========[ Invite a Friend - http://www.ganoksin.com/invite.htm ]========
> Some would like to take short cuts and skip a lot of the work of
> testing enamels and watching their co-efficients of expansions.
> However such a practice leads to many failures and sloppy work, and
> gives enameling a bad reputation.
Wait a minute. I am a professional enamellist and goldsmith. There is
absolutely no sloppy work and my enamels have an excellent
reputation. What I said was that there should be tests. And there
should be failures, in the tests, so you learn something. To hell
with coefficients of expansion. They tell you something you need to
know in the beginning which experience will eventually take over. As
I said earlier, I often use many different enamels in one piece -
lead free as well as lead bearing ones and from different companies.
If I need to check the CoE's of all those enamels, I can sit here all
day. Your post gives people the incorrect impression that it is
absolutely necessary to check CoEs, otherwise no decent work can be
done. For people who want to progress in enamelling, I am urging them
to forget about CoE's, to buy some copper sheet and try things out
until they have it perfectly right. Granted, this takes a long time.
When you do this, you will see the relativity of CoE's and you will
discover a lot of things. If you don't, your work will remain
mediocre forever. One is, of course, completely free to make the one
billionth piece of cloisonne (c) - this is exactly the reason why so
many of those pieces look the same.