Ivor and Olive Lewis on wed 16 jun 04
Dear Antoinette,
As you must realise from posts that have come in on this question it
is a topic dominated by Subjectivity.
As I see it, the problem is to get down to some fundamental
principles, back to basics.
There are several areas which come to mind which must be considered.
First is Capacity. Just what sort of volumes do we consider to be
proper. How do you get to a mass of clay which will enable you to
throw a mug body which when fired will give the volume you or your
potential customers desire?
The next is Stability. Mugs are used in many situations. But does a
person who keeps a mug of coffee going at the computer or office desk
want a utensil that is easily overturned. How does a mug maker ensure
that their product will not be overturned by the slightest
disturbance?.
Having considered those points then we can start to think about "Form"
. The most basic Form is a Cylinder with up and down sides. As you
know from the work you have done with me, a short stretch of the
imagination can take such a fundamental shape in many directions and
what emerges from those sorts of exercise can be further augmented by
altering the ratios and proportions of height and width, altering the
degree of curvature or location of inflections along a contour. Then
there is treatment of foot and the rim.
Which naturally leads to that appendage,"The Handle", with the
physical and mechanical limitations its placement imposes on the
design.
Beyond that, the scope for exploration becomes infinite as you
consider glaze and decoration.
What defines a "Good Mug"? Well, I would ask the opposite question,
"What are the reasons that might cause you to reject a Mug ?". I ask
because after these concepts have been eliminated from the equation
you have positive pointers to good design. But always remember, there
will always be those who disagree.
Best regards,
Ivor Lewis. Redhill, South Australia
Potters Council Member
----- Original Message -----
From: "Antoinette Badenhorst"
To:
Sent: Tuesday, 15 June 2004 7:25
Subject: Crystalline; more design discussion.
> Ivor,
> This subject about crystalline went beyond my expectations. Thanks
for
> seeing the opportunity to take it one step further than just
looking. I
> wish that we can do that with other forms, styles etc. I've
discussed
> mugs; their shapes and their handles and function with my students
this
> morning and I've realized there are so many mugs out there and
probably
> 90% of them are badly designed or just "happened". The same thing
can
> probably be said about anything else that is made on a wheel (or by
> hand.....)
> I had 2 mugs in my studio this morning that have thick rims. The one
was
> made locally(cylinder with a ripple wall, almost a loop for a handle
and
> glazed in two bright colors) and meant to be functional, the other a
mug
> from Peter Seabridge, suggesting function
> (http://www.pottery-tech.com/en/t/makigama/peterseabridge.html) For
the
> first one I am not willing to pay $1 and for the other one I paid
$30.
> We discussed how the handle should fit in the hand (and there are
> different preferences), how the mug should fit in the hand, how the
lip
> should be formed and how the coffee should stay warm and not "fall
out
> of the cup into ones mouth". We also discussed the esthetics of a
mug
> and the handle. I referred my students to Chris Schafale's website,
> since there is a good collection of mugs on there right now.
> I would like to get comments on this subject. What is a good
designed
> mug? How does it look, feel in the hand, feel on the lip etc. What
is a
> well designed handle?
> Thanks.
>
> Antoinette Badenhorst
> 105 Westwood Circle
> Saltillo MS
> 38866
> 662 869 1651
> www.clayandcanvas.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Clayart [mailto:CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG] On Behalf Of Ivor
and
> Olive Lewis
> Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2004 8:43 PM
> To: CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG
> Subject: Re: Incredible beautiful crystalline vases
>
> Dear Carol,
> Thank you for your observations. Living in a country where obesity
is
> approaching epidemic proportions I understand your metaphor !!!
> Perhaps some of those pots have a very high "Body Mass Index".
> I thing there is a consensus developing that, given careful thought
> and attention to detail, it is possible to design Forms which
promote
> appreciation of Crystalline Glazes within the restrictions imposed
by
> Technical Necessity.
