieving it in order to keep it.
-Snail=3D
Rimas VisGirda on thu 1 dec 11
I've always used a metal kitchen colander, mesh about the same as a standar=
=3D
d window screen, to strain my glazes. I'm talking about the ones that are a=
=3D
screen formed into a bowl about 8" diameter and 4-5" deep, with a handle. =
=3D
I rarely need to push material through the screen; I pour from (5 gal) buck=
=3D
et to bucket and elevate the bucket I'm pouring from to about waist high or=
=3D
higher. The velocity of the pour as it hits the screen seems to break up a=
=3D
ny lumps pretty well. I go back and forth between the two buckets maybe 6-8=
=3D
times...=3DA0 Even when we used ash glazes; the ash glazes invariably had =
ti=3D
ny bits of unburnt wood floating on top but these burned out in the firing =
=3D
without affecting the glaze. We also didn't wash the ash and it seemed quit=
=3D
e caustic, mostly oak from the Sierra Nevadas, so your hand came out quite =
=3D
pink after mixing it up for a glazing session. I still believe in hand mixi=
=3D
ng as that is the only way I can tel if all the constituents have
come up from the bottom; over the years I have learned to scrape the botto=
=3D
m with the fleshy part of my fingers so as not to wear away my fingernails.=
=3D
..=3D0AMany years ago Dick Peeler told me that he made a very comfortable l=
iv=3D
ing by averaging 20 pots per day and pricing them reasonably. At the time, =
=3D
30-35 years ago, his annual income was about 2-3 times my salary as a unive=
=3D
rsity professor; for me making pots was enjoyable but so was teaching. I ha=
=3D
d been a production potter for a number of years before I went back to art =
=3D
school and knew what that regimen was like and, for me, too repetitive on a=
=3D
daily basis...=3D0AWhen I was a physicist I had a good salary and bought a=
1=3D
966 Lotus Elan Coupe, cost $5000 brand new, wonderful car; had to give it u=
=3D
p when I quit science but always liked exotic cars -still do. About 4-5 yea=
=3D
rs later when I was doing the production, I lusted for a Maserati that cost=
=3D
$10,000. I figured I could have one if I made 10,000 cups and sold them fo=
=3D
r $1 each (that was late 60's - early 70's); I figured it would take me 2-3=
=3D
months to do that... Never got around to it though... damn!=3D0AI have now=
o=3D
verspent my daily time allotment for Facebook and clayart, must not have mu=
=3D
ch on my list for today...=3D0ARegards, -Rimas=3D0A
John Hesselberth on thu 1 dec 11
On Dec 1, 2011, at 8:40 AM, Snail Scott wrote:
> I seldom sieve anything. If a glaze has problem=3D20
> ingredients, it had better be one fabulous glaze
> for me to justify the effort of sieving it!
Hi Snail and Everyone,
Almost all of the problems I help people with, where the glaze has =3D
changed over time, are due to the glaze settling between uses and not =3D
being adequately re-dispersed prior to the next use. Reseiving solves =3D
this because it forces you to empty the bucket and see all that glop in =3D
the bottom and (hopefully) scrape it out and add it to the rest of the =3D
glaze. Not many potters stir well enough to get that sediment that is =3D
on the bottom re-dispersed and it is often thin enough you can't feel =3D
it, but thick enough to change the composition of an important =3D
ingredient like a colorant.=3D20
I do it myself with every glaze, every time through a 60 mesh sieve. I =3D
use a cut-off paint brush so the bristles are stiff. It only takes a =3D
minute or two because the glaze slop goes through a 60 mesh screen very =3D
easily--but saves a lot of grief with glazes "spoiling" over time. I can =
=3D
use glazes over many months or even years with no discernible shift in =3D
look. If consistency is important to you I highly recommend reseiving =3D
every glaze, every time.
