"The look" of precious metal clay

Hi Helen,

I used your examples in the context of a discussion, and your
examples were a reference point

for me to reply to a post by someone else.

The work I have seen of yours looked like you started off doing more
challenging work as a

beginner. You seemed to make more complex designs. I think you took
more risks than the average beginner. I was impressed by your
progress.

I am in agreement with Andy Cooperman that some people use PMC when
traditional metalsmithing methods would be faster, cheaper, and
quicker

Richard Hart G.G.
Denver, Co.

I think it’s that rough “stamped” look that a lot of PMC pieces have,
which I pretty much don’t like much either. There are some really
awesome PMC pieces, but there are a TON of the same old rough looking
stamped pieces. The thing with PMC is that it’s just like any other
form of metalwork. It takes time to get good at it and not have your
piece look like a beginner’s piece.

-m

The very diversity of jewelry making in all its forms is what keeps
this discussion forum alive and vibrant. Yes, we could argue forever
the relative merits of each type of metalsmithing, from classical
fabrication, through casting, to metal clay, and everyone with “a dog
in the fight” would have their own expert opinion to express.

Frank Goss put his finger on the point of this continuing issue, I
think. It comes down to what “vocabulary” of techniques the
particular metalsmith has at their fingertips to solve the particular
design problem you are faced with. If you need to complete a piece of
work as quickly as is practicable, as economically as possible, and
with the best quality you can accomplish, you have to choose those
techniques and skill sets which give you the best final result. Your
client base will be a determining factor in the type of work you do,
as well.

In the final analysis, it just really isn’t so important whether we
fabricate, carve a custom wax, roll out metal clay, or whatever type
of workshop voodoo we have to concoct to turn out the product we want
to create. The more processes you know about, the more information
you will be able to draw from when you need to solve a problem.

We should be grateful that this big, diverse metalsmithing community
of ours has so many talented artists willing to share their knowledge
with anyone who asks. The occasional rant just makes it all the more
interesting!

Jay Whaley

The very diversity of jewelry making in all its forms is what
keeps this discussion forum alive and vibrant. 

75% silver oxide + 25% fuel, and a sparkler, a very primal way to
melt silver :wink: CIA

Hi Richard

The work I have seen of yours looked like you started off doing
more challenging work as a beginner. You seemed to make more complex
designs. I think you took more risks than the average beginner. I
was impressed by your progress. 

Thank you very much Richard. I do tend to go at most things like a
bull at agate. I’m not satisfied unless I can do something really
well, so I’m still not satisfied with my jewellery work, as it’s
pretty average as far as I’m concerned. It does still wow it’s
recipients, but mainly I think because they don’t comprehend how an
ordinary person can create something that they might find in a
jeweller’s shop. They seem to think that jewellery appears in shops
as if by magic. I read a lot before I began making, and understood
the physics and engineering of it, as much as I needed to, so I
suppose that enabled me to make more complex pieces than some might
attempt at first. Of course I made a lot of mistakes and melted a
lot, so I had to come up with solutions to my problems in order to
make what I wanted to make - as I won’t be beaten by a design if I
have a mind to make it.

I’ve been away from it for a while but I seem to be getting my mojo
back and I’m creating once again.

Thanks for your kind words.

Helen
UK

To me creating Art, which is what I see my jewelry as is not as much
about the materails but what you do with them.

Linda Reboh

Thanks, everyone, for your comments.

Some of the example pieces were better looking than the ones I’ve
been seeing in the magazines. (I fully recognize that “better
looking” is largely a subjective judgment. There’s just something
about the lack of crispness in the designs and the color of the metal
that’s just off to my personal aesthetics.)

I’m still intrigued by the capability of the medium, but I still
have a lot of skills to learn. I think I’ll be keeping PMC be at the
back end of my “to learn” list.

Personally I saw pmc as another way for hobbyists to hack into the
jewellery market. after listening to this discussion I’ve realised
pmc is something that can be used by hobbyists but in skilled hands
it definitely has some potential. I just ordered some pmc, something
I never thought I would do!

Hi All. In spite of the fact that I have seen some really fabulous
pieces made of PMC, I have one small resentment of the technique. I
specialize in making steel stamps to create my designs-very time
consuming. But PMC makers have an increasingly large vocabulary of
pre-made stamps and textures available that make it relatively easy
to create some very interesting effects.

I know there are plenty of ready-made steel stamps and some
pre-textured silver stock available for us fabricators. But I think
there is an important difference between them and the simplity of
using commercial rubber stamps in soft material. Of course, this
could just be a manifestation of the same kind of envy I have for
photographers and painters who can crank out more prints at will. I
have great admiration of much of the PMC I’ve seen, and I know the
finished product is all that counts, but still it bugs me just a
little. Probably I’m just full of crap.

Allan

Dear Helen, “Bull at agate?” Is that a Briticism? I think I get the
gist. Is that like “bull in a china shop?” I really do enjoy your
posts!

