Topic: Victorian Lizard English Italian? vase help please

[brucebanner]

I can see a lot of familiar traits comparing the Auguste Jean vase link you gave me, the bases curled glass especially, the vase is displayed so the lizard is just coming around the corner you can't tell it's broken unless you turn it, buying damaged glass does not worry me at all, it's good for research and still has a charm about it. Looking at the cost of the others they are stupid money i think this cost me ten pounds and for that money i do not mind the reduced lizard angle on the sideboard, thanks again for your help and Sue you do not get it wrong very often at all, your knowledge puts me to shame and i've being collecting for about 18 years or so.

[flying free]

ok, the only thing I would say I've noticed about Auguste Jean work is that my books say pieces are almost always signed - and I've never seen an unsigned piece  that didn't turn out to be Harrach  (or possibly Sevres in the case of Ivo's amethyst vase) .  Some of the books show pieces in a similar vein by Clichy and Sevres as well as Leveille.  And I guess there may be Auguste Jean pieces in museums that perhaps aren't signed.  However, there are so many VERY similar pieces by Harrach that I'd never buy an 'Auguste Jean' piece unless it were signed either with the enamelled mark or the lozenge, because I've seen quite a few sold as Auguste Jean in the past in Auction Houses that I now know are Harrach.
If the vase is beautiful it shouldn't make any difference to the price, however it does.  A signed Auguste Jean vase commands a much higher premium in the cases I've seen, than a similar piece from Harrach.  But that's just my personal view, perhaps others will have seen it differently.

Le Genie Verrier de l'Europe, Cappa, shows a number of vases all signed in some way and one vase that is unsigned  as Auguste Jean - I'm not sure about the unsigned one. I think it could also be Harrach.
m

[chopin-liszt]

I've been collecting for about 15 years - but I've been here, learning from everybody else for 9 of them.
It's not nearly so much fun on your own. Glad you found us, Chris. You'll be streets ahead of me in no time.

[flying free]

I just wanted to say that when I commented above 'But that's just my personal view, perhaps others will have seen it differently.' I was only referring to this part of my reply:
'A signed Auguste Jean vase commands a much higher premium in the cases I've seen, than a similar piece from Harrach.'

With regards prices, I think, of course, market forces come into play.  In my view these are based on rarity and beauty (supply) , and so desirability (demand).  Demand can also be partly fed by 'fashion' as well.  But what also contributes to desirability is: who made it; when it was made; how it was made (the technique, how complicated the process, the materials and colours used, the fragility of the processes, using the new developments of the time); how many were made (and in the case of antique and vintage glass, how many have survived intact); and the condition.   The pieces which tick all the boxes at the high end are the ones that command the highest premiums.  And so it should be.  They are works of art

Balanced by the fact that I often buy damaged glass if I believe it to be rare or unusual/interesting and also beautiful (to my eye)
m