> Best regards,
> Ivor Lewis. Redhill, South Australia
> Potters Council Member
>
>
______________________________________________________________________
__
> ______
> 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.
>
>
______________________________________________________________________
________
> 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.
daniel on wed 16 jun 04
Hi Ivor, Antoinette,
I've been following this thread and keeping mum up 'til now. The following
part of Ivor's post has given me the opportunity to leap in, if I may.
> What defines a "Good Mug"? Well, I would ask the opposite question,
> "What are the reasons that might cause you to reject a Mug ?".
I have just begun throwing mugs for coffee in a concentrated sort of way.
Trying to really learn a little about functional ware. Anyhow I have a set
of mugs which are "rejects" a functional point of view. They suffer from (at
least) two faults, perhaps more.
They are barrel shaped, swelled in the middle, opening at the top about the
size of the foot, about as wide at the belly as they are tall - 3 and 3/4".
While the lip is not too thin, the mug is somewhat hard to drink from and
the coffee when hot is hard to drink carefully as the lip faces away from
you. This can result in having to tip the mug more and get more hot coffee
when you'd rather have less.
The handles are constructed from a pulled ribbon of clay which was then
laid flat and cut in half length wise. This resulted in a ribbon with a flat
face and a rounded edge. This was the applied to the mug so that the flat
face formed the inside of the handle and the rounded edge the outside. Alas,
the size of the handle precludes more than about one finger inside,
necessitating a supporting finger underneath the handle. Of course the
thinner rounded outer edge puts a lot of pressure on the finger when the mug
is full.
Finally, the opening at the top is such that on some of the mugs to empty
them, ones nose hits the other side of the rim.
All up not great, though I rather liked the form and the look. I have other
designs in the works.
Back to keeping mum then. Speaking of which what is the origin of that
expression I wonder.
Thanx
D
Belmont, California, USA
(ex terra australis)
Antoinette Badenhorst on wed 16 jun 04
Dear Daniel, I want to encourage you to take that same mug and make
little changes on it. Curl just the rim out or stretch the barrel, add a
full rim to the barrel etc. Do the same with the handle. Keep on doing
that till you find a version of that shape that looks good and also
function well. Some persons will encourage you to draw the mug and make
the changes on paper. Also a good idea.
Happy potting.
Antoinette Badenhorst
105 Westwood Circle
Saltillo MS
38866
662 869 1651
www.clayandcanvas.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Clayart [mailto:CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG] On Behalf Of daniel
Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2004 12:27 AM
To: CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG
Subject: Re: Mug Design
Hi Ivor, Antoinette,
I've been following this thread and keeping mum up 'til now. The
following
part of Ivor's post has given me the opportunity to leap in, if I may.
> What defines a "Good Mug"? Well, I would ask the opposite question,
> "What are the reasons that might cause you to reject a Mug ?".
I have just begun throwing mugs for coffee in a concentrated sort of
way.
Trying to really learn a little about functional ware. Anyhow I have a
set
of mugs which are "rejects" a functional point of view. They suffer from
(at
least) two faults, perhaps more.
They are barrel shaped, swelled in the middle, opening at the top about
the
size of the foot, about as wide at the belly as they are tall - 3 and
3/4".
While the lip is not too thin, the mug is somewhat hard to drink from
and
the coffee when hot is hard to drink carefully as the lip faces away
from
you. This can result in having to tip the mug more and get more hot
coffee
when you'd rather have less.
The handles are constructed from a pulled ribbon of clay which was then
laid flat and cut in half length wise. This resulted in a ribbon with a
flat
face and a rounded edge. This was the applied to the mug so that the
flat
face formed the inside of the handle and the rounded edge the outside.
Alas,
the size of the handle precludes more than about one finger inside,
necessitating a supporting finger underneath the handle. Of course the
thinner rounded outer edge puts a lot of pressure on the finger when the
mug
is full.
Finally, the opening at the top is such that on some of the mugs to
empty
them, ones nose hits the other side of the rim.