Gary Strickland

Hi Gary,

 "Bull at agate?" Is that a Briticism? I think I get the gist. Is
that like "bull in a china shop?" I really do enjoy your posts! 

Thanks very much, and yes I guess it might be a Briticism. “Bull at
a gate” has more to do with speed than the clumsiness of “Bull in a
china shop”.

Helen
UK

Of course, this could just be a manifestation of the same kind of
envy I have for photographers and painters who can crank out more
prints at will. I have great admiration of much of the PMC I've
seen, and I know the finished product is all that counts, but still
it bugs me just a little. 

I think you’ve expressed exactly what bothers metalsmiths about
metal clay.

Elaine
CreativeTextureTools.com

Way to go, Jon,

If you need any about using this great grey goop, please
feel free to contact me, off site, or, better yet, join the metal
clay yahoo group http://www.ganoksin.com/gnkurl/12t

You will find a discussion forum and photo gallery. I would also
recommend Margaret Schindel’s lens on using metal clay

http://www.ganoksin.com/gnkurl/12u

and/or

If you feel you need a workshop or a class, check out
http://www.ganoksin.com/gnkurl/12w or

If you are in the UK, there’s a wonderful school, Mid-Cornwall School
of Jewellery Jewellery making classes, training and workshops including silversmithing and metal clay.

Hope you find this useful,
Linda Kaye-Moses

Elaine,

I think you've expressed exactly what bothers metalsmiths about
metal clay. 

Well, not exactly for me. Metal Clay itself doesn’t bother me since
it just a medium. Skill in rendering a fine work in Metal Clay is
admirable in my book… there is nothing to downplay there. I admire
the similar skills of those who do sculptural works in other
sculptural media.

The key thing which has bothered me is the apparent
misrepresentation of certain works by the failure to identify the
medium of Metal Clay whether by error or intent. An notable example
is the case of Claire Holiday’s “Fine Silver” sculptural work on a
past cover of Metalsmith Magazine.

As an example I’m sure filigree artists shake their heads and are
bothered with work called filigree when it is clearly a cast piece
even though well done. Is there anything wrong with casting as a
reproduction technique? Does it bother me? No to both, but again, if
it is represented as something other than what it actually is
wouldn’t that bother you?

Let me be clear… Good work in any medium is still good work. But
no matter how good that artistry and workmanship may be, neither
cannot cause it to morph from one medium to another, Metal Clay
included.

Does the medium of the work matter? Well, that is for the
viewer/buyer/client to decide and they can best do so if all work is
properly identified.

j

J Collier Metalsmith

PMC is just another medium to explore. Polymer Clay is also another
medium. Each of these is pretty new to the “artistic” world. You
have those that make charms or happy pumpkins and those explore, take
risks, and create something new that no one has ever seen before. It
sounds like many of you need to do some exploration of your own, to
see the full potential and possibilities of each medium. Please look
up the following artists I hope they change your mind! Dan Cormier,
Kathleen Dustin, Jeffrey Lloyd Dever, Julie Eakes. These are just a
few of the many award winning nationally and internationally
recognized folks that have spent thousands of hours designing and
creating something brand new!! Not to mention have work in museums
across the country. Possibilities are endless if you are open to
them, isn’t that what growth is all about!

Greetings Jewelers:

It’s not that hard to have all the clay-like flexibility of PMC and
the look and price of a cast piece. I make models out of
Primo-Sculpy and a silicone mold of these models with Sorta-Clear 18,
a Smooth-On product sold by Reynolds. I pour wax into the molds and
cast these wax patterns conventionally. If you attach two
Primo-Sculpy “wires” to your model–one as a pouring channel and
sprue and one as an air vent, you won’t even need to use a wax
injector. Just pour molten wax into the mold.

Someday I will perform last rites over my wallet and try Pricey
Metal Clay. I will see if it is easier to use than Primo-Sculpy and
a silicone mold.

it dries faster than sculpey if you don’t add the softener stuff to
the polymer clay…if you are careful and add a single drop of
vegetable glycerine to metal clay you can extend the relatively
short time it allows you to work it- in any case one must work fast
even with the slow drying types…i have had the stuff begin to dry in
under 15 minutes to give you an example and reconstitution of a
partially dry partially complete workpiece is not easy particularly
if what you are making has sculptural detail or are carving the
stuff…if you know metal working / jewelry making and can cast i
would stick to using and buying actual precious metals unless its a
one time for fun experiment…the cost is not worth the results even
given the sculptural versatility possible that in some cases exceeds
wax and eliminates the casting but what results after firing is never
going to be as strong as .999 silver…there are a few great metal
clay artisans and actually anyone has creative potential more so if
you go into it with a working knowledge of metal properties and
jewelrymaking technique…sounds like you have a grasp of all that so
it may be a fun foray- just make sure you buy enough to fail with
and succedd with - somewhere between 10-15 grams for a few rings, or
a few small-ish objects, if you are after a bracelet add 5 grams to
the order and if you are into origami you could add a piece or two of
the paper type…the 23kt gold clay ( not the aura 22 or other gold
clay) however isn’t worth the cost for experimentation ( but
admittedly does look great when fired!)- better to invest in casting
grain 9 once the spot price comes down from over 1700.00…rer

The key thing which has bothered me is the apparent
misrepresentation of certain works by the failure to identify the
medium of Metal Clay whether by error or intent." 

