Looking for a cone 6 transparent/translucent matte glaze.

[bees.and.stones]

Hello

I have been looking for a transparent/translucent matte glaze for stoneware cone 6 firing. I have seen people use it, but trying to figure out a brand or recipe has been though. I hope someone on her has a good tip or even wants to share a recipe. Will be forever grateful! Will attach some links with photo references.

https://www.instagram.com/p/Cn05awejeRT/
https://www.instagram.com/p/CmLskrcoHd-/
https://www.instagram.com/p/CYbdZz3omj5/

makers are Denise Aimee Rijnen, Julia Saldana and Annemieke Boots

Best wishes

Edited February 8, 2023 by bees.and.stones

[Pres]

Sorry to say, but some of us do not use instagram, could you please post the images on in your post?

 

best,

Pres

[bees.and.stones]

makers are Denise Aimee Rijnen, Julia Saldana and Annemieke Boots

 

Edited February 8, 2023 by bees.and.stones

[Min]

Glazy might be somewhere to start looking then testing.

I put midrange + transparent matte into the search parameters  and these came up: https://glazy.org/search?keywords=transparent matte&base_type=460&cone=mid&analysisName=xUmfAnalysis&photo=true

Welcome to the forum.

 

[High Bridge Pottery]

The first photo doesn't look glazed to me.

Mostly reminds me of glazes called 'oatmeal' here in the UK.

 

Looking through the instagrams I feel they are half melted glaze and not very functional but that's the only way you can get that look. I wouldn't expect them to hold up well to use as the surface will be very rough and stain easily.

[Min]

Transparent matte is a bit of an oxymoron. I agree with @High Bridge Pottery, some of those pots look like they have an immature glaze, maybe an underfired gloss.

[Pres]

I have never heard of a transparent matt, the closest thing I can think of that would come close would be a dry salt/soda firing.  At the same time, with their bumpy surfaces in the images, I would really not want to eat out of them.

 

best,

Pres

[oldlady]

i have such a glaze.   it originated with Charles Counts.   he worked with standard clay 112.   i started with that clay but changed about 3 times before finding little loafers by highwater.   i do not know what kind of clay is available in amsterdam but if it as rough as the clay used in the bowls, i would try it only on the exterior.   matte glazes and rough clay make very poor eating surfaces.   the noise of a utensil scraping in a bowl is very irritating.

it can be seen on the avatar and several blue slipped bowls in my albums.   the pieces do not seem to have a white glaze over the slip but they do.   i have a small mug in standard 112 somewhere in my photo collection,  i will look for it.

[Babs]

Lot of that artist's work is unglazed.

The clay body is doing a lot for the look.

Not drawn to picking ip those pots for functional ware.

[Bill Kielb]

On 2/6/2023 at 1:28 PM, bees.and.stones said:

I hope someone on her has a good tip or even wants to share a recipe

This should get you close. Less silica = dryer look, more silica it will go to a full gloss. No guarantees it fits your clay but fits our porcelain, Bmix and some others. And yes it’s relatively transparent. https://glazy.org/recipes/19734

Quite obviously you cannot reduce silica forever nor increase it. Our experience per the recipe posted it’s fairly dry per the existing recipe, fairly transparent and a sample has been in the dishwasher for years now without any signs of degradation. Some folks have posted very positive results on Glazy as well. 

I may as well add, for interior glaze you can add silica till more satin and generally eliminate metal marking etc… we had folks do this regularly so they could clear glaze the entire pot and maintain the look. I have a progression of it somewhere from very matte to gloss. If I can still find it I will post here.

Ok found some of them, not the greatest but they go from a fairly dry matte to a full gloss. If you follow Stull at all, this is a fairly easy thing to work through. Sorry about the order and the Glazy picture is probably truest for the base glaze.

Actually the sugar bowl below is probably the best close up example of the recipe posted on Glazy.

