Glass Message Board
Glass Identification - Post here for all ID requests => Glass => Topic started by: glasswizard on July 11, 2005, 08:28:49 AM
-
This past weekend as is my usual thing to do, went antiquing.
Found some nice things but the winner has to be this.
I was thinking Bohemian, but imagine my surprise when I discovered it is in fact Stuart & Sons. It has the "Cairngorm" decoration and is listed as circa 1900s at www.great-glass.co.uk.
My question has to do with value. It is of course going into the "Collection" but that nagging question of value does come up.
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y283/Muscadale/Collection%20-%20Misc/TStuart.jpg
It stands about 4 inches high and is about 5 1/2 inches across.
Thanks Terry
-
I bought a piece with similar coloured trailing at the National, although it doesn't have the extra blue dot on the green :(
http://glassgallery.yobunny.org.uk/displayimage.php?pos=-1765 http://glassgallery.yobunny.org.uk/displayimage.php?pos=-1766
Confirm no marks on mine, though
At the time somebody on the board - I think it might have been Bernard - said it could be by one of a number of the Stourbridge glasshouses who were using similar patterns at the turn of the century (before last :roll: ).
I seem to recall paying about £70 for it - Sue, you were there, do you remember? - but I think yours is nicer so should be worth more :P
-
Leni, yours is lovely.
As to the prices I am hearing, lets say I made a very good buy. Upon entering the shop my heart fell when I was confronted with all sorts of new chinese glass but way back in a dark corner sat this little gem. Only when we got outside in the sunshine and looked at it again did the blue centers show.
Then I knew I had something. And a big thank you is in order to Peter, who when I was describing what I thought was Bohemian, said no, sounds English and steered me in the right direction.
Terry
-
I bought a large bowl 8" diameter nearly 2kg in weight with silver rim about 2 years ago and that cost about £130.00 , I still have the bowl
(http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y76/mhgcgolfclub/th_eye2.jpg) (http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y76/mhgcgolfclub/eye2.jpg)
(http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y76/mhgcgolfclub/th_eye1.jpg) (http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y76/mhgcgolfclub/eye1.jpg)
roy
-
Roy
Now yours looks Bohemian, as opposed to the mainly Stuart ones we've seen in this forum so far. Possibly Harrach as Max suggested in one of these threads. Now where might I find a Harrach expert ....hmmm in the Market Place forum maybe ...................
Silver rims seem to be found mostly on Bohemian items and stylistically it has more of that feel too. I wonder if yours pre-dates the Stuart Cairngorm ones which were c1900 according to www.great-glass.co.uk ?
I have a feeling it might. What year does the hallmark date to ?
Of course the glass can pre-date the silver rim but it's a good place to spart.
-
Hallmark is Birmingham 1905, if you find a Harrach expert please let me know as I have a large pair of Victorian lizard vases which I believe may well be Harrach
roy
-
OK, thanks folks - we now have a good selection of images to look at again, including those in my message: http://www.glassmessages.com/index.php/topic,5358.0.html
It seems to me that my friend's vase is of better quality (it looks cleaner and crisper in the design and appearance of the glass) than either Terry's or Leni's examples (but they are, indeed, both good in their own right).
Roy's rimmed bowl looks closer to my friend's in that the "eyes" are set in clear surround and trails, and the trails are very precise. Peter's view that it might be a Bohemian piece could be right, but going by the ones in the Great Glass site, I think Roy's and the one I show are Stuart.
I eagerly await the views of anyone who may know the difference and who may also be able to confirm the Thomas Webb versions as mentioned in my other message.
-
... At the time somebody on the board - I think it might have been Bernard - said it could be by one of a number of the Stourbridge glasshouses who were using similar patterns at the turn of the century ...
Leni - I can't recall exactly what I said, but the information I was trying to get across was that you cannot attribute by coloured streaks alone. Walsh certainly used them as well as Stuart, so you have to assume that the technique became universally known fairly quickly.
