Glass Identification - Post here for all ID requests > Glass Paperweights
New Acquisitions!
KevinH:
Thanks for adding that, Ray - and for the larger views, too.
This shows another point that can confuse - at least at the detailed level. In the larger image from George N. Kulles' book the points of the star are clearly rounded in most cases, whereas in the smaller image (and depending on your own screen resolution) the canes may appear as sharply pointed.
It's the same, and even worse, in real life. A crisp-looking cane can often be seen under magnification as less well defined, and some "star canes" turn out to be "daisy canes" instead.
But leaving aside the micro side of life (from a macro lens point of view), Ray's image does show that the full cane in Kulles' book is not of the same overall structure as the one in Leni's weight. I am not saying that Ray is wrong in his thoughts. On the contrary, his investigative skills are just what are needed. But as I said before, lots of makers produced 6-point "star" canes. Although I appreciate, and often use, the Kulles' references, I find the brevity of descriptions in some cases leads to a misunderstanding.
Ray has the latest version of the Kulles' book while I have the earlier ones (dealing with millefiori and lampwork separately). But perhaps the later one also includes, under the Baccarat section, the comment about "Baccarat bundles are composed of six-point star rods". And in my version of the books, it is also stated, against a drawing of a crisply pointed 6-point star:
--- Quote ---Because the points of Bohemian stars are wide and short, their central bodies appear to be larger than those of other stars. Although usually sharply pointed, these stars occasionally have rounded points.
--- End quote ---
That's a good description and one worth bearing in mind, but it could also be just as true of other makers' 6-point stars, too.
What concerns us most with cane identification is the full complex cane, rather than the individual elements. This is just as true with my cane tables for Ysart weights as shown in my web space. The initial entries show individual "basic" canes which, on their own, do not necessarily provide a positive identification.
Leni:
Kevin, I am hoping to get to the PCC meeting in Cambridge on 11th June to hear Sybille Jargstorf, :shock: and I am wondering if it would be acceptable to bring my mystery paperweight along for her perusal :roll:
Is that sort of thing permitted? Seeing as it will be my first meeting, I'm not sure how things go and wouldn't want to comit a faux pas :oops: :roll:
Leni
KevinH:
Leni wondered, in respect of attending her first PCC meeting:
--- Quote ---if it would be acceptable to bring my mystery paperweight along
--- End quote ---
Not only would it be acceptable, it's what the club is about ... sharing information and raising questions with all sorts of weights. Even if there is not an opportunity for guest speakers to consider things, many members always enjoy the challenge of a mystery.
At my first meeting, there was an identification session with a panel of experts. I took along the item shown in http://tinypic.com/4q4d9w and it was picked as the first piece for discusssion :!: It's identity was not confirmed for sure at the meeting but after some time various members did come to an agreement. Any ideas, anyone? :P
RAY:
it looks like whitefriars, but its the other maker that begins with W :)
Leni:
--- Quote from: "RAY" ---it looks like whitefriars, but its the other maker that begins with W :)
--- End quote ---
I would have said Whitefriars, too! :? Do you mean it's a Walsh? :shock:
Leni
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version