Glass Message Board

Glass Discussion & Research. NO IDENTIFICATION REQUESTS here please. => Scandinavian Glass => Topic started by: rocco on July 01, 2012, 03:33:03 PM

Title: Heavy optically ribbed vase, colourless glass, marked "Orrefors"
Post by: rocco on July 01, 2012, 03:33:03 PM
Can anybody help with designer and age of this Orrefors vase?
20 cm high, internal horizontal plus vertical ribbing, slightly ruffled rim, marked "Orrefors" without any further numbering.
Loads of wear all over...

I found several pieces on our board with a similar mark lacking the usual code, one "Stella Polaris" I think, and another item which was identified as being from the 1940s.

Thanks!
Michael
Title: Re: Heavy optically ribbed vase, colourless glass, marked "Orrefors"
Post by: kisslikeether on July 01, 2012, 08:05:11 PM
I have a large Optical piece similar to this by Lindstrand dated 1930
Title: Re: Heavy optically ribbed vase, colourless glass, marked "Orrefors"
Post by: langhaugh on July 02, 2012, 12:45:43 AM
kisslikeether,

Did the the Lindstrand piece have a number on it?

Lindstrand did do similar pieces in the 30's but not with a foot like this. It reminds me most of Hald's Granada from 1940. The size is right although I haven't seen a good enough picture of the Granada to say with any certainty.  You're straying quite far from Skrdlovice, Mcihael.

David
Title: Re: Heavy optically ribbed vase, colourless glass, marked "Orrefors"
Post by: kisslikeether on July 02, 2012, 06:53:01 AM
David

Yes my piece is numbered LU108 it also has the blue colour cast Lindstrand used often as well as an applied disc base.

I just threw Lindstrand into the mix as a possibility.
Title: Re: Heavy optically ribbed vase, colourless glass, marked "Orrefors"
Post by: rocco on July 02, 2012, 08:57:34 AM
Thanks a lot for your thoughts!

There were several pieces with a similar mark on the board:
>> "Stella Polaris" variation 1 (http://www.glassmessages.com/index.php/topic,43201.0.html)
>> "Stella Polaris" variation 2 (http://www.glassmessages.com/index.php/topic,47148.0.html)
>> Edvin Öhrström from the 1940s (http://www.glassmessages.com/index.php/topic,38257.0.html)
>> Edvin Öhrström 1945/46 (http://www.glassmessages.com/index.php/topic,5977.0.html)

To me it seems that for a period in the 1940s this Orrefors mark without numbering was used...

@David: a few hundred kilometres north of Skrdlovice, I know ;D
But it was a birthday present, so I am quite happy.

Michael
Title: Re: Heavy optically ribbed vase, colourless glass, marked "Orrefors"
Post by: langhaugh on July 03, 2012, 12:12:15 AM
Thanks for the number, kisslikeether. That was the piece I was think of, too, and Lindstrand is a great place to start looking.  The 'Granada' piece by Hald is a closer match, but I can't find a good enough photograph. The code for 'Granada' is HU 2221/3.

Michael, yes, I'd be very happy to get this piece in a present, or in any circumstances. After, all, a man cannot live with Skrdlovice alone.

David
Title: Re: Heavy optically ribbed vase, colourless glass, marked "Orrefors"
Post by: rocco on July 03, 2012, 05:16:13 PM
After, all, a man cannot live with Skrdlovice alone.

How true -- not even the most passionate Czech glass collector could :)

So my vase is possibly a Lindstrand or Hald design from pre WWII...?
I will keep that in my mind, maybe another one with a more revealing mark will appear.

Thanks a lot,
Michael
Title: Re: Heavy optically ribbed vase, colourless glass, marked "Orrefors"
Post by: Bill G on July 05, 2012, 03:04:20 PM
Hello

I understand the Orrefors Glass Works had individual workers sign the glass.

It is my feeling this piece is a second with someone trying to sign Orrefors. This is not historically
the way Linstrand glass is signed and other Orrefors glass.

One man's opinion.

Best Bill Geary
Title: Re: Heavy optically ribbed vase, colourless glass, marked "Orrefors"
Post by: rocco on July 05, 2012, 03:34:57 PM
Bill, thanks a lot for your contribution, very much appreciated!

I understand that Orrefors glass should not be signed like this, and you may well be right that it is a second; but is there an explanation why just a quick search here on the board came up with 4 identically signed pieces? (which suggests that there must be many, many more around...)

Michael