Regards,
John
John Hesselberth
john@frogpondpottery.com
"I love everything that's old: old friends, old times, old manners, old =3D
books, old wines." Oliver Goldsmith, "She Stoops to Conquer" (1773)
Lynn Wheeler on thu 1 dec 11
Hello Clayarters,
Another most-of-the-time lurker here...
I suspect you all may know this, but what I've found to be the best tool to
make sure the glob in the bottom of the bucket is redistributed, other than
sieving, of course, is a toilet bowl brush. Really works great for me and i=
s
good for keeping the sides of the bucket clean too so you don't get dried
layers dropping back into the bucket.
I learned to be sure to only use the all plastic ones, so any metal doesn't
turn to rust and contaminate your white glaze. Been there, done that, about
20 years ago.
My favorite is the one that is shaped at an angle like the descender in a
lower case y or g, with a hole in the middle. (Big Lots, my favorite store.=
)
If the handle is too long to store it in the bucket with the glaze, just cu=
t
the top off to size. I use it to stir every time and it taps off really
clean when you set it aside to dip the pot.
My husband certainly thinks it's too bad I'm not an expert on any other
housecleaning tools, especially since my annual sale is Sunday and he's
graciously doing much of that task.
Good luck with all your holiday sales.
Lynn Wheeler
Worthington, Ohio
> On Dec 1, 2011, at 8:40 AM, Snail Scott wrote:
>
>> I seldom sieve anything. If a glaze has problem
>> ingredients, it had better be one fabulous glaze
>> for me to justify the effort of sieving it!
>
> Hi Snail and Everyone,
>
> Almost all of the problems I help people with, where the glaze has change=
d
> over time, are due to the glaze settling between uses and not being adequ=
ately
> re-dispersed prior to the next use. Reseiving solves this because it forc=
es
> you to empty the bucket and see all that glop in the bottom and (hopefull=
y)
> scrape it out and add it to the rest of the glaze. Not many potters stir =
well
> enough to get that sediment that is on the bottom re-dispersed and it is
> often thin enough you can't feel it, but thick enough to change the
> composition of an important ingredient like a colorant.
>
> I do it myself with every glaze, every time through a 60 mesh sieve. I us=
e a
> cut-off paint brush so the bristles are stiff. It only takes a minute or =
two
> because the glaze slop goes through a 60 mesh screen very easily--but sav=
es a
> lot of grief with glazes "spoiling" over time. I can use glazes over many
> months or even years with no discernible shift in look. If consistency is
> important to you I highly recommend reseiving every glaze, every time.
>
> Regards,
>
> John
>
>
> John Hesselberth
> john@frogpondpottery.com
>
> "I love everything that's old: old friends, old times, old manners, old b=
ooks,
> old wines." Oliver Goldsmith, "She Stoops to Conquer" (1773)
Vince Pitelka on thu 1 dec 11
John Hesselberth wrote:
"Almost all of the problems I help people with, where the glaze has changed
over time, are due to the glaze settling between uses and not being
adequately re-dispersed prior to the next use. Reseiving solves this becaus=
e
it forces you to empty the bucket and see all that glop in the bottom and
(hopefully) scrape it out and add it to the rest of the glaze. Not many
potters stir well enough to get that sediment that is on the bottom
re-dispersed and it is often thin enough you can't feel it, but thick enoug=
h
to change the composition of an important ingredient like a colorant."
Hi John -
This is so true, and of course different materials settle out at different
rates, and thus if you do not mix all the way to the bottom, you have an
entirely different glaze. But you say, "reseiving solves this because it
forces you to empty the bucket and see that all the glop in the bottom and
scrape it out and add it to the rest of the glaze." So that leads to the
question, "How do I get all that settled glop out of the bottom of the
bucket? You can scrape it out, but the tried-and-true method for me has
always been the true "Jiffy-Mixer" impeller mixer in a normal 3/8" 110-volt
VSR drill. The Jiffy-Mixer has a circular rim around the bottom with blade=
s
that do not abrade the bottom of the bucket, and the circular rim prevents
it from abrading the sides of the bucket at the same time. Those blades ar=
e
a little like fan-blades, and they really help to create turbulence and
raise all of the settled material into suspension even if it is badly
settled. I am all for reseiving the glaze when it gets that bad, but for m=
e
this has been the best way to get all the material into suspension.
