Talk:Studio glass

message: This page is terrible and does a grave disservice to anyone who would like to do any serious research on glass art or the Studio Glass Movement. Really, it's embarrassing. When something is this deeply flawed, how do we even begin to fix it? Hurleydog3 (talk) 05:32, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Masters

message: I think we should extend the part of European glass art (italy and checz republic at least).. i think it is more important than north america and canada...  Pierpaolo.Dondio
:As a Canadian glass artist (born in Europe), I find that comment mildly offensive; But if you have more to add about Europe = please do.Bridesmill 21:39, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Canada

message: Please do not turn this page into a linkspam page of every one who has ever made a stained glass apple. If you have less than a thousand ghits as a glass artist you probably don't belong here; if someone considers you to be enough of an artist to be in Wiki; then perhaps you belong on this page. WP:BAI WP:NOT are probably good reading 
. Ideally this page contains 'the best of the best' representative of glass artists around the world; In other words, a prerequisite to be on this page is probably that the artist already has an article on WP. That does not mean there Has to be 10 from each country. Short form: if the artist you are thinking of is competition for the likes of Dale Chihuly, put them in - if not, it might be an idea to seek consensus here on the talk page lest someone comes along and removes them as NN. That does not mean that I am being elitist - I get over 3,000 ghits and I haven't put myself on this page.Bridesmill 21:39, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Content

message: Restored his name under U.S. He's had a 40-year career, is widely exhibited, is a reasonably important figure in the studio glass movement, and is a very well-known artist. Will be working on his article in the coming days. Shimeru 07:46, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lipofsky 

message: These comments are now mostly 3 years old. The debate seems to have been won by people who don't know the difference between Art Glass, Glass Art and Studio Glass !!!!!!
The Art Glass page no longer exists !! It just points here to "Studio Glass". That is just plain WRONG !!
"Studio Glass" is only one part of what is considered by collectors, researchers, publishers and librarians as "Art Glass". 
NOT all Art Glass is Studio Glass 
Not all "Studio Glass" is Art Glass; Some of it is small-batch utilitarian, craft, industrial or scientific.
As to Art Glass vs Glass Art
Both terms are valid. Both have specific meanings. 
There does need to be a disambiguation page referring to both as well as other terms.
 
"Art Glass" needs to be defined in relation to "collector glass" or "collectable glass", "domestic ornamental glass" and "historical glassware with ornamentation and/or decoration" and in opposition to "Glassware", "Pattern Glass", drinking glasses, decorative glass panels for architectural use and "Stained Glass".
"Glass Art" needs to be defined in relation to "Glass Sculpture", "Artistic Architectural Glass", "Art Glass Installations" "Sculptural Artworks which include glass elements" (Glass in Art) as well as in relation to or in opposition to "Hobby Glass or "Hobby Art Glass" or "Amateur Art Glass": lampworking, slumping & fusing, bead making, glass painting & stained glass"
PLEASE Restore the Art Glass page !
 for a definition PLUS links to Studio, Glass Art, Historical Glass, Glass history etc etc etc
It should also cover decorative techniques and technologies not unique to Studio Glass or links to separate pages for those subjects.
Morrisque (talk) 14:51, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that Art glass is in better condition at the moment.  The historical notes here could stand to be merged there.  I think the list of artists will be hard to manage either way, though; once the redirect is in place, the people who add themselves here will do the same there.  That page is also missing a few reasonably prominent artists like Christopher Ries, and somehow overlooks Harvey Littleton, a giant in the field.  I suspect a fair amount of research regarding the listed artists would need to be done to determine who to include.  Then again, the best bet might be not to have a list at all, but include the more prominent names among the text of the article, with citations to back up their contributions. Shimeru 19:28, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge, Glass art/Art glass 

