Glass Message Board
Glass Identification - Post here for all ID requests => Glass => Topic started by: josordoni on July 05, 2007, 01:38:01 PM
-
I have this little dish - rather like the Whitefriars Lotus, but I think they are all round tops and this has a wavy rim, and anyway, I think it is too small... only 5.5 ins 140 mm across the widest point.
So, if it isn't WF, anyone any ideas of who it is? It has a clean Scandi look to it, but that can be deceiving... :-\
dish
http://glassgallery.yobunny.org.uk/displayimage.php?pos=-7774
base
http://glassgallery.yobunny.org.uk/displayimage.php?pos=-7773
Thanks!
-
Lynne this looks OK to be WF to me - have a look at the 1964+ catalogues - pattern numbers 9516 and 9517 - I think yours is possibly the 9517 .... I have several of these in ruby and kingfisher blue and yours looks fine shapewise to me - not sure what colour it is though, I'm not very good at distinguishing between the greys and pale blues.
-
Lynne this looks OK to be WF to me - have a look at the 1964+ catalogues - pattern numbers 9516 and 9571 - I think yours is possibly the 9571 .... I have several of these in ruby and kingfisher blue and yours looks fine shapewise to me - not sure what colour it is though, I'm not very good at distinguishing between the greys and pale blues.
Thanks Pip! Off to have a look.... oh and it's a sort of pale bluey grey... ;D ;D ;D
-
Lynne I've just altered my post to read 9517 (sorry I transposed the 1 and the 7)...
-
Thanks! and I've modified mine because I forgot to say thanks..... :-[
-
As you probably know by now Lynne the 9517 appears in the 1964 and 66 catalogues but only in ruby, kingfisher blue and green - encased in clear - how does it compare to yours sizewise? I wonder if WF produced these in a different colour under a different pattern number later? Hopefully the WF oracle Emmi will be along to say yea or nay.
DOH! I've just seen that you say yours is 5.5in across - well that's spot on for size Lynne.
-
Ah, the moot point here would seem to be the casing. This is not cased, seems to be all one shade of grey blue - I have a feeling that most of the WF pieces would be cased.
As you say, Emmi is bound to come over to play at some time... and she's ever so good on colours too.8)
-
Ah, the moot point here would seem to be the casing. This is not cased, seems to be all one shade of grey blue - I have a feeling that most of the WF pieces would be cased.
As you say, Emmi is bound to come over to play at some time... and she's ever so good on colours too.8)
Not so about the casing Lynne - I've had plenty of uncased WF especially it seems in these paler colours.
-
Ah, right. So it goes on the unknown shelf for a bit then, until we get some more input.
-
Or you could bung it on the WF Is It in the meantime?
-
Good idea, I'll do that. Thanks for reminding me! I'm a bear of little brain today I think...... :-[
-
Hi there, I agree the shape looks okay for 9517 (1963-1966). I can't find any reference to them being made in Arctic Blue but that looks like the colour and it was used until 1970, just not for that bowl...
But things are known to turn up in odd colours :-\
-
This shape appears from 1960 which coincidentally was the year that Arctic Blue appeared. Unfortunately the catalogue does not clearly show the colours in which it was produced, so can't definitely confirm, but let's put it this way, it is certainly possible. Emmi
-
I don't think I have seen Arctic Blue in the flesh Emmi, is this grey/blue sort of in the right ball park?
-
Yes........why else would I have mentioned it LOL!!!! here's an Arctic Blue beak vase
http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e57/emmismith/9556ArcticBeak.jpg
It is certainly the closed colour to your bowl. emmi
-
Yes........why else would I have mentioned it LOL!!!! here's an Arctic Blue beak vase
http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e57/emmismith/9556ArcticBeak.jpg
It is certainly the closed colour to your bowl. emmi
DOH! Well, yes, I suppose when you put it like that..... ::) ;D ::)
Thanks very much!