I have thoroughly tested all available drill-impeller mixers including the
Hanson mixers and all of the choices at the home improvement centers, and
none lives up to the Jiffy Mixer in efficient mixing without abrading the
sides or the bottoms of the bucket. Anyone who has had the experience of
having a drill impeller mixer knock or abrade a hole in the side of a bucke=
t
doesn't want to go through that again. The ubiquitous ones from the home
improvement centers have a ring around the lower rim, but only have two
spiral vanes to provide mixing action, and they do not lift the material
from the bottom effectively. They also create the wrong kind of turbulence
and will splatter glaze out of the bucket if you bring the drill up to spee=
d
too quickly. Also, the chrome plating is very thin, and they start rusting
almost immediately, whereas the Jiffy Mixer is stainless steel. For anyone
interested in getting a Jiffy Mixer for use in five-gallon buckets, be sure
to get the model ES, which fits a 3/8" chuck and has a 20" shaft. If you
mix glaze in larger barrels, get the PS-2, which has a 40-inch shaft and
fits a 1/2" drill. I like using a standard VSR (variable speed reversible)
drill for this application because they have the speed necessary to do a
good job and you never have to worry about the battery going dead. I stick
to the ES in a 3/8" drill because 1/2" drills don't develop the speed to mi=
x
efficiently.
Sorry to digress. That was more information than needed in response to your
post.
- Vince
Vince Pitelka
Appalachian Center for Craft
Tennessee Tech University
vpitelka@dtccom.net
http://iweb.tntech.edu/wpitelka/
Steve Mills on thu 1 dec 11
Mel, I'm with you in the 60 mesh zone except for my ash glazes. I have a ho=
m=3D
e made ball mill I use for them. 3 hours in the mill, and they run through =
a=3D
n 100 without stopping, sit tight on the pot without dusting, and melt real=
l=3D
y well. Very important, as few of my recipes contain any clay, but boy do t=
h=3D
ey sing!
Steve M
Steve Mills
Bath
UK
www.mudslinger.me.uk
Sent from my Ipod touch
On 30 Nov 2011, at 23:29, mel jacobson wrote:
> i often think (blaspheme) that many over sieve.
>=3D20
> in many cases when using modern well refined chemicals
> we over refine even further.
>=3D20
> i never go into that 100 mesh range.
> keep down in the 60.
> that just pours through nicely. takes out junk.
> a few wisks with a brush at the end and
> away we go.
>=3D20
>=3D20
Snail Scott on thu 1 dec 11
On Dec 1, 2011, at 9:54 AM, John Hesselberth wrote:
> ...If consistency is important to you I highly recommend reseiving =3D
every glaze, every time...
This is entirely reasonable. I do not sieve my=3D20
glazes because my results are satisfactory=3D20
without doing so. I am not a production potter,=3D20
I do not have a standardized product line, I do=3D20
not even use glazes on much of my work, and=3D20
when I do it's not critical that the glaze look=3D20
identical to the last time I used it, as long as the=3D20
result falls within acceptable parameters. Glazes=3D20
that require greater attention to do so simply do=3D20
not remain in my repertoire.=3D20
Some people's work is rooted strongly in the=3D20
particular surface qualities of their glazes. For=3D20
them, no effort is too much to maintain their=3D20
distinctive look, as failure to do so would badly
undermine the appeal of their work. If sieving=3D20
before every glazing session is needed, then it=3D20
clearly best to do so.
