Is this true for the join line on the outside of pot where handle or spout is attached?chrl42 wrote:In fact, both. Just lines on half hand-made are not as clear as full hand-made pots.Tead Off wrote:Now, I'm a bit confused. You said earlier that half-handmade don't show join lines. Why is it different for Factory 1 pots that use molds?chrl42 wrote:I doubt that has, that's joint line from moulds, those lines are often found on Factory-1 pots.Tead Off wrote:I see, but can you show any with join showing near handle or spout on early pots?wert wrote:Tead Off wrote: Can you show an example?
Factory-1 for example, the earlier the period it is, the clear the lines are shown.
Re: Not my teaware.....but I wish it were....
Re: Not my teaware.....but I wish it were....
From what I know, joint lines are seen outside as well but very faintly, and sometimes on half hand-pots, too...Tead Off wrote:Is this true for the join line on the outside of pot where handle or spout is attached?chrl42 wrote:In fact, both. Just lines on half hand-made are not as clear as full hand-made pots.Tead Off wrote:Now, I'm a bit confused. You said earlier that half-handmade don't show join lines. Why is it different for Factory 1 pots that use molds?chrl42 wrote:I doubt that has, that's joint line from moulds, those lines are often found on Factory-1 pots.Tead Off wrote:I see, but can you show any with join showing near handle or spout on early pots?wert wrote:Tead Off wrote: Can you show an example?
Factory-1 for example, the earlier the period it is, the clear the lines are shown.
Re: Not my teaware.....but I wish it were....
Very interesting discussion on joint lines.
Up to now, my experience has been limited to cheap yixing which surely non handmade (maybe not even half handmade).
They dont have any joint lines inside the pot's inner wall or where the wall join the base (but usually they have scrapped marks where the wall join the base, maybe this is what charl meant as to disguised it as to look like more handmade in the eyes of non expert?)
However some of them show joint lines outside of the pots, usually above and bellow spout and handle.
Another thing that pops up in my mind is the difference of join line in my previously uploaded "laozhuni" pots.
I suppose now both of them are highly unlikely to be handmade (half mold more likely), but one has untouched join line and the other concealed.
Is this what charl and teadoff talk about?
(Sorry for re-uploading them, just for the shake of discussion. These two are most likely from same clay, same craftmanship, same price range, possibly same studio)
on closer observation, both pots also shows the shrinkage in the inner wall same as what kyarazen has shown earlier.
Up to now, my experience has been limited to cheap yixing which surely non handmade (maybe not even half handmade).
They dont have any joint lines inside the pot's inner wall or where the wall join the base (but usually they have scrapped marks where the wall join the base, maybe this is what charl meant as to disguised it as to look like more handmade in the eyes of non expert?)
However some of them show joint lines outside of the pots, usually above and bellow spout and handle.
Another thing that pops up in my mind is the difference of join line in my previously uploaded "laozhuni" pots.
I suppose now both of them are highly unlikely to be handmade (half mold more likely), but one has untouched join line and the other concealed.
Is this what charl and teadoff talk about?
(Sorry for re-uploading them, just for the shake of discussion. These two are most likely from same clay, same craftmanship, same price range, possibly same studio)
on closer observation, both pots also shows the shrinkage in the inner wall same as what kyarazen has shown earlier.
- Attachments
-
- pot2c.jpg (16.05 KiB) Viewed 762 times
-
- pot1c rez.jpg (40.83 KiB) Viewed 762 times
Last edited by devilducklings on Mar 21st, '14, 04:31, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Not my teaware.....but I wish it were....
If I am not mistaken, this is what chrl42 refers to as handmade join lines. Did I understand correctly?
What I was originally trying to understand was the exterior join lines near spout and handle and whether these were signs of mold use or handmade. I am still unclear about these points because I believe I have seen these lines on both handmade and half made. I guess by combining all facets of the join lines, both interior and exterior, you get a better picture of how the pot was made.
The link that Wert posted showing the making of a pot using a mold is very interesting. Yours do not look like mold made but I can't see every join line on them.
What I was originally trying to understand was the exterior join lines near spout and handle and whether these were signs of mold use or handmade. I am still unclear about these points because I believe I have seen these lines on both handmade and half made. I guess by combining all facets of the join lines, both interior and exterior, you get a better picture of how the pot was made.
The link that Wert posted showing the making of a pot using a mold is very interesting. Yours do not look like mold made but I can't see every join line on them.
Re: Not my teaware.....but I wish it were....
The exterior of my friend's pots dont exhibit any joint lines above/bellow spot and handle (there is no vertical line from above to bellow where the mold joins).Tead Off wrote:I guess by combining all facets of the join lines, both interior and exterior, you get a better picture of how the pot was made.
The link that Wert posted showing the making of a pot using a mold is very interesting. Yours do not look like mold made but I can't see every join line on them.
