Talk:Modelling clay

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of visual arts on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Visual artsWikipedia:WikiProject Visual artsTemplate:WikiProject Visual artsvisual arts articles

Sculpture

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sculpture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sculpture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SculptureWikipedia:WikiProject SculptureTemplate:WikiProject Sculpturesculpture articles

Dougart's comments

As the author of Modelling Clay, I welcome editorial amendments, corrections and additions. This is my first article and clearly having re-read it, it requires cleanup. Your patience will be rewarded as I will not be satisfied with it until I have reworked it endlessly. This article is necessary because of the proliferation of modelling clays which need an umbrella gateway. I will address the issue of connecting to the other specific clays or will write articles for them in due course. Particular attention needs to be given to the re-direct from modeling clay to plasticine. Modeling clay needs to be redirected to modelling clay and the redirect to Plasticine deleted. If somebody else hasn't dealt with this in the next few days, I will deal with it myself. Dougart 12:00, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dougart, I would agree that whilst the article is the start of a useful entry it does need tidying up. And a few suggestions 1. Explain what earthen clay is, or remove altogether if it's not adding value 2. Neither plasticine nor ploymer clay actually conatin any clay minerals 3. Often dried' is too vague, and possoibly could not be substantiated 4. ... no more than 15 mm thick seems overly precise. What would happen if the object was made 16mm? 5. Your statement about earthen clay puzzles me '... disadvantages namely that it dries out unevenly and relatively quickly, it cracks when used in thick sections, it is not easy to re-work, it requires high temperatures to fix it permanently, it can distort as it shrinks and it is brittle.' If by earthen clay you mean clays that are used to produce ceramic ware then there much is incorrect: i. any uneven drying is due to the processes used and not the material ii. why is it not easy to re-work? Providing it has not been fired it can be easily so iii. Requiring high temperatures to 'fix it' can be an advantageous as after wards the article relatively temperature inert iv. Distortion is not due to the material itself but how it has been used v. Ceramics are brittle but clay is not

Just a few points that I guess seem rather harsh ... sorry

Regards,

Andy

Earthen clay

Can anyone suggest a better term than 'Earthen clays'? In addition to seemingly rather clumsy (IMHO), it is not used by geologists or potters (who does?) and the meaning is not explained in the article

Regards, Andy

origin

I can't actually find out in ANY of the clay articles HOW clay is actually made! If anyone knows, please add on to this discussion Italic textbefore 8/11/06 (November 8th)

Layman's Terms?

Sorry, I'm not a clay expert, so I'm just passing through. I wanted to point out that the end of the first paragraph reads something like: "In layman's terms, [technical description]"

Layman's terms are more or less antonymous with the well-informed description. It should be closer to "In layman's terms, clay is squishy stuff you make other stuff with."

~justpassingthrough —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.226.96.72 (talk) 12:56, 6 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Rewrite

I rewrote most of this article. I must admit, most of the content I added was just from my own memory, or from other articles on WP, which also lack sources. Another source I used for confirmation was this site. I don't doubt any of the article's content, but it doesn't appear to be a particularly reliable source (It's attributed to an author, but it doesn't say where her information comes from), so I didn't bother adding it as an inline reference. Off the top of my head, more work should be done to the paperclay section (again paperclay may be a trademark name, and I'd prefer to use the proper generic name whenever possible), I think the link to clay (industrial plasticine) needs to be readded, and information on other clays may be added, including 2-part epoxy clays, dough clays (like Play-doh), silver clay, and possibly WED clay. -Verdatum (talk) 18:38, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As a sculptor I would find more information very useful. I have only just begun looking into artificial clays, always having worked with natural clay, but the enormous variety of materials is just a bit daunting. I regret that I can't help you more here, but more on the uses and origins would be very welcome. About the link to Industrial plasticine, I don't see why it shouldn't be there already. A bit of structure is most welcome. I am afraid though that, as you already remarked, it will be very hard to find quotable "scientific" sources... Greetings,--Satrughna (talk) 13:42, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think the location of the link to Industrial plasticine is relevant, but its location doesn't make sense to me. Would the following sentence work better? "...this brings difficulty to making molds of items made of it. Due to this concern, sulfur-free versions of Industrial plasticine have been developed." Zuzie3 (talk) 22:29, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Play-doh?

Is play-doh a type of clay? Its solid component is mostly flour rather than mineral, so i would say no (it is a dough). But maybe it is a sub-type like "paper-clays"? Either way, the article currently has a picture of play-doh, but it is not mentioned anywhere in the article text, so i moved the image here.

