studio pottery views

I was just discussing glaze misses on studio pottery,in my opinion they're just indications that the pot is hand made but do these "imperfections" put you off buying a pot?

If its not damage thats occured post manufacture, then I consider any imperfections as part and parcel of the proceess of making pots by hand and don't see them as a reason not to buy.

so you would prefer a studio pot with glaze miss over a 100
so you would prefer a studio pot with glaze miss over a 100% perfect transfer printed plate that came out of a mould?








%

one assumes thestudio pot was deemed ok by its creator , a glaze miss on a transfer print has missed the quality control but I might still prefer a mass produced plate even a second above a studio pot depends which pot or plate

so you judge on the basis of personal appreciation rather than production quality?

every time, cheap and nasty can be great superb craftsmanship can be boring

dantheman wrote:I was just discussing glaze misses on studio pottery,in my opinion they're just indications that the pot is hand made but do these "imperfections" put you off buying a pot?

I wouldn't call a glaze miss on a studio piece an imperfection ,true studio pieces are unique so differences in glaze etc are to be expected / wanted , some mass produced pieces have hand applied glazes that are shabbily done and are a bit hit and miss as to quality or pleasing to the eye (imo) .

It is not a glaze miss exactly but I thought that it might be interesting to look at the Japanese take on kiln imperfections.

There appear to be many water pots that were made in Iga during the 16th and 17th century that have claims to fame but in the eyes of those who practice the tea ceremony there are none to equal the one that has been give the name, Yaburebukuro.

Water pots, as the name implies, are used to store water that is used to make the tea and Yaburebukuro translates as "torn pouch" - it has a filthy great fissure down the front that makes it unfit for purpose. However, the pot is registered as an "Important Cultural Property".

I was just thinking that any potter would rather that there would be no missed glazed bits in their work. All things being equal, I would prefer fully glazed than bits missing.

Of course I'm not talking about transfers or mass production.

xx

I think it depends on the pot and the potters intent.

With some items glaze misses it add's to the charm, others it would ruin the appeal.

As an ex Chelsea pottery decorator (1972-1982) I can say that any pin holes, crawling,blistering,under or over fireing, thin glaze spraying(last layer in the process) were all considered faults. Some were sold as seconds,others smashed.
But beauty is in the eye of the beholder and whether a piece is studio,factory,perfect or faulty doesn't really matter unless you are buying for investment.
Time and fashion play a part also of course.
I found this forum by accident. Pleased to see Chelsea is still collected!

welcome to the forum,as you can see from my avatar I love Chelsea and one of my most prized pieces is a Chelsea cockerel

do you have a Chelsea collection??

Hi, as Dan says welcome , it's interesting that you say imperfect factory pieces are sold as seconds or thrown away , it shows another difference betwen the studio potter who in all probability would work and rework a piece till satisfied and the factory worker who has to conform to company standards or public demands , I buy studio ceramics to collect and hopefully it's an investment as well , imperfect studio can still be a good investment as they can be acquired relatively cheap .

Hi Dan and Ed, thank you for your welcome.
I think that I would class Chelsea pottery as a studio rather than factory but even the smallest pottery has to factor in time constraints and an element of quality control if they want to be financially viable.
Having the time to work and rework a piece is easier in a studio situation but you have to be carefull you don't end up working for nothing! Unless of course you are someone like Grayson Perry. Whoops! now I'm drifting into a different discussion -Is it art or craft? Is Is it made by a potter or a ceramic artist.
I completely agree that imperfect is often not really the right description for a piece at all.

I do have some Chelsea, Dan, though not a huge amount. I may be able to put some names to signatures if you were wondering about them.
I worked there at the same time as Hazel Livi, Joyce Morgan,Barbara Ross,Kim Warmen,and Mary Fenton.
I don't know what date your lovely cockerel is as Joyce wasn't working on models when I was at the Radnor Walk studio.

I tend to think of studio pottery in terms of an individual potter making individual unique pieces ( place of work pottery) I know the term is stretched at times but that's a sign of the times I suppose , I do like various types it's just so happens I prefer the likes of , alan wallwork , robin welch, sam hall , peter wills etc , people who concieve an idea and carry it through to the end ,only my opinion , Graydon Perry , ...Mmmmwell not my cuppa , publicity is fine for the right reasons but it can disguise the facts at times , IE he aint that good again imo . ED

I was only one day in London recently couldnt get into the grayson Perry at the BM tickets sold out it was pensioners half price day tho. Had a nice time at theVandA tho and saw the hockney at theroyal academy

What did you think of Hockney ? , I think he did some very good work , but latest stuff he is more toulose Le plot .

the hockney expo is amazing it really gives you a hit dont like everything but such a lot to see very interesting recent video work as well as the Ipad drawings and some huge canvasses I would say some more succesfull than others but a great result to a huge challenge ie fill up the RA with new work --------------- getting a bit of topic here maybe it should be moved

Ok , start new topic , sounds good

Chelseapotter wrote:Hi Dan and Ed, thank you for your welcome.
I think that I would class Chelsea pottery as a studio rather than factory but even the smallest pottery has to factor in time constraints and an element of quality control if they want to be financially viable.
Having the time to work and rework a piece is easier in a studio situation but you have to be carefull you don't end up working for nothing! Unless of course you are someone like Grayson Perry. Whoops! now I'm drifting into a different discussion -Is it art or craft? Is Is it made by a potter or a ceramic artist.
I completely agree that imperfect is often not really the right description for a piece at all.

I do have some Chelsea, Dan, though not a huge amount. I may be able to put some names to signatures if you were wondering about them.
I worked there at the same time as Hazel Livi, Joyce Morgan,Barbara Ross,Kim Warmen,and Mary Fenton.
I don't know what date your lovely cockerel is as Joyce wasn't working on models when I was at the Radnor Walk studio.

I would love to see some pics of your pottery (Chelsea and others) but I must admit to hoping you would help solve the mystery of Chelsea monograms,I'm probably the main collector of Chelsea on the forum but still I can only put a name to 4 of the marks?

http://search.aol.com/aol/image?q=chealsea+pottery+pics&v_t=client-browser10-auth

Tons here Dan