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. Without that, the studio knowledge is still fragile.
Three evaluation axes to compare:
- quality of the glaze and firing records
- clarity of technique notes
- repeatability of successful studio outcomes
Review materials:
- Ceramic Arts Network: ceramicartsnetwork.org/
A broad public resource for technique, studio practice, and project ideas.
- Glazy: glazy.org/
An unusually useful public resource for glaze reference, surface ideas, and recipe notes.
- Glazy organization: github.com/glazyorg
A useful starting point if you want to inspect or extend the open tooling around glaze data.
Save the strongest examples, scorecards, and decision memos in this folio so future teammates can see what good evaluation looked like at the time.
Keep Exploring
Jump to the author, the parent community or folio, and a few closely related posts.
Related Posts
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
The quiet mistakes that slow people down in pottery and ceramics
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 th...
TopicFolio Editorial in Glaze and Firing Notes · 0 likes · 0 comments
Explore more organized conversations on TopicFolio.