Craig Martell on fri 24 may 02
Hi:
I'm driven to find a better personal explanation of what, "too much work"
actually is.
I thought that Ian Curries method of volumetric biaxial blends were very
fast for the amount of information generated. It takes me about 3 hours to
prepare a 35 glaze biaxial grid using Ian's method. If I had to weigh,
mix, and screen each of the 35 glazes it would take an astronomical amount
of time. I've actually done this sort of thing in the past when searching
for a particular glaze or effect.
I made two plaster molds for the grid tiles and I usually do a bunch in
advance. Then, if I want to run some grid experiments, I have plenty of
tiles and I don't have worry about making tiles for the tests.
The idea that Ian's second book is "too easy" is good to hear. The method
is supposed to be easy and understood without having to delve into
mineralogy, thermal chemistry, etc. What isn't easy is having the
knowledge and experience with raw materials so that one makes an effective
choice with regard to the "c" corner of the grid. This corner is just the
glaze fluxes and nothing else. It's also not so easy to make a good
interpretation of the results and proceed from there. If one is looking
for glazes to apply to domestic pots you then need to acertain which are
durable and likely to be food safe. A knowledge of the Seger Formula and a
willingness to do some lab tests is the next step.
There's a huge amount work that needs to be done by any individual that has
a desire to use minerals effectively with regard to glazes. The nice thing
is that the more work you do, the better your understanding of the whole
process. Ian has given potters a wonderful method for working through all
of this stuff. There are other methods and approaches that are very good
too. We have a lot of good stuff at our disposal and we live in a time
when it's possible to use all this information to broaden our understanding
of minerals and how to apply them to our needs and our work.
So, if Ian Currie's method is too much work, is there another method of
developing glazes that isn't? I don't think so. I think it just comes
down to motivation. Not everyone will be motivated to do the work that you
need to do to reach a goal of understanding a glaze, types of glazes,
etc. I really like doing this kind of work and find it very interesting
but I don't expect that everyone else would, or should.
regards, Craig Martell in Oregon
Hank Murrow on sat 25 may 02
>Craig martell wrote;
>
>I'm driven to find a better personal explanation of what, "too much work"
>actually is.
>
>I thought that Ian Curries method of volumetric biaxial blends were very
>fast for the amount of information generated. It takes me about 3 hours to
>prepare a 35 glaze biaxial grid using Ian's method. If I had to weigh,
>mix, and screen each of the 35 glazes it would take an astronomical amount
>of time. I've actually done this sort of thing in the past when searching
>for a particular glaze or effect.
>
>I made two plaster molds for the grid tiles and I usually do a bunch in
>advance. Then, if I want to run some grid experiments, I have plenty of
>tiles and I don't have worry about making tiles for the tests.
>
>The idea that Ian's second book is "too easy" is good to hear. The method
>is supposed to be easy and understood without having to delve into
>mineralogy, thermal chemistry, etc. What isn't easy is having the
>knowledge and experience with raw materials so that one makes an effective
>choice with regard to the "c" corner of the grid. This corner is just the
>glaze fluxes and nothing else. It's also not so easy to make a good
>interpretation of the results and proceed from there. If one is looking
>for glazes to apply to domestic pots you then need to acertain which are
>durable and likely to be food safe. A knowledge of the Seger Formula and a
>willingness to do some lab tests is the next step.
>
>There's a huge amount work that needs to be done by any individual that has
>a desire to use minerals effectively with regard to glazes. The nice thing
>is that the more work you do, the better your understanding of the whole
>process. Ian has given potters a wonderful method for working through all
>of this stuff. There are other methods and approaches that are very good
>too. We have a lot of good stuff at our disposal and we live in a time
>when it's possible to use all this information to broaden our understanding
>of minerals and how to apply them to our needs and our work.
>
>So, if Ian Currie's method is too much work, is there another method of
>developing glazes that isn't? I don't think so. I think it just comes
>down to motivation. Not everyone will be motivated to do the work that you
>need to do to reach a goal of understanding a glaze, types of glazes,
>etc. I really like doing this kind of work and find it very interesting
>but I don't expect that everyone else would, or should.
