Thursday, January 29, 2009
A Brief Update
Apologies for the overly long delay in updating the blog. With the holidays over and a much needed vacation nearly in the bag (along with 25lbs of volcanic ash) things will be ramping up here shortly. Stay tuned and thanks for staying in touch.
Friday, January 2, 2009
Casting Experimentation Sub-Phase 5
The Final (Sub) Phase
After allowing the gypsum cement to cure for 48 hours final preparations were made to prepare TF1 for casting duty. The cast was thoroughly sanded to remove the majority of surface features transferred from the clay model. During casting small air pockets and areas displaying a different texture than the cast surface were uncovered. Some of these areas were removed but some were too deeply embedded within the cast to remove. These areas appear as tiny pits and lighter colored areas in the subsequent photos. Once sanded TF1 was treated to four coats of ultra-flat forest green paint.
(You wouldn't like me when I'm angry.)
A substantial amount of the physical landmarks present on the cast were succesfully removed. The following photo is a comparison between the unprepared TF1 and the finished TF1. In both frames 1 represents the clay model toe and 2 represents the TF1 toe.
(The Devil is in the details.)
With TF1 complete it's time to move on to the casting phase. Various substrates and casting methods will be tested over a period of time with the subsequent results posted here.
(Toeing the line.)
(The evolution of TF1.)
After allowing the gypsum cement to cure for 48 hours final preparations were made to prepare TF1 for casting duty. The cast was thoroughly sanded to remove the majority of surface features transferred from the clay model. During casting small air pockets and areas displaying a different texture than the cast surface were uncovered. Some of these areas were removed but some were too deeply embedded within the cast to remove. These areas appear as tiny pits and lighter colored areas in the subsequent photos. Once sanded TF1 was treated to four coats of ultra-flat forest green paint.
(You wouldn't like me when I'm angry.)A substantial amount of the physical landmarks present on the cast were succesfully removed. The following photo is a comparison between the unprepared TF1 and the finished TF1. In both frames 1 represents the clay model toe and 2 represents the TF1 toe.
(The Devil is in the details.)With TF1 complete it's time to move on to the casting phase. Various substrates and casting methods will be tested over a period of time with the subsequent results posted here.
(Toeing the line.)
(The evolution of TF1.)In closing the sub-phase of this project I'd like to thank everyone for their feedback so far and encourage any questions or suggestions in the future. The entire purpose of this project is to help advance the subject of casting, as well as hopefully helping to educate those who might be interested in taking what they learn here and elsewhere and applying it to their own interests.
Thursday, January 1, 2009
A Brief Interlude
Good And Bad
Before moving on with the test foot I'm posting a few photos per request. The first is a closeup of the lateral edge of the test foot. The thin horizontal lines were transferred from the clay model to the gypsum cast. This shows the fine level of detail that can be captured by the latex mold.
The second and third photos show the potential for inaccuracy in the molding process.
In the above photo A is the clay toe and B is the gypsum cement cast toe. The red arrows point to a depression and a ridge not present on the clay model. The ridge was created by the latex being too thin and bunching up, which in turn created the adjoining depression.
The above photo shows the aforementioned ridge and depression (2) along with a much larger ridge that bisects the toe (1). The large ridge is another defect again caused by the latex being too thin and adhering to itself.
These defects are inconsequential in regards to the test foot but do illustrate some of the potential pitfalls involved in replicating casts. The TF1 did not need to be an exact copy of the clay model and the latex mold was only needed for one casting. Because of this the latex mold was made thin. Where the replication of detail is paramount or where the mold will be used numerous times the latex should be applied much thicker than previously described in order to prevent binding and to form a much sturdier mold.
Before moving on with the test foot I'm posting a few photos per request. The first is a closeup of the lateral edge of the test foot. The thin horizontal lines were transferred from the clay model to the gypsum cast. This shows the fine level of detail that can be captured by the latex mold.
The second and third photos show the potential for inaccuracy in the molding process.
In the above photo A is the clay toe and B is the gypsum cement cast toe. The red arrows point to a depression and a ridge not present on the clay model. The ridge was created by the latex being too thin and bunching up, which in turn created the adjoining depression.
The above photo shows the aforementioned ridge and depression (2) along with a much larger ridge that bisects the toe (1). The large ridge is another defect again caused by the latex being too thin and adhering to itself.These defects are inconsequential in regards to the test foot but do illustrate some of the potential pitfalls involved in replicating casts. The TF1 did not need to be an exact copy of the clay model and the latex mold was only needed for one casting. Because of this the latex mold was made thin. Where the replication of detail is paramount or where the mold will be used numerous times the latex should be applied much thicker than previously described in order to prevent binding and to form a much sturdier mold.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
