StudioLily Posted August 22, 2017 Report Share Posted August 22, 2017 Hi there, I've used the bright gold lustre from Duncan but it wears off quite quickly. Is there a significant difference when using the premium version or not? I make jewelry and particularly my rings loose the golden details way too fast. So I'm wondering if it's worth experimenting with the premium version or just forget the lustres in my case? Lily Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JBaymore Posted August 22, 2017 Report Share Posted August 22, 2017 Personally I have found a great variety in the durability of various different gold lusters. Plus a lot depends on the substrate... the glaze that is UNDER it...and how well it bonds at the firing cone used. And of course the cone at which the luster is fired impacts durability also. There is more than one variable involved here. As a guess.... try a 2 gram vial of the premium and paint some next to the "regular" and than devise an abrasion test of some sort to see if it makes a difference. On my work I typically use a 'commercial' luster that is made for industry at the moment. High gold content and quite durable. Only sold in large volumes (ie.- inve$tment). best, ...................john Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark C. Posted August 23, 2017 Report Share Posted August 23, 2017 Think this is a you get what you pay for deal-more gold more cost more thickness =holds up better=maybe longer-testing like John says is the only real answer. All lusters will wear-its just part of the deal as they are just a thin coating and barely flux at low temps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyler Miller Posted August 23, 2017 Report Share Posted August 23, 2017 I think I'd skip the gold. At best, you have John's solution, which is ideal for heirloom quality sunday-best functional ware. In that case a plate or tea bowl could last generations and show little wear. But a ring is too high wear an item. Gold rings of too high purity will be noticeably thinner after just a few years use. Worn out wedding bands are a thing. Lustre won't be archival, to borrow a painting term. And I'm sure you put enough time and effort into your work that you want it to last. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StudioLily Posted August 23, 2017 Author Report Share Posted August 23, 2017 Many thanks for your comments! I'll definitely test them like John suggested. Now back to the creative mind's infinite loop: This is awesome This is tricky This is I am This might work This is awesome Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JBaymore Posted August 23, 2017 Report Share Posted August 23, 2017 Tyler and Mark are dead on..... luster is very "fragile". I caught the word "jewelry" in your fist post... but not the word "rings". If you are doing maybe pendant and brooches and the like........ might be doable. Still "high care" items. For rings....... I'm guessing a 'losing battle'. The stuff I do with lusters is all "high maintenance" type items and the type of people who buy them understand that this is stuff to be handled very carefully. Hand washing, mild cleaners, and that it WILL have the "wabi-sabi" impact over the years of wearing.... which is actually appreciated in some markets. You might contact Johanna Demaine for her thoughts about what is the most durable luster. She is a member here and is on Facebook. She is THE luster and overglaze person in the world. Second would be Paul Lewing, the author of the book "China Paint and Overglaze". best, ..................john Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.