Dear Folks;
The evidence for the integrity of Craig's remarks may be
found on the cover and inside the pages of Ceramics Monthly (current
issue). And in the Gallery he and Linda run in Sheridan, OR.
I have found the Currie method brings an almost magical
clarity to my glaze queries, though it may be argued that my glazes
have not reached Craig's beauty. No fault of the Currie method.
Syringes loaded, and kiln waiting, Hank in Eugene
Ababi on sat 25 may 02
Dear fox (too)
My studying of ceramics began in a three hours once a week school.
This kind of studying is for people who want to make ceramic as an
excitement, hobby.
I found my way to learn by testing glazes. ( Lately ceramic bodies too)
When I could enter to the net I entered a lot to the ceramic web, wrote
a name of a material, got 10-15 glazes with that material, tested and
learned something, not much.
I bought Fraser Forsythe's glaze simulator (version 1), and learnt in
the hard way, to convert materials, was a very good study and
exersise!Learned in a beautiful visual way the relation ship between
the materials their LOI as well as other parts of the glaze doing.
I bought Tony Hansen's Magic of Fire , came with Insight and got a
limitless source of information. I set hours at night reading clayart
as well as planning glazes, some I never made, To learn learn learn!
I try different glazes. Lately I found which is my main direction and
I test it. I did not mean that Ian Curries waywas a bad way. I think
it is the best solution to people that the words CEERRAAMMIICC
SSoFFTTWWArEEE irritates them. I say: In Matrix I can get all the
measures for currie's grid in volumetric or with ingredients by weight.
I think If I remember correctly: Ian currie offers to do it with you
students. For this case: I am my students
Ian Currie's Revealing Glazes Knock knock knock ( it was the book
asking Currie about Australia) Well this is one of the book I enjoyed
very much reading though I understood I eventually I would not use it.
But who knows?
Ababi
Paul Lewing on sat 25 may 02
on 5/24/02 8:47 PM, Craig Martell at ashglaze@WVI.COM wrote:
> So, if Ian Currie's method is too much work, is there another method of
> developing glazes that isn't? I don't think so. I think it just comes
> down to motivation. Not everyone will be motivated to do the work that
you
> need to do to reach a goal of understanding a glaze, types of glazes,
> etc. I really like doing this kind of work and find it very interesting
> but I don't expect that everyone else would, or should.
This right here ties in beautifully with another thread that's going on now,
namely the one about who gets profiled in magazines. The people who get
profiled are usually (not always) the people with just Craig's attitude.
People who think nothing is too much work if they can learn from it, or if
it makes their art look more like they want it to. People who have done
"too much work" for not just years, but decades. People who've done the
testing, bought a little of every chemical they've ever heard of, read every
book they could find, pursued every clue, learned the Seger method and the
Currie method and the software. They're the ones who have laid awake nights
thinking about chemistry and firing methods and materials. It's why Craig's
a Cover Boy and others are not. His pots are gorgeous, and that's no
accident.
If you're going to do anything at all distinctive or interesting or original
with glazes (or any other art form), there's no way around doing the testing
and experimenting. And I don't mean testing an occasional new recipe that
looks interesting. I mean constant, lifelong, obsessive testing. In every
firing. With every new material you can find. By every method. If it were
easy, it wouldn't be fun.
I took Ian's workshop last fall, and finally got around to making my first
set of grid tiles in my last firing. The results? Two words for you- UGH
LEE! But I already know what I want to test next, and I'm sure that by the
time I do 50 or so, I'll really be getting a lot of benefit from it.
Incidentally, I see the real payoff from Ian's method not in how it relates
to glaze software, but in how it relates to materials for which you don't
have an analysis, so that software is useless. I can't think of a faster,
better, easier way to get good glazes from ash or local clays or stones than
his.
I love Ian's analogy of the Blind Fisherman. Testing a recipe here and a
recipe there is like a blind man fishing with a spear. Ian's method is like
fishing with a net. Too much work? No, it saves a tremendous amount of
work!
One of the best things about art is that there's no right answer, and
there's no wrong answer. There's just YOUR answer. And you wouldn't want
someone else to just HAND YOU the answer, would you?
