mel jacobson on sat 25 feb 06
when clayart was a young pup, we got all kinds
of requests for `recipes`. in many ways the early
clayart was thought of as a `recipe swap site`.
it was not that, but many thought that was the case.
many elite (so called/self named) thought this silly
clayart was for simpletons. it has never been that.
we have come a long ways from those days.
recipes mean very little any longer.
it is a vast system of clay, glaze, heat, kilns style,
throwing style, known materials and about 50 other variables.
those that use a computer to do clayart can
sure use your computer to compute and calculate
glazes...any glaze.
so, i am very pleased that i do not have to wade
through 50 email posts wanting a nice oatmeal.
or a `good cone six glaze` every week.
i was beaten up pretty soundly for calling the
iron saga a `system`. well we have proven
about 200 percent that it is a system. without
the system in place, you cannot make what we made.
period. it is clay, dark iron bearing, able to reach cone 13,
a glaze system of at least three recipes to allow it to stick and
move, a kiln that will fire in oxidation, and the courage to seek
out some new materials and fire that hot. take any of those
away...bingo. failure. and the courage to fire that hot may
be the key. 16 $125 kiln shelves for each firing. covered with
temmoku. do you want to try it? everything manual, no
electronics, no ramps.
joe has in the safe at laguna, recipes that number in the thousands.
almost every recipe that has ever been made. note books of voulkus
and susan peterson from the 50's. guarded. integrity paid to even those
that are dead and gone. all the work of harding black and carelton
ball, and other
great folks that should get the credit for a great deal of modern
work. joe sees books all the time that are loaded with hamer and
black...almost no credit given.
as joe says, `don't post me your research, show me your work.
the finished pots`. then we can have some great discussions.
raw data is just what it is...raw data. theory, the pots tell all the stories.
the most impressive aspect of the work of ron roy that i saw years
ago, were totally terrific pots. amazing throwing, great clay, and
superb temmoku black. perfection. no corners cut. a professional.
i did not want to own his research books, i wanted the pots.
(still have a set of dishes ordered, now nine years...he is an ass.)
but he is a great potter.
i can say the same thing about dannon, or david hendley.
great researchers, but the pots speak for themselves.
i think of the work of connie christenson...worked her tail
off with shino...and the work shows...great pots. amazing pots.
quiet, slow, plodding research. asks for nothing. just look
at her pots.
these will be the discussions in the clayart room. tell us
about your pots, show us your pictures, share your ideas.
clayart is not about recipes, it is about total human potters
and clay folks. dedicated, willing to show their work. men and
women, young and old. and lily can remain seated, as she
has paid her dues.
i am proud to work for you all.
it is a pleasure.
mel
"Luck is prepaid."
from: mel/minnetonka.mn.usa
website: http://my.pclink.com/~melpots3
John Britt on sun 26 feb 06
Mel,
Hate to have a difference of opinion ...But...
I remember last year when this topic of =93system=94 birthed the =93Red Temm=
oku
Challenge=94. Actually, this is about the one year anniversary.
I think we discussed that every glaze is a =93system=94 whether it is
acknowledged or not. So I don=92t think you took the flack for that but for
implying your approach is was something new or unique
Then, we proved that most anyone, with the recipes (no formula please) and
firing instructions could fire pots like yours and Joe=92s with ease. I
believe that Sam Hoffman, Jennifer Boyer and many others, proved it with
their beautiful pots which they took to NCECA. They still have photos
posted on their websites.
Now, the irony in your post is telling us how many =93REICPES=94 Joe has in
his vault. Imagine that. If recipes suck so much why does he have so many?
And why are they in the vault!
Now you have done it. This is just another reason for a crusade by the
Glaze Free Trade Society and our mission to Free-All-Imprisoned Glazes.
Where=92s the vault!
Here we go again!
Anyway, I always find that those with the recipes and knowledge try to
prevent the spread of recipes. It is like money, the ones with it
say =93Money is not everything=94. But you will never hear that from a poor
person, I guarantee you.