It’s fair to add
I am compelled to add any of the pots or references I post are for educational purposes and often are solely produced by me or in collaboration with my Marcia. The collaborative works can only be attributed to Madison pottery a single entity, but in many collaborations I am the thrower / glazer, Marcia loves the artwork and is truly a gifted artist. We do not sell any of the work, including any technical work I write about where the pottery community is the focus. Even though some of the work is my sole production, most often it is the result of a some form of collaboration over the years. The pot below was thrown by me, decorated by Marcia Grant and glazed using a glaze we worked on together under Madison Pottery. The glaze was subsequently published on Glazy for use in the public domain under Marcia’s Matte.

Edited February 10, 2023 by Bill Kielb

[Jeff Longtin]

Interesting body of work. Thank you for bringing it to our attention. (It always fascinates me to see how potters elsewhere present their work.)

Having looked at the sites I don't see transparent glazes. I see unglazed pots and pots with matte glazes. (You know the pot has a glaze because it has spots. The spots are iron bleeding through the glaze.)

If you fire an unglazed pot hot enough the clay will start to melt/vitrify and give the appearance of a glaze. 

I work at a pottery shop (800 pots a day) where we tried to achieve the same effect. We even commissioned glaze companies to make a formula for us. No such luck. Translucent/cloudy, yes, but not transparent. 

 

[neilestrick]

I would say that at least 2 of the samples you posted are raw clay. The third it's hard to tell, but it's either raw or has a very dry glaze on it. Personally, I wouldn't want to eat off of any of them. rough dry surfaces are not a pleasure to use or clean.

A matte glaze can't be transparent, but a satin glaze can be (mostly). It's a balancing act. Dark underglazes can come through a satin transparent, but lighter colors can get hazy. If you're looking for something as matte as the samples you posted, you won't get transparency. The surfaces and colors you're seeing in the examples are coming from the clay. 

[Callie Beller Diesel]

Because I do spend an unhealthy amount of time on instagram, I sleuthed around all 3 accounts a bit more, to see if I could figure out exactly what was going on there. 

All of the accounts you linked to are using assorted speckled clays, not a plain clay with a speckled glaze. Find images and carousels where you can see the fired foot rings of the pots, and you’ll see the evidence. The speckled look comes from either manganese or iron impurities in the clay body, depending on whether they’re firing in an electric or gas kiln respectively. Also, the images you’ve chosen to link all appear to be very matte due to moody lighting, but product listings of the same items on their websites show the work more clearly. All the glazes on all the functional pieces are a satin or gloss. Most notably, the “balance” cup is remarkably more glossy on the artist’s website than in the image posted here.

Get a speckled clay body and use the glaze Bill linked, and you should get your desired effect. 

Edited to add links to the respective artist’s websites:

@annemiekebootsceramics: https://www.annemiekebootsceramics.nl/work/tableware

@sensitiveboi: https://cargocollective.com/sensitiveboy/index

@darc.matter.ceramics https://www.darcmatter.eu/shop/alle-items

[Min]

@bees.and.stones, please let us know if any of the glazes linked work for you. Bill's glaze is a great example of how one glaze can work really well for one person and not so much for someone else and the importance of test tiles to try out a glaze before committing good work to a new untested glaze. Glaze recipes often don't travel well. Given that you are in Europe your materials could well have a different analysis from what's available in North America.

My test tiles of Marcia's Matte from Bill's link above. Ink stained and cutlery marked with a rough unmelted surface when I tested it a couple years ago. Black underglaze stripes on 3rd test tile.

[bees.and.stones]

Hello all :-)

thank you for the replies! There has been mixed responds, some calling them nonfunctional or not glazed at all. I disagree since I own work by these potters and they are great and definitely glazed! However, some of you were believers in the existence of this transparent/see-through matte(ish) glaze.

