Author Topic: New Acquisitions!  (Read 8530 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline RAY

  • Members
  • **
  • Posts: 988
New Acquisitions!
« Reply #20 on: April 21, 2005, 10:19:50 PM »
i kow what you mean kev about feeling the weight 1st hand, i just got a strathearn weight off ebay, just got it this morning 2 chips in it and a bull's eye on the side no mention of them in the lack of description, i got it cheap so not really bothered it's a p6 flower with the yellow date cane and with white s cane

just been looking at the new photos and what a diffrence, i still say clichy even though i still havent managed to steal my books back off me mum
cheers Ray


Offline Frank

  • Author
  • Members
  • ***
  • Posts: 9226
  • Gender: Male
    • Glass history
    • Gateway
New Acquisitions!
« Reply #21 on: April 21, 2005, 10:53:20 PM »
:?:  :?
Frank A.
Please help preserve glass web-sites for posterity by donating to The Glass Study Association a non-profit organisation.
Scotland's Glass - Ysart Glass
Glass Zoo - Glass Study.COM
Commercial Czech


Offline Leni

  • Members
  • **
  • Posts: 2277
New Acquisitions!
« Reply #22 on: April 24, 2005, 09:07:56 AM »
Hasn't anyone else got any ideas?   :(

I have continued to search the internet and re-read my paperweight books, but I've only succeeded in confusing myself even more!   :shock:  :roll:

I thought about St Mande for a while, but there aren't that many examples around to compare - and some books don't mention them at all!   :roll:  Then I began to think maybe Clichy again, but it's the combination of the complex canes that is confusing me   :?

On the whole I guess I'm still thinking Bohemian, though.  Trouble is, the only one of my books which goes into much detail on Bohemian weights is the Jargstorf, and I haven't found much at all on the net!

Kevin, have you had any more thought on this one yourself, or any further 'hints' you could give me?

Leni   :?
Leni


Offline KevinH

  • Global Moderator
  • Members
  • *
  • Posts: 4331
    • England
New Acquisitions!
« Reply #23 on: April 24, 2005, 09:00:21 PM »
Hi Leni,

I have been tied up with all sorts of things recently but have now checked through various books and sale catalogues for any canes that may match those in your weight. I will add some more info soon (with some images, maybe), but for now, I can offer some thoughts that illustrate one of the many problems with cane identification.

As I know you have Pat Reilly's book, Leni, take a look at page 24, image top left. It's a Clichy chequer with a cane having an outer row of Stars. Ray said that he felt he knew of a Clichy cane with a six-point star surrounded by 5 stars, similar to one in your weight. And he may be right, although as yet I have not found a direct equivalent of that cane in a Clichy weight.

The image shown here is an enlargement from the weight in Pat Reilly's book: http://tinypic.com/4lrqfk

This cane helps to show that Clichy certainly did make 6-point star canes [but so did just about all millefiori makers] and therefore could have produced a complex cane with stars in the middle and in the outer parts.

However ...

From your pics of the canes we can clearly see that the central part of the cane Ray referred to has an appearance of being a light blue core with a darker blue "ruled" star pattern. Yet, in the view through the base, the same cane looks rather different - it shows the blue inner star as a regular "filled in" pattern within a thin coating of light blue.

What has happened is that the cane has distorted during the setting such that from the top view the inner part has closed up leaving the image of a specific type of star pattern that actually did not exist in the cane when it was made  :!:

As I have said, your weight has some features that illustrate some of the difficulties in making an attribution. And this "distorted star" perfectly highlights a general rule when checking paperweight canes. If the base is clear, always study the canes through the base as well as the dome to check whether any distortions have occurred. Often it does not make much difference, but occasionally it can highlight crucial evidence.

More to come ...
KevinH


Offline RAY

  • Members
  • **
  • Posts: 988
New Acquisitions!
« Reply #24 on: April 24, 2005, 09:49:33 PM »
got my books back today, just been looking at them and the last one i looked in came up with the clichy star, looking at Lenis green cane set up you can see the blue star in the center described as six pointed star in  the kulles lampwork book and the outer canes purple/white as in the photo from the book , click on image for larger image

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v235/refined/th_a40d5ea5.jpg)
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v235/refined/th_bd0f5904.jpg)
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v235/refined/th_73039287.jpg)
cheers Ray


Offline KevinH

  • Global Moderator
  • Members
  • *
  • Posts: 4331
    • England
New Acquisitions!
« Reply #25 on: April 24, 2005, 10:38:14 PM »
Thanks for adding that, Ray - and for the larger views, too.

