No-one likes general adverts, and ours hadn't been updated for ages, so we're having a clear-out and a change round to make the new ones useful to you. These new adverts bring in a small amount to help pay for the board and keep it free for you to use, so please do use them whenever you can, Let our links help you find great books on glass or a new piece for your collection. Thank you for supporting the Board.

Author Topic: Murano attribution Opalescence ??  (Read 3975 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline langhaugh

  • Members
  • **
  • Posts: 2017
  • Gender: Male
    • My albums
Re: Murano attribution Opalescence ??
« Reply #10 on: March 07, 2009, 09:08:09 PM »
Shannon, I think you're most likely right about he original ashtray being Murano. You're reference to polveri reinforced my conclusion that I'm confused about sfumato. Mentioning polveri reminded me that polveri is Italian for particle, a term that was crucial to my definition of sfumato. So  I've just spent a few minutes looking through my Murano books and resources for definitions of polvreri and sfumato. I could only found three definitions of sfumato, all from Pina, and none of polveri. That included looking at the definitions provided on the Losch  and the Barovier and Toso sites, both of which are fairly inclusive. To me, this suggests that the techniques are not very important to the top level of Murano glass. It also means that my understanding is operational rather than definitional, that is, Ive seen pieces called sfumato and polveri and recognize them as such, but I couldn't define each term, nor describe the technique used to create the effect. 

My take is that both polveri and sfumato involve some gradual change from one colour or shade to another. Your definition seems to rely more on the veil mentioned by Pina, which as you suggest, could consist of a layer of fine bubbles. Would this mean that every pulegoso piece with colour in it is also sfumato?

Interesting where even fairly mundane pieces can take us. Or is just me?

David
My glass collection is at https://picasaweb.google.com/lasilove

Offline TxSilver

  • Members
  • **
  • Posts: 2808
  • Gender: Female
    • San Marcos Art Glass
Re: Murano attribution Opalescence ??
« Reply #11 on: March 07, 2009, 09:24:20 PM »
If I understand right, A. Seguso's polveri pieces are sfumato. In this case the color powders (polveri) are overlaid with gold so that the three blend together (sfumato).
Anita
San Marcos Art Glass
Visit the Murano Zoo
http://sites.google.com/site/muranozoo/

Offline KevinH

  • Global Moderator
  • Members
  • *
  • Posts: 6545
    • England
Re: Murano attribution Opalescence ??
« Reply #12 on: March 08, 2009, 02:50:42 PM »
Quote
I can see the big bubbles in the ashtray, but am I failing to see smaller ones?
Quote
I don't see the sfumato in this ashtray either, David.
Quote
I think what appears to be light opalescence as actually a thin veil of super tiny bubbles.

I know nothing about this subject but I can confirm that when the image from the first url posted by Vinatge Treasures is enlarged to 400% it becomes clear that the light-coloured, "smokey" or "opalescent-type" part of the ashtray does seem to have a mass of fine bubbles. This is seen most clearly in the lower right section of the image between the orange and green and is very apparent where the "grey" part overlaps the green in the photo.

Does that help?
KevinH

 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk
Visit the Glass Encyclopedia
link to glass encyclopedia
Visit the Online Glass Museum
link to glass museum


This website is provided by Angela Bowey, PO Box 113, Paihia 0247, New Zealand