The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

I just sent in my request to join the SRA (a group of Self Representing Artists who work with glass). As part of the application, they asked for photos of my beads and where I made them. This is to try and verify that I really am making beads and not reselling another artist's work.

This is an excellent idea, IMHO, and I very much want to join.

This got me thinking, though, which generally gets me into trouble. Wouldn't it be better to ask for pictures of horribly yucky beads? Beads that no self-respecting artist would ever sell? If I could produce a picture of, say, a misshapen blob of puke-green with violet dots, they'd know for sure that I had the tools necessary to melt and shape glass. Hmmm?

Or, I could just send in this photo of some of my very first (bad) beads:

(Believe it or not, I actually wore this necklace--I love the colors--and people complemented me on it. Either they have poor eyesight, or they are *very* polite.)

My point is this: Many glass artists try to explain how labor intensive well-made lampworked beads are, but I can't find anyone showing pictures of how many things can go wrong in the process.

So, being the smart-aleck I am, and having many, many examples to draw from, I present to you a new Blog Post Series: How NOT to Make a Lampworked Bead.

Comments? Questions? Outraged Lampworkers? Comment away!

Kelley