This shows another point that can confuse - at least at the detailed level. In the larger image from George N. Kulles' book the points of the star are clearly rounded in most cases, whereas in the smaller image (and depending on your own screen resolution) the canes may appear as sharply pointed.

It's the same, and even worse, in real life. A crisp-looking cane can often be seen under magnification as less well defined, and some "star canes" turn out to be "daisy canes" instead.

But leaving aside the micro side of life (from a macro lens point of view), Ray's image does show that the full cane in Kulles' book is not of the same overall structure as the one in Leni's weight. I am not saying that Ray is wrong in his thoughts. On the contrary, his investigative skills are just what are needed. But as I said before, lots of makers produced 6-point "star" canes. Although I appreciate, and often use, the Kulles' references, I find the brevity of descriptions in some cases leads to a misunderstanding.

Ray has the latest version of the Kulles' book while I have the earlier ones (dealing with millefiori and lampwork separately). But perhaps the later one also includes, under the Baccarat section, the comment about "Baccarat bundles are composed of six-point star rods". And in my version of the books, it is also stated, against a drawing of a crisply pointed 6-point star:
Quote
Because the points of Bohemian stars are wide and short, their central bodies appear to be larger than those of other stars. Although usually sharply pointed, these stars occasionally have rounded points.
That's a good description and one worth bearing in mind, but it could also be just as true of other makers' 6-point stars, too.

What concerns us most with cane identification is the full complex cane, rather than the individual elements. This is just as true with my cane tables for Ysart weights as shown in my web space. The initial entries show individual "basic" canes which, on their own, do not necessarily provide a positive identification.
KevinH


Offline Leni

  • Members
  • **
  • Posts: 2277
New Acquisitions!
« Reply #26 on: April 25, 2005, 07:40:56 PM »
Kevin, I am hoping to get to the PCC meeting in Cambridge on 11th June to hear Sybille Jargstorf,  :shock:  and I am wondering if it would be acceptable to bring my mystery paperweight along for her perusal  :roll:  

Is that sort of thing permitted?  Seeing as it will be my first meeting, I'm not sure how things go and wouldn't want to comit a faux pas  :oops:  :roll:

Leni
Leni


Offline KevinH

  • Global Moderator
  • Members
  • *
  • Posts: 4331
    • England
New Acquisitions!
« Reply #27 on: April 25, 2005, 11:13:10 PM »
Leni wondered, in respect of attending her first PCC meeting:
Quote
if it would be acceptable to bring my mystery paperweight along
Not only would it be acceptable, it's what the club is about ... sharing information and raising questions with all sorts of weights. Even if there is not an opportunity for guest speakers to consider things, many members always enjoy the challenge of a mystery.

At my first meeting, there was an identification session with a panel of experts. I took along the item shown in http://tinypic.com/4q4d9w and it was picked as the first piece for discusssion  :!: It's identity was not confirmed for sure at the meeting but after some time various members did come to an agreement. Any ideas, anyone?  :P
KevinH


Offline RAY

  • Members
  • **
  • Posts: 988
New Acquisitions!
« Reply #28 on: April 26, 2005, 12:23:33 AM »
it looks like whitefriars, but its the other maker that begins with W :)
cheers Ray


Offline Leni

  • Members
  • **
  • Posts: 2277
New Acquisitions!
« Reply #29 on: April 26, 2005, 08:47:27 AM »
Quote from: "RAY"
it looks like whitefriars, but its the other maker that begins with W :)

I would have said Whitefriars, too!   :?  Do you mean it's a Walsh?  :shock:

Leni
Leni

 

Search
eBay.com
eBay.co.uk

Enter key words
Link to Glass Encyclopedia
Link to Glass Museum
Enter
key words
to search
Amazon.com