Author Topic: Lizard weight  (Read 5094 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Anne

  • GMB Tech Support Manager & "Board (never bored) Dame"
  • Global Moderator
  • Members
  • *
  • Posts: 11173
  • Gender: Female
  • I has a stick to poke the server with yes!
    • Glass trinket sets
    • Cumbria England
    • ALAVNA Vintage & Collectable Glass
Re: Lizard weight
« Reply #20 on: May 22, 2007, 11:04:02 PM »
Pukeberg and Lindshammar vikings and unidentified troll David:
http://www.glassmessages.com/index.php/topic,5889.msg81435/topicseen.html#msg81435
Not sure he'd be much of a paperweight though.  ;)


Offline karelm

  • Members
  • **
  • Posts: 278
  • Gender: Male
Re: Lizard weight
« Reply #21 on: May 23, 2007, 03:21:16 PM »
Hi,
I've also seen the penguins but they dont seem so nice, the crab that was on ebay (sorry cant find the link now) recently was also a nice weight.
I believe that in time these MAY become the collectables of the future, if one only looks at the reference books many of them are starting to list the older chinese weights and their prices are starting to go up already.
Kind regards
Karel
"Holy cows make the best steaks"


Offline Ivo

  • Author
  • Members
  • ***
  • Posts: 7356
  • Gender: Male
    • old website
Re: Lizard weight
« Reply #22 on: May 23, 2007, 04:20:49 PM »
Did anyone say TROLL?


http://glassgallery.yobunny.org.uk/displayimage.php?pos=-7168

This one is by Hadeland and will actually hold a pile of papers down.

You see, trolls and paperweights do mix after all....
Ivo
► BLUE HENRY ◄
 New Book: The Almost Forgotten Story of the Blue Glass Sputum Flask

all texts and pictures (c) Ivo Haanstra.


Offline josordoni

  • Members
  • **
  • Posts: 1670
  • Gender: Female
  • Location: Swinging London
    • Josordoni Collectables
Re: Lizard weight
« Reply #23 on: May 23, 2007, 04:28:47 PM »
that's not a troll, that's a wol...

in the Winnie the Pooh sense, of course....



Offline tropdevin

  • Members
  • **
  • Posts: 1954
  • Gender: Male
    • Paperweights
    • England
    • My Paperweights Website
Re: Lizard weight
« Reply #24 on: May 23, 2007, 09:05:28 PM »

I think this is one of the most outrageously inaccurate statements I've seen in a long, long time. Are you actually writing that Caithness bought Chinese weights and, what..., signed them as their own? Rubbish. Utter rubbish.

And to even compare Paul Ysart (or Caithness for that matter) with the China output that's seen everywhere is also absurd. Ysart is one of the great ones. And the Caithness glass people did darn well themselves.

Let's examine what aspect of my post was 'utter rubbish'.

I did not say Caithness bought Chinese weights and signed them as their own.  Caithness made some very high quality signed lampwork weights, and - in my view - rather too many horrid swirls and bubbles, which they also signed. But I have seen for sale some horrid swirl and bubble weights (in significant numbers, in commercial outlets) which have ground, slightly irregular bases, and carry a paper 'Caithness Glass' sticker. Not 'Handmade in Scotland' etched on the base, or even on a sticker.  Where were they from? Not Scotland, I fear.

As for copying the Chinese, I was thinking off the appalling 'Glass Zoo' items like Boing the Bird, Trumpet the Elephant, and similar cheap trashy trinkets. China and Murano had been producing such items for years - why did Caithness copy them? Please don't claim they are original and wonderful designs from a team of craftsmen...

Ysart is a great what?

Teacher - undoubtedly. His students' and apprentices' lampwork is often indistinguishable from his own.

Man who ploughed the lonely paperweight furrow when few others were interested? Yes - but don't forget that Walsh Walsh were making paperweights throughout the period that Paul was learning, right up to 1950. Then Whitefriars joined the game. Then came Jokelson to 'lead the revival' (I think fan the flames would be the best description).

Failure when it comes to learning how to match glass and anneal it? Yes. Have you ever seen from any other maker such a high proportion of weights that have cracked since manufacture? I very much doubt it.

