Dori Grandstrand on tue 9 nov 04
I'm rather with Mel on this one. At some point a commitment must be made to glazes. I'm guilty!! I've experimented the bleep-bleep out of glazes the last few years, but now that I want to make and market a functional line of pottery, I must now commit to a few of those glazes and get on with making lots and lots of stuff.
My dilemma is that I just got a copy of MC6G (Roy & Hesselberth) and would like to make several of those glazes, but there are several base glazes to work from. I'm interested in choosing 1 or 2 of those base glazes and working on variations from there. For instance, I want a good shiny, clear transparent glaze to go over slips, Mason Stains, etc., but I would also like to try the Licorice and Variegated Blue. This calls for 3 different glazes in the book, Glossy Base 1 for Variegated Blue, Glossy Base 2 for Licorice, and then the Clear Glossy Liner Glaze. Isn't there a way to condense all of this into one clear base glaze?
I also love the Variegated Blue and Oatmeal from the High Calcium Semimatte Base 1, as well as the Bone, Raw Sienna and Spearmint from the High Calcium Semimatte 2. Again, couldn't a single base be selected and the oxide variations utilized from there?
Limited experimentation should always continue if you want to keep your art-soul alive. I love experimenting with glazes, firing, clays, etc., (that's why pottery is so captivating) but at some point I've got to "get down to business" with a limited pallet and produce enough work to sell on a regular and steady basis. Besides, I don't happen to have Frit 3195 in stock, and I don't want to have to add yet another frit to my already large selection of chemicals. Can the Frit 3195 be substituted, perhaps with the 3134 used in the other recipes? What's the difference with those two frits? Anyone with any comments on this idea of condensing some of these glazes? Has anyone done any of it?
--- Dori Grandstrand, Sultanarts Studio
Charles Moore on tue 9 nov 04
Dori,
If I were to pick only one glossy base glaze from MCG, I would choose Glossy
Base 2 (the base for R&J's Licorice). It pours and dips more smoothly than
any gloss I have tried, including Hansen's 5X20. I almost never see a
ripple or a drip.
Charles Moore
Sacramento
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dori Grandstrand"
To:
Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 11:01 AM
Subject: Was Limited Pallet, Now Condensing MC6G Glazes
> I'm rather with Mel on this one. At some point a commitment must be
> made to glazes. I'm guilty!! I've experimented the bleep-bleep out of
> glazes the last few years, but now that I want to make and market a
> functional line of pottery, I must now commit to a few of those glazes and
> get on with making lots and lots of stuff.
> My dilemma is that I just got a copy of MC6G (Roy & Hesselberth) and
> would like to make several of those glazes, but there are several base
> glazes to work from. I'm interested in choosing 1 or 2 of those base
> glazes and working on variations from there. For instance, I want a good
> shiny, clear transparent glaze to go over slips, Mason Stains, etc., but I
> would also like to try the Licorice and Variegated Blue. This calls for 3
> different glazes in the book, Glossy Base 1 for Variegated Blue, Glossy
> Base 2 for Licorice, and then the Clear Glossy Liner Glaze. Isn't there a
> way to condense all of this into one clear base glaze?
> I also love the Variegated Blue and Oatmeal from the High Calcium
> Semimatte Base 1, as well as the Bone, Raw Sienna and Spearmint from the
> High Calcium Semimatte 2. Again, couldn't a single base be selected and
> the oxide variations utilized from there?
> Limited experimentation should always continue if you want to keep your
> art-soul alive. I love experimenting with glazes, firing, clays, etc.,
> (that's why pottery is so captivating) but at some point I've got to "get
> down to business" with a limited pallet and produce enough work to sell on
> a regular and steady basis. Besides, I don't happen to have Frit 3195 in
> stock, and I don't want to have to add yet another frit to my already
> large selection of chemicals. Can the Frit 3195 be substituted, perhaps
> with the 3134 used in the other recipes? What's the difference with those
> two frits? Anyone with any comments on this idea of condensing some of
> these glazes? Has anyone done any of it?
> --- Dori Grandstrand, Sultanarts Studio
>
> ______________________________________________________________________________
> 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.
>
>
Mark Tigges on tue 9 nov 04
On Tue, Nov 09, 2004 at 07:01:40PM +0000, Dori Grandstrand wrote:
> Can the Frit 3195 be substituted,
> perhaps with the 3134 used in the other recipes? What's the
> difference with those two frits? Anyone with any comments on
> this idea of condensing some of these glazes? Has anyone done
> any of it?
I can't remember which frit licorice calls for, but whichever it was I
messed up and used the other of the two that Ron & John use in their
recipes. I actually emailed John about it before adding the
colourant, and he said it was very likely that I would not notice a
difference in that glaze. The little bit I have used the glaze it has
performed adequately. Though I underfired it the one time I did use
it so I can't say definitively. Moreover, there is a table in the
back of the book which lists the constituent materials for each
ingredient used. If I remember correctly the only substantive
difference in those frits is in the minor ingredients.
Mark.
Ron Roy on thu 11 nov 04
Actually they are quite different - I just calculated the licorice both
ways and while the fluxes are still balanced with the 3195 the boron is way
up and so is the alumina and silica - and the expansion is way down. It may
look the same but my concern is with the low expansion rate.
The main differences between the two frits are.
3134 has no alumina - 3195 has lots
3134 is high in CaO - 3195 has half the amount.
3134 has no MgO - 3195 has some.
They both have the same amount of boron.
3134 is my favorite frit - no alumina allows more raw clay to keep the
glaze floating - it does have a lot of CaO so if you need less you have to
use another fit.
If your glaze already has a lot of raw clay in it using 3195 - with it's
high alumina allows you to use less clay in the recipe.
The analysis for all the materials we used in our book are included in the
appendix by the way.
RR
>On Tue, Nov 09, 2004 at 07:01:40PM +0000, Dori Grandstrand wrote:
>> Can the Frit 3195 be substituted,
>> perhaps with the 3134 used in the other recipes? What's the
>> difference with those two frits? Anyone with any comments on
>> this idea of condensing some of these glazes? Has anyone done
>> any of it?
>
>I can't remember which frit licorice calls for, but whichever it was I
>messed up and used the other of the two that Ron & John use in their
>recipes. I actually emailed John about it before adding the
>colourant, and he said it was very likely that I would not notice a
>difference in that glaze. The little bit I have used the glaze it has
>performed adequately. Though I underfired it the one time I did use
>it so I can't say definitively. Moreover, there is a table in the
>back of the book which lists the constituent materials for each
>ingredient used. If I remember correctly the only substantive
>difference in those frits is in the minor ingredients.
>
>Mark.
Ron Roy
RR#4
15084 Little Lake Road
Brighton, Ontario
Canada
K0K 1H0
Phone: 613-475-9544
Fax: 613-475-3513
| |
|
