- Ceramic Arts Daily Community
- → Viewing Profile: Likes: Stephen
StephenMember Since 28 Jan 2013
Online Last Active Today, 11:16 AM
- Group Members
- Active Posts 97
- Profile Views 4,827
- Member Title novice
- Age 53 years old
- Birthday October 2, 1960
Posted by Stephen on 19 November 2013 - 01:59 PM
Posted by Stephen on 14 November 2013 - 05:33 PM
After reading the last two posts though, it certainly seems to me that a separate forum for this would so much better serve the members because the process is obviously very involved and the back and forth you two just did ought to be given a chance to happen when examining someone's work AND it seems so important that the work being commented on needs to have been put forth by the artist for just such commentary.
Obviously it can be argued that by merely uploading the images an artist offered the work for critique. If that's the case then there are going to be so many members here that are never going to show us their work because they do not want this from this forum in this setting. This may have absolutely nothing to do with how they feel about their work but rather they see the process differently and don't see this forum as a place for this to happen. One reason might be that the internet is searchable and many professionals would not want this process to be this transparent to their customers, or potential customers. A scathing exchange might turn the customer against the work and cause the artist to lose a sale or a contract, or many sales and many contracts over a process that they personally didn't ask for and don't want to be a part of.
Posted by Stephen on 14 November 2013 - 11:48 AM
It is certainly an art in of itself to be able to provide quality feedback, especially negative feedback without offending. I think the reason the software defaults to admin approval is for another a person representing the organization keeping up the site to make sure that the exchange is civil. There is no getting around the fact that some people enjoy being cruel and the internet coupled with anon identities feeds into that. I have not read any comments by anyone posting here so I am certainly not saying their comments were not spot on.
This forum is the face of a large non-profit organization that promotes ceramics for everyone, bad, mediocre and skilled professionals alike, sure makes sense to make sure the comments are meaningful and not just mean.
Posted by Stephen on 30 October 2013 - 12:24 PM
I don't know how many folks that went to Weebles link on faso.com read the comments but they are certainly extensive.
I certainly came away feeling that the very best thing to do if wanting to base some work off another's effort (in any medium) is to get permission. That said though I have come across situations where folks want to try and project ownership of methods or designs that are not theirs to begin with.
I also feel people need to consider that even if you did come up with a design or method without any input from any other source that does not mean that you alone came up with that design or method and with functional pottery I would think that many designs get 'dreamed up' independently by numerous folks around the world regularly. I thought the faso.com article did one thing very well and that is to demonstrate that many things are much more complicated than they may seem on the surface and it is best that the situation be completely sorted out before judgments can be made and just comparing the work in no way means its an infringement.
In the pottery world there is a case in point from a few years ago where a popular potter who sells on etsy publicly attacked another potter on her blog when she 'caught' the potter selling one of her signature forms on etsy as well, for less. She sent her a C&D email and crowed how the potter cowered to her and apologized and immediately removed the item. She said she thought the potter was genuinely sorry but ignorance was no excuse and decided to take to the blogs to publicly thrash this new potter. The problem I had was that the form in question was a form that goes back centuries in Japan and she made a few minor tweaks and then went after someone else using it.
All in all I thought the post and resulting comments were alarming since they appeared to come from many established potters around the country and, at least to me, they seemed to really be off base on what is and isn't infringement and/or ethical.
Posted by Stephen on 30 October 2013 - 10:33 AM
Posted by Stephen on 20 September 2013 - 02:23 PM
Posted by Stephen on 18 September 2013 - 10:50 AM
On thing that hit me on one of her post that seems to ring true:
"There is no magic formula to when your work is "good enough" for the marketplace, and it is true that most artists will continue to improve throughout much of their career. I still consider myself a student of pottery, I'm learning and -- I hope-- still improving my work. But I do think one needs to be out of that rapid growth and improvement stage, where from month to month your work looks markedly better, before you start selling."
Posted by Stephen on 12 September 2013 - 09:54 AM
Oh one other thing you might consider is putting some wire mesh between layers of pots so as the fuel burns away the pots don't pile into each other and leave unwanted marks or damage.
Posted by Stephen on 04 September 2013 - 10:08 AM
Ya know if the intent of the studio is truly in the spirit of a valid apprenticeship relationship with a new artist then it seems like all should be fine based on the list of qualifiers in the article. If on the other hand it is simply a way to get around employment responsibilities for grunt level studio work then this should be a good thing in that it will clean up these questionable practices. Of course defining the level of work a pottery apprentice should be legitimately doing is going to be the tricky part for both the studios and those monitoring the process.
In the interest of disclosure I must point out that I am very pro labor and feel that it is very important to set strong guidelines for employers and have a very rigorous enforcement system to back them up. The honor system does not work and never will. There will always be folks that want to be what they consider creative and that is bad for the rest of us in so many ways and horrible for the person being used. Pottery is a dream career for many and that means a lot of folks would be willing to work for little to be involved but minimum wage is as low as it should be allowed to go if in fact they are just doing a low level job for free or close to it.
Posted by Stephen on 14 May 2013 - 10:18 AM
What? I know that it's not that great,but someone wants to buy it.
Well that was an unfortunate post and I hope you didn't pay attention to it. Some folks get a rise out of picking on people online or have the audacity to think that only what they like is worthwhile which is not true of course. My 2 cents, I would never utter those words though. It is your work and some people will like it, some people will love it and some will simply not care for it and I wouldn't defend my work to someone so obviously out of line.
Like Gypsy I like the work. Hand building is something I admire and would like to spend some time experimenting with. How are you planning on glazing the set? Are you concentrating on tea sets? You know on pricing, if this is a friend you might just ask them what they had in mind and bargain from there. Hand built work generally cost more because it is often more involved but of course value and the time it takes to produce has a very loose connection in pottery.
You did say a mouthful though when you pointed out you have a buyer, nice quip :-)
Good luck and let us know what you ended up charging. Also be sure and post the finished glazed pieces, would love to see them.
Posted by Stephen on 09 May 2013 - 11:19 AM
Posted by Stephen on 30 April 2013 - 10:35 AM
Posted by Stephen on 09 April 2013 - 10:02 AM
The standard by which we can all aspire . . . Issac Button, country potter. One ton per day throwing. http://www.youtube.c...h?v=l4qdGTFBRJ4
That was completely uncalled for, you cost me at almost an hour on youtube,
It is fun watching accomplished potters work though.
Posted by Stephen on 08 April 2013 - 10:22 AM
one of my students recently spent some time working in just such a setting (production, presumably throwing) ........ making 300 + pieces a day. Day after day.
This is in line with what I have seen in other forums and articles and I am trying to understand this number. This would mean one person adding 6600 pieces in a 22 work day month. I do realize that the rest of the process, and people must kick in but I am curious how many potteries get this kind of production from single throwers and if ones with several throwers are really moving 20,000 pieces of pottery every month and where? I guess the B part of my question is what do folks that can throw 6000-7000 pieces of pottery a month earn on the average?