Keep testing.
Paul Lewing, Seattle
Lawrence Ewing on sun 26 may 02
Hi again Craig,
While we are on the subject of Currie Recipe Grids, recently a student of
mine drew our attention (yet again) to the fact that the method Ian uses for
generating the recipes in the grid produces a non-symetrical map of glazes
in terms of the mol. parts of Al2O3 and SiO2. When the unity formula values
for the grid recipes are plotted on an Al2O3 SiO2 graph the values bunch up
in the C corner.
The effect of this bunching up can produce considerable differences in
glazes particularly between column 4 and 5 and in rows 1 and 2 while glazes
around Corner C can be very similar. We have a recipe grid displayed on the
Matrix2000 website which shows the effect of this bunching up.
http://www.matrix2000.co.nz/TinaLuxBlend/TinaLuxQuad.htm
Has anyone else using Currie Recipe Grids noticed this?
Some senior students have been experimenting with a design which will result
in a more even distribution. I am still working on a computer model for this
in Matrix. We have not fired any of grids based on the new model yet but
will post the results when we have.
Cheers,
Lawrence Ewing
Senior Lecturer
School of Art
Otago Polytechnic
Dunedin
New Zealand
email: lewing@clear.net.nz
url: http://www.Matrix2000.co.nz
----- Original Message -----
From: "Craig Martell"
To:
Sent: Saturday, May 25, 2002 4:47 PM
Subject: Currie/too much work?
> Hi:
>
> I'm driven to find a better personal explanation of what, "too much work"
> actually is.
>
> I thought that Ian Curries method of volumetric biaxial blends were very
> fast for the amount of information generated. It takes me about 3 hours
to
> prepare a 35 glaze biaxial grid using Ian's method. If I had to weigh,
> mix, and screen each of the 35 glazes it would take an astronomical amount
> of time. I've actually done this sort of thing in the past when searching
> for a particular glaze or effect.
>
> I made two plaster molds for the grid tiles and I usually do a bunch in
> advance. Then, if I want to run some grid experiments, I have plenty of
> tiles and I don't have worry about making tiles for the tests.
>
> The idea that Ian's second book is "too easy" is good to hear. The method
> is supposed to be easy and understood without having to delve into
> mineralogy, thermal chemistry, etc. What isn't easy is having the
> knowledge and experience with raw materials so that one makes an effective
> choice with regard to the "c" corner of the grid. This corner is just the
> glaze fluxes and nothing else. It's also not so easy to make a good
> interpretation of the results and proceed from there. If one is looking
> for glazes to apply to domestic pots you then need to acertain which are
> durable and likely to be food safe. A knowledge of the Seger Formula and
a
> willingness to do some lab tests is the next step.
>
> There's a huge amount work that needs to be done by any individual that
has
> a desire to use minerals effectively with regard to glazes. The nice
thing
> is that the more work you do, the better your understanding of the whole
> process. Ian has given potters a wonderful method for working through all
> of this stuff. There are other methods and approaches that are very good
> too. We have a lot of good stuff at our disposal and we live in a time
> when it's possible to use all this information to broaden our
understanding
> of minerals and how to apply them to our needs and our work.
>
> So, if Ian Currie's method is too much work, is there another method of
> developing glazes that isn't? I don't think so. I think it just comes
> down to motivation. Not everyone will be motivated to do the work that
you
> need to do to reach a goal of understanding a glaze, types of glazes,
> etc. I really like doing this kind of work and find it very interesting
> but I don't expect that everyone else would, or should.
>
> regards, Craig Martell in Oregon
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________
__
> 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.
Craig Martell on sun 26 may 02
Lawrence asked:
>When the unity formula values for the grid recipes are plotted on an Al2O3
>SiO2 graph the values bunch up
>in the C corner.
>Has anyone else using Currie Recipe Grids noticed this?
Hi Lawrence:
Yes, I've noticed this and I believe it was discussed some time ago on
Clayart when Ivor Lewis asked about this characteristic in Ian's
method. Ian sent an explanation and his take on the subject and it may be
in the archives. Perhaps Ian will respond to this again. Better Ian than
meself. He has a much better grasp of the method and all it's nuances.
regards, Craig Martell in Oregon
Ababi on sun 26 may 02
Excuse me Paul, I will answer just a part of your letter. From my point
of view it is my last answer unless someone else .will make me jump!
