Jump to content


Photo

Is it important to you that your utlitarian pots are light enough to use with ease?| May 7, 2012


  • Please log in to reply
10 replies to this topic

#1 DPancioli

DPancioli

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 23 posts

Posted 07 May 2012 - 02:32 PM

Is it important to you that your utlitarian pots are light enough to use with ease?


Or do you like "beefy" pots? How about non-utilitarian pots and their weight--
does it matter if they are heavy???

Diana Pancioli
Potters Council Board Member
Diana Pancioli
Potters Council Board Member
dianamp@comcast.net
dianapancioli.com

#2 clay lover

clay lover

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 851 posts
  • LocationSoutheast

Posted 07 May 2012 - 03:08 PM

I want a piece, functional or not, to be balanced first, with even thickness through out the walls. A rim slightly thicker can be forgiven in the name of durability. Having said that, even the most balanced piece, if thick and heavy, makes me wonder why the maker did not take more care to produce a nicer piece.
Poorly trimmed bowls puzzle me. Why bother if you're not going to bother?
If a piece is for presenting or serving food, I want it to be a manageable size and weight when filled with food or drink. Otherwise, it is not a utilitarian piece, rather for display, in my book.

#3 Marcia Selsor

Marcia Selsor

    Professor Emerita, Montana State University-Billings

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,892 posts
  • Locationwhere Texas, Matamoros, Rio Grande and Gulf of Mexico come together.

Posted 07 May 2012 - 04:18 PM

I like well balanced pieces and light weight.
I like to throw thin. Lately I have been resist carving on functional porcelain and have kept the work thin.
Marcia Selsor

#4 OffCenter

OffCenter

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,372 posts

Posted 07 May 2012 - 05:14 PM

For some of us thinness can be a hangup. I was taught to throw thin and light. Experienced potters sometimes pick up my large pots and go, "Whoa! how'd you do this?" and, I get a little rush of pride from it, but it interferes with my pots. When throwing I have to fight the impulse to pull it one more time for just a little more height or diameter when that extra pull might make it bigger and lighter but at the cost of freshness, spontaneity, movement and gesture which are all much more important than thinness.

Jim
E pur si muove.

"But it does move," said Galileo under his breath.

#5 Denice

Denice

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 671 posts
  • LocationWichita, Kansas

Posted 08 May 2012 - 08:44 AM

After making a set of dishes for myself I believe that it is extremely important to make utilitarian pottery light and strong. My large bowls are little too heavy when they a full of food, I thought they were fine when I made them but using them tells a different story. Non functional work can be heavy to achieve the lines and design you want in the piece, very few people will actually be picking them up. Denice

#6 Pat P

Pat P

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 1 posts
  • LocationNew Jersey

Posted 08 May 2012 - 06:21 PM

I want utilitarian pots to be light enough to use with ease. I strive to throw light and even, and encourage my students to do the same. In my opinion it takes greater craftsmenship to throw thin and even. It's one of the "wow" elements of a great pot.
Pat

#7 Frederik-W

Frederik-W

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 292 posts
  • Locationa distant moon of Uranus

Posted 12 May 2012 - 01:02 AM

I like "beefy" pots. Especially if they have beef in.:D

#8 Marcia Selsor

Marcia Selsor

    Professor Emerita, Montana State University-Billings

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,892 posts
  • Locationwhere Texas, Matamoros, Rio Grande and Gulf of Mexico come together.

Posted 12 May 2012 - 05:54 PM

Offcenter has a good point. Most utilitarian pots are usually beefier that the fine porcelain. Many fine potters throw beefy. I like a sturdy mug with a handle that reflects its mass.
Marcia

#9 Pres

Pres

    Retired Art Teacher

  • Moderators
  • 2,020 posts
  • LocationCentral, PA

Posted 13 May 2012 - 08:51 AM

Offcenter has a good point. Most utilitarian pots are usually beefier that the fine porcelain. Many fine potters throw beefy. I like a sturdy mug with a handle that reflects its mass.
Marcia


I like so many others here was taught to throw thin. The test was to lift the pot after completion. If it felt heavier than perceived, then poorly done. Over the years I have found myself pushing to make some items heavier for functional reasons. A mug that is too thin looses heat quicker than a mug that is a little thicker. At the same time larger pots need extra work to keep them thin enough to not fail at the test. My main concern now more than thickness in the wall is to throw as much of the bottom clay as possible so that trimming is a quick deal, an over trimmed pot usually shows.

Simply retired teacher, not dead, living the dream. on and on and. . . . on. . . .                                                                                 http://picworkspottery.blogspot.com/


#10 Nelly

Nelly

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 380 posts

Posted 13 May 2012 - 01:02 PM


Offcenter has a good point. Most utilitarian pots are usually beefier that the fine porcelain. Many fine potters throw beefy. I like a sturdy mug with a handle that reflects its mass.
Marcia


I like so many others here was taught to throw thin. The test was to lift the pot after completion. If it felt heavier than perceived, then poorly done. Over the years I have found myself pushing to make some items heavier for functional reasons. A mug that is too thin looses heat quicker than a mug that is a little thicker. At the same time larger pots need extra work to keep them thin enough to not fail at the test. My main concern now more than thickness in the wall is to throw as much as the bottom clay as possible so that trimming is a quick deal, an over trimmed pot usually shows.


Dear All,

After a long time working with clay, I am at the stage in my development where I allow myself to throw either way. I must say though, a thin vessel to me lacks weight and almost substance. I don't feel it the way I feel a nice pot that is of a medium weight. When I started throwing at least twenty years ago, my aim was thin, thin and thin. The other day, I broke a bowl from this time period. In keeping with all potters preoccupation with walls, I was sad but said "at least the walls were even from top to bottom." Today, I like to trim. Thus, my bowls are on the medium side with hefty or well elevated foot rings. For me, that is beauty. But then, you look at some pots by some of the world's masters and they are not thin. They are, as you said "beefy." Hips and lips. Thick and beefy. I think that is where I am now. I don't want to worry about breaking stuff in the wash and yet, I want it to be okay when it is handled. No one likes a heavy, heavy bowl of ice cream or soup served-up in one of these lead weight tankards. Having said that, in my experience, it does hold the heat or cold much better. So what am I saying??? I like my pots on the medium side and if they are a little thicker, I say that is okay. In short, I allow myself the freedom to throw without the "thin" variable. If I have to spend a little more time trimming to my desired weight, so be it. I love my giff n grip.

Nelly

#11 Mark C.

Mark C.

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,814 posts
  • LocationNear Arcata Ca-redwood rain forest

Posted 15 May 2012 - 09:56 PM

I used to throw potato chips as I called them-My functional ware broke easy so about 25 years ago I started making dishes that lasted but are not to thin. I think a pot should feel the weight you think it should before you lift it. If it feels wayyyyyyy light then thats not right or way heavy same deal.
Dinnerware needs to hold up to daly use without breaking.
My 2 cents


Mark Cortright
www.liscomhillpottery.com




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users