Maybe I didn't choose my words right, I'm looking for a non-high-glossy glaze that shows the character of the clay. ( a bit earthy ). Possibly a 'satin' does the trick. These pots by Denise Rijnen show exactly what I'm looking for. The marbled cups are definitely glazed because you see the orange line., but the glazes does show the character of the different clays underneath... that's pretty  transparent/see-through/translucent if you ask me.

I went ahead and asked the artists directly what they used.

Annemieke Boots didn't really want to tell, the response i got was : 'It’s a glaze I adapted to my use, a glaze of Lucie Rie. Just check, google and try!!'
I tried to google it and wasn't very successful. :-(  

I asked Julia, and she gave me a link to a ceramics shop that sold a transparent matte powder glaze! juhu! 
 https://www.keramikos.nl/aardewerk-poederglazuren/1743-matglazuur-transparant-1kg.html

And Denise Rijnen I still have to ask.

@Bill Kielb your recipe looks great! Thank you for taking the time to share it!

Thanks @Callie Beller Diesel for trying to figure it out with me :-) 

Edited February 8, 2023 by bees.and.stones

[Bill Kielb]

4 hours ago, bees.and.stones said:

I asked Julia, and she gave me a link to a ceramics shop that sold a transparent matte powder glaze! juhu! 
 https://www.keramikos.nl/aardewerk-poederglazuren/1743-matglazuur-transparant-1kg.html

As you have experienced, there is a wide definition of matte surfaces often qualified as satin or semi matte etc…. Transparency varies as well, so some level of right up until it’s translucent. I think all perspectives are valid though.  I have bowls matte on the outside for their aesthetic appeal. Some have gloss liners, some have satin finishes inside. The ones with zircopax often metal mark regardless of the finish. I think testing is the only way to find out if it’s appealing and acceptable and functional to you.

I think my point about the recipe is it most likely can be done to fulfill your needs. The recipe I posted is simply one we created when we had similar needs.

The real reason for my post is the glaze listed above appears to  be is a lowfire or cone 05/04 style glaze. Since you are firing cone 6 it presents a bit of a problem or extra step to getting your clay fully vitrified and in the end may not fit.

Edited February 8, 2023 by Bill Kielb

[bees.and.stones]

@Bill Kielb shoot! I just realized i posted the wrong link! This is the one: https://www.keramikos.nl/steengoed-poederglazuren/2075-steengoedgl-transparant-mat-1kg.html 

This is meant for stoneware and works for cone 6 :-) thanks for keeping me on my toes, so kind!

Going to try your glaze for sure! Will keep you posted how it went 

[Callie Beller Diesel]

Regarding the overall response here: we’ve had a LOT of folks over the past few years ask about how to achieve a similar aesthetic as in the pictures you’ve posted. Most beginners don’t realize the look can either achieved with photography edits by someone who is both a good potter and photographer, or with poorly fired/impractical ware made by someone who is taking accurate pictures. Without holding the pots in question, it can be hard to spot the difference. When someone doesn’t know badly fired ware is a possibility, they have no reason to think to look. 

Glazes that are dry matte can be made through a number of mechanisms, some of which are great for sculptural work, but aren’t durable enough long term to use on kitchen dishes. However some glazes that have a satin finish are extremely durable and ideal for functional use. You can’t tell which is which without looking at the glaze recipe in software or knowing firing temperature though. A glaze that is very dry to the touch is often underfired though, and falls into that first category.

If you don’t have a lot of glaze chemistry knowledge and are making pots for yourself and not for sale, using a commercial product that is designed for the purpose is an ideal solution, and will save you a lot of work. 

If you do want to mix your own glazes, you want to make sure your glaze is fired to maturity and formulated properly and involves a bit more testing. You’ve got some good starting points here, and we always appreciate updates!

 

 

[High Bridge Pottery]

Maybe nonfunctional is not the right word but I have found for the surface to look matte is has to be rough to scatter the light in different directions. It doesn't mean they wont function as a glaze it is just something to keep in mind and what many of us will classify as nonfunctional.

