Jump to content
Rebekah Krieger

Glaze formula mistake- refire glaze questions

Recommended Posts

http://<img src="https://i.ibb.co/yq0WTZM/5-DC75691-AEF0-4-CB7-B091-16957130-C4-B0.jpg" alt="5-DC75691-AEF0-4-CB7-B091-16957130-C4-B0" border="0"> <img src="https://i.ibb.co/yq0WTZM/5-DC75691-AEF0-4-CB7-B091-16957130-C4-B0.jpg" alt="5-DC75691-AEF0-4-CB7-B091-16957130-C4-B0" border="0">

Edit to add- if the photo didn’t work, I have a link posted below to it. 

I hope the photo worked.  Above are two pots. The glossy pink one is the formula I use on most of my pots. The brushwork bleeds exactly the way I want it to.

The other one is a matte mistake. I mixed up a batch of my glaze (VC matte in John britt’s book) and accidentally added the (8%) titanium listed in the ingredients for the colorant. (As well as the rutile and tin) I forgot that typically I leave the titanium out and add rutile and tin to achieve the flowy pink. The black  brushwork is purposefully messy because they almost always run the way I intend. This recent batch was quite large and all of my pots turned out to be this chalky yellow. 

I attempted to re fire a pot (as a test) with a more accurate mixture of my glaze on top, and it didn’t improve the flow or shine.  

So now I’m wondering if there exists a glaze formula that I could dip these pots into that would fix these pots before I toss the entire load. I’m thinking something that flows to encourage the black glaze to run when re heated. (The black is fat white found in Pinterest with 6600 mason stain)

I’m open to trying a whole new formula that is proven to be consistent with this kind of  situation. I would LOVE any help I can get to save this load before I throw it away. 

Edited by Rebekah Krieger
Bad link

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That’s what I believe. The firing was the same. I did a pure mixture with no titanium over one and re fired it and it didn’t change it much at all. 

There is a small chance I got some fat white mixed into it as well (magnesium glaze) but I don’t believe that to be the case based on my recent test tiles to troubleshoot the problem. 

50 minutes ago, liambesaw said:

So you're saying the only difference between the left pot and the right pot are 10 parts titanium?

https://i.ibb.co/yq0WTZM/5-DC75691-AEF0-4-CB7-B091-16957130-C4-B0.jpg

test 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rebekah Krieger said:

http://<img src="https://i.ibb.co/yq0WTZM/5-DC75691-AEF0-4-CB7-B091-16957130-C4-B0.jpg" alt="5-DC75691-AEF0-4-CB7-B091-16957130-C4-B0" border="0"> <img src="https://i.ibb.co/yq0WTZM/5-DC75691-AEF0-4-CB7-B091-16957130-C4-B0.jpg" alt="5-DC75691-AEF0-4-CB7-B091-16957130-C4-B0" border="0">

Edit to add- if the photo didn’t work, I have a link posted below to it. 

I hope the photo worked.  Above are two pots. The glossy pink one is the formula I use on most of my pots. The brushwork bleeds exactly the way I want it to.

The other one is a matte mistake. I mixed up a batch of my glaze (VC matte in John britt’s book) and accidentally added the (8%) titanium listed in the ingredients for the colorant. (As well as the rutile and tin) I forgot that typically I leave the titanium out and add rutile and tin to achieve the flowy pink. The black  brushwork is purposefully messy because they almost always run the way I intend. This recent batch was quite large and all of my pots turned out to be this chalky yellow. 

I attempted to re fire a pot (as a test) with a more accurate mixture of my glaze on top, and it didn’t improve the flow or shine.  

So now I’m wondering if there exists a glaze formula that I could dip these pots into that would fix these pots before I toss the entire load. I’m thinking something that flows to encourage the black glaze to run when re heated. (The black is fat white found in Pinterest with 6600 mason stain)

I’m open to trying a whole new formula that is proven to be consistent with this kind of  situation. I would LOVE any help I can get to save this load before I throw it away. 

First to answer your question, I think highly unlikely you can make these flowing  again. A thought that comes to mind would be a flowing celedon may give you a new look but as a refire  there are risks. A bit less risky would be to downfire using a lowfire celedon  that fits the body, but again will likely be a unique look to what you have come to expect.

An interesting observation, from memory the Britt matte is matte because of the titanium, else it is a gloss with a 6:1 ish si/al ratio. Adding the  8% titanium dioxide makes it matte and adding colorant,  4% rutile (more titanium) really gets it yellow.

This glaze as I recall is often considered decorative and not necessarily durable as well, it has an inverted flux ratio, but I do not know if you care in that respect.

This glaze in its base form is truly matte and likely melts on the low end of cone six due to the boron, lithium and whiting which likely makes it appear as a runny matte Which was probably intentional.

Now, to the question, it appears you want a slightly runny gloss actually. Do I have that right?

 

Edited by Bill Kielb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, liambesaw said:

That's weird, titanium can encourage crystal mattes, but generally require a slow cool I'm pretty sure, otherwise they are an active melter.  

Here is what I see for a test of this glaze. It looks exactly like what I would expect. Without titanium it is 6:1, with the titanium it is 4:1 at best.

4:1 is solid matte to me 6:1 is a gloss. Seems like a slightly runny matte that is yellow.