If currie's way is the only way to be a cover boy, I will not be a
cover boy. I think for a person who learns by himself , including
books software and clayart as a part of the "himself" ( including Ian
Currie's book) to achieve what I achieved after 6 years, no reason to
be embarrassed , besides, whenever I open Ian's book , as a glaze
addict I become "high" from the pictures.
If this is the naked truth:
I am on my way to: Playboy!
( Do they get 55 years old men?)
Ababi Sharon
Kibbutz Shoval- Israel
Glaze addict
ababisha@shoval.org.il
http://members4.clubphoto.com/ababi306910/
http://www.milkywayceramics.com/cgallery/asharon.htm
---------- Original Message ----------
>thinking about chemistry and firing methods and materials. It's why
>Craig's
>a Cover Boy and others are not.
>someone else to just HAND YOU the answer, would you?
>Keep testing.
>Paul Lewing, Seattle
>_______________________________________________________________________
_
>______
>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.
iandol on sun 26 may 02
Dear Craig,
You suggest <grid using Ian's method.>>
I do a 6*6 test tile so there 36 recipes on that. Make up 10 gm samples =
and load these into 3 "twelve well" paint palettes. No screening because =
all of the ingredients are -200#. Takes me about three hours. When a day =
spent preparing a couple of tiles can give more than enough potential =
good working glazes for a years exploration, it seems to me to be =
excellent time utilisation and well worth the expense.=20
I read Ian's first book a couple of years ago but did not see any =
improvement on the method I have used for several years. For anyone who =
has not already established their own system it would be a good =
springboard into the realms of glaze chemistry.
Recently I've been reading some early work on the compounding of =
Industrial Porcelain and Bristol glazes. Interesting to see that they =
used this idea of plotting the Al2O3 to SiO2 mol values on a square =
graph back in the early 1900s, well before a lot of the modern phase =
diagrams were prepared and published.
All the best,
Ivor Lewis, Redhill, South Australia=20
Ruth Ballou on sun 26 may 02
Craig and Hank and everybody,
Well said, both of you. Far from being too much work, Ian's method has been
the biggest time saver for glaze testing that I have come across. It's real
strength, though, lies in increasing one's general knowledge of how and why
glazes behave as they do. As for the first book being too technical, all
should realize that the key to understanding its contents is to do the
experiments. Once these are done, a potter has a glaze reference library
that is unbeatable. I can't count the number of times a glaze has been
posted to Clayart and all I had to do was run it through Hyperglaze, go to
my grid tiles and find the glaze. The recipe may fall between squares, but
it's pretty easy to figure out what will happen between the grids. Also,
these experiments are designed to show the characteristics of the behavior
of each of the major fluxes in glazes. It's almost impossible to figure
this out by the hit or miss method that most potters persue. Once you know
and understand the layout of the grid, you can mentally place any glaze on
it and get some idea of how it will behave.
Clayart has grown dramatically in the last few years so most do not know
that a few years ago several of us started Currie Correspondence groups
that shared the work of doing the experiments in the first book. We each
did different experiments and made extra tiles and traded the unfired tiles
by mail. Everyone got to fire the tiles in their own kilns. Some did the
mixing alone. Others formed groups with nearby potters. In this way, we
quickly got through most of the experiments. The book is designed for this
type of cooperative work and our collective knowledge and experience grew
exponentially.
Glaze calculation software fills a real need, but does not, by itself, tell
you how a glaze will look. I think of all the posts from people who've just
gotten glaze software and write in wondering why they're still wondering
what to do. They're still dependent on someone else to tell them how to fix
their glazes. You need experience for that answer. The grid tiles provide
the necessary experience in short order.
On the other hand, I recognize that people on this list are at all of
stages of expertise and involvement. As you master a level, you'll move on
and gradually want more control over your materials. At that point, Ian
Currie's method will help you gain a better understanding of your glazes.