As for "Cairngorm" and "Peacock's Eye" glass, I have found very little in the authoritative sources. "Cairngorm" was certainly used by S&W for a range of cased glass which Dodsworth dates to around 1925. I can't find any authoritative source for the use of the name by Stuart. It could be another name introduced by Bill Heacock. It seems to me unlikely that S&W would use a name already in widespread use by Stuart.
Jackson attributes two colour green peacock's eye glass to Stuart, with an introduction date of around the turn of the century. She also notes a citron and chocolate version which I have not seen. It is not too difficult to find, so it is reasonable to assume that it was in production for a long time, perhaps until the late 1930s. The sources are notably silent on single colour peacock's eye glass, so it could be a cheaper range by Stuart, or by any of a large number of other glass works, including continental glass houses.
Perhaps the most revealing source is Hajdamach. There is a deafening silence on peacock's eye glass, which indicates to me that the author was possibly unhappy with popular attributions, but could not find sufficient primary source material to correct this.
Hajdamach omissions are always interesting.
I am sure that I have seen another relevant source, but cannot find it at present. I would be pleased if anyone reading this could point me in the direction of any primary or authoritative sources I have missed.
Bernard C. 8)
-
A couple more pics both attributed to Stuart, both cabouchon / inset style.
http://tinyurl.com/h3y3z
http://tinyurl.com/gznd4
-
Found it!
Jackson's Whitefriars Lookalikes, a lengthy illustrated article in Glass Association Journal Vol. 5, 1997. Plate 6 shows two examples of two colour green peacock's eye glass, which she attributes to Stuart 1900-10. However Plate 6(i) is of a wavy-edged mushroom posy, a shape to my knowledge not made until the 1930s.
You can see how persuasive the old-style experts have become. You find yourself looking at it the opposite way around. In this case starting to believe that Stuart made mushroom posies at the turn of the century. You find yourself becoming convinced that all British glassworks virtually closed down for about a third of a century!
Bernard C. 8)
-
Harrach definitely made these (several are in the Harrach and Passau museums), and also shown in the Truitt Bohemian Glass book on page 67. Apparently so did other various English glass makers.
I'm not sure how you would be able to differentiate between the makers on these, I suspect it was just a popular design at the time.
Brian Severn
www.Glasscollector.net
-
Hi,
I believe these were made by more makers then Harrach and Stuart. Unless someone did a deep dive analysis I think you'd be hard pressed to differentiate who made what (IMO).
I've seen a few (very few) that had the peacock medalions engraved. These I do believe to be Harrach, but I have no factual data to back this up. It's a hunch from other similar things I've seen from them.
Brian
www.Glasscollector.net
Glad to hear from you Brian, I was keeping quiet...I was beginning to think I'd imagined Harrach made these too! :shock:
-
Thanks for responding Brian.
Brian said
Harrach definitely made these (several are in the Harrach and Passau museums), and also shown in the Truitt Bohemian Glass book on page 67
The base of #2 in that photo in Truitt's looks very similar to Terrys.
Next to it there is one with a wavy edge but not turned over.
On the other hand all four shown look to be a single color - green only.
On Terry's one the two colors look mixed in together at the head of each tadpole.
-
I have also looked at the picture on page 67, Truitt's Bohemian glass book one. I agree with Peter. It takes a magnifying glass, but the second piece shows an indent at the head of the "feather" if you we can call it that. Mine also has such an indent where the blue meets the green. For my piece I am leaning more to Harrach rather than Stuart. Terry
-
Very interesting observations.
I have to ask - other then the Great Glass website, is there another reference for the Stuart attribution? If it's in the Manley book, I'm not sure I'd put a lot of faith into that attribution as he shows many pieces of easily ID'd Bohemian glass as English glass, or states he wasn't sure. In all fairness to him, there wasn't a lot of reference material on Bohemian glass when he wrote that book. It's rumored that it was he that started the myth of the Webb "propeller" mark (which is actually a documented Harrach mark).
I'm traveling or I'd look through the Hajdamach British Glass 1800-1914 book, I vaguely recall it showing an example of one of these. I call them peacock feather pieces, for lack of an actual factory name.