So, I say to all the members of the Secret Society =96 spread the love. And
if anyone needs =93Buttermilk=94 let me know,
Best,
John Britt
mel jacobson on sat 7 jun 08
anyone can publish a recipe of their own on clayart.
we love that, it is a good thing to do.
but, be careful that it is `your` recipe you are giving
away.
as most veteran potters know....recipes mean very little
in themselves.
as maurice has pointed out, and many others before him...
it is the system that makes the glaze, not the formula/recipe.
application thickness, clay body,drying, firing, hold time, down fire
cooling.
they are all critical.
when people are working hard on something new/a study/
a search....leave them alone. they don't have to share anything
until they are ready.
i just saw some wonderful nickel recipes from a clayart friend.
years of work...would i publish that stuff...? hell no.
i would not even try it...leave her alone. she sent it to
me for comment. that is all i can do...comment. it belongs to
her until she has things ready for publication.
same for ron and john's work. it has a copyright. don't publish
what has already been published. not only courtesy, it is the law.
i have my ideas and recipes stolen, because i gave them away. (oxymoron.)
i at least expect to have `mel's orange` listed when someone
else publishes a story using my stuff. but no, bob's orange...his
invention. right out of my cm article. the recipe was identical.
mel's temmoku with mel's orange.
god i hate that. but, some just will do anything.
so, publish what you do, your work, ask others for ideas and
recipes...just give credit. it is what most potters want.
simple credit.
you notice that i always say my main glaze is rhodes/shaner.
my saga glazes are always koons. my red is pete's.
1234 is leach/sung
anyway...it is how i fire, clay, apply, layer, cool my kiln that counts.
like richard aerni...who can makes his stuff? no one. it is unique
and wonderful. his glaze, his clay, his style, his firing.
as i have said many times....if you are working at an art center,
junior college and are using their kiln, their glazes, their clay, their
wheels, their janitor...what you put into the party is about 20 percent.
so, if you show...mention. `clay,firing, glazes and studio@kentucky jr. college`
pot by `wanda lou sloop`.
when you credit others, it spreads a very fine history of
the glaze. it makes you stronger...it puts you in the line of
other fine women and men that made pots before you.
it helps you up the ladder of fame. one rung at a time.
pulling others up with you is a good thing. reach down.
pull. it shoves you up a few rungs every time you do it.
mel
from minnetonka:
website http://www.visi.com/~melpots/
clayart site:
http://www.visi.com/~melpots/clayart.html
WJ Seidl on sat 7 jun 08
Just my 4 cents here, to embellish on what Mel has already mentioned.
As some of you might already know, in the case of paintings, sometimes
the provenance is as important as the work. Just look at the brouhaha
surrounding the paintings (allegedly?) stolen by the Nazi's...those are
still creating headaches to this day.
Provenance establishes where the work was originally done, by whom, to
whom the work passed in order, from creation to the (current/final)
owner. No one in the art collector circle would dream of buying a work
of art unless provenance was established and could be proved. Of course,
some unscrupulous collectors don't give a tinker's damn for who the
rightful owner is, they just want the "thing". But we all know potters
aren't an unscrupulous lot, now don't we?!
We credit forms to their original creators...Greek amphorae, Syrian wine
vessels, southwestern (Native) American pots, Japanese yunomi etc.
These are a given, and no one thinks twice that a shape like any of
those would be an "original" creation. You would be laughed at among
your peers (us), and rightly so. (And I have to admit here, I've often
"created" then thought a shape was "mine" only to find a similar shape
in a magazine, or a book that I glanced at and promptly forgot...insert
sound of palm slapping forehead. D'OH!)
It should be NO DIFFERENT with glazes. As Maurice pointed out (get
packing Maurice and quit posting...I'll bet I finish first ) the clay
body and the application, the firing schedule and cooling cycle all play
major roles in how a glaze appears. Sometimes, it can be a completely
different animal (just ask me about June Perry's Yellow on my porcelain
sometime) but that does not negate the fact that YOU did not invent the
thing. You may have altered it, in which case (again) you may claim
alteration credit: (Joeblow's adaptation of "WooHoo Timbuktu Purple")
but the fact remains that it was not yours to begin with. Or, as a wise
woman once told me "...just because you can play Beethoven don't mean
you wrote it." Racers or shards, 1sts or 2nds, doesn't matter.
Credit where credit is due, and due provenance. It's the right thing to
do, and costs you nothing. No one is going to think less of you for
giving due credit, but they will if you don't.