Let's keep things in perspective.  Caithness have made, and continue to make, some superb weights. But they have marketed far too much rubbish - hence they went down the pan in their previous incarnation.  Paul Ysart was a very competent maker who pursued a private interest (paperweights) with little or no managerial support for much of his career - that takes some doing, and deserves a lot of credit.  He made some very attractive weights. But he also had his failings: in some people's view, including mine, poor colour sense - too many muddy or garish products. And serious technical failings with his glass during or after annealing, leading to cracked weights, often years down the line.

Alan
Alan
The comments in this posting reflect the opinion of the author, Alan Thornton, and not that of the owners, administrators or moderators of this board. Comments are copyright Alan Thornton. Please feel free to contact me direct if you do not agree with my comments and do not wish to make your concerns known by posting in this thread.
 http://www.pwts.co.uk


Offline glasstrufflehunter

  • Members
  • **
  • Posts: 583
    • My Yahoo 360 page & Paperweight Blog
Re: Lizard weight
« Reply #25 on: May 23, 2007, 10:42:44 PM »
I collected Glass Eye for years and after a while they all started looking alike to me -various configurations of bubbles, spatters and swirls and latterly dichroic glass thrown in. Caithness did not appeal to me because it cost four times as much and was basically the same thing. I do like Caithness's lampwork and millefiori. I have one so far (shamrock with mille garland) and am looking for others. They're pretty uncommon compared to the swirl and bubble weights.

Lately, I have seen a very nice lampwork weight by Glass Eye.



I collect Scottish and Italian paperweights and anything else that strikes my fancy.

My Paperweight Blog


Offline RAINBOWGIRL

  • Members
  • **
  • Posts: 36
Re: Lizard weight
« Reply #26 on: May 24, 2007, 12:43:24 PM »
To Tropdevin: You defiintely rote this: "I believe that Caithness decided to buy in the low end weights from China towards the end, rather than copy them."

So, I gather you is sentence? It's a serious slam at Caithnes and you imply that Caithnes bought weights from Chine.

Now, you're writing that it didn't? Chinais weights are not the gretest, and to smear Caithnes with this sillness is ofensive to all the men and women who worked there and who continue to work there under Dartintown.

As for your rip at Ysort. Give me a beak. In the 1950s, the man - Paul Ysurt - along with Chss Kazien, Jr. in the U.S., and the early experiments from Bacarat and Saint Lewis in French, helped bring about the paperwaight renaysance that we continue to enjoy today.

And you have a wesite that sells paperwaights? Unbevable.

As four Glass Eye Studio, you can view it output at: www.glasseye.com

 


Offline tropdevin

  • Members
  • **
  • Posts: 1954
  • Gender: Male
    • Paperweights
    • England
    • My Paperweights Website
Re: Lizard weight
« Reply #27 on: May 24, 2007, 01:04:19 PM »
To RAINBOWGIRL

I am not backtracking - I never said that Caithness bought weights from China, and signed them. I said - and I am happy to re-iterate - that "I believe that Caithness decided to buy in low end weights from China towards the end, rather than copy them". I did not say or imply they appeared with 'Handmade in Scotland' engraved on the base.  But I do think that weights appeared in commercial outlets, as I said above, with 'Caithness Glass' stickers on the base.  That does not take anything away from the skilled craftsmen and women at Caithness - rather the reverse, I would say.

Regarding the paperweight renaissance, who produced the first dated paperweight in the 1950s?  Not one of the companies you name, but Whitefriars, in 1951.  That was a couple of years before the French factories got back in the act, inspired by Jokelson.  I don't think any single person - maker, dealer, entrepreneur - led the revival.  A whole range of people spotted an opportunity and managed to exploit it quite successfully.

Regarding Paul Ysart - are you claiming that the quality of the glass in his earlier work is as good as other makers? The evidence is to the contrary. And I stand by my comments.

Sorry if inconvenient facts get in the way of cherished beliefs.......

