Topic: curious condition of U. toilet water bottle.

[Anik R]

Streuth, wish I'd never bought the thing - think I will bury it in the ground.

Paul, I think the 'curious condition' of the bottle makes it all the more intersting and worth hanging on to...  It would be a shame to unlove it just because it's a little different.  :spls:

[Ivo]

I'm sure this is not crizzled, which is an internal condition only apparent when the sun shines. This is more a case of burst bubbles - tiny inclusions exposed to air when they were panel cut. It could be a glass condition (gas) or a contamination (refractory material) - but it is interesting enough to hang on to.

[Paul S.]

sorry - just being a bit flippant   Don't think I could grow to love it exactly, but will certainly put it away into a box and keep it somewhere   -  then take it out when I am old/older and go all nostalgic.    Anik.......come up and see me some time, and you may have it
To quote Ivo......."I'm sure this is not crizzled, which is an internal condition only apparent when the sun shines. This is more a case of burst bubbles - tiny inclusions exposed to air when they were panel cut".
Can only say Ivo, that this 'condition' is very apparent without any need for the sunshine, and gives an appearance of being semi-opaque(?)  -  and do you really mean 'panel cut'  -  I had assumed this was mould blown glass??
However, as I said, these were only my amateur thoughts.

[Anik R]

Anik.......come up and see me some time, and you may have it

I'll be taking the next bus...   

[Max]

I wouldn't say it's crizzling either, but unless you're actually holding the item, it could look like that in photos. I do find it very intriguing that both our bottles have exactly the same defect...and you mention another one in the Big Book of Vaseline Glass Paul?  Does that look exactly the same?

[chopin-liszt]

I always take "crizzling" to mean a network of cracks, not this pitting of the surface.
I may be biased,  :24:  but crizzle is the name used for the cracks deliberately produced on the surface of a hot gather by plunging it into cold water, a technique used at Mdina. The surface was further treated with silver chloride being introduced into the cracks, then recased and blown again.

As is most beautifully demonstrated in John's recent thread, showing his "Crizzle Stone".

http://www.glassmessages.com/index.php/topic,34239.0.html

The surface of this uranium glass bottle looks decidedly pitted to me.

[Cathy B]

For a while I had a uranium piece which had some random areas of this sort of surface. On other parts, it had water damage and was also badly chipped. It looked like it had been buried in a dump and unearthed.

[Lustrousstone]

No the Skelcher one is fine; it just has normal damage. Crizzling came before Mdina Sue; it was what George Ravenscroft's glass suffered from before he got his lead glass formula right. Whatever it is, if not crizzling as a result of contact with water and a dodgy formula, then it is something similar, i.e., chemical instability as a result of a dodgy formula leading to physical instability. These things take time so the bottles would have been fine when they were shipped and probably for the next 70/80 years.

[chopin-liszt]

 :kissy:

I know it came long before Mdina - for example, the Monart Cloissonne pieces, I just sort of thought that perhaps as the "official" title of the effect used at Mdina is "crizzle", it would be a good example to show, as the effect is actually picked out in colour.
Thanks for making it much clearer!

[Lustrousstone]

I had vaguely wondered after I posted whether this was a pulegoso type effect, but there are too may open pits on the moulded surfaces.