All up not great, though I rather liked the form and the look. I have
other
designs in the works.
Back to keeping mum then. Speaking of which what is the origin of that
expression I wonder.
Thanx
D
Belmont, California, USA
(ex terra australis)
________________________________________________________________________
______
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.
Laurie Kneppel on wed 16 jun 04
> Finally, the opening at the top is such that on some of the mugs to
> empty
> them, ones nose hits the other side of the rim.
> Thanx
> D
>
> Belmont, California, USA
> (ex terra australis)
Hi Daniel,
A good rule of thumb that I was taught is the rim should be the the
same width as the distance from your nose to your chin. That way when
you are drinking, the top of the rim is above your nose. No crashing
and no coffee up your nose!
Hope that helps,
Laurie
Sacramento, CA
rockyraku.com (going to be getting a MAJOR facelift very soon)
Potters Council, member
Sacramento Potters Group, member
Ivor and Olive Lewis on thu 17 jun 04
Dear Laurie Kneppel,
Could be the cue for a consensus <<...A good rule of thumb that I
was taught is the rim should be the same width as the distance from
your nose to your chin. ...>
How about a straw pole for the measurement of each of the 3000 or so
of us.
I suggest we each measure from the underside of the nose to the
underside, on the bone, of our chin.
I seem to be about 80 mm, say 3 3/16 ins. A quick check in the
cupboard shows the mugs I have made are between 70 and 80 mm measured
at the outer edge of the rim.
Anyone else with a dimension to share?
Best regards,
Ivor Lewis.
Redhill,
S. Australia.
.
Ivor and Olive Lewis on thu 17 jun 04
Dear Daniel,
An interesting handle.
I must comment.
I would like to know what prompted you to have the cut side, with its
square edges facing towards the body and the curved side facing
outwards. I ask because this leads to disfunctionality. It would be
most uncomfortable to hold. the square edges will cut into the fingers
of the user.
However, used in the opposite sense and made long enough to give a
good grasp, it is a wonderful solution which could lend itself to
sensitive decorative treatment.
Best regards,
Ivor Lewis.
Redhill,
S. Australia.
----- Original Message -----
From: "daniel"
To:
Sent: Wednesday, 16 June 2004 2:56
Subject: Re: Mug Design
> Hi Ivor, Antoinette,
>
> I've been following this thread and keeping mum up 'til now. The
following
> part of Ivor's post has given me the opportunity to leap in, if I
may.
>
> > What defines a "Good Mug"? Well, I would ask the opposite
question,
> > "What are the reasons that might cause you to reject a Mug ?".
>
> I have just begun throwing mugs for coffee in a concentrated sort
of way.
> Trying to really learn a little about functional ware. Anyhow I have
a set
> of mugs which are "rejects" a functional point of view. They suffer
from (at
> least) two faults, perhaps more.
>
> They are barrel shaped, swelled in the middle, opening at the top
about the
> size of the foot, about as wide at the belly as they are tall - 3
and 3/4".
> While the lip is not too thin, the mug is somewhat hard to drink
from and
> the coffee when hot is hard to drink carefully as the lip faces away
from
> you. This can result in having to tip the mug more and get more hot
coffee
> when you'd rather have less.
>
> The handles are constructed from a pulled ribbon of clay which was
then
> laid flat and cut in half length wise. This resulted in a ribbon
with a flat
> face and a rounded edge. This was the applied to the mug so that the
flat
> face formed the inside of the handle and the rounded edge the
outside. Alas,
> the size of the handle precludes more than about one finger inside,
> necessitating a supporting finger underneath the handle. Of course
the
> thinner rounded outer edge puts a lot of pressure on the finger when
the mug
> is full.
>
> Finally, the opening at the top is such that on some of the mugs to
empty
> them, ones nose hits the other side of the rim.
>
> All up not great, though I rather liked the form and the look. I
have other
> designs in the works.
>
> Back to keeping mum then. Speaking of which what is the origin of
that
> expression I wonder.