Brian
-
Did a look in Hajdamach and the page is 268 plate 258, but not much help. The photo is in black and white and so much detail is lost. My original attribution was from the Great glass site. Terry
-
Thanks to Terry for the page and plate references from the Hajdamach book.
I had ooked at that earlier but missed an important point. In the text for the plate it states: ... Tall vase, Stuart Crystal
Given Charles Hajdamach's insistence on accuracy, as can be confimed by Frank for the editing of the Ysart Glass book, I trust the "Stuart & Sons" attribution for the vase as the piece was from the Stuart Crystal factory.
[But I also bear in mind the fact that a very good piece of Bohemian cut and decorated white and blue overlay glass was once believed to be by Richardson as it used to be in Benjamin Richardson's collection - Hajdamach, page 91, colour plate 8.]
I agree that since the book image of the Stuart & Sons vase is b&w it is difficult to assess the details, particularly of the coloured parts. However, under a loop it can be seen that the trails are formed as clear glass surrounding a coloured "eye". Whether that "eye" is green or blue - or both - cannot be determined. The clear glass continues as a well-moulded length to form the trail. This description fits the example I have shown.
Of the examples of this type of decoration that might be Bohemian, or those that were indeed confirmed in the Truiits' book as Harrach, they all seem to have full (or part) green in the stems of the trails, In fact most seem to have been formed in a tapering shape - akin to tadpoles.
It is the very fine, and non-tapering, form of the clear trails that I have linked to Stuart & Sons. So it would useful to know of other examples with that feature that can be identifed as other than Stuart.
My original message for my friend's vase has been updated with a note that an indistinct etched mark has now been found on the brim (I had mainly studied the base area as that was where I expected any mark to be!). When I next see the vase I will try to get images of the mark. Even if it is indistinct, it may show enough shape and form to identify it.
-
This otherwise very knowledgeable seller on one in the same decorative style as Terry's is equally baffled.
His pics do show the tadpoles a tad more clearly .......
http://www.glasshound.com/harrachvase_135.html
I have invited the website owner to join in here.
-
I eagerly await the views of anyone who may know the difference and who may also be able to confirm the Thomas Webb versions as mentioned in my other message.
My father is certain that Webbs made this type of glass. I will check out the pattern books as soon as possible.
It will also be interesting to see what the glassware is called in the pattern books (S & W and Webbs). References have been made on this board to 'Cairngorm'. Since Cairngorm (in Scotland) was associated with the Arts & Crafts movement, and the design obviously belongs to that style, that name would make a lot of sense. 'Peacock's Eyes' sounds like more of a 'shop-floor' term to me.
Let's see what some research can reveal.
-
The motif is undoubtedly a stylised peacock feather. It has been used both applied and moulded.
Harry Northwood made a vase known to collectors as the Tornado vase. The name was given to it by US collectors based in Kansas (Tornado Alley) in the 1960s - though another collectors' group gave it the name Tadpole vase. In fact the vase is a pressed glass version of applied peacock feather motifs.
You can see both the applied motifs and the press moulded ones, here.
http://glassgallery.yobunny.org.uk/thumbnails.php?album=30
Tadoples, teardrops, tornadoes. They are all in fact, stylised peacock feathers.
Glen
-
The motif is undoubtedly a stylised peacock feather.............Tadoples, teardrops, tornadoes. They are all in fact, stylised peacock feathers.Glen
That might well be the case, but it is important to know what the designs were called in the original pattern books etc.
You also have a 'chicken and the egg' type of scenario. Were the trails designed to be stylised peacock feathers, or were they called that after the similarity was spotted (by the maker?)?
The trails are extremely stylised and could arguably represent some kind of flower. Hopefully a close look at the pattern books will shed some light on the matter.
-
A contemporary Harrods catalogue (1909) referred to them as "The original English Peacock Decoration". And of course, the peacock feather was one of the great style motifs of the era. A study of press moulded patterns in the early 1900s shows that peacock designs (peacock "eye", full feather, highly stylised representations of the feathers and even the full bird itself) were exceptionally popular.
JMHO
Glen
-
A contemporary Harrods catalogue (1909) referred to them as "The original English Peacock Decoration".
