Author Topic: Monart Glass formula ??  (Read 5143 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Gary

  • Members
  • **
  • Posts: 574
  • Gender: Male
Re: Monart Glass formula ??
« Reply #50 on: October 09, 2011, 03:08:19 PM »
"i note that the four vases with the labels on them all have the same size code do we know if they match up to the vases  actual size codes on the ysart glass site for the actual size of each individual vase" quote from Millarart.
I looked through the Monart catalogues on the Ysart Glass web site and the Ysart Glass book.
The N shape has no size code X1, the nearest is X and that is 5 inches tall
The SA shape has a size code X1 and is 3 inches tall.
The GC shape has no size code X1 in the original Monart catalogue, the nearest size code is V11 and is 6 3/4 inches tall. In the Ysart Glass web site the GC shape has a size code X1 and is 3 inches tall.
The MF shape has no size code X1 in the original Monart catalogue, the nearest is V11 and is 8 1/2 inches tall.In the Ysart Glass web site the  smallest MF shape is 8 inches.
Gary


Offline Gary

  • Members
  • **
  • Posts: 574
  • Gender: Male
Re: Monart Glass formula ??
« Reply #51 on: October 09, 2011, 05:17:44 PM »
Just seen this on eBay, this is one of the lots from the auction. This one also has the odd coding sequence and has the same size code as the others ie X1.
The ZK shape has no size code X1, the nearest is 1X and that is 5 inches in diameter.
This ZK shape for sale is 5 inches in diameter.
http://www.ebay.co.uk/sch/i.html?LH_Auction=1&_nkw=monart&_dmpt=UK_Art_Glass
Gary


Offline Frank

  • Author
  • Members
  • ***
  • Posts: 9197
  • Gender: Male
    • Glass history
    • Gateway
Re: Monart Glass formula ??
« Reply #52 on: October 09, 2011, 05:57:15 PM »
Weird describes it as 'Rare'  :D lowering the tone of the sale, but neglects the interesting provenance that would enhance saleability.
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 millarart

  • Members
  • **
  • Posts: 564
Re: Monart Glass formula ??
« Reply #53 on: October 11, 2011, 04:01:57 PM »
catalogues and the FORMULA arrived today, after giving the formula a good examanation i decided the only way to find out if it was Monarts most kept secret was to give it a try, so after converting my 8x6 garden shed into a clone of Moncrieff works, after following the formula to the last grain of sand i was ready to proceed, i couldnt wait to see the outcome , after hours upon hours working in sweltering heat and picking a shape of a piece i already had in my collection to make it easier for me, the end result just minutes away, the truth about to be revealed, was it the Monart formula or wasnt it, finally the cooling down period was over , the end result is below, so  is it monarts formula you decide . :24: personaly i think it looks more monart than pyrex


Offline Frank

  • Author
  • Members
  • ***
  • Posts: 9197
  • Gender: Male
    • Glass history
    • Gateway
Re: Monart Glass formula ??
« Reply #54 on: October 11, 2011, 06:52:05 PM »
I have a suitable photo of the formula, so when I find my Moncrieff archive  :huh: so far found a dozen crates of glass catalogues and have not noticed it yet. But the box mountain has to be moved so I can line the roof and keep damp out a bit more! Luckily nothing appears to have suffered in 3 years of storage. Apart from me of course.

Quite remarkable what you can achieve in your little garden shed Gary, but I find your finished product unconvincing. Monart has dark colour at the top with shiny bits. Let me guess on the label XXX.GM.666
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 millarart

  • Members
  • **
  • Posts: 564
Re: Monart Glass formula ??
« Reply #55 on: October 11, 2011, 07:35:29 PM »
uncanny Frank how you guessed the code, the making the glass to the formula was the easy part, its making the label so that the print doent come off when you rub it with your finger, if only theyd wrote down the label formula, mmmmm you never know it might be the next thing to be discovered ,


Offline Gary

  • Members
  • **
  • Posts: 574
  • Gender: Male
Re: Monart Glass formula ??
« Reply #56 on: January 03, 2012, 02:11:54 PM »
One more Monart piece has turned up on ebay with the wrong coding sequence(31:Y:X11), plus the colour code(31) is wrong. Colour code 31 is surfaced decorated polycrhome,the correct colour code for this pin dish is 158.
This piece is from the same vendor who sold the other Monart pieces with suspect labels discussed in this thread.
Gary
http://www.ebay.co.uk/sch/i.html?LH_Auction=1&_nkw=monart&_dmpt=UK_Art_Glass&_ipg=&_trksid=p3286.c0.m283&_rdc=1
http://www.ysartglass.com/Moncat/Colours099.htm


Offline Frank

  • Author
  • Members
  • ***
  • Posts: 9197
  • Gender: Male
    • Glass history
    • Gateway
Re: Monart Glass formula ??
« Reply #57 on: January 03, 2012, 04:38:27 PM »
With a flat base and pristine label there must be zero wear on base as the label would stop the glass from contacting surface.
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 RAY

  • Members
  • **
  • Posts: 988
Re: Monart Glass formula ??
« Reply #58 on: January 04, 2012, 09:30:10 PM »
look at the IEA paperweight they have for sale,  not a single wear mark on the monart label from the pontil mark ,
cheers Ray


Offline KevinH

  • Global Moderator
  • Members
  • *
  • Posts: 4324
    • England
Re: Monart Glass formula ??
« Reply #59 on: January 04, 2012, 11:06:51 PM »
Ray, the IEA weights (at least, those with a blue ground) had a smooth polished base ... hence no pontil mark to cause any wear mark on the label.

Edited to say ... Doh! That's incorrect. They had a small round pontil scar which was (usually) in an indentation. Therefore the pontil mark causes no wear other than an impression of the edge of the mark - which is what can be seen on the one referred to.
KevinH

 

Search
eBay.com
eBay.co.uk

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