4762869B-D0D1-4C63-90C9-751F5F518F2C.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, liambesaw said:

Wow nice, didn't know it was that strong of a matting agent, I use it to make zircopax less intense and it's never given me an issue but I'm only using it at 4 parts.

What I am thinking though is she uses the recipe without the titanium but adds 4% rutile for colorant  so chemically it should be a gloss and it seems to fire that way for her so those two things matching make me feel better that one verifies the other. But I think she wants a runny matte, sort off, that is mildly glossy. And any pink accent is a plus!
 

I think

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Bill Kielb said:

What I am thinking though is she uses the recipe without the titanium but adds 4% rutile for colorant  so chemically it should be a gloss and it seems to fire that way for her so those two things matching make me feel better that one verifies the other. But I think she wants a runny matte, sort off, that is mildly glossy. And any pink accent is a plus!
 

I think

Would the titanium be refractory at that level?  The black should still run if it was melting, right?  To me the one on the left looks like it hasnt even been fired

Edited by liambesaw

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, liambesaw said:

Would the titanium be refractory at that level?  The black should still run if it was melting, right?

No, with 4% rutile, the high lithium, whiting, and boron (From Gerstley) looks like it was all formulated to make it an early melt so the crystals run. It’s a true matte so we would expect it to form normally and then make it run. Often they take on a pink / violet hue.

same idea as below. Over melted titanium matte under blue rutile. The titanium glaze melts about cone 4 and the crystals drag though the blue rutile glaze. It’s actually a bit pink / violet inside in the photo as well.

With the extra  titanium, it becomes a plain old matte and less runny from what she is used to.

5C7A65AB-DEC5-4849-93F8-B2E29EA62664.jpeg.201e071403988156703e8000ed8e4bf8.jpeg

 

 

 

Edited by Bill Kielb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Rebekah Krieger said:

My cones indicated a strong 5 , almost cone 6 with that firing 

In general, many Titanium (Rutile) colored glazes are often sensitive to temperature and tend to go yellow as they get hotter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://<a href="https://ibb.co/C9v9yX7"><img src="https://i.ibb.co/WzFzXdy/32-D4-E7-B1-F539-4-FB2-B16-C-FB49565-D74-B8.png" alt="32-D4-E7-B1-F539-4-FB2-B16-C-FB49565-D74-B8" border="0"></a> 

hopefully that worked. Here is a better shot of some flow I get. I like the “buttery” meltyness 

its 2% tin 5% Rutile. 

I sometimes spray portions with scm warm to encourage more interesting surface too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, neilestrick said:

@Rebekah KriegerMix up a hundred grams of the glaze without any rutile, tin or titanium, mix it with a roughly equal amount of the bad glaze and see how it fires. If it's something nice, then do up a full batch.

I have your clay and wollastonite.

 Thank you Neil! I will be coming Saturday early eve to pick it up. Feel free to message me how much I owe you. 

My question to what you said...  do you think it might help if I layered it on my bad pots for a re fire with no colorants added? Perhaps some scm warm sprayed under to or would that worsen the problem?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ahhhh... I’m such an airhead. I just put 2 and 2 together to realize that titanium and rutile are basically the same thing. Yes, the newly mixed batches have 8% titanium PLUS 5% rutile. (And then the 2% tin) So it’s essentially 13%. Glazing is such a learning curve.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bill Kielb said:

No, with 4% rutile, the high lithium, whiting, and boron (From Gerstley) looks like it was all formulated to make it an early melt so the crystals run. It’s a true matte so we would expect it to form normally and then make it run. Often they take on a pink / violet hue.

same idea as below. Over melted titanium matte under blue rutile. The titanium glaze melts about cone 4 and the crystals drag though the blue rutile glaze. It’s actually a bit pink / violet inside in the photo as well.

With the extra  titanium, it becomes a plain old matte and less runny from what she is used to.

5C7A65AB-DEC5-4849-93F8-B2E29EA62664.jpeg.201e071403988156703e8000ed8e4bf8.jpeg

 

 

 

I still don't get it, the VC matte with Rutile on Britt's blog has 10 Titox and 4 rutile and is running like a triathlete, so shouldn't that very same recipe be moving on Rebekahs left pot with 8 titox and 4 Rutile?  I feel like the titanium is not causing the glaze to be frozen in time, it should still be melting and making the black accent marks run with 10 titox as shown by that Britt picture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, liambesaw said:

I still don't get it, the VC matte with Rutile on Britt's blog has 10 Titox and 4 rutile and is running like a triathlete, so shouldn't that very same recipe be moving on Rebekahs left pot with 8 titox and 4 Rutile?  I feel like the titanium is not causing the glaze to be frozen in time, it should still be melting and making the black accent marks run with 10 titox as shown by that Britt picture.

I don’t think this runs until it’s thick actually from looking at the tiles but for me the chemistry says with titanium  it  is  matte, without it says gloss.  That’s the way. it seems to fire. So when the firing agrees with the chemistry, I am pretty happy.  It looks like this is a runny matte especially applied thick and fired to cone six. When she leaves the extra titanium out - gloss! Not sure what else to say actually.

I will send you three maps, give me a bit

Edited by Bill Kielb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.