If included, which type of clay is it? And should we use the brand name (i don't know if there is another name, but i have made generic play-doh at home before, from kitchen ingredients). The wiki article called it a "modelling compound", so it sounds as though Hasbro don't call it a clay, or are not allowed to?YobMod 07:21, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's a tough one. I believe you are correct in it technically being a dough, and not a clay; further that the appropriate generic term would be a "modeling compound". At the same time, polymer clays, (e.g. Sculpey) are generally considered "modeling clays" even though they don't contain a speck of the mineral clay. Regardless, I'd prefer more traditional modeling clay to be used as the first image for this article. I've got some images of plastilina sculptures lying around somewhere that I could release. -Verdatum (talk) 13:27, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh wait, I'd forgotten the state of the article. It has lovely images. The scope of the article is still open for discussion. I personally think it's best to have the article be about any modeling compound (but keep the article titled "Modelling clay"). I still have no problem with leaving out the play-doh image though. -Verdatum (talk) 13:47, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds reasonable. I added a link to Salt dough and playdoh in the see also for now. I only noticed because the images were all placed in the lead, so playdoh image was pushed into a section that i was certain it had nothing to do with. If someone with playdoh expertise wanted to create a section for "modelling dough" or something, then the image may still find a good home.Yob Mod 14:05, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not so fast. Play-Doh is a brand name and registered trademark of Hasbro, Inc. Therefore, it cannot be used in this article. One would need to find a generic term for it. Like Verbatum says, it is a modeling clay. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dan Bollinger (talk • contribs) 00:47, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Modern Thermoplastic Materials

It would be interesting to know what compounds give modeling materials such as "CX5" and "Pro-Clay" their unique properties. "CX5" is used by sculptor Adam Beane and there are YouTube videos about it. "Pro-Clay" is used by special effects artist Mark Alfrey on his DVD "Mark Alfrey's Sculpting the Human Head. (It is not to be confused with the polymer clay called "Sculpey ProClay" ) The material used by Alfrey can be cast in alginate molds At one stage of warmth, it can be pulled into strands like taffy or Silly Putty. Are these materials wax based like traditional modeling clay? Or are they based on some new compound that has only been available in the past decade?

Tashiro (talk) 11:19, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Editing And Correcting

I was reading your article (very useful by the way :) and I saw in polymer clay that you left an "a" out of craft, so I fixed it for you... Is that okay? I am new and not trying to offend anyone but I have OCD and it was driving me crazy o.O

I thought there should be a segment to tell you about minor fixes so you aren't alarmed, so here it is! Just click the "[Edit]" button on the in above this segment, and go below what I wrote and say what you fixed :D

A good habit for compulsive folks to indulge in is signing their postings with four of these. ~ Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 00:31, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Modelling or modeling? both is written in the article. Please fix. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.109.16.179 (talk) 11:26, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Polymer clay

I have been editing the Polymer Clay page and came here to check out the link. This entry says that polymer clay will thermoset when heated. That is incorrect. It is already set. Rather, the particles having absorbed a plasticizer fuse into a single structure. There is no setting or melt process going on. Therefore, I've changed this page slightly.Dan Bollinger (talk) 00:28, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Are Modeling Clays Really Fired?

In common usage (in the US, anyway), 'modeling clay' refers to clays that are not fired (typically, they contain no clay minerals). Plasticine/plastilina are the standard examples, but others exist. You'd never find clay that can/should be fired categorized as modeling clay by a US art supplier. Here's the descriptive text from the 'modeling clay' page of a major art supply house:

Modeling Clays have several distinct properties that make them useful. Unlike firing clays used in pottery, oil-based clays stay soft and workable. They never harden or dry, but that means they also cannot be fired. They can be pigmented too, with a wide array of bright colors that can be blended still further. Although some professional products are pigmented, scholastic modeling clays are the most brightly colored. They are also the softest and easiest to work with, although they won't hold detail as well.
Although the name is not used as often in the United States, plastilina is a generic term for oil-based modeling clay. Plastilina was developed in Germany in the 1880s. Plastilina was originally a trade name, like aspirin and nylon, but the name lost its trademark status when it came into general use. Today, many professional modeling clay products still go by this name, plastilina.

76.118.178.18 (talk) 23:09, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps a mention of ADOBE clay,Both as a Art medium and building material?

Perhaps,ADOBE clay cpould be mentioed in article. Alhough rarely used in ART it is used! And of course its use in builing structures! Thanks!Eddson storms (talk) 00:27, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]