Glass Message Board

Glass Discussion & Research. NO IDENTIFICATION REQUESTS here please. => British & Irish Glass => Topic started by: uraniumsteve on April 21, 2010, 07:31:56 PM

Title: Davidson 279 vases query
Post by: uraniumsteve on April 21, 2010, 07:31:56 PM
Evening all

I have a pair of column vases but am unsure as to which type they are I would not say they are cloud glass or jade they seem more like etched as they are opaque in appearance. They seem to be matte both inside and out. So what to call them also on the base of one of them is D1/19ME any ideas. They are 10 inch tall please ignore the candle holder in the picture
Please share your grains of wisdom
Thanks a roonie
Title: Re: Davidson 279 vases query
Post by: dirk. on April 21, 2010, 07:51:50 PM
Hi Steve,
I´d call your vases satinised or frosted; the technique would be acid etching.
Cloud glass would be streaky, jade glass opaque. Your use of the term opaque is
a bit inapplicable as it would be used for glass, which is nontransparent while yours
despite of the finish still is translucent.
err - hope I got everything right myself.  ;)
Regards,
Dirk
Title: Re: Davidson 279 vases query
Post by: John Smith on April 21, 2010, 09:17:22 PM
Hi and yes your vases are indeed a registered Davidson pattern, however the moulds for these vases were sold on/passed on and they cannopt be attributed to any known maker, but they are most deffinately flint glass that has been then SANDBLASTED and not acid etched. Acid etching is by far a more expensive and labour intensiveb method to achieve the effect, sandblasting is both quicker and more productive.  Even to this day.  I have seen these vases in three sizes.  25cms being the tallest.  Each and every one of them from Davidson moulds/designes, but Davidson do not produce them in green and neither did they frost them.  This does not detract, for you have a fine pair!  Satin Glass they are not, but then again this does not detract. Their bases could be the give away to their place of origin and so study them closely.  If there is any indications of "unfrosted glass" to AND throughout the bases, then they are are continental. Also, they are most certainly English if the bases of your vases are not flat! In other words, if the base of the pair is flat to the ground and without an interior, then they are more probably or not German. They are however, produced from Davidon moulds. Hope that helps?   One other guideline, is to obeserve if any side moulding lines are present?  These were apparant in all of the Davidon vases of this type.  They were all polished out (in the main) even the those in cloud glass etc., and sandblasting will also discard any such moulding marks, but to less effect. Look INSIDE your vases for any moulding lines also.  For sandblasting OR glass polishing cannot disguise these! They sure look super!  Frosted 'N all!     
Title: Re: Davidson 279 vases query
Post by: Mosquito on April 21, 2010, 09:40:34 PM
but Davidson do not produce them in green and neither did they frost them.

I don't know where this information came from. Davidson produced a large quantity of green glass. This non-Uranium green is seen quite often. Davidson also produced a lot of satin glass; much of their cloud glass production was satinised/ matted on one side, though unsatinised and all-over satinised are also seen. These are very nice looking vases & it's good to have a pair.

Re. the description, I agree with Dirk & would call these green satin glass. Davidson's Jade is much deeper colour, more opaque and sometimes shows trails/ bands, almost like malachite glass. Green cloud has green trails on a clear base.

By the way, the best resource for Davidson's glass and other cloud glass in general is Chris & Val Stewart's excellent site here:
http://cloudglass.com/home.htm

Steven
Title: Re: Davidson 279 vases query
Post by: John Smith on April 21, 2010, 09:54:41 PM
I SPEAK as a glassblower myself. The Rd. Marks upon your two vases are not (as far as I am aware) recognised or doccumented as being Davidson items.  The MOULDS, however ARE Davidson, but this frosted glass was not issued by them (well, certainly not acid etched). It is, as I am sure you well agree, dififcult to attribute withiout "FEELING" the gass itself.  Patternend MOULDS are the same, but the glass used is not!  Many a firm exchanged MOULDS, but their recipe's for the glass was totally different and this can only be judged by weight/sight and feel!  Davidson they may be, but i think not! And this is not to detract from their desire!   :-) They are however, very nice!
Title: Re: Davidson 279 vases query
Post by: Mosquito on April 21, 2010, 10:20:09 PM
Uraniumsteve, how are the numbers marked on the base? It might help if you could include a photo of the mark.

The MOULDS, however ARE Davidson, but this frosted glass was not issued by them (well, certainly not acid etched).

