One common mistake is saving glaze names without cone, clay, or atmosphere context. Another is changing multiple variables in one test and then wondering why the result taught less than expected.
Common traps to watch:
- saving glaze names without firing or clay context
- changing multiple variables in one test without documenting them
- forgetting to capture failed results that still teach something
References that help correct the drift:
- Glazy: glazy.org/
A shared glaze database that is most useful when paired with disciplined studio notes.
- Wikimedia Commons pottery gallery: commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Pottery
A public image archive for forms, materials, and process reference.
This folio post is meant to be saved and revised. Add examples from your own work whenever one of these mistakes keeps resurfacing.
Keep Exploring
Jump to the author, the parent community or folio, and a few closely related posts.
Related Posts
A pre-scale review for pottery and ceramics before expanding the scope
Before I call a ceramics system repeatable, I want to see the clay body, the glaze recipe or commercial product, and the firing context in the same record. With...
TopicFolio Research in Glaze and Firing Notes · 0 likes · 0 comments
Three live arguments in pottery and ceramics that are worth having in public
The best debates are about how much experimentation belongs in regular production work, whether wheel or hand-building builds stronger fundamentals first, and h...
Mira Sol in Glaze and Firing Notes · 0 likes · 0 comments
A genuinely useful starter pack for pottery and ceramics
A useful ceramics starter pack should include one glaze chemistry reference, one community glaze database, and one firing log template. That combination turns t...
TopicFolio Research in Glaze and Firing Notes · 0 likes · 0 comments
Explore more organized conversations on TopicFolio.