Is that for the Northwood pressed pieces?
-
No, it's not for Northwood pressed pieces - it's for "glass with applied decoration probably made in Stourbridge or Birmingham".
Glen
-
Is there no reference to a manufacturer in the Harrods catalogue?
-
Nope. It simply states: "Hand Made English Glass".
-
I eagerly await the views of anyone who may know the difference and who may also be able to confirm the Thomas Webb versions as mentioned in my other message.
My father is certain that Webbs made this type of glass. I will check out the pattern books as soon as possible.
I have looked at what footage my father has of the Webbs pattern books and I can confirm that they did produce 'peacock eye' glass. The shapes and variations are quite distinctive, so they should be easily distinguishable from others made by Stephens & Williams, Stuarts and Richardsons etc etc.
Unfortunately there was no reference to any kind of description or name for this glassware.
My father has looked at the Stephens & Williams pattern books and found several examples of the glass we are discussing. None of the documentation he looked at had any descriptions or names either. Interestingly he did find silver rimmed bowls/vases and decanters.
I have also been told that Mervyn Gulliver has done a lot of research into 'peacock eye' glass. He says that it is almost always referred to as "Peacock Eye Trail" in the Stuarts pattern books.
Unless someone carefully catalogues the relevant pattern books for 'peacock eye' glass, and also acquires examples from all the makers concerned, I doubt that any definitive advice for identification can be provided.
One more thing that might be of interest. I found several examples of 'peacock eye' glass in a 1907 edition of the "Army & Navy Stores Catalogue". The glass is only described in terms of "flower vases" or "bowls". There is no mention of a maker and the glassware is simply described as being "Best English Glass". or "Best English Flint Glass".
-
Jackson attributes two colour green peacock's eye glass to Stuart, with an introduction date of around the turn of the century. She also notes a citron and chocolate version which I have not seen.
I think Jackson might be talking about a ruby over citron variant, where the greeny-yellow base colour makes the ruby trails look chocolate in colour. My parents own an example, so I will take a photo when I get the chance.
I have just found a few small snippets of useful information in Mervyn Gulliver's "Victorian Decorative Glass: British Designs, 1850-1914", ISBN 0-7643-1597-8.
On pages 87-89 there are several examples of peacock eye glass. All the examples are attributed to Stuart & Sons Ltd and described as having "stylised peacock eye trails".
To confirm that Stuarts did make such glass, there is a copy of an illustration from their pattern books (page 269). The item illustrated is a "Glass bowl to hold flowers". A registered design number is also given: "R. D. 486685 - September 8, 1906".
Interestingly there is an example of a bowl made by Richardson's (page 204). The illustrated example features the distinctive peacock eye trails, but also has "machine threading" and a "pincered work frill" around the body.
One last bit of information I neglected to mention with regard to the Webbs pattern books. Almost all of the illustrations show peacock eye trails that do not have a central 'eye' shape.
-
Thanks for the extra info, David. I had also checked the Gulliver book and had noted the items you pointed out. He also shows another example (at the top right of page 87) but with no attribution.
And there is one that is a Satin "air trap" type vase (lower left of same page) which is stated to have a "stylised peacock tail [not "trail"] pattern" (ie presumably without the "eye" part of the description for "peacock eye trails"). Or is "peacock tail" something else again? Unfortunately for that Satin vase it's not possible to see the design feature that is a "tail". I wonder whether that is simply a "tear drop" pattern.
And could "tear drop", rather than "peacock eye" be applicable to the Webbs versions if, as you say, they do not have a central "eye" portion?
What would be really useful is for the Webbs patterns to be published so that we can all see the clear differences in shapes and variations that you mentioned.
-
I think that the 'peacock tail' vase has nothing to do with the glass we are talking about. Stylistically it bears no resemblance to 'peacock eye' glass. The piece in question is a typical piece of Victorian (continental) decorative glass, whilst the peacock eye glass has its stylistic look firmly rooted in the 20th Century, and illustrates the first tentative steps towards modernism (sort of).
