Jon Pacini on fri 8 feb 02
Greetings all--------Rafael wrote---It's only been a recent development to
fire at the "mid-temperature" of cone 6. I'm curious about exactly how did
we arrive at that temperature?
Prior to the Bernard Leach ^10 revolution, here in Southern California
at least, most of the Colleges and Universities taught "mid range" stoneware
and "low fire" earthenware. The only Instructor from that time that I know
of who could shed some light on your question is Susan Peterson. She taught
at USC and developed many of the ^5 clay bodies that were commercially
produced in the 40's and 50's by Westwood Ceramic Supply.
I learned from a student of hers, Dennison Herring who was still
teaching ^5 ceramics into the 1970's when he retired. He never could
understand why potters wanted to fire at ^10. His position was that anything
that could be done at ^10 could be done at ^5.
But Back to the Point---If you can track down Susan, who is quite
knowledgeable in many areas of Ceramics including it's history, you could
find out who decided on ^5/6.
Jon Pacini
Clay Manager
Laguna Clay Co
MOLINA, RAFAEL on fri 8 feb 02
Jon:
Thanks for replying to my query. There is one comment that I found =
intriguing.
>His position was that anything that could be done at ^10 could be done =
at ^5.
I have to inject my own personal bias here. I don't think this is true. =
In a previous post I detailed why I believe ^ 6 oxidation should be an =
integral part of any ceramics curriculum. However, in my view (which, =
of course, is subjective), based on my experience firing at a wide range =
of temps and atmospheres, cone 10 2381 F oxidation or reduction surfaces =
are much more rich in character.
I know that sounds vague and nebulous, but the surfaces have quality =
(depth?) about them that in my opinion, based on a lot of experience =
firing in different situations, is absent in glazes fired at lower temps =
irregardless of the atmosphere. It's hard to describe the surface =
quality difference, but it is apparent if you compare and contrast them =
side by side.
In my eight years of firing ^ 6 oxidation I've encountered some very =
nice glazes including Antique White, Matt Turquoise, Deep Maroon, Cream =
Gloss, Metallic Black, Blue Hare's Fur, Randy's Red, Shiny Blue, Shiny =
Green, etc.,... I confess I don't know if they are all durable and =
"food safe", but with the information now in my possession from R & J's =
new book I will find out. In my defense I encourage my student's to =
only use the Antique White glaze on surface that will come in contact =
with food or beverage and all others restricted to the exteriors of =
pieces.
Although I have fired ^ 6 ox consistently since 1994, I've yet to =
encounter a mid-temp glaze which compares in surface quality to a =
celadon or shino or copper red or temmoku or rutile blue or wood ash =
glaze fired to cone 10 in reduction. Moreover, the numerous firings =
I've done with glazes on white stoneware and porcelain clays fired to =
cone 10 in oxidation yeild what I consider a more beautiful surface than =
those fired to 2232 F.
Let me state clearly that it's only my subjective opinion about ^ 6 vis =
a vis ^ 10 glazes. I've previously stated my ideas about the efficacy =
of firing to ^ 6 and the important place mid-temp exploration has in a =
ceramics curriculum.
Chao,
Rafael
Rafael Molina, MFA
Assistant Professor of Art
Department of Music, Art, and Dance
Tarrant County College-Southeast Campus
2100 Southeast Parkway
Arlington, TX 76018-3144
(817) 515-3711
(817) 515-3189 fax =20
-----Original Message-----
From: Jon Pacini [mailto:jpacini@LAGUNACLAY.COM]
Sent: Friday, February 08, 2002 11:40 AM
To: CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG
Subject: Who decided on ^6
Greetings all--------Rafael wrote---It's only been a recent development =
to
fire at the "mid-temperature" of cone 6. I'm curious about exactly how =
did
we arrive at that temperature?
Prior to the Bernard Leach ^10 revolution, here in Southern =
California
at least, most of the Colleges and Universities taught "mid range" =
stoneware
and "low fire" earthenware. The only Instructor from that time that I =
know
of who could shed some light on your question is Susan Peterson. She =
taught
at USC and developed many of the ^5 clay bodies that were commercially
produced in the 40's and 50's by Westwood Ceramic Supply.
I learned from a student of hers, Dennison Herring who was still
teaching ^5 ceramics into the 1970's when he retired. He never could
understand why potters wanted to fire at ^10. His position was that =
anything
that could be done at ^10 could be done at ^5.
But Back to the Point---If you can track down Susan, who is quite
knowledgeable in many areas of Ceramics including it's history, you =
could
find out who decided on ^5/6.
Jon Pacini
Clay Manager
Laguna Clay Co
_________________________________________________________________________=
_____
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.
