Chris Campbell on thu 23 nov 00
Friends -
I am searching for the porcelain clay body that I most often see
photographs of in Australian and European pottery publications. It has warmth
and life yet is beautifully translucent. I have been testing commercial
Groleig porcelain bodies without success - am I correct in assumming that I
will need to start making my own or is there another avenue to explore first?
I am hand building and currently enjoy firing to Cone 6. Will I
necessarily need to move up to Cone 10? Is there a sacrifice in workability
to attain the translucence?
I know that I am asking an " It all depends..." kind of question that
will lead me into a ten year pit of learning experiences .... but that has
never stopped me before.
Chris Campbell - in North Carolina
" I asked him what the paddle was for and he said it was there in case we
encountered some calm patches and needed some excitement."
Iveragh Ceramics on thu 23 nov 00
Chris,
The best porcelain body by far is Limoges, I don't have the
number right now but it will fire up to 1440 Celsius. The amount of
translucency depends on how thin you throw,coil or slab your work, you can
get translucency from very white earthenware and stoneware bodies, again
providing the work is thin enough, these bodies tend to look warmer than
porcelain bodies. I have found the Limoges body is great for any kind of
building and I have raku, pit and high fired it, stands up to all this, it
is very expensive but worth every penny.
The only information I have is: K.P. C. L
Limoges,
France.
and there is a number on the bags 81298.
Hope this is of some help to you.
Regards,
Bob Hollis
----- Or
iginal Message -----
From: "Chris Campbell"
To:
Sent: 23 November 2000 16:01
Subject: My Porcelain Quest 2001
> Friends -
>
> I am searching for the porcelain clay body that I most often see
> photographs of in Australian and European pottery publications. It has
warmth
> and life yet is beautifully translucent. I have been testing commercial
> Groleig porcelain bodies without success - am I correct in assumming that
I
> will need to start making my own or is there another avenue to explore
first?
>
> I am hand building and currently enjoy firing to Cone 6. Will I
> necessarily need to move up to Cone 10? Is there a sacrifice in
workability
> to attain the translucence?
>
> I know that I am asking an " It all depends..." kind of question
that
> will lead me into a ten year pit of learning experiences .... but that has
> never stopped me before.
>
> Chris Campbell - in North Carolina
> " I asked him what the paddle was for and he said it was there in case we
> encountered some calm patches and needed some excitement."
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________
__
> Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
>
> You may look at the archives for the list or change your subscription
> settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
>
> Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at
melpots@pclink.com.
>
Paul Taylor on fri 24 nov 00
Dear Chris.
Last time I visited my supplier in Banbridge (Ireland) Scarva pottery
supplies.
David gave me a bag of Audrey Blackman porcelain . I was stunned when I
enquired the price of it - if I had bought it . With a look David said
Just take it and see what you think.
It is amazing to throw with and the whitest body and very translucent at
orton cone 8b down and cone nine bent at the top. I expect it fires higher
and lower but that's the temp I fire at. Now as I use my other porcelain
clay I my mind wanders as to whether I am doing the best for myself, Which
explains David Maybrys look. I have not finished testing it with all my
glazes yet.
Other potters inform me it was originally designed for hand building.
Reputedly the top porcelain is Limoges 9 (French so watch how you
pronounce it limo as in car and more jeh than ges ) The best potters in this
part of the world use it . It costs the earth it works out at about double
the price of a cheap porcelain but as a percentage of costs of the finished
product the clay cost is still small compared with the labor cost.
The other porcelains I have are a Ming porcelain that David makes .I
have a bag I am yet to try it . It could be as good as all the others and
reasonably priced. He has revolutionized the market for white stoneware
clays and they are very popular here and in Britain. I expect his porcelain
will give the same value.
David Leech porcelain. his recipe is also popular If you are using
Derrick Emmses glaze recipes which fit modern reduction cycles very well.
This is the stuff they fit on - not that most porcelains have very differing
expansion rates but they can. I am now using the David Leech clay because I
ordered it by mistake but I did not cancel the order because the Leech stuff
still fits the glazes and has a published recipe. I can do a quick turn
around if I decide to make my own porcelain (importing a percentage of
bagged British water to the west of Ireland seems a stupid to me but my back
thinks different).
I used to use Potclays 1146.I do not fully vitrify some of my porcelain
I feel that translucency is an unnecessary pursuit - apart from the look it
gives to a glaze even if is too thick to see through and under fired, so a
cheaper porcelain will do and I do not remember it being any worse than the
David Leech stuff , The 1146 works very well and is very tough as green ware
- great for raw glazing.
If you decide to do your own thing and do it better than what's on offer
you will have to know about glazes calculation, because porcelains are
calculated similarly. I recommend the proportional percentage analyses
method. the Pontificates prefer more natural methods . Then you can go
after the best and finest materials available and not just the cheapest that
will do . I used to be under the illution that I knew he best avalabul but I
have found out that I know little about the details of the matirials that
are mined and their grades . There are several grades of all the matirials
we take for granted you will have make your own contacts and know what you
are talking about to get the sevise you will need.
The suppliers of clays do not make a living out of artists but out of
education est, semi industrial and hobbiests that want clay " as cheap as
they can get it as long as it works . They have to make a living and compete
so because until now customers are not too fussy about the difference, they
are forced to buy the cheapest materials to make their porcelains. Even so
compared with the stuff they sold in the sixties and early seventies the
stuff that the main suppliers put out is not bad. The porcelain I first
threw with seemed to have rubber in it . So if you want to make a better
job you may have to buy materials
that the local suppliers do not carry in their catalog - again you will have
to know what you are doing.
To get the best materials available will be a quest as you described.
If you decide to make it your self write to me and I will tell you what
is involved.
However from your post I see you are a sculptor and I see Bob Hollis has
recommended Limoges. So I can only say that Bob Hollis has a reputation
here for knowing what he is talking about If he says that Limoges is the
best it probably is. Audrey Blackman's is good as well and I think these two
maybe better than making your own, but not as cheap.
Making your own is ideally the best. But take note that ideals are more
expensive than diamonds. If you can buy in the quality you want - do.
Regards from Paul Taylor
http://www.anu.ie/westportpottery
> From: Chris Campbell
> Reply-To: Ceramic Arts Discussion List
> Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2000 11:01:35 EST
> To: CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG
> Subject: My Porcelain Quest 2001
>
> Friends -
>
> I am searching for the porcelain clay body that I most often see
> photographs of in Australian and European pottery publications. kind of
question that
> will lead me into a ten year pit of learning experiences .... but that has
> never stopped me before.
>
> Chris Campbell - in North Carolina
| |
|
