Phil Smith on thu 18 dec 03
Hi folks.
Been working on some lighting fixtures with the look of turn of the century
metal work. Craftsman style with mica shades.
Simulated hammered metal bands with rivets.
I'm gettin this look dialed in pretty well but do not yet posess the glaze
know-how to pull it off. I was thinking I could glaze these works with
something that resembled bronze or copper. Maybe even try the low fire
metallic lusters on the bands and rivets. I have seen some work by Lucy Rie
that had glazes which looked like tarnished copper. I believe they were
Manganese/copper glazes.
Anyway, I have several of these pieces ready to go and if any of you could
point me in the right direction I would be very grateful.
Thanks.
Phil...
Susan Cline on thu 18 dec 03
There is a Weathered Bronze Green developed by Pete Pinnell that John Hesselberth has tested for durability and safety. The calculations, recipe and a picture are on John's site: www.frogpondpottery.com
I have used it both successfully and not, but when it works, it works beautifully and is true to its name. I haven't had the space nor the frequency of firing to test and re-test this glaze under my own various parameters, but since you are on the search, you might give this a try. I've had some pinholing problems and if thin the glaze is a muddy matte brown, but the successes are very good.
You may want to have a look.
-- Sue Cline
Cincinnati, Ohio
-----Original Message-----
From: Phil Smith
Sent: Dec 18, 2003 1:31 PM
To: CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG
Subject: Copper/manganese glaze?
Hi folks.
Been working on some lighting fixtures with the look of turn of the century
metal work. Craftsman style with mica shades.
Simulated hammered metal bands with rivets.
I'm gettin this look dialed in pretty well but do not yet posess the glaze
know-how to pull it off. I was thinking I could glaze these works with
something that resembled bronze or copper. Maybe even try the low fire
metallic lusters on the bands and rivets. I have seen some work by Lucy Rie
that had glazes which looked like tarnished copper. I believe they were
Manganese/copper glazes.
Anyway, I have several of these pieces ready to go and if any of you could
point me in the right direction I would be very grateful.
Thanks.
Phil...
______________________________________________________________________________
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.
Valice Raffi on fri 19 dec 03
>When you referred to copper luster in your post are you speaking of the low
>fire metallics? If so, Which brand? What iv'e read so far indicates only
>for use on glossy finishes.
Hi Phil,
I've used copper luster and other low-fire metallics and lusters on matt
glazes as well as on bisque, both "raw" and underglazed. The lusters will
"take on" the attributes of whatever you apply it to, so on a matt, the
luster will be matt. I mostly use Hanovia lusters, mainly because I can
get them from Alpha Ceramics, which is about 10 minutes from my house.
When I was checking brands for you, I discovered that one of my lusters is
from "Loretta Young Products"! Anybody know if that's THE Loretta Young
(who was an actress some time ago)?
Valice
in Sacramento
Snail Scott on fri 19 dec 03
At 01:31 PM 12/18/03 -0500, you wrote:
>[lamps]...I was thinking I could glaze these works with
>something that resembled bronze or copper...
Most of the lamps I've seen in this style are
virtually black (very dark brown), with only a
hint of metallic glint mainly in the worn areas.
I've gotten roughly similar effects using a matte
glaze, applying a copper luster to some areas,
then scotch-briting it off almost entirely. (For
a piece using similar effects but with more luster,
see December in the new calendar.)
The high-manganese glazes will give a matte-brass
effect going to gunmetal-grey if thin. Not as warm
a look. It will tend to obscure details if applied
thick enough to go metallic.
Some folks have mentioned Pinnell's Weathered
Bronze as a glaze. Note that it's a very bright
bluish-green, though, not dark or brown.
I do think part of the appeal of these craftsman-
style lamps is the direct, honest look of the
hammered metal, though. Tromp l'oeil can be great,
but simulating this style or metalwork in clay
seems to be setting yourself up for second-best.
-Snail
Phil Smith on fri 19 dec 03
Dear Snail,
Thank you for your reply.
I also had the thought that a Faux metal fixture would seem a bit cheesey.
I set up these projects for myself to improve my skills and knowledge.
Helps me to have focus. Often takes me off on a new tangent.
When you referred to copper luster in your post are you speaking of the low
fire metallics? If so, Which brand? What iv'e read so far indicates only
for use on glossy finishes.
Phil...
Snail Scott on fri 19 dec 03
At 01:40 PM 12/19/03 -0500, you wrote:
>Dear Snail,
>Thank you for your reply.
>I also had the thought that a Faux metal fixture would seem a bit cheesey.
>I set up these projects for myself to improve my skills and knowledge.
>Helps me to have focus. Often takes me off on a new tangent.
>When you referred to copper luster in your post are you speaking of the low
>fire metallics? If so, Which brand? What iv'e read so far indicates only
>for use on glossy finishes.
Any of the usual overglaze lusters (^018-020 or thereabouts)
will work. When they say they have to go on over glossy
glazes, that's only because they figure the hobby crowd
only want shiny metallics. The layer of metal which gets
deposited is super-thin, and it will have the same gloss
(or lack thereof) that the glaze underneath has. I often
use the same metallic luster over base glazes of different
gloss levels. I like it over matte glazes best. As long as
the surface underneath is vitreous, it'll work. It'll even
work on underglazes or bare clay, IF they are truly vitreous.
The same goes for when they say use only light-colored
glazes underneath. It's just that a dark glaze underneath
gives a different effect, and shows flaws more strongly.
It's not wrong; it's just a change from the standard set
of assumptions, and it gives different results.
-Snail
>
>Phil...
>
| |
|