>
> Thanx
> D
>
> Belmont, California, USA
> (ex terra australis)
>
>
______________________________________________________________________
________
> 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.
Christy Pines on thu 17 jun 04
From the point of my chin (so to speak) to the tip of my nose is
approx. 80 mm, and all of my favorite drinking vessels are at least this
large, the one's I like the best are as large as 90mm. My wine goblets
measure 80 mm. outside-rim to outside-rim.
I have two different favorite mug shapes. One is tall and very
cylindrical - 130mm tall by 90mm wide. It's perfect when I want to make
a single serving of tea. One tea bag flavors the water perfectly and I
don't feel like I wasted a tea bag on a too-small cup. Also, the rim is
beveled on the inside, so that when my mouth hit is, the insides of the
edges of my mouth (does that make any sense?) form to the rim and it's
not only pleasurable but gives of sense of security that nothing will
dribble out the edges. It's soda-fired, glazed on the inside, so the
outside has a pleasant pebbly feel and the inside, where inner lips meet
rim, is smooth and comfortable. Large handle to accomodate such a large
mug. Very comfortable. I easily fit all my fingers in the handle.
christy in connecticut, who visited with Katherine Pearson last night
and saw an amazing studio full of a lifetime of work. She's 79 and has a
handshake built of carrying 50lb bags of clay all her life. What a woman.
Ivor and Olive Lewis wrote:
>I suggest we each measure from the underside of the nose to the
>underside, on the bone, of our chin.
>
>
daniel on thu 17 jun 04
Hi Ivor, Everyone,
> I would like to know what prompted you to have the cut side, with its
> square edges facing towards the body and the curved side facing
> outwards.
I wish I could explain this choice. I seem to recall being concerned that
bending it the other way would have resulted in bunching up clay on the
inside of the curve - then bend is tight-ish. That said I do not recall
actually trying it. Further, I don't see why it would be better this way
than the other, from that point of view. I think I was also aesthetically
drawn to the rounded edge being on the outside.
> I ask because this leads to disfunctionality. It would be
> most uncomfortable to hold. the square edges will cut into the fingers
> of the user.
This is true - it is uncomfortable - but not because of square edges. I did
spounge them down a bit . The real problem, I find, arises because the
thinner rounded edge places pressure on the back of the finger outside the
handle. This is due to the leverage around the pivot of the upper finger
inside the handle and the weight of the coffee, I think.
> However, used in the opposite sense and made long enough to give a
> good grasp, it is a wonderful solution which could lend itself to
> sensitive decorative treatment.
This is certainly worth trying. I originally sent my note as a example of
poor mug design, in response to your question about what does not work. I've
got so many ideas on how to work with it and corrrect it that I'll be making
variants for weeks !!
Thanx everyone.
D
Belmont, California, USA
(ex terra australis)
Fara Shimbo on thu 17 jun 04
The nicest mugs I have -- as in, those that hold as much tea
as I want to drink (a lot!) and are the most comfortable in
the hand -- are, alas, some of my most funny-looking. I make
pulled handles but instead of making a nice curved form, I grab
the handle as if I were grabbing the cup, and use that shape.
It comes out strange looking but you can carry these mugs around
all day.
Fa
--
=============================================================
Fara Shimbo, Master Crystalliere, Certified Public Nuisance
-------------------------------------------------------------
Shimbo Pottery, PO Box 41, Hygiene, CO 80533 USA 720.207.5201
Crystalline-Ceramics.Info ShimboPottery.com Crystallieri.Org
Klysadel.Net TuranianHorse.Org
=============================================================
Hendrix, Taylor J. on thu 17 jun 04
Ivor and others in Clay Town:
Let's be quite clear about WHICH bodily dimension we are talking. I
don't want the likes of David Hendley or Tony C piping in with longer
(or shorter) dimensions and bragging about them.
BTB, I'm 3 1/4 or 83mm, baby. No need to congratulate me.