Sure, it takes committment and some time. What worthwhile doing doesn't?
Ruth Ballou
Silver Spring, MD
John Britt on sun 26 may 02
I cannot say enough good things about Ian and the method he has developed.
It provides you with an "understanding" of glazes, which is far more than
mere recipe development! (Although you will get more recipes than you
could ever use.)
It is a tool that can be used to save you time! Of course it depends on
what you need and want from the system. Unity Molecular give you one
approach, percent analysis another, etc.
Making the initial investment of time will pay off exponentially over the
years. No question.
Incidentially, if you could only buy one book in your life on
ceramics "Stoneware Glazes" would be the one.
Thanks,
John Britt
Lawrence Ewing on sun 26 may 02
Well said Craig. I couldn't agree more. We have used recipe grids in our
teaching program since the publication of Ian's first book.
The value in Ian's method is reflected in the decision to include of a
facility in Matrix to generate a recipe grid with a couple of clicks of the
mouse. Matrix is really useful for those who wish to take Ian's method a
step further and look at the unity formula patterns in the grid.
Cheers,
Lawrence Ewing
Senior Lecturer
School of Art
Otago Polytechnic
Dunedin
New Zealand
email: lewing@clear.net.nz
url: http://www.Matrix2000.co.nz
----- Original Message -----
From: "Craig Martell"
To:
Sent: Saturday, May 25, 2002 4:47 PM
Subject: Currie/too much work?
> Hi:
>
> I'm driven to find a better personal explanation of what, "too much work"
> actually is.
>
> I thought that Ian Curries method of volumetric biaxial blends were very
> fast for the amount of information generated. It takes me about 3 hours
to
> prepare a 35 glaze biaxial grid using Ian's method. If I had to weigh,
> mix, and screen each of the 35 glazes it would take an astronomical amount
> of time. I've actually done this sort of thing in the past when searching
> for a particular glaze or effect.
>
> I made two plaster molds for the grid tiles and I usually do a bunch in
> advance. Then, if I want to run some grid experiments, I have plenty of
> tiles and I don't have worry about making tiles for the tests.
>
> The idea that Ian's second book is "too easy" is good to hear. The method
> is supposed to be easy and understood without having to delve into
> mineralogy, thermal chemistry, etc. What isn't easy is having the
> knowledge and experience with raw materials so that one makes an effective
> choice with regard to the "c" corner of the grid. This corner is just the
> glaze fluxes and nothing else. It's also not so easy to make a good
> interpretation of the results and proceed from there. If one is looking
> for glazes to apply to domestic pots you then need to acertain which are
> durable and likely to be food safe. A knowledge of the Seger Formula and
a
> willingness to do some lab tests is the next step.
>
> There's a huge amount work that needs to be done by any individual that
has
> a desire to use minerals effectively with regard to glazes. The nice
thing
> is that the more work you do, the better your understanding of the whole
> process. Ian has given potters a wonderful method for working through all
> of this stuff. There are other methods and approaches that are very good
> too. We have a lot of good stuff at our disposal and we live in a time
> when it's possible to use all this information to broaden our
understanding
> of minerals and how to apply them to our needs and our work.
>
> So, if Ian Currie's method is too much work, is there another method of
> developing glazes that isn't? I don't think so. I think it just comes
> down to motivation. Not everyone will be motivated to do the work that
you
> need to do to reach a goal of understanding a glaze, types of glazes,
> etc. I really like doing this kind of work and find it very interesting
> but I don't expect that everyone else would, or should.
>
> regards, Craig Martell in Oregon
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________
__
> 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.
iandol on mon 27 may 02
Dear Lawrence Ewing,
I believe Herman Seger ( Do you have his books? )may have used the idea =
of mapping Al2O3 on the Y-axis and SiO2 on the X-axis. It was certainly =
employed and shown in research papers before 1920 with the Y-axis being =
scaled with a multiplier to get a square picture. I have an example for =
^9 porcelain glazes with RO of 0.3 K2O 0.7 CaO showing fields for degree =
of maturity as well as the deformation temperatures of cones made from =
the glaze recipes.
Best regards,
Ivor Lewis.
| |
|