Again, where does this information come from? I am intrigued as to why you would keep insisting on this  even though Chris Stewart's site - a carefully researched and beautifully illustrated resource - shows a wealth of Davidson's vases with matted or part matted finishes.
Title: Re: Davidson 279 vases query
Post by: John Smith on April 21, 2010, 10:39:01 PM
So sorry.  I am new to this message board, but then again and all said, i speak as a wroker with glass and that is not to distract from anybody elses knowledge.  I cannot and will not dispute Chris & Stewarts OWN knoweldge and or research and nor can I re-write history!  (smile) but going by your photos iof this particular pair of vases, they have very much indeed been produced in green glass using: Manganese Oxide, Ironstone & Brass Pin Dust which was then added to the glass crystal batch to achieve this green as shown in your pics. . . A recipe unused by Davidson.  The frosting comes secondary and is most CERTAINLY and GUARANTEED as not being "acid etched".
Title: Re: Davidson 279 vases query
Post by: Cathy B on April 21, 2010, 11:05:08 PM
Chris and Val's site refers to documentation of matt green glass being made by Davidson as early as 1922 (http://www.cloudglass.com/Davidsonbetweenwars.htm), and there are plenty of images of green, acid etched glass on their site. How can you tell the recipe for this green glass, and how do you know it wasn't used by Davidson?
Title: Re: Davidson 279 vases query
Post by: John Smith on April 21, 2010, 11:24:57 PM
Oh My Dear Steven . . .  I stick by what I say and would SWEAR by it . . .   Your vases are "probably" and perahps even  deffinately, DAVIDSON MOULDS, but the Davidson factory/works nevr made them.  I stand by my words.  Your vases are from Davidson moulds/patterns, but the glass as was used did not come from them or their factory. Do you have other Davidson glass?  If so, then compare its "FEEEEEL."    Steve, I am not trying to suggest thar your vases are lesd desirable due to "ME" knowing thay are not by Davidson!  They are, MORE desirable as being not by that factory, simply due to the metal/glass used to produce them and you are a lucky man. They are more desirable than a Davidson pair of Jade Glass items, as I am sure that lovers of such glass would agree! Hey, I am with you, in your CORNER and on your side!  I'd much rather have yours than a Davidson pair! (smile)
Title: Re: Davidson 279 vases query
Post by: Cathy B on April 21, 2010, 11:32:02 PM
Lovesglass, no offence, but if you are going to make such claims, you need to provide some sort of evidence other than feel. Chris was working from factory documentation.
Title: Re: Davidson 279 vases query
Post by: John Smith on April 22, 2010, 12:07:11 AM
Cathy, no offence taken or given.  I just say like it is, through shared and ongoing lifes experience.  "EVIDENCE!" what can i say?  I am not here to question the works of others, or their endeavours, but whatever I say I am prety sure to know to be correct with what I "DO" know.  I don't know everything. I do't know it ALL!,  but hey, am not here to give wrongful information. Am doing my best without trying to brag and shared KNOWLEDGE is priceless. etc. etc. 
Title: Re: Davidson 279 vases query
Post by: Bernard C on April 22, 2010, 05:30:15 AM
lovesglass — I am intrigued by your assertions, and would welcome more information on how they came about.   Glass is an interesting collectable as it generates a huge number of misconceptions which can be quite difficult to correct.   I will give you two examples:-

...   the state of glass knowledge when Manley wrote his book.   At that time Walsh was not considered a possible attribution for unmarked and undocumented handmade fancy glass, in the same way as Smart Bros, Molineaux Webb, and Kempton still aren't today.   ...

I wrote this rather cynical comment only recently, and it shows how the glass community still has a long way to go to achieve reality.   Click on the quote heading for the context.

The second came about at the recent Dulwich fair.   A dealer asked me if there was anything about glass we could assume.   I replied "No, nothing at all."   I then went on to explain that you cannot even assume that the glassworks were in it to make money, as, certainly at Joblings and Bagleys there was an element of fancy glass production being motivated by the requirement of keeping their mouldmakers occupied at times when they weren't needed for the production of Pyrex or bottle moulds.    The requirement to make money, or, possibly more realistically, not to lose too much money, may have been secondary.

As a dealer, I've probably handled more Davidson glass than most on this message board, probably something like 500 items.   I started before Chris Stewart showed any interest and initially I had to work it out as I went along with the help of some original Davidson documentation.  Our knowledge has improved dramatically since then.

A large proportion of Davidson glass is frosted — and much of this is cloud glass, which is part-frosted, usually on the inside.   If you look at the boundary between the frosted and unfrosted parts, you will see that it is always quite sharp, a definitive characteristic of acid-matting, as the glass was either matted where it was exposed or not matted where the wax resist was applied.   In contrast sandblasting gives you a soft boundary line as very little of the sand gets right up to the edge of the resist.   You can also tell the two techniques apart by feel.   Acid-matting gives you a soft, silky surface, whereas fine sandblasting gives you a good grip with no silkiness, quite different.

Steve's two 10" 279s are standard Davidson items without any doubt whatsoever.   

Quote from: Davidson's 1936 price list giving wholesale ex-factory gate prices
VASES
No. 279 10" — Amber and Emerald / Matt or Matt Polished Per Dozen 27/-

Finally I would be happier if you used Davidson terminology.   The three sizes were 6", 8", and 10" whether 279s or 279Ds (with the rim turned over), whatever their actual measurements.   Davidson never used metric measures in their British Empire and American literature.   Unfortunately some museum-trained professionals who should know better use metric measures in these circumstances and can come up with statements as ludicrous as "Telford had milestones placed at intervals of 1,609 metres along all his turnpikes."