Best,
Wayne "...did these glaze chemicals/ bags/ molds/ tools/ buckets
MULTIPLY while I wasn't looking?? UGH!!" Seidl
Mel Jacobson wrote:
>
> when you credit others, it spreads a very fine history of
> the glaze. it makes you stronger...it puts you in the line of
> other fine women and men that made pots before you.
> it helps you up the ladder of fame. one rung at a time.
> pulling others up with you is a good thing. reach down.
> pull. it shoves you up a few rungs every time you do it.
> mel
>
>
> from minnetonka:
> website http://www.visi.com/~melpots/
> clayart site:
> http://www.visi.com/~melpots/clayart.html
>
>
Lois Aronow on sat 7 jun 08
Just to offer another perspective: I believe glaze recipes are, in a way,
teaching tools. I know that *I* learned through trial and error on recipes
people gave me, and I have no problem passing on the basic components for
others to learn from.
Only serious collectors and other professional potters care about the
provenance of the glaze. The majority of people only care if they like it
or not. No matter where it came from, every glaze will have to be tweaked
to be used successfully. Students just beginning, or hobbyists in craft
centers should not be denied this very minute bit of information just
because they are at square one. That's how you learn.
And now, since Wayne has incited Godwin's Law, this thread can end.
Thank you and goodnight.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Clayart [mailto:CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG] On Behalf Of WJ Seidl
> Sent: Saturday, June 07, 2008 7:22 PM
> To: CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG
> Subject: Re: clayart and recipes
>
> Just my 4 cents here, to embellish on what Mel has already mentioned.
> As some of you might already know, in the case of paintings,
> sometimes the provenance is as important as the work. Just
> look at the brouhaha surrounding the paintings (allegedly?)
> stolen by the Nazi's...those are still creating headaches to this day.
> Provenance establishes where the work was originally done, by
> whom, to whom the work passed in order, from creation to the
> (current/final) owner. No one in the art collector circle
> would dream of buying a work of art unless provenance was
> established and could be proved. Of course, some unscrupulous
> collectors don't give a tinker's damn for who the rightful
> owner is, they just want the "thing". But we all know
> potters aren't an unscrupulous lot, now don't we?!
>
> We credit forms to their original creators...Greek amphorae,
> Syrian wine vessels, southwestern (Native) American pots,
> Japanese yunomi etc.
> These are a given, and no one thinks twice that a shape like
> any of those would be an "original" creation. You would be
> laughed at among your peers (us), and rightly so. (And I have
> to admit here, I've often "created" then thought a shape was
> "mine" only to find a similar shape in a magazine, or a book
> that I glanced at and promptly forgot...insert sound of palm
> slapping forehead. D'OH!)
>
> It should be NO DIFFERENT with glazes. As Maurice pointed
> out (get packing Maurice and quit posting...I'll bet I finish
> first ) the clay body and the application, the firing
> schedule and cooling cycle all play major roles in how a
> glaze appears. Sometimes, it can be a completely different
> animal (just ask me about June Perry's Yellow on my porcelain
> sometime) but that does not negate the fact that YOU did not
> invent the thing. You may have altered it, in which case
> (again) you may claim alteration credit: (Joeblow's
> adaptation of "WooHoo Timbuktu Purple") but the fact remains
> that it was not yours to begin with. Or, as a wise woman once
> told me "...just because you can play Beethoven don't mean
> you wrote it." Racers or shards, 1sts or 2nds, doesn't matter.
>
> Credit where credit is due, and due provenance. It's the
> right thing to do, and costs you nothing. No one is going to
> think less of you for giving due credit, but they will if you don't.
>
> Best,
> Wayne "...did these glaze chemicals/ bags/ molds/ tools/
> buckets MULTIPLY while I wasn't looking?? UGH!!" Seidl
>
> Mel Jacobson wrote:
> >
> > when you credit others, it spreads a very fine history of
> the glaze.
> > it makes you stronger...it puts you in the line of other fine women
> > and men that made pots before you.
> > it helps you up the ladder of fame. one rung at a time.
> > pulling others up with you is a good thing. reach down.
> > pull. it shoves you up a few rungs every time you do it.