The Webb’s trails, and designs, look very much like the pieces shown in Mervyn's book, as well as the examples posted on this message board. They do include a large tadpole-like blob that thins into a tail, which trails down the glass onto the base. They just don't have the internal 'eye' tool-work. My parents own a piece that has the same sort of trails, so I will post an image when possible.
My parents have quite a few pieces of peacock eye glass and there are a lot of variations between the pieces, indicating different makers. For instance, a piece that resembles the Webbs patterns has no eye tooling, but the trail is all one colour. Other pieces have no eye tooling, but the centre of the eye has a different colouration. Another piece has the head of the trail opening up into a fan shape that meets the rim of the glass. These are all signature features that would distinguish the work of one maker from another. Someone just has to do the research and look at all the pattern books etc.
When it comes to identification, Stuart's signed their pieces consistently form the 1930s and Webbs from 1907, so later pieces should be easy to attribute.
As for the Webbs pattern books............ to look for the patterns I had to take video footage that my father had filmed and convert it to DVD. I suppose I could try to find out how to get stills from the DVD, but there are copyright issues and limitations to the use of such material. The footage I looked at is far from complete and I’m sure that there are more examples in the records. These may well include details such as the name Webb’s gave to such wares. This might include the origins of the infamous Manley reference to ‘Cairngoram Drops’.
-
Thanks David, fascinating info. I appreciate the point about possible copyright issues, but if feasible, stills from DVD (or video) would be superb.
I tend to agree with your comment about the Satin vase with the "peacock tail" being outside the range of what we are discussing here. But since the naming is very similar it is useful to know about it, if only to eliminate it from the the other clues.
Perhaps this subject could make a good article for, say, a future issue of the Glass Cone - if, as you say, somebody could find the time to dig a little further into the available record books. :)
-
I will see if I can get some stills from the DVD footage.
I will also take some images of some of the glass I have mentioned. These should help to illustrate the varying techniques and designs used by various manufacturers (it will probably be 2-4 days before I can do this).
I am sure that an informative article could be put together. This would involve a lot of work and someone would have to invest a lot of time sifting through the archives of the various makers. Something of a momentous task!
-
Bernard C wrote:
Jackson attributes two colour green peacock's eye glass to Stuart, with an introduction date of around the turn of the century. She also notes a citron and chocolate version which I have not seen.
David Hier wrote:
I think Jackson might be talking about a ruby over citron variant, where the greeny-yellow base colour makes the ruby trails look chocolate in colour. My parents own an example, so I will take a photo when I get the chance
We can't really assume that. She may have been talking about the 2 colour trails but in either case, from your reports of the catalogues David, if I am reading them right, neither would be Stuart ? Or do you knmow that this varient is ??
Here are examples of what looks to be the ruby over citron variant:
http://julia.hanovercomputer.com/lamp/jun06/catalog/pages/62984.htm
-
The vase on the far left is a fairly close match to the colouration of the ruby over citron piece my parents own. I will post an image later today.
I know that I can't assume that the chocolate variant is actually ruby over citron, but the description is such a close match it seems too much of a coincidence.
I'm not sure why you think the ruby over citron pieces can't be Stuart's. The shape and tooling on the eyes certainly seem to match other Stuart's pieces I have seen.
As I have mentioned earlier, Webb's designs don't appear to have any tooling to the eyes of the peacock trails, which might rule them out. Richardson's pieces appear to feature eye tooling that makes the central eye of the feather protrude out significantly, which may also rule them out as the maker. As for Harrach, I haven't seen enough examples to make a judgement, but my gut feeling tells me that these examples (ruby over citron) aren’t continental.
No one can know for certain without finding the exact patterns in the maker's records.
I have finally managed to put together some images.
The first set of images show what could be an example of the Stuart's 'chocolate' variant, which has been mentioned in previous threads:
http://www.glassfairs.co.uk/peacock.htm
The next set of images show two very different examples:
http://www.glassfairs.co.uk/peacock2.htm
The vase on the left has not been attributed, but the 'peacock eye trails' are distinctive in that they do not feature any tool-work in the centre of the eye. The trails on this piece are very similar to those illustrated in the Webb's pattern books (sorry no images yet).