message: I feel the first paragraph of Glass Art reads more like "Glass in Art" stating a number of uses how glass has been used in combination with other materials to form objects. Often the glass is the decorative component of the object (ie. in glass beads in a bracelet, stained glass with lead in a window, crystal with metal in a chandelier etc)  
My understanding of the term Art Glass was that it referred to both the glass itself and objects almost solely made of glass which are decorative/challenging/inspiring and perhaps of no other use than to be looked at (often vases, ornanments, paperweights).
In my understanding the likes of Tiffany would fall under both categories as he not only experimented with producing different types of glass (art glass) but mostly used them in other things ("glass in art" - lamps, windows, theatre curtains)
I find the reference to the use of Art Glass in cannabis pipes to be close to a joke.
My understanding of Art Glass is that it refers to the type of glass, not to the art of glasswork.
While it should be noted that I have no formal training in this discipline, it is my understanding that these two terms are interchangeable.  I would be amenable to having the articles merged under either title with the remaining term redirected. SteinAlive 12:24, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  More comments 

message: Is this an article talking about the glass art or just a yellow page for glass artists? I suggest to remove all the country-specific glass artists. It's not what Wikipedia for. — Indon (reply) — 01:25, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree. Naming the artists who create the Glass art is a perfectly normal thing in an encyclopaedia. But, the observation that Wikipedia is not a Yellow page is correct. All links in the article itself should be removed immediately. If we don't stop it now, more are coming.--GerardusS (talk) 10:13, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  If the artist doesn't have a page, they should be removed. Better yet, we should move to whole mess of glass artist lists to a new page, List of glass artists. Clubmarx (talk) 02:44, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: First part : no!! (If that is your task, you have more pages to do a clean-up). Second part: yes, and you did so already without real consent. You see the result!!--GerardusS (talk) 14:23, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Here is a list of glass artists from the article glass which requires incorporation into this article.  They have no place in glass but could be used here. 
While earlier modern glass masters such as Rene Lalique, Louis Comfort Tiffany, Emile Gallee, Carlo Scarpa and Paul Venini were sought after for important glass collections, the scale and ambition of glass art scaled new heights. Some important contemporary glass artists in glass include Dale Chihuly, Lino Tagliapietra, William Morris, Martin Blank, Stanislaw Libensky, Bertil Vallien, Willem Heesen, Livio Seguso, Harvey Littleton, Dante Marioni, Dan Dailey, Sonja Blomdahl, Tom Patti, Stephen Rolfe Powell, Richard Marquis, Therman Statom, Hiroshi Yamano, Ann Robinson, Paul Marioni, Nancy Callan to name just a few.
Polyamorph (talk) 11:19, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Content 

message: No, No, No.
Glass , Colors, Ovens and tools. Glass artists cannot create without them. Yes essential. Look at Dale Chihuly work and you know it's right.
But so what. In an article about art and artforms you just does not talk about these subjects.
The list is highly interesting, but not here, on this place.
Put it back where it came from. Give in the article a SUPERLINK to that place and let's concentrate on art!! 
Sorry for spoiling the party. Cheers--GerardusS (talk) 08:03, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The content is NOT appropriate where it came from, possibly glass production would be better but it was decided after mutual discussions that for now colors are more appropriate in glass art than any other subject since that is where they are used most. Your comments about how important colors are in art don't back up you arguements at all abut instead support the view that the colors section most certainly belongs in this article Polyamorph (talk) 11:11, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi Jdrewitt, that was highly ironically ment. Can you find in the article about painting one word about the kind of/color of the paint. You must do what was mutually discussed, but I don't agree. But what with the glasssculptors not using color at all? Cheerio--GerardusS (talk) 11:32, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have created the page glass production and moved the colors section there since it is rather technical.  I do however think that color (or lack of it) is extremely important in art and should be discussed in an art article, as an artist's tool.  Polyamorph (talk) 11:47, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Colors 

message: By removing the gallery to the bottom of the page you suddenly showed me the miserable images in it.
Cannot we find better ones ( in Wikimedia Commons  Category:Glass art for instance).--GerardusS (talk) 08:11, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gallery 

message: I added an internal link to the glass disease page since glass disease is a problem encountered on occasion by art conservators.--CristaPack (talk) 13:35, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  See also 