> > mel
> >
> >
> > from minnetonka:
> > website http://www.visi.com/~melpots/
> > clayart site:
> > http://www.visi.com/~melpots/clayart.html
> >
> >
WJ Seidl on sun 8 jun 08
Dear Lois:
Very sorry if I touched a nerve. It was the best example I could think of.
I had to go to Wikipedia to explore "Godwin's Law"...but this is how we
learn.
My apologies if I upset you, or any other list members.
Best,
Wayne Seidl
Lois Aronow wrote:
> And now, since Wayne has incited Godwin's Law, this thread can end.
>
> Thank you and goodnight.
>
>
Neal on sun 8 jun 08
When I started out mixing my own glazes five years ago,
I was very careful about writing down where the recipe
came from. I still am. And when people ask me, I try
to point to the original source and then let them know
what changes I have made. Some glaze recipes worked
for me immediately. Others have had to be tweaked. It's
all about getting a glaze that works with your clay and
your firing conditions.
But with all of those caveats about how careful I am in
giving credit where credit is due, the copyright issue
is clear--"Mere listings of ingredients as in recipes,
formulas, compounds or prescriptions are not subject to
copyright protection"--according to the U.S. Copyright
Office. (http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl122.html)
So if you do not want everyone to know your glaze recipe,
it's best not to share it with anyone. And once you've
published it in an article or a book, it's out there in
the public domain. The text surrounding a recipe will be
protected by copyright, but the formula itself is not.
One of the reasons I looked into sources other than
Mastering Cone 6 Glazes is that so many potters in my
area are using these glazes. I don't want my pots to
look so similar to everyone else's pots--especially
since the few times each year I sell pottery are mostly
in shows with other potters guild members.
Neal O'Briant
Raleigh, N.C.
Lois Aronow on sun 8 jun 08
oh, no nerve struck at all, but thanks!
I have been on line since the wild west BBS days pre-dating internet, and
Godwin's Law has become one of my favorite rules for life.
I find it amusing that, when people are trying to REALLY make a point - when
all else has failed - the Nazis or Hitler are ALWAYS invoked. Now that you
know about Godwin's law, you'll notice it often in your everyday life.
For those of you who are not familiar with this interesting bit of internet
lore:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law
Basically, once the word "nazi" or "hitler" comes up in a thread, it must
end. It is a sure sign the thread has gone on for waaaayyyy too long.
That's Godwin's Law.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Clayart [mailto:CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG] On Behalf Of WJ Seidl
> Sent: Sunday, June 08, 2008 9:03 AM
> To: CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG
> Subject: Re: clayart and recipes
>
> Dear Lois:
> Very sorry if I touched a nerve. It was the best example I
> could think of.
> I had to go to Wikipedia to explore "Godwin's Law"...but this
> is how we learn.
> My apologies if I upset you, or any other list members.
> Best,
> Wayne Seidl
>
> Lois Aronow wrote:
> > And now, since Wayne has incited Godwin's Law, this thread can end.
> >
> > Thank you and goodnight.
> >
> >
May Luk on sun 8 jun 08
I start all my glazes like this:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/yamerica/sets/72157600170245097/
I started this transparent glaze back in April 07. I have just got it fixed=
on porcelain this week (with my own brain juice, I was rebelling against R=
R) I spend a lot of time thinking just a few glazes. My own policy on recip=
e is like gays in the military, don't ask and don't tell. Although I always=
invite people to come to my glaze groups (when I used to have it), look at=
my tiles and we can brainstorm together. I prefer thinking about a problem=
, make deviations, than copying other's effort. I set my own end goals and =
I find my way there. It takes longer but the pleasure is all mine.
I read loads of recipes like I read cook books, but I never follow any of t=
hem. I look at a glaze and I pretty much know what's in it. I like to guess=
about food like that too.
My father told me since my childhood: 'Don't do something that everybody el=
se can do. Try to do something different'
Happy Fathers Day!=20
Regards
May
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
"The road to shiney happy ceramics is paved with broken sad clown face mask=
s" -Me
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
=0A=0A=0A __________________________________________________________=
=0ASent from Yahoo! Mail.=0AA Smarter Email http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyou=
can.html
| |
|
