iandol on mon 17 feb 03
Dear Lois Ruben Aronow,=20
If your clay was translucent after firing and you have not changed the =
composition of that clay body, it is still porcelain and it still has =
the ability to transmit a limited amount of light But you have masked or =
concealed this property by using an Engobe, giving it an overcoat which =
is opaque.
Best regards,
Ivor Lewis. Redhill, South Australia.
Lois Ruben Aronow on tue 18 feb 03
On Mon, 17 Feb 2003 16:52:33 +1030, you wrote:
>Dear Lois Ruben Aronow,=20
>
>If your clay was translucent after firing and you have not changed the =
composition of that clay body, it is still porcelain and it still has the=
ability to transmit a limited amount of light But you have masked or =
concealed this property by using an Engobe, giving it an overcoat which =
is opaque.
>
What if I used no engobe, but threw it thick so it wasn't translucent?
Would it still be porcelain, by your definition? It is the same clay
body, only used differently.
Sorry, but I feel your definition is very narrow and I would like to
understand it.
--------------------------------------------
=46ine Craft Porcelain - New and Updated for 2003!!
http://www.loisaronow.com=20
| |
|
