mel jacobson on wed 8 mar 00
as many of you know/ i am not a scientist, i am a potter.
after years of observation i can be very clear on one thing:
the color and quality of the clay is the most important
factor in the quality and color of the glaze.
period.
i have had trouble for almost three years with rhodes 32.
it has no life.
i have been bumping up the iron content of my clay in small
stages.
rhodes is back.
without thinking, i have been using dirty porcelain for three years..
it gets re/cycled into my stoneware....it has diluted the clay.
like white paint and water in a painting.
i just had to kick up the iron content, get the color of the clay
correct. now it is fine.
for years i used scrap clay from school, mixed with fire clay.
it had a very high concentration of iron and made the rhodes
dance.
i have not used that formula for 8 years.
got caught....did not have a clue...now i know.
when i read some notes from david shaner, how he loved
iron in his clay it just stopped me like a brick wall.
that was the answer to my problem. fixed it.
mel/mn
http://www.pclink.com/melpots (website)
from minnetonka, minnesota, u.s.a.
iandol on fri 10 mar 00
------------------
Mel makes a good point to reinforce our understanding of the aesthetic he
prefers. I had a look at the composition of the high alumina matt Rhodes 32
recipe, given as a stony smooth matt very opaque. Obviously a glaze which
responds to iron bleed through no doubt giving a good spotty surface which =
could
not happen if he used porcelain. Must be a pleasure to be back on track =
again.
Ivor. Resisting the urge to follow e. e. cummings.
| |
|