Bernard C.  8) 
Title: Re: Davidson 279 vases query
Post by: uraniumsteve on April 22, 2010, 08:54:14 AM
WOW! what a debate whilst I was sleeping. This is very exiting I will try to offer more information

They do not have flat bottoms
They weigh (just for you Bernard) 2Lbs 13 oz  Thats just under 1.3k to those of you who don't remember metric
The mark on the underside is hand written it looks like pencil I tried to wash it off as it appears to be on the outside but it isnt. The vase with the mark is partially smooth ie not sand blasted I assume to be able to read the mark. I cannot post a picture as my camera is not good enough.
They have moulding lines I can feel them but only just, funnily enough more so on the outside
Title: Re: Davidson 279 vases query
Post by: Mosquito on April 22, 2010, 11:32:12 AM
I've seen pencil marks before on Davidson, they could have been added at any time and are not necessarily factory marks. For example, I have a pink chevron vase (partially acid matted by the way) which has 3/6 written on the base in pencil which I guess is the original price, probably added by the retailer. These marks don't tend to wash off easily if they're on a frosted surface - certainly I noticed the mark on my vase only when I was drying the piece!


They have moulding lines I can feel them but only just, funnily enough more so on the outside


This is quite usual, in fact, I can see no reason why a piece of pressed glass would have mould lines on the inside. Plungers for vases are typically solid, made from one piece. Mould seams occur at the joins between the sections of the metal moulds and are therefore on the outside surface of a piece. Of course, there may be other marks on the interior of a pressed vase, such as the shear mark, but these give no real clue as to the vase's origin.

Whilst there's been an interesting discussion regarding these vases, I have no doubt that these are Davidson. This is based not only on Bernard's observations and the excellent research conducted by Chris Stewart but also on my years handling Davidson glass, as well as pressed glass from a wealth of other makers.

While Lovesglass obviously has an enthusiasm for the subject, I have yet to be convinced by his argument that these are not Davidson production. The fact that they are a known and well doumented Davidson pattern and are in a typical Davidson colour and finish means the only reasonable conclusion at this stage is that they are most likely Davidson vases. Now, if lovesglass were to produce say a catalogue or advertisement from another maker also showing this pattern, then we might have cause to question the attribution, but as this is not the case & Lovesglass hasn't yet backed up his claim that this is not a Davidson colour with any form of verifiable evidence, then I wouldn't have any problem describing these as Davidson.

Steven

Title: Re: Davidson 279 vases query
Post by: Lustrousstone on April 22, 2010, 11:36:16 AM
There is no debate. These are without doubt Davidson vases and satinised by either acid treatment or sand-blasting (only handling would tell).

For the mark to be on the inside, it would appear reversed on the outside. It sounds like a pencil stock mark, and if it is on satinised glass will require vigorous scrubbing for removal. Take the best picture you can of the base for us to have a look at. If your camera has no macro, stand at the minimum focusing distance and zoom in for as far as it stays in focus.

In pressed glass, like these vases, mould lines are most identifiable on the outside because the smooth plunger smooths them out on the inside. They occur because the outer mould has to split so the glass can be got out. How easily mould seams are felt or seen depends on the quality of the finishing process and how worn the mould is.
Title: Re: Davidson 279 vases query
Post by: Bernard C on April 22, 2010, 12:17:44 PM
Please never try to remove pencil marks unless they are seriously obtrusive.   They can tell us original retail prices, about which we know almost nothing as in Steven's example, or, as Christine says, they could be stock numbers which might identify the wholesaler or retailer.

Lovesglass — I've had a flash of inspiration!   Sowerbys did not resume acid-matting of their fancy glass upon restarting production after WWII.   Could your source be getting these two big Gateshead factories confused?

Bernard C.  8)
Title: Re: Davidson 279 vases query
Post by: Lustrousstone on April 22, 2010, 12:42:32 PM
Sowerby did use sandblasting on some of their post-war production
Title: Re: Davidson 279 vases query
Post by: uraniumsteve on April 24, 2010, 08:32:13 AM
 Wahey! I managed to get the macro on my camera working again. So here is a picture of the base although it is still not brilliant
Title: Re: Davidson 279 vases query
Post by: Adam on April 26, 2010, 10:32:06 AM
Sowerbys pre-WW2 did some acid work but I don't know any details.  Post-war they did no acid work, at least until 1956 when I left.  Quite a lot of sand-blasting was done in the same period.

At Davidsons, when I was there (1956-61) a great deal of acid work was done (the River Team was heavily polluted with our effluent as well as everyone else's!) but no sandblasting at all.

Adam D.
Title: Re: Davidson 279 vases query
Post by: chopin-liszt on April 27, 2010, 12:41:51 PM
Lovesglass - you say you are a glassmaker/blower yourself  :hiclp:

- would you be so kind as to show us some of your work - obviously in a new thread - we'd love to see it.