I was not urging everyone to give up sieving! Rather,=3D20
I was making the point that no one working method=3D20
can ever be correct for everyone. Do not blindly follow
some rote methodology taught by someone else for=3D20
other purposes. Evaluate your methods for yourself,=3D20
consider the reasons for your methods, and make=3D20
thoughtful choices about the value of those methods=3D20
to YOUR work.=3D20
If you don't need to sieve, it's silly to do so.=3D20
If you do need to sieve, then it's foolish not to.=3D20
(and there's no one correct way to sieve, either.)
-Snail=3D
Margaret Flaherty on fri 2 dec 11
It's this kind of digression that makes Clayart so valuable...Please, keep
digressing & thanks for the info!
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 12:32 PM, Vince Pitelka wrote:
> John Hesselberth wrote:
> "Almost all of the problems I help people with, where the glaze has chang=
ed
> over time, are due to the glaze settling between uses and not being
> adequately re-dispersed prior to the next use. Reseiving solves this
> because
> it forces you to empty the bucket and see all that glop in the bottom and
> (hopefully) scrape it out and add it to the rest of the glaze. Not many
> potters stir well enough to get that sediment that is on the bottom
> re-dispersed and it is often thin enough you can't feel it, but thick
> enough
> to change the composition of an important ingredient like a colorant."
>
> Hi John -
> This is so true, and of course different materials settle out at differen=
t
> rates, and thus if you do not mix all the way to the bottom, you have an
> entirely different glaze. But you say, "reseiving solves this because it
> forces you to empty the bucket and see that all the glop in the bottom an=
d
> scrape it out and add it to the rest of the glaze." So that leads to the
> question, "How do I get all that settled glop out of the bottom of the
> bucket? You can scrape it out, but the tried-and-true method for me has
> always been the true "Jiffy-Mixer" impeller mixer in a normal 3/8" 110-vo=
lt
> VSR drill. The Jiffy-Mixer has a circular rim around the bottom with
> blades
> that do not abrade the bottom of the bucket, and the circular rim prevent=
s
> it from abrading the sides of the bucket at the same time. Those blades
> are
> a little like fan-blades, and they really help to create turbulence and
> raise all of the settled material into suspension even if it is badly
> settled. I am all for reseiving the glaze when it gets that bad, but for
> me
> this has been the best way to get all the material into suspension.
>
> I have thoroughly tested all available drill-impeller mixers including th=
e
> Hanson mixers and all of the choices at the home improvement centers, and
> none lives up to the Jiffy Mixer in efficient mixing without abrading the
> sides or the bottoms of the bucket. Anyone who has had the experience of
> having a drill impeller mixer knock or abrade a hole in the side of a
> bucket
> doesn't want to go through that again. The ubiquitous ones from the home
> improvement centers have a ring around the lower rim, but only have two
> spiral vanes to provide mixing action, and they do not lift the material
> from the bottom effectively. They also create the wrong kind of turbulen=
ce
> and will splatter glaze out of the bucket if you bring the drill up to
> speed
> too quickly. Also, the chrome plating is very thin, and they start rusti=
ng
> almost immediately, whereas the Jiffy Mixer is stainless steel. For anyo=
ne
> interested in getting a Jiffy Mixer for use in five-gallon buckets, be su=
re
> to get the model ES, which fits a 3/8" chuck and has a 20" shaft. If you
> mix glaze in larger barrels, get the PS-2, which has a 40-inch shaft and
> fits a 1/2" drill. I like using a standard VSR (variable speed reversibl=
e)
> drill for this application because they have the speed necessary to do a
> good job and you never have to worry about the battery going dead. I sti=
ck
> to the ES in a 3/8" drill because 1/2" drills don't develop the speed to
> mix
> efficiently.
>
> Sorry to digress. That was more information than needed in response to yo=
ur
> post.