Jon Pacini on mon 11 feb 02
Hi Rafael, greetings all-----Certain glaze effects are definitely easier to
accomplish at ^10, but after working at ^5 for 30 years, I would be hard
pressed to determine any difference of consequence between ^10 reduction
pots and similar ^5 reduction pots. I'm not at all sure however, that you
could favorably compare oxidation with reduction.
Many of the subtleties you mention are inherent in specific firing
techniques and reproducing those nuances at mid range temperatures is every
bit as important and daunting as the glaze reformulation.
This may be splitting hairs a bit but you could take two pots glazed and
fired the same @ ^10 and see observable differences in the depth and
richness, even if fired in the same kiln, at the same time. I've seen it too
many times to deny it.
It is a very difficult task --granted -- and the time and energy involved
may be prohibitive, but the adjustments I believe, are possible.
Best regards
Jon Pacini
Clay Manager
Laguna Clay Co
-----Original Message-----
From: MOLINA, RAFAEL [mailto:RAFAEL.MOLINA@tccd.net]
Sent: Friday, February 08, 2002 2:09 PM
To: Jon Pacini; CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG
Subject: RE: Who decided on ^6
Jon:
Thanks for replying to my query. There is one comment that I found
intriguing.
>His position was that anything that could be done at ^10 could be done at
^5.
I have to inject my own personal bias here. I don't think this is true. In
a previous post I detailed why I believe ^ 6 oxidation should be an integral
part of any ceramics curriculum. However, in my view (which, of course, is
subjective), based on my experience firing at a wide range of temps and
atmospheres, cone 10 2381 F oxidation or reduction surfaces are much more
rich in character.
I know that sounds vague and nebulous, but the surfaces have quality
(depth?) about them that in my opinion, based on a lot of experience firing
in different situations, is absent in glazes fired at lower temps
irregardless of the atmosphere. It's hard to describe the surface quality
difference, but it is apparent if you compare and contrast them side by
side.
In my eight years of firing ^ 6 oxidation I've encountered some very nice
glazes including Antique White, Matt Turquoise, Deep Maroon, Cream Gloss,
Metallic Black, Blue Hare's Fur, Randy's Red, Shiny Blue, Shiny Green,
etc.,... I confess I don't know if they are all durable and "food safe",
but with the information now in my possession from R & J's new book I will
find out. In my defense I encourage my student's to only use the Antique
White glaze on surface that will come in contact with food or beverage and
all others restricted to the exteriors of pieces.
Although I have fired ^ 6 ox consistently since 1994, I've yet to encounter
a mid-temp glaze which compares in surface quality to a celadon or shino or
copper red or temmoku or rutile blue or wood ash glaze fired to cone 10 in
reduction. Moreover, the numerous firings I've done with glazes on white
stoneware and porcelain clays fired to cone 10 in oxidation yeild what I
consider a more beautiful surface than those fired to 2232 F.
Let me state clearly that it's only my subjective opinion about ^ 6 vis a
vis ^ 10 glazes. I've previously stated my ideas about the efficacy of
firing to ^ 6 and the important place mid-temp exploration has in a ceramics
curriculum.
Chao,
Rafael
Rafael Molina, MFA
Assistant Professor of Art
Department of Music, Art, and Dance
Tarrant County College-Southeast Campus
2100 Southeast Parkway
Arlington, TX 76018-3144
(817) 515-3711
(817) 515-3189 fax
-----Original Message-----
From: Jon Pacini [mailto:jpacini@LAGUNACLAY.COM]
Sent: Friday, February 08, 2002 11:40 AM
To: CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG
Subject: Who decided on ^6
Greetings all--------Rafael wrote---It's only been a recent development to
fire at the "mid-temperature" of cone 6. I'm curious about exactly how did
we arrive at that temperature?
Prior to the Bernard Leach ^10 revolution, here in Southern California
at least, most of the Colleges and Universities taught "mid range" stoneware
and "low fire" earthenware. The only Instructor from that time that I know
of who could shed some light on your question is Susan Peterson. She taught
at USC and developed many of the ^5 clay bodies that were commercially
produced in the 40's and 50's by Westwood Ceramic Supply.
I learned from a student of hers, Dennison Herring who was still
teaching ^5 ceramics into the 1970's when he retired. He never could
understand why potters wanted to fire at ^10. His position was that anything
that could be done at ^10 could be done at ^5.
But Back to the Point---If you can track down Susan, who is quite
knowledgeable in many areas of Ceramics including it's history, you could
find out who decided on ^5/6.
Jon Pacini
Clay Manager
Laguna Clay Co
____________________________________________________________________________
__
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.
| |
|
