Topic: Thomas Webb — heat sensitive? — akin to Alexandrite?

[chopin-liszt]

I suspect Christine might have been my reference for overcooking to chocolate, it probably came up during the many excited conversations about her glasses.
There was a great deal of discussion going on and lots of poking different lights at them when a large crowd of us all met up.

It looks far better without the chocolate. (I never thought I'd ever say anything like that )

[Lustrousstone]

Nigel appears to be the only person who mentions the chocolate... The Webb colour recipe list in Hajdamach cites a tri colour containing gold and uranium among a long list of ingredients. I wonder if this is Alexandrite

[chopin-liszt]

I had suspected Nigel was the origin, but defaulted to you, as the one who passed it on. 

[flying free]

He does but he has also probably seen, as far as I know from what he's said on that thread link and from the rarity/scarcity of Thomas Webb Alexandrite pieces around, the greatest quantity of different pieces of Webb Alexandrite, so his comments would have been obtained from that perspective.  I assume he will have seen that feature (however it is perceived i.e whether 'definitely there', 'dichroic effect' or 'optical illusion') in all the Webb Alexandrite pieces he has seen, in order to make the comment.

I'm just off to look at the CH book for the recipe.  But in the meantime I wrote this so will post it


I have been having a very good search around having done so previously at great length when I was researching my piece of Thomas Webb Alexandrite. 

I have been unable to find any other shaded glass that contains the violet to blue at the top with the chocolate rim (or dichroic?appearance of chocolate rim), other than those identified as Thomas Webb Alexandrite. 

Obviously I can't tell if any of the other makers shaded glass pieces I've seen are uranium glass but none I've found have been mentioned as such.  But what is clear to me from the photographs is, that they look very different to those pieces identified as, or that I recognise as (subjective of course as it's based on my opinion/recognition), Thomas Webb Alexandrite.
And the TW pieces are very rare. 

My thoughts are that the violet to blue or violet/blue at the top, with chocolate rim (however it is seen or 'perceived'), along with the glass being uranium glass (since I've not been able to find a reference anywhere that shaded versions of those pieces titled by the owners as Amberina, Bluerina, Rose Amberina, Fuschia Amberina etc  are uranium glass) would be markers for the glass being Thomas Webb Alexandrite,  along with the requisite three colour shading from being twice struck starting with amber. 

With the exception of three pieces, the other 'shaded' glass I have seen has been easily identifiable from my perspective, as not being Thomas Webb Alexandrite and could not be confused with it. 
With regard the exceptions, I came across last night and a few months ago, three pieces that were not titled by the owners as Thomas Webb Alexandrite but which I thought might be (obviously again subjective based on my opinion as a layman ):
1) a small creamer in the Chrysler museum collection.  They have a number of Thomas Webb Alexandrite pieces which are labelled as such.  This creamer is not labelled Thomas Webb but I think it is.
2) A posy vase with crimped rim that was sold on ebay as an American maker but which I thought was Thomas Webb Alexandrite, and it sold for a vast amount of money and I suspect I was right in my thoughts
3) A piece I've seen listed as Libbey which made me pause.  The piece has similar qualities to a very tall goblet labelled by it's owner as Thomas Webb Alexandrite and which I think might be the one Paul referred to earlier.

So from my perspective, with regard all the other 'Shaded' pieces I've come across online, I had no problem working out that they were not Thomas Webb Alexandrite and couldn't be confused as such. 

I'm wondering three things:
- Firstly what happened to the pieces from the Parkington collection?
- Secondly, there has been mention on previous threads that all the glass came from a single pot. I wonder if that is true?
- Lastly, I wonder if they just made a series of single pieces (or sets in the case of Christine's glasses) in terms of shapes, with no repeats?

m

[chopin-liszt]

There was a single wine glass for sale at the same fair as Christine brought hers to show, but it had a different optical effect - it was much plainer than the quilted effect, with simple vertical panels.

[Lustrousstone]

- Lastly, I wonder if they just made a series of single pieces (or sets in the case of Christine's glasses) in terms of shapes, with no repeats?

I doubt it. The same shapes do appear more than once. They are not generally completely free blown, so a short run in one mould is much more likely than a one-off and then change the mould.

David had a footed compote with a chocolate rim but you'd be hard put to see the blue: it's more like a fine line of indigo. This shape would be very difficult to reheat accurately. I reiterate my view that the chocolate is overheating; that is may be more desirable and "valuable" because the colours overall are more intense but the original aim was probably blue at the rim as with the easy to reheat vertically sided glasses. Quality control and lack of consistency probably contributed to the short run.

[chopin-liszt]

I agree (opinion only) that the chocolate colour should not be there.
It just doesn't look right. 

[flying free]

maybe - but it looks perfect on my piece 
I have to say, it is a very, very fine line all around the rim and  if someone not into glass, was looking at it I'd guess they wouldn't see it.  But it's there nonetheless And mine has a very definite area of blue around the top shading from the rose then violet to blue.

Christine, do you have a reference for the same shape appearing more than once?  I've not been able to find any which is why I was wondering about the Parkington collection.
I take your point about the moulds, and would add cost to the reasons for it being a short run. 

Bernard also questioned iirc (opened to correction if I've incorrectly remember reading this) the theory that it all came from one pot, by asking whether it was possible they couldn't replicate the recipe.

Just had another look at CH British Glass and in fact my piece is so similar, in depth of colour and the colour variation and the rim, to the piece in there (but not an identical shape), that I suppose it's possible it came from the same mold and was made by the same hand.
Mine is a honeycomb mold with each segment of the comb being six sided.  It's hard to tell on the pic in CH if that was the same mold.
m

[flying free]

Christine - re the recipes

I noticed there is a colour called 'Tricolore' they launched in 1886.
Would this be different to the 'Tricolour' they refer to in the recipe I wonder?

p.s. as a complete aside, I also noticed they used 'brass pin dust' in all their greens.  Conjures up images of someone grinding brass tacks to put in the mix 
I also noticed there is no mention of Titanium in the recipes (just referring back to an earlier post link where the research referenced Titanium)
m

[Lustrousstone]

The same-shapes thing is just an observation over time. It is highly likely that all the pieces were made by the same chair or two chairs. The moulds were standard (certainly a honeycomb mould and a ribbed mould), so it's not that that's the expense, it's the interruption of production for swapping moulds and designs. This was factory work and each chair had a high daily target and consequent output.

The recipe would have been written down. Alexandrite was just plain expensive for time, ingredients  and hard to maintain consistency.

I meant Tricolore, I just couldn't remember how it was spelt. The brass pin dust is likely factory waste