Taylor
Waco, TX
http://www3.baylor.edu/~Taylor_Hendrix/tjpots.htm=20
-----Original Message-----
From: Clayart [mailto:CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG] On Behalf Of Ivor and
Olive Lewis
Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2004 11:40 PM
To: CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG
Subject: Re: Mug Design
...
How about a straw pole for the measurement of each of the 3000 or so
of us.
I suggest we each measure from the underside of the nose to the
underside, on the bone, of our chin.
I seem to be about 80 mm, say 3 3/16 ins. A quick check in the
cupboard shows the mugs I have made are between 70 and 80 mm measured
at the outer edge of the rim.
Anyone else with a dimension to share?
...
Hendrix, Taylor J. on thu 17 jun 04
Howdy y'all:
My favorite mug is still the world famous David Hendley mug--perfect
shape, perfect handle. To hold the outside is to have the hands
pleasured with the juxtaposition of both satiny and smoothly textured
slip glazes of David's. The smooth lip invites a kiss. However, my
Mark Issenberg mug is ash glazed lusciousness, and every time I use it I
want to lick it. Better get on he hasn't stuck to the kiln shelf.
I aspire to throw mugs as good as these two models (Yes, David, I
remember how you make some of your mugs. No time to get to the junk
yard...or weld).
Taylor
Waco, TX
http://www3.baylor.edu/~Taylor_Hendrix/tjpots.htm =20
-----Original Message-----
From: Clayart [mailto:CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG] On Behalf Of Christy
Pines
Sent: Thursday, June 17, 2004 7:06 AM
To: CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG
Subject: Re: Mug Design
...
I have two different favorite mug shapes. One is tall and very
cylindrical - 130mm tall by 90mm wide. It's perfect when I want to make
a single serving of tea. One tea bag flavors the water perfectly and I
don't feel like I wasted a tea bag on a too-small cup. Also, the rim is
beveled on the inside, so that when my mouth hit is, the insides of the
edges of my mouth (does that make any sense?) form to the rim and it's
not only pleasurable but gives of sense of security that nothing will
dribble out the edges. It's soda-fired, glazed on the inside, so the
outside has a pleasant pebbly feel and the inside, where inner lips meet
rim, is smooth and comfortable. Large handle to accomodate such a large
mug. Very comfortable. I easily fit all my fingers in the handle.
...
Ivor and Olive Lewis on fri 18 jun 04
Dear Taylor,
Two points.
First, I have logged your vital dimension.
Second, define "Perfect".
Yes, I know, A David Hendly Mug : )
Best regards,
Ivor Lewis.
Redhill,
S. Australia.
daniel on fri 18 jun 04
Hi Muggers,
I had a similar thought Ivor. Was going to send this yesterday but got
distracted.
Chin to nose tip 85 mm - 3 3/8 " or thereabouts.
Given Laurie's suggestion, I also measured the distance from underside of
upper lip (mouth open as to drink) to nose. About an inch and a half. The
difference would seem to relate to the clearance one has to avoid rim
collision.
Of course we could measure lip to collision point - somewhere about the
bridge of the nose., and adjust for the rotation about the cup rim in the
mouth while drinking, fluid level, tilt of head etc. come up with the
equation for the perfect mug opening. But this really would be going a might
far :) But its an interesting thought exercise.
Thanx
Daniel "have I over-analysed this ?" Semler
Belmont, California, USA
(ex terra australis)
Laurie Kneppel on fri 18 jun 04
Hi Ivor,
That is interesting. I wonder how much variation there is within our
species as to distance between nose and chin. I would imagine there is
quite a bit and that we would have to get an average from a large
sampling to figure optimum mug rim diameter.
My nose to chin distance is approximately 2 7/8 inches or 73 mm.
My favorite Paul McCartney 2002 Back In the USA Tour mug (here at the
office) has a rim that is 3 1/4 inches in diameter (outside to
outside). Or 82.6 mm. A quick measurement of all the commercially made
mugs I could find in the office (3 of them anyway) revealed rims within
1/8 of an inch of that, more or less.