> - Vince
>
> Vince Pitelka
> Appalachian Center for Craft
> Tennessee Tech University
> vpitelka@dtccom.net
> http://iweb.tntech.edu/wpitelka/
>
Lee on fri 2 dec 11
My Talisman is the only tool, other than my throwing tools and my
Fluke, that I took to Japan. It is essential for wet sieving woodash
for use in traditional liquid/ladle measured glazes.
--
=3DA0Lee Love in Minneapolis
http://mingeisota.blogspot.com/
=3DA0"Ta tIr na n-=3DF3g ar chul an tI=3D97tIr dlainn trina ch=3DE9ile"=3D9=
7that is, =3D
"The
land of eternal youth is behind the house, a beautiful land fluent
within itself." -- John O'Donohue
Bonnie Staffel on fri 2 dec 11
Hi Clayarters,
I actually wore out my first Jiffy Mixer, even using it in plastic =3D
buckets.
I purchased one of the first ones that came out many years ago, =3D
stainless
steel and a wonderful tool. Even bought a larger drill to handle the =3D
heavier
rod. I used it for years when my studio was very active producing =3D
functional
work. But I finally found some scraps of plastic in my glazes and on
examination of the blade the glaze, being very abrasive, had worn the =3D
turned
edges of the mixer away with little sharps remaining. Well, I then heard
about the toilet brush method and really liked that since I use Flocs or =
=3D
CMC
in my glazes that tend to sink to a solid mass at the bottom, so no =3D
longer a
problem.=3D20
Regards,
Bonnie
http://webpages.charter.net/bstaffel/
http://vasefinder.com/bstaffelgallery1.html
DVD Throwing with Coils and Slabs
DVD Introduction to Wheel Work
Charter Member Potters Council
William & Susan Schran User on sun 4 dec 11
On 11/30/11 6:29 PM, "mel jacobson" wrote:
> i know some have a need for very careful glaze
> production, and i do not put them down for what
> they do.
> but, in a general sense most things that come in a
> bag from your vendor is pretty damn well refined.
> and hours of tedious meshing at 90+ range will not
> do much for it. it is like how some measure in grams
> and worry over a ten gram error...never matters a bit.
> i use all pounds. a great old scale. works like magic.
It comes down to developing a method that works best in each individual
circumstance.
I do crystalline glazes and I mix in small batches.
I only mix 200 grams at a time.
I can't store these glazes for long periods.
High amount of sodium, even fritted, changes glaze over time.
I measure on electric digital scale.
I need accuracy down to .01%.
I used to sieve all the glazes using small test screens.
Changed to throwing it all in a thrift store blender a couple years back.
Dry materials + CMC gum solution, couple minutes on high, all set to go.
All my glazes are brushed on.
Don't have spray booth in studio.
Glazes are applied 3 to 4 times thicker than you would ever apply.
Glazes run like a cat with it's tail on fire.
(Please note: would NEVER set my cat's tail on fire).
Every pot has pedestal and glaze catcher plate.
Every pot foot must be ground.
Sounds nuts, eh?
But that's what I do.
Bill
--
William "Bill" Schran
wschran@cox.net
wschran@nvcc.edu
http://www.creativecreekartisans.com
Randall Moody on mon 5 dec 11
I have often wondered about the use of high mesh screens for sieving.
It seems to me that at some point you are removing a certain amount of
the ingredient. If the ingredient is 80 mesh in particle size and you
try to run it through a 120 mesh sieve you are totally blowing the
percentage that the recipe called for. Am I missing something?
--
Randall in Atlanta
http://wrandallmoody.com
Steve Mills on mon 5 dec 11
Randall
I don't think you are. I suspect that a lot of the "old" recipes were so si=
m=3D
ple and "flexible" that a proportion lost on the mesh didn't really make a =
l=3D
ot of difference, except to parsimonious characters like me.=3D20
Now, with the more accurately constructed and complex glazes that are curre=
n=3D
t, plus materials of a much finer particle size, either less is lost, or mo=
r=3D
e makers are abandoning very fine sieving or ball-milling their concoctions=
b=3D
efore use.=3D20
Either way there is less "visible" concern over mesh loss.=3D20
Things have maybe moved on.=3D20
Steve M
Steve Mills
Bath
UK
www.mudslinger.me.uk
Sent from my Ipod touch
On 5 Dec 2011, at 13:37, Randall Moody wrote:
> I have often wondered about the use of high mesh screens for sieving.