Where as in the inside, we could see join line of the walls and wall-to-base line.
Those untouched join line was what made me think it is full handmade when I first saw it.
Re: Not my teaware.....but I wish it were....
2nd pic is not clear, but 1st pic follows that hand-made interior OR imitated one, either way it's not typical half hand-made interior.devilducklings wrote:Very interesting discussion on joint lines.
Up to now, my experience has been limited to cheap yixing which surely non handmade (maybe not even half handmade).
They dont have any joint lines inside the pot's inner wall or where the wall join the base (but usually they have scrapped marks where the wall join the base, maybe this is what charl meant as to disguised it as to look like more handmade in the eyes of non expert?)
However some of them show joint lines outside of the pots, usually above and bellow spout and handle.
Another thing that pops up in my mind is the difference of join line in my previously uploaded "laozhuni" pots.
I suppose now both of them are highly unlikely to be handmade (half mold more likely), but one has untouched join line and the other concealed.
Is this what charl and teadoff talk about?
(Sorry for re-uploading them, just for the shake of discussion. These two are most likely from same clay, same craftmanship, same price range, possibly same studio)
on closer observation, both pots also shows the shrinkage in the inner wall same as what kyarazen has shown earlier.
Joint line in the back of the wall, sometimes they can be faint depending on potter's trimming process, sometimes even wall-base joint lines can be faint. But still different from half hand-made pots' that you could touch to find those lines or marks are done more clearly, as opposed to ramdomly done on half hand-made's.
And over the long period of using, those lines and trimmed marks will be more noticeable than they just got out of the kilns.
Half hand-made pots exterior could have those trimming marks as well, but full hand-made pots marks are usually much neater and done well.
Mar 21st, '14, 06:36
Posts: 1144
Joined: Jul 10th, '13, 01:38
Scrolling: scrolling
Location: Japan.
Re: Not my teaware.....but I wish it were....
Thanks for the clarification, Chrl.chrl42 wrote: CR doesn't have Zhuni. 5~60s SPs have wrinkles though, those were very early stage of using moulds, so the ratio of hand-making was higher compared to now. 5~60s SPs also have joint lines, but not as clear as fully hand-made pots of Qing/ROC.

Re: Not my teaware.....but I wish it were....
Hi Guys,
I really like this discussion and that's why I'd like to get your opinions on this one.
Claims to be from 1952, Zhuni from Huanglong Mountain, Handmade.
Someone translated Seal to the guy I bought it from, see link:
http://lejardindethe.blogspot.be/2008/1 ... -seal.html
Capacity: 140ml and kind of heavy for this size; 189g.
This pot has no joint lines but I can almost feel them on my fingers, it has also a lot of wrinkles all around the pot but these are more smaller and less bumpy than some of my Zhunis.
See below pictures for reference and link: http://lejardindethe.blogspot.ca/2013/0 ... ni-de.html
The seal also claims that the pot was wood fired and I think every pre-60 were wood fired if I`m not mistaken, I remember Billy Mood talking about very specific marks that has a wood fired pot, Hence my question: what kind of marks should I be looking at?
What do you think guys, Handmade ?
Thank you in advance for your replies.
I really like this discussion and that's why I'd like to get your opinions on this one.
Claims to be from 1952, Zhuni from Huanglong Mountain, Handmade.
Someone translated Seal to the guy I bought it from, see link:
http://lejardindethe.blogspot.be/2008/1 ... -seal.html
Capacity: 140ml and kind of heavy for this size; 189g.
This pot has no joint lines but I can almost feel them on my fingers, it has also a lot of wrinkles all around the pot but these are more smaller and less bumpy than some of my Zhunis.
See below pictures for reference and link: http://lejardindethe.blogspot.ca/2013/0 ... ni-de.html
The seal also claims that the pot was wood fired and I think every pre-60 were wood fired if I`m not mistaken, I remember Billy Mood talking about very specific marks that has a wood fired pot, Hence my question: what kind of marks should I be looking at?
What do you think guys, Handmade ?
Thank you in advance for your replies.
Last edited by achyle on Mar 22nd, '14, 11:40, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Not my teaware.....but I wish it were....
Exercise caution.achyle wrote:Hi Guys,
I really like this discussion and that's why I'd like to get your opinions on this one.
Claims to be from 1952, Zhuni from Huanglong Mountain, Handmade.
---snip---
Re: Not my teaware.....but I wish it were....
This has turned into a very helpful and informative discussion that is not really at home in this particular thread.
Chip, I'd like to request that the various yixing discussions that started with devilducklings' request for help back on page 14 (March 18th) be split into its own topic. Thanks for considering it!
Chip, I'd like to request that the various yixing discussions that started with devilducklings' request for help back on page 14 (March 18th) be split into its own topic. Thanks for considering it!
Re: Not my teaware.....but I wish it were....
on the lid skirtTead Off wrote:Where is the 1952 claim?