message: This is the intro:
Glass art and Glass sculpture is the use of glass as an artistic medium to produce sculptures or two-dimensional artworks. Specific approaches include stained glass, working glass in a torch flame (lampworking), glass beadmaking, glass casting, glass fusing, and, most notably, glass blowing. As a decorative and functional medium, glass was extensively developed in Egypt and Assyria, brought to the fore by the Romans (who developed glassblowing), and includes among its greatest triumphs European cathedral stained glass windows. Great ateliers like Tiffany, Lalique, Daum, Gallé, the Corning schools in upper New York state, and Steuben Glass Works took glass art to the highest levels. Glass from Murano (also known as Venetian glass) is the result of hundreds of years of refinement and invention. While there are now more hotshops and glass artists working in Seattle (USA), Murano is still held as the birthplace of modern glass art.
* Easiest to fix first. 
What we have here is a potted history of Art Glass. However, it runs happily from Egypt and Rome to New York State without a single indication of a time frame. Are we talking about 'Ancient Egypt here? ...or what?  This is an encyclopedia. We need to make these things clear. 
Likewise, we are told here that Murano's glass is the result of hundreds of years of refinement... yet because the chronollogy has been stuffed-up, it really reads as if New York is "the birthplace of modern glass art". 
* Definition 
This is harder. This article used to be called "Art glass", and there is a very good case for it still being called "Art glass", because that is what the article describes. 
This article is about "real and major" glass studios. This is not about "glass art" as in amateur copper foil production. Neither is it about stained glass as in stained glass windows. 
My proposal is that we return this article to its proper name Art glass. The intro then will need to indicate that "Art glass" does not mean "all artistic products in glass".  It means, specifically, the products of Art Glass studios such as those of the Murano glass artists, Faberge, and Dale Chihuly. 
Amandajm (talk) 14:25, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I am far from sure that distinction, or the timing of it, is universally supported, but I agree two articles are best, wherever the split is made.  See here and here. If you support renaming this (back) to Art glass, please say so above. It is easier to take the studio glass out of here than the other way round. Johnbod (talk) 16:35, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Several comments

message: "Art Glass" and "Studio Glass" are two different animals. It would serve both best to take the Art glass references off the Studio glass page and give Art glass its own page. "Studio Glass" is an art movement that was started in the early 1960s by Harvey Littleton with the assistance of Dominick Labino. Studio glass has come a long way via several ideological turns since then, but it can be said that artist-craftspeople from that time to this who both design and have a hands-on relationship with the blowing, molding, carving, flame working, etc. of the glass are Studio glass artists, and that what they make is called Studio glass.  Art glass is glass that has been made in a factory under the factory division of labor. This means that an artist or designer designs the glass object, and it is then produced on the factory floor by skilled laborers. Glass by Lalique, Galle, Faberge, Tiffany, Loetz, Steuben, etc. and much of the Murano glass would be included in this category. Glassnote (talk) 21:06, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I am far from sure that distinction, or the timing of it, is universally supported, but I agree two articles are best, wherever the split is made.  See here and here. If you support renaming this (back) to Art glass, please say so above. It is easier to take the studio glass out of here than the other way round. Johnbod (talk) 16:35, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion: Studio glass and Art glass: Two different animals

message: Thanks for your notes above. I have thought about working on the Studio glass page, but decided that because there is so much contention about it, it would be best to discuss here instead of bulling my way ahead with changes. The discussion page is an excellent venue for working out ideas. "Studio Glass", as we both realize, is a large and complex subject. It is better to get some sort of consensus before trying to organize the subject into a Wikipedia entry. 
I am still working (as I have the time) on some individual glass artist entries. I started to expand Stanislav Libensky' and have not had time yet to fact check and add references, which that article needs. Fortunately, I've got some great books on a variety of glass topics from which to draw. You might want to add some pages for those early glass artists, Morrisque. I've found that the entire subject of glass art, and info on glass factories and individual artists, is sorely needed. 
Sincerely, Glassnote (talk) 15:09, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Hello Morrisque:

message: Hello Morrisque - Please note that "Studio Glass" is not the be-all and end-all in glass art. I still hold that it is a term for a more specific time period and place, rather than an honorific catch-all for every bit of fine contemporary work in glass that has been done in the past 50 years. Here is what Sylva Petrova writes in "Czech Glass" on the subject of "studio glass" (p. 14): 
"The work of Czech artists is sometimes referred to as studio glass, perhaps to present the contribution of Czech glass artists towards the development of world modern glass. Even that is not a correct term. The activities of modern glass have a rather longer history and quite a different character in the Czech lands than the studio glass ever had in the United States, Great Britain, and other countries, from where the term "studio glass" originates." 
So, we had better be careful who we call a studio glass artist- it may not be appreciated in some quarters. A page titled "Czech glass" could cover the Czech tradition without mixing it up with "Studio Glass"; "French Glass" could cover the French contribution to glass art and a new page, "American (or United States) glass" could cover US glass production from Colonial days up through Harvey Littleton and the Studio Glass Movement and beyond. Perhaps this is the best way to organize the different eras and places; maybe there is really no need for a specific "Studio Glass" page. That way we can concentrate on what studio glass is, or was, give it its due without intending to take away from the rest. Glassnote (talk) 19:18, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Hello again

message: I see Art glass is  now under construction, which is good.  My main concern is that Glass art still redirects to this page, while Glass in art & other variants go nowhere. The only approach to an overall international and historical survey article on glass as an art we have is History of glass which is pretty sketchy, and naturally also covers technical and archaeological stuff.  But it does serve as a summary to link things like Korean glass art and Ancient Roman glass off. 
In the absence of a survey article more centred on glass as an art, I propose that Glass art redirects there instead. Johnbod (talk) 13:00, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I thought we had established above that "Works of "Art" by established and recognised artists who use glass as their canvas" was Art glass.  I'm sure "glass art" may be used in that specialized sense re the contemporary scene but it also seems to me to be in wide use as a general term for "Glass as art" worldwide and throughout history.  At the very least there should be a disam page. Johnbod (talk) 21:21, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Back to the bigger picture

message: Since Editing/Development seems to have fallen off, last year, I'd like to revive editing on it; Seeing the page as a Wiki reader, when i search for the differences between glass art, art glass, studio glass, and glassblowing -- i am pretty disappointed to have to dig through and make the disambiguation for myself, and still come up a little confused.
1. Can we do a disambiguation page
2. Can we do a little intro for at least this page, studio glass page, and glass art page, definitively telling readers what WE have decided is the meaning of each term?
FauxClaud (talk) 20:30, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Can we Revive Editing on this Page?

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests July 2011 
;What should I do?
	A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 12:20, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Glass.sculpture.kewgardens.london.arp.jpg Nominated for Deletion

message: This page and art glass use the same terms, images, and artists.  This should be fixed.  This page currently refers often the the "art glass movement" rather than the studio glass movement, and seems to want to include everything; those parts should be merged back into art glass. 
It should be clarified whether art glass is an umbrella movement and term of which studio glass is a specialized subset, or whether they are two different movements with no overlap aside from some historical shared origins.  I can't tell which it is from what I've read; but that relationship should be stated in the first paragraph of each page's lead.
Related: an overview page is sorely needed.  Currently glass art is a mess and should be an overview of art made with glass, or glass in art.  (I see no sources for the casual uses of "glass art" to refer to monumental glass sculptures; monumental glass art can be a section of the overview page :)  – SJ + 17:27, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Pinging  who's still editing in this area. :)  – SJ + 17:32, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably. I'm just about to go travelling, I'm afraid. Johnbod (talk) 22:22, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  Travel well!   I'll try to fix up the overview page, which has no refs and is redundant, before thinking about these two articles.   Update: the overview draft is done.  Take a look at how I describe there the difference b/t art glass (as a type of glasswork) and studio glass (the movement). It's not quite how these two articles describe it today.  – SJ + 19:00, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Separate cleanly from [[art glass]], make [[glass art]] into overview page 

message: [here] is the diff. If reliable sources can be added then feel free to add them and restore a particular section. Otherwise, keep massive swaths of unsourced material out of articles. See WP:VERIFY and avoid  original research. jayhawker6 (talk) 17:50, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: As  states in their edit summary, you can start by tagging the sections. Just because content is currently unsourced does not mean it is not verifiable. While I very much agree that content should be sourced, the question to ask would be is any of the unsourced content actually contentious? If not then the  can simply be used, since wikipedia is a work in progress. Polyamorph (talk) 08:06, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of sections lacking sources