> It seems to me that at some point you are removing a certain amount of
> the ingredient. If the ingredient is 80 mesh in particle size and you
> try to run it through a 120 mesh sieve you are totally blowing the
> percentage that the recipe called for. Am I missing something?
>=3D20
>=3D20
> --
> Randall in Atlanta
> http://wrandallmoody.com
Ron Roy on mon 5 dec 11
Hi Randall,
I have some problems with my celadon glaze - specking if I used it
soon after mixing. I decided to see what mesh sieve I needed to stop
the specking and disperse the iron oxide. It turned out I needed to
sieve through 120 mesh to stop the specking.
I just used a few cups of the mixed up glaze along with the iron
through the 120 mesh which was then added to the 25 lb. batch.
I never experienced any material left on the screen. Much depends on
the mesh size of the materials used - most are 200 mesh and finer.
I have always used 80 mesh having found that 60 mesh would sometimes
result in noticeable unmelted bits in glazes. More for mixing than for
anything else - adding lots of water makes the process really easy -
then decant off the extra water the next day.
RR
Quoting Randall Moody :
> I have often wondered about the use of high mesh screens for sieving.
> It seems to me that at some point you are removing a certain amount of
> the ingredient. If the ingredient is 80 mesh in particle size and you
> try to run it through a 120 mesh sieve you are totally blowing the
> percentage that the recipe called for. Am I missing something?
>
>
> --
> Randall in Atlanta
> http://wrandallmoody.com
>
Steve Slatin on mon 5 dec 11
I wouldn't say you're missing anything, I'd say we're dealing with=3D0Adiff=
er=3D
ent understandings of seiving.=3DA0 If you seive simply for particle=3D0Asi=
ze, =3D
and throw away everything too big to go readily through the=3D0Amesh, then =
yo=3D
u're right, you totally blow the recipe.=3DA0 If you seive=3D0Afor consiste=
ncy,=3D
and break up everything too big to go through,=3D0Aand ultimately get it a=
ll=3D
into the bucket, then no.=3D0A=3DA0=3D0AOf course, when you get a glaze re=
cipe f=3D
rom a book (or off of=3D0Athe internet) you probably don't know which way t=
he=3D
glaze=3D0Adeveloper seived, so you don't know whether you're possibly=3D0A=
thro=3D
wing away too much stuff, or not throwing away enough ...=3D0A=3DA0=3D0A=3D=
A0=3D0ASte=3D
ve Slatin -- =3D0A=3D0A=3D0AN48.0886450=3D0AW123.1420482=3D0A=3D0A=3D0A____=
______________=3D
______________=3D0AFrom: Randall Moody =3D0ATo: Cl=
ayar=3D
t@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG =3D0ASent: Monday, December 5, 2011 7:37 AM=3D0ASubject:=
Re:=3D
sieving glaze/selling=3D0A=3D0AI have often wondered about the use of high=
mes=3D
h screens for sieving.=3D0AIt seems to me that at some point you are removi=
ng=3D
a certain amount of=3D0Athe ingredient. If the ingredient is 80 mesh in pa=
rt=3D
icle size and you=3D0Atry to run it through a 120 mesh sieve you are totall=
y =3D
blowing the=3D0Apercentage that the recipe called for. Am I missing somethi=
ng=3D
?=3D0A=3D0A=3D0A--=3D0ARandall in Atlanta=3D0Ahttp://wrandallmoody.com
| |
|
