Author Topic: Is this Caithness?  (Read 554 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Jeffingtons

  • Members
  • **
  • Posts: 75
  • Gender: Male
    • GB
Is this Caithness?
« on: September 20, 2011, 06:35:30 PM »
Took a punt on this today, guessing that the etched mark may be a seventies caithness one. Appears to say CG but has two lines in between.

Anyone able to confirm or suggest alternatives?


Offline chopin-liszt

  • Members
  • **
  • Posts: 8231
Re: Is this Caithness?
« Reply #1 on: September 20, 2011, 06:40:42 PM »
 :hi:
CG is for Caithness, the II is for a "second".
It will have a tiny, (possibly imperceptible) flaw of some sort.
Cheers, Sue (M)

“All things are subject to interpretation. Whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.” Friedrich Nietzsche


Offline Jeffingtons

  • Members
  • **
  • Posts: 75
  • Gender: Male
    • GB
Re: Is this Caithness?
« Reply #2 on: September 20, 2011, 06:47:09 PM »
That's good to know.  A tiny bubble perhaps?  Am I right about the period?


Offline tropdevin

  • Members
  • **
  • Posts: 2024
  • Gender: Male
    • Paperweights
    • England
    • My Paperweights Website
Re: Is this Caithness?
« Reply #3 on: September 20, 2011, 09:30:20 PM »
***

Sometimes the CIIG mark was put on a piece that was experimental, or had been made in training, and was then sold in the factory shop (rather than just being a sub-standard piece). So, for instance, your example might be from someone learning how to make a spatter ground. Regarding date, I think there is little to tie it down to a particular time frame (the CIIG mark was used for a long time) - but you may well be correct with 1970s.

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 chopin-liszt

  • Members
  • **
  • Posts: 8231
Re: Is this Caithness?
« Reply #4 on: September 21, 2011, 09:51:46 AM »
That's good to know - I often have a lot of trouble finding any flaw at all on "seconds". Now I know why.  :smg:
Cheers, Sue (M)

“All things are subject to interpretation. Whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.” Friedrich Nietzsche


Offline jakgene

  • Members
  • **
  • Posts: 719
  • Gender: Female
  • Mrs Doasyouwouldbedoneby
    • Mid 20 Century glass
    • Australia
Re: Is this Caithness?
« Reply #5 on: September 21, 2011, 03:50:41 PM »
I also thought they could be marked as  a second if the design did not match the artists proof exactly . I have had a Sea Gem marked as a second that was just too big - it was about 1.5 times the usual size, but otherwise fine.

JAK
jakgene
Western Australia
Mid 20 Century Glass
British Glass, Scandinavian Glass, Murano Glass,
Paperweights. (and anything gorgeous!)


Offline Frank

  • Author
  • Members
  • ***
  • Posts: 9379
  • Gender: Male
    • Glass history
    • Gateway
Re: Is this Caithness?
« Reply #6 on: September 21, 2011, 10:08:03 PM »
You should be able to ID this weight on Scotlands Glass, Glass Images section, 70s and 80s mostly complete.
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 KevinH

  • Global Moderator
  • Members
  • *
  • Posts: 4421
    • England
Re: Is this Caithness?
« Reply #7 on: September 22, 2011, 11:42:11 AM »
Yes, Caithness Glass designated weights as "seconds" for various reasons and in many cases, without a "non-second" example to compare with, it is very hard to see what the problem was. But I don't think a single small air bubble would count as a "seconds" flaw unless it somehow obscured the look of the design.

But something like an overly large intended bubble or a weak colour in part of an otherwise acceptable weight might get it marked as a "second".

I wonder if anyone has started a collecting theme of Caithness "seconds" alongside a perfect example of the same design? :)
KevinH


Offline chopin-liszt

  • Members
  • **
  • Posts: 8231
Re: Is this Caithness?
« Reply #8 on: September 22, 2011, 12:03:41 PM »
 :wsh:   :ooh:

That would require a certain.... dedication I do not posess.

My "Edinburgh Rock" is a second. It's not faceted - I assume it being a second is why. The only "flaw" is some swirling in a bit of the clear glass dome.

I also have two "free-form" chargers, supposedly limited editions of just 250, but as they're unmarked, I have assumed they're seconds. I don't know why.
Cheers, Sue (M)

“All things are subject to interpretation. Whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.” Friedrich Nietzsche


 

Search
eBay.com
eBay.co.uk

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