I know I have tried using thrown mugs that had too narrow of a rim and
was distressed when they hit the end of my nose when going for that
last drop of tea or coffee.
Laurie
Sacramento, CA
rockyraku.com
Potters Council, member
Sacramento Potters Group, member
On Jun 16, 2004, at 9:39 PM, Ivor and Olive Lewis wrote:
> Dear Laurie Kneppel,
> Could be the cue for a consensus <<...A good rule of thumb that I
> was taught is the rim should be the same width as the distance from
> your nose to your chin. ...>
> How about a straw pole for the measurement of each of the 3000 or so
> of us.
> I suggest we each measure from the underside of the nose to the
> underside, on the bone, of our chin.
> I seem to be about 80 mm, say 3 3/16 ins. A quick check in the
> cupboard shows the mugs I have made are between 70 and 80 mm measured
> at the outer edge of the rim.
> Anyone else with a dimension to share?
> Best regards,
> Ivor Lewis.
> Redhill,
> S. Australia.
> .
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> _______
> 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.
>
daniel on fri 18 jun 04
Hi Laurie, Ivor,
I just checked a bunch of mugs also. 3 1/4" near enough. Interestingly this
applies to my one HP mug - mass produced - and a number of handmade mugs -
some by me (complete fluke earlier on) and some I very much like by Bill
Creitz. I have a couple made by a friend of mine which are nearly 4".
The ones I was describing which have the problems only open 2 3/4" at the
top.
That coupled with a bulge in the middle certainly seems too small.
Thanx
D
Belmont, California, USA
(ex terra australis)
Tracy Wilson on sat 19 jun 04
Well I'd like to throw in my 2 cents worth. My most popular mug is the
tall thin mug. 5 1/2" ht and outside top diam. 3 1/4" (inside 2 7/8")
Probably the fact that it has no bulge in the middle makes even my large
proboscis(ed) customers incredibly satisfied. 1 lb and 6" tall when
throwing, the handle starts down about 1/2" from the top and big and small
hands are comfortable.
Tracy Wilson
Saltbox Pottery
www.saltboxpottery.com
Eleanor on sat 19 jun 04
For the record, nose-to-chin: 3 1/4".
In his very fine book "Functional Pottery" Robin Hopper uses a
bridge-of-nose-to-mouth measurement (which on my face is also about 3
1/4").
I don't sell my pots but my wide audience of friends and family
agrees that they like a mug which tapers to the top "to hold in the
heat" and has a comfortable lip. I leave some extra clay at the lip,
make it smooth and rounded and flare it out a bit, forming a nice
little depression for the lower lip--very comfortable.
To feed my coffee addiction I acquired an espresso machine and found
that a standard 4" mug doesn't fit under the double spouts (I make
latte) so I made a short, squat cup that fits perfectly and holds the
double shot of coffee, the foam and milk. Would such a mug sell?
BTW, Robin Hopper's book is useful not only for functional but also
for non-functional artists. There are chapters on design, decoration
and proportion--he refers to the Golden Ratio for example-- and there
are many illustrations, both drawings and photographs. There is even
a discussion and a picture of a recurring theme here: The French
Butter Keeper.
My three cents (inflation, you know).
Eleanor Kohler
HHH Centerport, NY
Pat Southwood on sat 19 jun 04
Hi,
73cm.
pat@southwood4.fsnet.co.uk
Ivor and Olive Lewis on sun 20 jun 04
Dear Eleanor,
Thank you for your value. The figure is logged in.
Yes, "Functional Pottery" contains a wealth of information and is well
worth serious study by people who are interested in design.
Best regards,
Ivor Lewis.
Redhill,
S. Australia.
Ivor and Olive Lewis on sun 20 jun 04
Dear Pat Southwood,
Thank you for your value which I have entered as 73 mm, as you would
wish.
Best regards,
Ivor Lewis.
Redhill,
S. Australia.
| |
|