The bowl on the right is by Richardson's (similar to a piece featured in Mervyn Gulliver's book - see previous posts for details). Note how the 'eyes' have a centre that is a different colour to the trail. The centre of the eyes also protrude quite significantly. Perhaps this is a signature feature unique to Richardson's?
The third page of images shows two examples that appear to be very similar to one another:
http://www.glassfairs.co.uk/peacock3.htm
What you can't see very clearly, is that both pieces feature eyes that have differently coloured centres. Another feature that doesn't show up clearly is the tool-work on the tall vase. Although the vase on the right looks very similar, it's eyes are mostly smooth (i.e. no tool-work).
The final page of images features another two examples of peacock eye glass:
http://www.glassfairs.co.uk/peacock4.htm
On the left of the page is an epergne, with two close-up images. This piece seems to show a development of the trail design, fanning the head of the trail to meet the edge of the glass.
The image on the right is just another example that I thought I would share with you.
Hopefully the images provided will show just how varied the designs and techniques can be for this type of glass. If someone can link these signature features to designs in pattern books, it should make it easier to distinguish the work of one manufacturer from another.
-
David,
The Hajdamach book shows the Webb catalog design on page 436. They show it as "Posy Bowl with 'Cat Eyes' teardrops." Design No. 27414, from 1903.
On the same page they show in the center a "Vase with three coloured teardrops." Design No. 30736, from 1907.
I can't quite tell if Design No. 26113 on the same page is the same style of glass or not, but if so it dates to 1901.
Brian
-
Just wanted to add my little contribution to this thread :oops:
Any ideas about this one? It is rather more 'lily leaf' than 'peacocks (or any other sort of) eye' (there are 3 pictures in the gallery) http://glassgallery.yobunny.org.uk/displayimage.php?pos=-2180
The green trails are obviously done in two trails of glass, one over the other, but they don't have the indentation. Presumably this rules out Richardson. Is it even English? :?
Does it add anything to this discussion or is it merely another distraction? :roll:
-
The Hajdamach book shows the Webb catalog design on page 436. They show it as "Posy Bowl with 'Cat Eyes' teardrops." Design No. 27414, from 1903..............On the same page they show in the center a "Vase with three coloured teardrops." Design No. 30736, from 1907.
Well spotted Brian, you’ve really put the cat among the pigeons with that observation. Both designs clearly show the trails with tooling to the centre of the peacock eye. Obviously they did variants with and without that feature.
Looking at the pattern books they also did other different versions. These feature face-like tooling to the eye of the feather. There are also versions where the trail is segmented, like the body of a snake. They also did versions that were cut/engraved, with extra detail added to the trails.
-
Does it add anything to this discussion or is it merely another distraction?
Leni,
Someone posted a very similar piece earlier under this topic. Such designs can be found in the Stephens & Williams pattern books. The designs are part of a range called "Grotesque" ware. Definitely part of the peacock eye family of design.
Here is the Link to the image:
http://glassgallery.yobunny.org.uk/displayimage.php?pos=-1765
The 'Grotesque' name could possibly come from one of the French uses of the word i.e. a fanciful style of decorative art.
For any moderators out there.....................with all the images and information included within this thread, would this topic be suitable for the archive?
You could also consider amalgamating the topic with the 'Stevens & Williams bowl - Peacock Feathers' thread.
I may be able to add some images from the Webb's pattern book in the next week, which should also be included.
-
Thanks again, David, for the additional info you have posted. I agree that this is a message that should, at some stage, be saved to the archive and would benefit from the details in the S & W thread.
I look forward to any extra images from the Webb pattern books that you can provide.
As has been shown so far, and as is often the case with decorative glassware, there is often a great deal of similarity between English and Eurpean versions of a basic design. Certainly, the Truitts showed examples of pieces with shapes (including some with "Peacock whatever" patterns) that, prior to the publication of their books, many UK fairs dealers seemed happy to attribute as Thomas Webb. And after seeing the books, labels were qucikly changed to read such as, "Harrach" or "Kralik"!