Alan
Alan
The comments in this posting reflect the opinion of the author, Alan Thornton, and not that of the owners, administrators or moderators of this board. Comments are copyright Alan Thornton. Please feel free to contact me direct if you do not agree with my comments and do not wish to make your concerns known by posting in this thread.
 http://www.pwts.co.uk


Offline karelm

  • Members
  • **
  • Posts: 278
  • Gender: Male
Re: Lizard weight
« Reply #28 on: May 24, 2007, 02:44:44 PM »
Hi,
As a matter of intrest how common are Caithness stickers.  I believe it is general knowledge that Murano stickers are not that hard to come by, (I have actually had a shop here (Vienna) offer to stick one on a weight that the assistant said he "thinks it is from Murano").  So was there a similar situation with Caithness stickers?
Also I personally have no problem if Caithness had bought in cheap weights (Chinese or other) and labeld them.  It is a sound business practice that is followed in the electronics market as well as in several other markets. 
Also it makes business sense to have lower end and higher end products to saturate your market.  If you buy the cheapest BMW you are sure as hell not getting a product that is remotely the same as the most expensive BMW.
Therefore if they did do this it makes business sense, it is up to the buyer to determine if what s/he is buying is the quality that they want for the price that they are prepared to pay.
Kind regards,
Karel
"Holy cows make the best steaks"


Offline Frank

  • Author
  • Members
  • ***
  • Posts: 9199
  • Gender: Male
    • Glass history
    • Gateway
Re: Lizard weight
« Reply #29 on: May 24, 2007, 03:40:48 PM »
Stickers are gummed and printed paper labels. The simpler the sticker the easier to reproduce with embossed and special shaped labels being harder to reproduce but not impossible. Labels made before, say arbitrarily, 1950 will be harder to reproduce due to the paper ands printing methods used, by the 1980's many were being made with plasticised materials that are easy to distinguish from older types.

But as with signatures, labels are easily added and are just another indicator of provenance. Ultimately you need a match on design, materials, manufacturing methods including finishing, in addition to labels and signatures. Most of the problems are encountered with the gift trade articles and it has been common practise since the souvenir trade began to produce these at the lowest possible price. I was always amused as a child to read the "Made in Hong Kong" or "Foreign" on the seaside souvenirs of Southend-On-Sea. Nothings changed but some still find it hard to accept.

Paul Ysart's earlier production of paperweights were made in difficult circumstances because of the intolerance of Salvador Ysart who regarded them as a complete waste of time, an attitude unchanged at Vasart. They did however have a good market, via Pirelli Glass, for these 'gift trade' baubles, the women could assemble the canes and the men could finish them off quickly resulting in very cheap items for resale... allowing the production of the important non-weight production to continue. No real art involved, yet some very attractive weights were also being made, no doubt because they did produce valuable cashflow. The abstract weights that were made at Strathearn and Caithness, Selkirk etc were also targetting the gift trade - being much easier and cheaper to make than millefiori. It is arbitrary who made the lampwork in PY weights as the concept of 'designer' weights did not really exist everything was the output of a chair  - arguably until the 1990's when designers were being acknowledged in Caithness catalogues.

In 1989 John Deacons wrote "The few better quality weights I make are for collectors who phone or visit me. My main market is in the cheaper millefiori paperweights which I make in quantity. The workshop which I operate at present gives me a reasonable income producing paperweights which do not give production problems. I intend to continue this type of operation, gradually improving equipment etc. and perhaps producing a few more ‘specials’." http://www.ysartglass.com/Ysartnews/YsartnewsSpecial.htm#Deacons In 2007, his studio is now one of the most important in Scotland, and longest surviving!

Memories are short and for those collecting paperweights in the last ten years would do well to look at the past history of collecting. Note also how the calibre of information has improved, often well referenced and approaching academic standards, although some still write with no acknowledgements to their sources they are more likely to be ignored.

In the 1980's Paul Ysart weights were nearly all in the USA and most of his unsigned pieces unrecognised or assumed to be antique (Bergstom collection). All 1848 weights were Whitefriars, now none are. It was collector groups in the USA, Germany and UK that started to change the culture and knowledge base through the 1970's and 1980's. As each area has been more extensively researched so more unrecognised weights are known as such and the process of ferreting out who made them continues. The growth of the Chinese gift trade weights has raised hackles but it has also started to fill in another area of unknown. A never ending process. Now we know Murano stickers are available in Vienna too ::)
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

 

Search
eBay.com
eBay.co.uk

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