We’re clearly fans of 3D printing at CFile, or, when we’re not overtly supportive, we still like to see how people explore the medium. A question that arises for makers, though, is how to maintain ownership over their work when much of it is automated by machines.
Netherlands designer Daniel De Bruin came up with a poetic response to that with a ceramic printer he has to power himself. In addition, his pieces bear some imperfections, which he says are one of his favorite features in ceramics. He powers the machine with a 15-kilogram weight. He states:
“by lifting a weight of 15 kilograms the machine is turned on. the weight allows me to be still connected with the process. because there is no external force involved like electricity it’s still me that’s making the print. by physically building and powering the machine the products that come out of it are the result of all the energy that has gone into it. Therefore I have a strong connection with the resulting products, these are not products of the machine but products of my hand.”
A common criticism of clay printing (and, we assume, all forms of art that adopt automation — Ray Bradbury refused to own a computer, for example) is that it takes all of the “hard” work out of the process, and the piece is somehow lesser as a result. We see such devices as tools more than anything else. But, in recognition of that criticism, we see how De Bruin’s machine blurs the line. If De Bruin designs, powers, modifies the aluminum guide wire to change a vessel’s shape and mixes clay to create gradients, how is that any less involved than more conventional methods?
What do you think? Let us know in the comments.
Images courtesy of the designer.
I am new to 3D printing and researching for a printer I can use to produce a great amount of work. That was good!
Beautiful machine (interesting variation on Jonathan Keep’s work) / intriguing hybrid process / lovely result. Though the latter is not the sole aim – playful experimentation is good for ceramics!
Brilliant and refreshing! Often the (digital) 3D clay printing brigade seek to use the technology to ‘make something that only the printing machine can make’ – rather thanto actually ‘make something interesting/beautiful/well designed’. In this clip I was impressed to see an initial apparent simplicity to the machine but, on further thought, realised the complexity of manipulation to make the pots (syringe plunger depresses, making table drops and moves to wider or narrower diameter to modify the pot’s shape. I liked the effect of the ‘squidgy’ line that shows on the pots, but unimpressed by the actual forms made – but I am sure they must be test forms to see what will and won’t work. Looking forward to see further development (in design) ot pots made this way. Bravo!
Such negativity. What do you think your wheel is? It’s a machine, a tool. Does your wheel have a motor? Then it’s even more like a lathe or other production tool than what traditional potters use/d. That’s all that rapid prototyping machines are, tools. To malign someone for choosing a different tool than the one you use shows a cultural bias that is losing ground. The guy obviously is a great machinist who is using his expertise to make in a new way.
Thank you Marnia, there is always the “no change” Luddite fringe and the new scares them (hence the anger). When the talkies first arrived, the makers of silent films dismissed it as a fad! The same is true of digital printing. I admit that it will be nice for digital ceramics to get past its two styles–dog poop and fractals–but in time, maybe five years, maybe a decade, it will. Like it or not, its the wheel of the future (which does not mean that the venerable wheel will disappear). Is another option for forming clay.
C’mon! This is not new, I have seen it in other sites doing the same sh… and I really don’t understand what is the reason of it. I think a lot of people think herself are artist, designers… I simply think are stupid people with a lot of time to do nothing really interesting for the art.
I look forward to the C-File e-mail and links every week. Thank you. Always stimulating and interesting. I learn a lot.
New technology brings new ways of working demonstrating mans ingenuity throughout history. Daniel’s de Bruins machine is very ingenious.
For Daniel’s use of body and machine perhaps he would find it less taxing and more enjoyable to become a thrower using his ingenuity directly to create interesting variations with both materials and forms.
However it is good that we are all different in our aims, work and feelings. He may with time develop something unusual.
How clever! Has he got a machine to shave his beard too! What a waste of time and money, I bet he got a doctorate for building it too. People throw pots on a wheel. and have done for thousands of years. it’s pointless. People are starving! Is C-File only interested in what’s new? Do Americans understand tradition?