Metal clay is an ingredient in the recipe of a whole piece, just as
solder, casting grain, and sheet metal are ingredients not processes.
When metal clay is fully sintered in a kiln, it becomes fine silver.
If you are talking about photos that list processes of how the pieces
are made, then I can see saying it was carved from metal clay or that
it was textured metal clay, the same as if I say my piece is made
from the lost wax casting process. Then you know it is made from
casting grain. But if I am asked to just list the materials of a
piece, I wouldn’t say “sterling silver casting grain,” I would just
say “sterling silver.” The same for metal clay. It is fine silver
once it is fired completely. I personally don’t know of any metal
clay artists who are trying to hide anything. Those that I know are
proud of their medium.

Before I tried it, I was under the impression that it was a way to
make costume jewelry. Once I tried it, I wasn’t content with rolling
textures onto it or stamping things out. I pulled out all my Wolf
carving tools and started carving it like I do wax, only it is an
additive process rather than subtractive. It carves beautifully and
it is so much easier to repair breaks and mistakes than wax ever
was. It is very satisfying for the sculptor in me. I use my entire
studio of tools on the days I work with metal clay. For some of us,
it’s another tool in the toolbox. Why wouldn’t anybody want a new
tool?

Kelley

The key thing which has bothered me is the apparent
misrepresentation of certain works by the failure to identify the
medium of Metal Clay whether by error or intent. An notable
example is the case of Claire Holiday's "Fine Silver" sculptural
work on a past cover of Metalsmith Magazine. 

I’ve stayed out of this so far, but just can’t resist asking by it
is representation to call an item made of fine silver by its correct
name? Once fired, silver metal clay is pure .999 silver. If one said
it was forged or cast when it was sculpted with metal clay, that
would be misrepresentation. Calling it fine silver is simply fact.

Pat Evans

Hello J. Collier, et al,

The difficulty in describing a piece made using metal clay lies in
the fact that metal clay can be described as a number of things: a
tool, a medium, a technique, a process, etc. The end product is
always metal, precious or otherwise. Claire’s piece was made using
metal clay, I believe, but the end product was a metal objet. There
was no attempt at deception, nor would there be for any object made
using metal clay.

Metal clay, casting, assembly, fabrication, die-forming, repousse,
enameling, et al, all are simply methods for creating a metal objet.
The Material of that object is not the processes used to achieve it.
Let me say that again and louder: THE MATERIAL OF THAT OBJECT IS NOT
THE PROCESSES USED TO ACHIEVE IT. The material is the metal. An
object made using metal clay is no longer metal ‘clay’; it is METAL.

There are many ways to manipulate metal clays that, added to
traditional methods for forming metal, expand what a metal artisan
can do to form metal objects. Is this a problem? Was it a problem
when small hydraulic presses entered the studio jeweler’s repertoire
of techniques? Was it a problem when anticlastic raising was
introduced to our vocabulary? Was it a problem when micro-folding
processes were being explored? Metal clay is only the new kid on the
block, only a new way to work with metal. That’s all it is. Is this
conversation merely one more occurrence of resistance to the New or
Strange, this response to metal clay that is endemic to our field
(and to humanity)?

There are so many of us whose work has exemplified the best in our
field, who are part of the Orchid community, and who have not tested
metal clay, but who find it necessary to comment negatively. Yes,
there is work out there made using metal clay that is not high
quality, not visually appealing, not to our individual tastes.
Commenting on that is actually only a review of the individual
pieces, not the material. Imagine if our Orchid community decided to
condemn the use of rolled metal sheet because some of the work
(perhaps even a majority of the work) made was of inferior quality.
We all know that there is lots of work out there that is simply not
worth discussing because it’s made poorly or inadequately thought
out. This is true across the board, and in all art forms (we won’t
get into the discussion of whether jewelry is Art, OK?). Simply
because many pieces made using metal clay processes are considered
inferior in quality or style, does not mean that there aren’t
beautifully made pieces using these processes. It just means that the
commentators lack a broad enough exposure to the field of work made
using metal clay.

So, come on, get out there, look at all the work, try using metal
clay, before you decide you are in a position to comment critically,
positively or negatively, about this process. You may decide that the
material works for you (or you may hate it); you may decide it will
never replace the methods you’re currently using or, alternatively,
that metal clay will add to the skills you already possess and will
enhance the quality or style of your work. You may find it utterly
boring or magnificently stimulating. At least you will have become
informed. And, if you don’t choose to do any of the above, then
recognize that you are not qualified to discuss or critique metal
clay and it’s consequent objets, and refrain from doing so.
Uninformed commentary does not add to our understanding of any
process or material.

Hope this advances this discussion topic,
Linda Kaye-Moses