But from comments in this message, the uncertainties are still clearly with us. Mervyn Gulliver's book gave us examples of (stated) Stuarts pieces and yet, as has been shown in this message, we need to also consider Webb and S&W (plus others?) for their similar pieces. And we must not forget to keep an eye on the area of Glen's expertise - the Carnival "Peacock ..." patterns.
I find this utterly fascinating. So much so, that I am (probably!) willing to have a go at a project studying the available Pattern Books of whatever companies are relevant. But first I would need to know where to start. For instance, are the Webb, S&W etc. pattern books at Himley Hall or Kew Records Office, or somewhere else? Should my first contact be through Broadfield House? Perhaps, David, you could email me separately with any info that could get me started on a plan for such a project?
As for the piece that I showed a while ago, owned by a friend, I will hopefully be looking at it again this Saturday. I will try to get whatever details I can about the mark that is on it (which I suspect will be an etched "Stuarts").
-
When I find the time I will add images from the Webb's pattern books (if possible).
As for the similarity between English and European glass, in today's cultural climate I find such distinctions merely colloquial, but you certainly raise an important issue.
When it comes to Art Nouveau, the French certainly knew what they were doing: so a distinction between possible continental originators and UK copies would be an interesting study. Although you have to realise that a lot of companies swapped and poached designers and blowers. Complicated stuff!!!!!!!!!!!!
I think the best way to look at the 'peacock eye' glass is to see how it reflects a stylistic trend of a period. I don’t think that any one maker started this type of glass, but manufacturers were actually following stylistic trends of the day.....i.e. Dresser and Liberty.
One thing I would like to make clear.....my parents both know Mervyn Gulliver personally and I am assured that he would not give provenance to a piece of glass, unless he had personally seen the relevant pattern books etc. If you can find a copy of his book, you will see what I mean.
As for the sources for original pattern books, I will have to check with my father (he is out of the country at the moment), but I suspect that Broadfield House would be a good place to start.
Browsing this message board, there is obviously a good deal of knowledge out there, so perhaps some kind of voluntary 'glass' 'Wikipedia' could be created. That certainly won't happen if it is left to the authorities (mesume curators etc.).
-
We've taken a fresh photo of one of our "Tornado Variant" (i.e. peacock feather motif) vases and I have extended an article that I had written previously. If you're interested in seeing all the photos etc., the direct link is here (you can get the links to the rest of the article from this page too). You can also go direct from my main home page (url in footer here)
http://www.geocities.com/carni_glass_uk_2000/Tornado1.html
Glen
-
I said, earlier:
As for the piece that I showed a while ago, owned by a friend, I will hopefully be looking at it again this Saturday. I will try to get whatever details I can about the mark that is on it (which I suspect will be an etched "Stuarts").
Ah! Good intentions. I visited the friend but in the heat (actual and metaphorical) of the day's other events, I entirely forgot about the vase. :oops:
-
We've taken a fresh photo of one of our "Tornado Variant" (i.e. peacock feather motif) vases.....
It's interesting to see some better photos of such distinctive glassware, which is so different to what most people refer to as 'peacock eye' glass. Interesting stuff!
The new posts to this topic remind me that I should try and capture some stills from the DVD footage of the Webbs catalogue I have.
Does anyone have any ideas as to how this might be done?
-
David, I don't have the technical knowhow for proper image capturing from a DVD, although I thought there were controls in some players that allow exactly that.
However, perhaps it would be sufficient to simply pause on the required images and take a standard photo of the screen and work from there? Or just use standard pc controls for image capture, as below?
As an experiment, here's an image I took (without permisssion !!) from a rather good DVD on British Birds:
http://glassgallery.yobunny.org.uk/displayimage.php?pos=-2316
I ran the video via Windows Media Player (to keep it basic), paused the play then used Alt + Prnt Scr to capture the DVD window. After resizing the captured image to 500 pixels width and sharpening, I optimised it from over 200Kb to around 50K. The full-sized result is not too different in quality from the actual paused DVD image.