Topic: Tiffany Favrile Ewer?

[svazzo]

Hello Janice,
Thank you very much for finding that article.
Guess there would not be any information out there about the mark being used sporadically on certain pieces?

[svazzo]

... how does that fit with the KB label?...

Hi Kristi,
That is what we are trying to figure out.
My paperweight does have the KB label, but the one with the signature does not.

Javier

[Frank]

It is not a tough weight to copy by any means, but it does need to be established if the weight is genuine. I disagree that making the die is cheap, cheap dies = low definition, not that one. The value of the weight is not high enough to pay for it.

[krsilber]

I meant, how does that fit timewise with the KB label.  It the pwts really are identical (as far as handmade glass goes), and the KB label more recent than 1902 (as seems likely), that would support the idea that the impressed mark on the one in the auction is fake, which IMHO is probable since it's not a match to the real mark and no one has been able to find other evidence of any genuine stamped mark on Tiffany glass.

Personally, I would be surprised if the ewer in question were Tiffany Favrile...or has that already been established?

Frank - why do you think it would be hard to make a stamp like that?  All they've done is etch the metal.  To me it doesn't look very clear and crisp anyway - you can't even make out the "Favrile."  And if that bumps the selling price from $20 to $200 and you're selling 1000 of them, it's worth it!

[Frank]

.. having the additional (extraneous) "o" in the C.  ...

Those are stamping artefacts, not part of the stamp.

[krsilber]

The O perfectly formed and centered in the C?  The other two dots clearly are, but that looks like it's part of the stamp to me.  And look at "GLASS" - the first letter looks like a C, especially when compared with the G in "registered."

I dunno, maybe Tiffany was experimenting with the stamp, not very successfully, and that's why we never hear of them.  (A die would be used in a press - seems more likely to be a stamp, don't you think?)

Why would a stamp have those dots anyway?

Huh, according to http://www2.tbo.com/lifestyles/life/2011/jul/10/BANEWSO8-paperweights-are-not-tiffany-ar-242720/, "However, traditional paperweights in Favrile glass apparently were not produced."

[krsilber]

And really, let's be honest.  LC Tiffany was into design, experimentation, fine craftsmanship.  The spotted paperweights show none of those things.  There's not even a layer of clear on top, as far as I can tell, which is a common aspect of his many paperweight vases made around 1900.  There are fine parallel streaks encircling the spotty ones, left by the maker as he formed it in newspaper or whatever.  These just don't have the quality of Tiffany.  That's my 2 cents!   

[svazzo]

I'll preface this with the fact that I know nearly nada about Tiffany.

Hello Kristi,
Please do not take this the wrong way, it is being said in jest.
I thought you knew nada about Tiffany?

Well, in regards to the iridescence.
I am very surprised you think once the iridescent surface is crated that they would put a clear coat on top.
That is the purpose of that treated surface, to be able to create a rainbow of colors once the light hits the objects.
Putting a layer of clear defeats that purpose of it. At least in my experience with Italian glass, pieces with Iridescent surfaces do not have a clear coat over them.
And from what I have seen personally, Tiffany pieces would not be coated with an extra layer of clear.

[scimiman]

Putting a layer of clear defeats that purpose of it.

Cant agree with you there Richard Golding often puts on an iridescent layer and then cases it with clear glass. The effect is mesmerising. Many glass blowers use that method.
I have to agree with krsilber it doesn't have the quality or design qualities of Tiffany.
Mike www.abfabglass.co.uk

[svazzo]

Hi Mike,
I personally have not seen Tiffany pieces with a clear glass over them when the surface is iridescent.
Not that I am an expert in the matter by any means (i have only seen a handful of pieces), but also I am talking with my experience with Italian glass.
There is no doubt that if another maker/artist wants to create a piece that way, it can be done.
I do own 2 modern paperweights done that way, but they are not Tiffany or Italian.