 

Here's and experiment where I tried looking into Silica:Alumina ratios while trying to keep fluxes the same. Depending how much testing you want to do this kind of work can be great for finding the surface you desire. Looking at the tile you probably want to be in the range 5.5:1 - 6.5:1 Silica:Alumina. @Bill Kielb it's interesting that you are way down at 4.34:1 and still getting some gloss!

I have found the surface quality has a lot more to do with that ratio than what fluxes you use. In this test I used as many different flux as I could, each flux does bring it's own qualities to the surface but it is a lot less than siilica and alumina.

The way these tiles work is you make up the 4 corner glazes and blend different volumes of each together to get the whole range of tests. Glaze A is the top left square, B the top right square, C the bottom left square and D the bottom right square. The glaze is probably 3-4 times thicker than it would be on a pot and I did fire to cone9 so keep that in mind as a thinner layer will show more clay underneath.

 

I am glad the forum keeps a record of my 7 year old tests as I have long forgotten what exactly happened.

Edited February 10, 2023 by High Bridge Pottery

[Bill Kielb]

5 hours ago, High Bridge Pottery said:

Here's and experiment where I tried looking into Silica:Alumina ratios while trying to keep fluxes the same

You may find this a good watch. https://youtu.be/DptgFBkynHA
Sue is one of my favorites and recreated Stull and presented at 2018 NCECA. Her presentation was to simulate Stull in test tile form. To answer your question Si:Al ratio of 4.34:1 ends up to be relative as that glaze needed additional boron to ensure it would melt over heavy underglaze applications which was the specific issue we were trying to solve the summer of 2017. The additional boron does affect the surface.

However, that glaze was designed as a true matte, meaning even over-fired it will be a runny matte. Anyway, no method is foolproof but if you use Stull as a reasonable guide to the expected surface it can become a game changer. Predictable surfaces often lead one to inquire and test whether things are under fired for the composition.

Anyway, Stull kept his fluxes at 0.3:0.7 for good reason at the time, and fired and mapped the result. Sue emulated that in tiles as Stull becomes another tool in analyzing glazes. Sue does a great job of explaining it IMO and is worth the watch and read.

Additionally there have been studies on mattes and durability and there certainly are many true mattes that are durable, so testing IMO is always wise. Funny, everyone wants to slow cool to get the matte look but a matte that develops later is ok and durable? I am not sure why that would be better but believe testing is always wise.

Anyway, Stull can be helpful in my view and SI:Al has a pronounced effect on the final expected surface texture. Like anything though, just another tool, have not found the one stop analysis tool, limit formula, experience, etc…. Yet. It is interesting you sort of re-created Stull on your own.

Sue has a wonderful site IMO and generally shares her research. Worth the read in my opinion. Her site: https://suemcleodceramics.com/understanding-cone-6-nceca-presentation-2018/

 

Edited February 10, 2023 by Bill Kielb

[High Bridge Pottery]

Thank you for the link to her presentation, I will watch that today. 

I am not sure stull's research was as popular back then but looking at Ian Currie's method it is the same idea. Vary Silica and Alumina while keeping flux the same relative to each other and he was a big inspiration for the test.

 

Edit: Very interesting results in that video, particularly around B2O3 and cone04 glazes leaching a lot less copper than cone10 glazes and matte glazes leaching less than gloss. Funny that they used Lucideon for testing, I have tried and failed a few times to get a job working there.

Edited February 10, 2023 by High Bridge Pottery

[Bill Kielb]

13 hours ago, High Bridge Pottery said:

Very interesting results in that video, particularly around B2O3 and cone04 glazes leaching a lot less copper than cone10 glazes and matte glazes leaching less than gloss

Yes lots of generalities around clay often don’t always hold up in all cases but being extra careful not a bad thing I suppose. Stull drew his map and did his research prox.. 1912 so maybe he indirectly inspired Currie. RT Stull was the head of the ceramics engineering department at the University of Illinois - my home state.

Edited February 10, 2023 by Bill Kielb