dbarnese on thu 18 jan 07
Correction --
The sentence below is supposed to say "Is the use of commercial GLAZES
considered 'cheating'?
Also, I should clarify that I am talking about using stains for
colored slips, and not for coloring glazes. But then we get into
another converstation about using transparent glazes over colored
slips, which I have also heard many opinions on...
> Is the use of commercial stains considered 'cheating'? Is there an
> ethical problem with using stains? Is that cheating?
> I would love to hear your opinions on both.
Lois Ruben Aronow on fri 19 jan 07
Correction --
The sentence below is supposed to say "Is the use of commercial GLAZES
considered 'cheating'?
- Only if you pass it off as your own creation. There is nothing wrong
with using commercial glazes. Especially if you can REALLY master the
process. FYI - Fong Choo uses many commercial glazes, and is probably as
well known for his glazes as his pots.
Also, I should clarify that I am talking about using stains for colored
slips, and not for coloring glazes. But then we get into another
converstation about using transparent glazes over colored slips, which I
have also heard many opinions on...
- Use whatever you want. Hell, there was a thread here once about people
grinding kitty litter for the bentonite. Having the luxury to experiment,
I'd throw in anything just to see what it does. I once put a penny in a
dish during a glaze firing. That was cool.
Snail Scott on sun 21 jan 07
At 09:16 PM 1/18/2007 -0000, you wrote:
>...then we get into
>another converstation about using transparent glazes over colored
>slips, which I have also heard many opinions on...
Who could object to that, and why?
-Snail
Lois Ruben Aronow on mon 22 jan 07
Using a clear glaze on top of a slip adds: an extra chemical. An extra
step. Extra work. Extra time. Extra money.
-----Original Message-----
From: Clayart [mailto:CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG] On Behalf Of Snail Scott
Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2007 6:43 PM
To: CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG
Subject: Re: Correction to: Commercial glazes & stains
At 09:16 PM 1/18/2007 -0000, you wrote:
>...then we get into
>another converstation about using transparent glazes over colored
>slips, which I have also heard many opinions on...
Who could object to that, and why?
-Snail
____________________________________________________________________________
__
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.
Taylor Hendrix on mon 22 jan 07
Lois,
You forgot 'extra effect' which I suppose would be the whole reason to do so.
No cheating if you're not getting graded! Hee haw.
Taylor
On 1/22/07, Lois Ruben Aronow wrote:
> Using a clear glaze on top of a slip adds: an extra chemical. An extra
> step. Extra work. Extra time. Extra money.
Snail Scott on mon 22 jan 07
At 08:20 AM 1/22/2007 -0500, you wrote:
>Using a clear glaze on top of a slip adds: an extra chemical. An extra
>step. Extra work. Extra time. Extra money.
>
But it's a different effect than that produced
by slip alone, or by overglaze and majolica
techniques, or by the use of colored glazes,
or by paint with varnish on top.
I'd put the importance of the intended result
over inconvenience or cost. If the effect
is best attained with colored slips or engobes
under clear glaze, then that ought to be
what's used. In any case, the added time, e
ffort, and cost seem fairly trivial, and less
than some of those other methods I noted.
I don't know what the original post intended
by the question, but if it was still related
to the question of 'cheating', I just don't
get it.
-Snail
Lois Ruben Aronow on mon 22 jan 07
If you're just doing it to add color and have a 'safe' glaze on top of it,
it's not extra effect. It's just extra work.
I don't using commercial stuff is cheating at all. I happen to use a
commercial underglaze myself, as well as mason and cerdec stains. I would
rather spend my time making a good, safe, durable glaze than taking an extra
production step.
...Lo
Lois,
You forgot 'extra effect' which I suppose would be the whole reason to do
so.
No cheating if you're not getting graded! Hee haw.
Taylor
On 1/22/07, Lois Ruben Aronow wrote:
> Using a clear glaze on top of a slip adds: an extra chemical. An
> extra step. Extra work. Extra time. Extra money.
____________________________________________________________________________
__
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.
dbarnese on tue 23 jan 07
I didn't mean anything by it.. so really there's nothing to 'get'.
There are people, artists, craftspeople, whatever you want to call
them, who are very hung up on purist ideas. I have been around potters
who feel that if it's not wood-fired, it's not worth it. The very idea
of putting a transparent glaze over the top of colored slips is like
sacrilege. The color should come from the ash. Others feel that a
commercial glaze has no place in a "real" studio.
Perhaps I got these vibes because I was in an academic setting for a
few years. People were very set in their ways, and in fact, only one
glaze chemistry class was offered in the BA program, and NO glaze or
color application classes, at least not for high fire. Focus was on
wood and soda/salt firings. Students were on their own if they wanted
to learn about other ways of decorating. Since leaving, I have learned
a lot from many fabulous books and websites.
So... the reason I posted the original question was because I was
curious about how people who actually work in the field (outside of
academia) felt about commercial products, and I think this is a very
knowledgable and talented group, so it was the perfect place to ask
the question. And the answers were very helpful. :-)
> I don't know what the original post intended
> by the question, but if it was still related
> to the question of 'cheating', I just don't
> get it.
>
> -Snail
Snail Scott on wed 24 jan 07
At 04:05 PM 1/23/2007 -0000, you wrote:
>...I was
>curious about how people who actually work in the field (outside of
>academia) felt about commercial products...
My background and present practice is
pretty closely tied to academia, but
I've found that this is not synonymous
with condemnation of commercial glaze,
at least not everywhere.
Most programs start out by discouraging
its use, in order to remove the 'crutch'
which might prevent students from learning
about their processes. That accomplished,
however, a sensible program may reasonably
allow their use, and many do. The main
reason for their avoidance in academia,
aside from a certain style-snobbery that
persists from the Voulkos/Soldner era,
(i.e. if it ain't brown, it's crap) ;)
is that you don't LEARN as much from using
them, and learning is, after all, the
ostensible purpose of education.
Half the problem lies with artists who
never learn to think like professionals
instead of students. They get told
something in school, then obey it for
the rest of their life as though it were
holy writ, instead of something specific
to that time and place.
-Snail
| |
|
