Topic: Large Woodland Vase

[obscurities]

Just a quick note that it appears that Steven's (Mosquito) image has been taken down from the RLalique.com website on the "Free RLalique Authentication" page.

Craig

Kidcobra - Along the lines of a simple suggestion for the site would be to put a caption under known pieces as to manufacturer and period.  As an example the Blue Ingrid vase could simply state under it, "Ingrid Vase by Schlevogt - Age Unknown". The clear or transparent color ones could state "Ingrid Vase by Schlevogt - Post WWII Production". The vase in question that started this thread could simply state "Barolac 11549 - In the Forrest ca. 1950"  or "Age Unknown" if it cannot be determined. "Unidentified" for those that can not be easily named.

Providing this information would lend credibility to the fact that they are stated to not be R Lalique or Lalique. I recognize many of the pieces and identification of many would likely not be that difficult....

They could, after all is said and done, join this board and enlist the enthusiastic help of people here to identify difficult pieces.......

Craig

[msiscoe]

Hello, has anyone made any of these suggestions to the guys at rlalique.com? I have read a lot of criticism of them lately, but not heard of any positive actions being taken to rectify these issues.  I do know that they do not "nick" images from other people's websites. They do post photos that are sent to them, and their form used to submit photos states that all photos sent to them become their property. Perhaps someone sent them the photo in question, and asked if it was Rene' Lalique because they own one or are interested in buying one. Not everyone owns a digital camera. Just an idea.

[Lustrousstone]

As someone who has been a spectator on this thread, I thought there have been a lot of positive suggestions. Also, you cannot solve a problem until you know you have a problem.

Isn't Kidcobra from rlalique.com?

Even if photos are sent to a website for ID purposes, they remain the copyright of the person who took them (hopefully the person who sent them in) or the company that commissioned their taking. The copyright doesn't revert unless full rights are purchased or waived.

[obscurities]

I have had a couple of interactions with the site in the past, and as I stated in an earlier discussion with Kidcobra, they did not, at least in my interactions, seem to take well to constructive suggestions.

As far as the image question goes, Steven has not responded with a remark regarding whether he listed and sold the item or not, but I am going to go out on a limb here take a wild guestimate, and since he termed their use as having "nicked" his photo, and it is contained in a copyrighted album of Barolac images related to the GMB, I am going to guess he did not attempt to sell it as Lalique, thereby giving someone a reason to send it to them to verify, or send them a copy in an email to see if it was Lalique.  

Following in the spirit of their use of forged and fake applying to anything pictured that is not Lalique, I would have to say that calling the use and watermarking of any image that is owned by someone else, "nicked", would seem to follow suit.   :thup:  (just having a bit of fun here)

In any event, since people are sending them random images, copyright laws would be something any website undertaking the practice of watermarking images should be very careful about..... If they use a form that states that all images sent to them become their property, that could be an issue if someone sends them a copyrighted image that they (the sender) themselves do not own.....

I also find it interesting that the image in question is not present on their site after this discussion here, and was pulled pretty quickly. Kidcobra may have more input than we think....  which is good. (Christine, My suspicion is that Kidcoba is in some way associated with the site)

I do not feel that we were terribly critical of their site, but instead were having a conversation regarding definitions and use of specific terms. The same, or very similar conversations could be had in regards to several sites on the internet... They just happened to be the lucky ones that came to the forefront because of this piece of glass.

I for one stated several times that in general I like the site, and have used it for several years....

My suspicion is that the suggestion I made in my earlier post today will be read by Kidcobra and forwarded to the powers that be at that website.....

Only time will tell if the suggestion is deemed to have merit....  or if the conversation here is deemed to have any merit....

Craig

[kidcobra]

Hi Obscurities. A change was made to the 8 pages of photos (including the vase page which started this discussion) bringing essentially the statement from the first page of that section to every one of the photo pages; the statement being to the effect that all the items pictured are made by different manufacturers and none were made originally with the intent to fool anyone.  Also, that many of the items are collectible in their own right. There are only a handful of lines of text at the top of those pages, so I think it's more likely than not that people coming to those pages for information will read them. And it's the same statement on the top of each of the 8 pages of photos, so it only has to be read once by someone going though the pages.

The suggestion to reformat the pages and provide labels to ID the pieces is a good idea. There are some programming and presentation issues (including with the way the pages were originally set up to take the photos), so it's not a minor task time wise both for redoing the pages and then of course getting all the info  (or as much as possible that can be tracked down) and trying to make sure it's accurate, but everyone agreed it is something that would be great to get done, time, and priorities dictating if, how, and when it happens.  Time will tell, but it's on the list. And I did confirm that it never did came up in the development of those pages what the effect would be on the fields or people that actually collect some of the pieces shown. The sole focus was on R Lalique collectors and their view, and no one ever thought about the rest of the planet in that regard. Can't think of everything, but the suggestion for labeling the item to satisfy this concern are obviously well taken if it can be implemented in a reasonably efficient and effective way.

[obscurities]

Kidcobra....  I am pleased that our suggestions were taken into consideration, and I actually feel a little better knowing that the discussion here may have helped to influence a change which I honestly feel will increase the credibility of the site when completed in one form or another.  I think the addition of the statement to the top of each page  is a great step in a positive direction.

I again want to make it quite clear that I think the site is a good and valuable one, and speaking for myself and hopefully the others, the conversation here was much more about the "theory" of the internet and it's sites, than specifically in regards to any "negatives" regarding the RLalique site.

I must also say that I now stand corrected, and gladly so......  The site's reaction to constructive criticism seems quite open and receptive...

Thank you,

One last suggestion that may work in lieu of recreating the pages for text labeling, would be to make the text appear when the mouse hovers over each image. In place of "R Lalique Fake - Not The Work Of Rene Lalique", It could then say "Barolac 11549 - In the Forrest ca. 1950". If that text can be individualized for each inserted photo, then the need to reformat your pages to insert text would be moot. My suspicion is that it would be easier to that than to reformat your pages.  If you can do it that way, then you can simply add a note at the top of each page directing the users to hover and read about the pieces. I believe it can be done by editing image properties, of course depending on the program that is being used to manage the site.

Lastly, I again invite you to utilize this site to aid in the identification of pieces.... We are a global community with an amazing diversity of interests, and we love a good challenge. I have found that the breadth and depth of knowledge present here is quite amazing...

On a lighter note about the RLalique.com site, I am not a Lalique collector (God knows I collect a lot of other glass!!) and have never owned a piece myself (much to the dismay of my wife), but I am a fairly frequent flier at your site..... My guess is that there are many others like me...  window shoppers so to speak..... I have to admit that your site has helped to increase my knowledge of Lalique, and what is not Lalique, and I know that when the time or opportunity comes to purchase a piece the RLalique.com site will have played a role in educating me. I found your site long before I bought the books I own on the glass!!  With the vast proliferation of the internet, scenarios such as this are most likely scenarios that may not have even been initially considered!!

Thanks again, as this discourse has been quite enjoyable....

Craig