Two jobs are currently top of my list (amongst all the other jobs that I got bored with and stopped part way through but I promise I’ll get back to the editing in a bit), and they are adding photos of pots rather than just marks. That may look like just the one job but they fall into two categories.
Firstly, entries where I don’t have an example of the potter’s mark but they are on the database. I’ve been trawling the pottery associations so there are hundreds of these potters now in the database. In such cases I’ve added them under ‘Other’ on the drop down list of Mark Type. If and when I find an example of their mark then I’ll update their record, but I reasoned that many may simply have a label or have signed their pots so a quick search on their name would find them. A fellow collector asked why I bothered including potters who don’t mark their work when this is a database of marks. I could only say ‘So they’re not lost.’
Which brings me to the second category: Entries where I only have one example of the potter’s work and little or no mention of them online. These are often potters who missed the first and second editions of the BSPM books because they started potting in the pre-internet days of the 70s and 80s, and had retired or died or moved abroad by the 90s. In such cases I’m adding a photo of their pot along with their mark.
I hope all these extra photos doesn’t add a lot of extra pages to plough through when searching for a mark. If it does, then I can only apologise.