Glass Message Board
Glass Identification - Post here for all ID requests => Glass => Topic started by: shugdens on January 11, 2011, 09:17:35 PM
-
Stunning is all I can say, bought as the main piece of a job lot of glass. Lable to the base just says made in Czechslovakia
http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a361/WhiteRose1649/DSC00186.jpg
-
Can I see the label please??
Is that Mica or Silver foil in the glass?
Thanks, Craig
-
Can I see the label please??
Is that Mica or Silver foil in the glass?
Thanks, Craig
it looks like silver foil, I'll put the pic of the lable up tomorrow. it still needs a clean up.
-
It's Mica.
There's one of these for sale in my local(ish) antique centre. Exactly the same. I don't think the maker has been tracked down yet, but lots of folk want to know - it is most likely Bohemian.
Work from this maker can often be confused with Monart - it's the use of combing effects in the decor and the inclusion of mica which can confuse - the mica used by the Ysarts was actually the christmas glitter bought from Woolworth's, I have no idea what this other maker used - but it looks exactly the same.
I don't think this lamp base would get confused with Monart - colours are wrong, the criss-cross is wrong, and although Jesus Brasso did do crimped frilly stuff, that was, to my knowledge, mostly huge basketty things
(I thought that attachment of "jesus brasso" to these was simply somebody's reaction to seeing them - not somebody's name.....)
This is a link to the correct page of Frank's Scotland's Glass site, 4th row down under Bohemia/American Union Glass?, you'll see a combed vase with mica and a..... thing in the same colours as your lamp base.
http://www.ysartglass.com/Ysart/NotYsart.htm
-
I think there is a strong possibility that this is a Kralik product.... I would love to see one in person...... What do they want for the one in the shop?
Attached is an example of a recently discovered decor by them......
The patterning in the glass, the colors, and also the color of the applied rigaree are all consistent with their production... It is not a decor I have seen before, but I would not be surprised if it is their work.
Craig
-
That doesn't look like the same thing at all, Craig - it looks far more finely blown, and more as if it contains silver foil, while the lamp base is definitely Mica chips.
The lamp base has whitish-pink (as in opaque) criss-cross combing over a sort of streaky blue-in-clear glass gather, not the bright pink enamels and blue crizzle-y sort of effect.
The rigaree on the lamp is orange and quite substantial. The whole thing is quite thick and substantial!
The one near me, I'm afraid, is "first dibs" to my brother - if he's willing to pay the price!
-
I did not think it was the same decor as the lamp, only that there were some similarities.... the piece I posted is also quite thick and substantial.
The vase is definitely not silver foil inclusions....
Craig
-
:huh:
But the silver in your vase would fit back together if it was shrunk a bit, Craig - it really, really looks like it's been silver foiled, then blown to stretch it a tiny bit, to me. I know my eyesight is rapidly failing and I need 3 different pairs of glasses to see, but I still think it looks like foil............... mica is quite different - it's much glitterier, it can be at different angles, (while foil gives a flatter appearance, all in one plane) and the shapes do not "jigsaw" back together with mica.
I can see where you're coming from, honest, :thup: :sm: I just think there are more differences than similarities.
-
The owner of the vase, a member of our discussion group for the website owns it and has assured me it is not silver foil..... and I trust his opinion..... It was sold on ebay recently and several of us were interested in it. I was one of them, and thought it was foil also...... something we have not seen in a piece of marked Kralik, which this is (arched Czechoslovakia).
When the owner received it, he announced that it was not foil.
You do see well enough to find this though..... :sm: ..... :thup: ;D
Craig
-
It's his vase, so it can be what he likes.... :P
I haven't had it in my sticky mitts, only looked at the images - and you know what a difference that can make!
-
It does not look like silver foil to me, but I can see what Sue means about the way it (whatever the substance is) has broken up and stretched apart as the vase was blown.
John
-
i promice to add a picture of the sticker & base of the lamp in the morning,
Mod: post edited rather than shunt topic to Market Place
-
Shugdens, don't make offers to sell in the ID forums please or you'll find your whole topic is promptly whizzed over to Market Place. See forum descriptions for what may go where. Thanks!
-
Craig, what do you mean by "arched Czechoslovakia?" Is the vase signed in any way?
-
Paul,
Attached is an image of the mark on the underside of the pink vase. It is considered a provenance mark associated with Kralik.
There are also other stamps they are thought to have used that are similar to other companies. There are also a couple of straight line marks and a two line mark that are considered to be theirs also, but you have to look at fonts and some other things to distinguish them apart, but the arched mark like this is considered to be exclusively theirs and an indication of their production. Just as a couple of acid stamps are considered to be indications of Loetz production post 1918.
Many other marks and labels of the period are thought to be exporters marks and can not be directly associated with any particular production house.
Craig
-
Wow, this is just fantastic, really cool. It ties into some very, very obscure research I've been doing for 15 years or so and answers a question. I am really indebted to you for this, thank you. :rah: :hiclp: :chky: :24: :bf:
-
Paul, send me an email about your research using the email icon below my name on the left. I am the webmaster for a new Bohemian glass website which has been under construction for the last year+, and the member of a group that does research. I have done a bunch of research on Franz Welz production and I would be interested in your work and what you have been studying..... maybe we can help each other.....
Craig
-
Owner of the vase checking in - the inclusions are not silver, as much as I had hoped they would be... they are as white as the driven snow. It is a great piece of glass, though. :)
-
So that explains the "jigsaw" effect, which couldn't occur with mica but would occur with silver foil or enamel powder.
-
If not silver foil, then what material was used? Craig, I will e-mail you soon, and thank you again.
-
Here is a more close up, detailed photo - it looks like some sort of white powder to me.
-
That's white frit/enamel
-
OK... so the vase is getting less and less like the lamp....... :huh:
Craig
-
OK... so the vase is getting less and less like the lamp....... :huh:
Craig
I've given up on the Lamp, I'm non the wiser. Its a ''Retro Cased Czech Bohemia Web Vase With Silver Flecks'' shortly. :24:
-
Or maybe even, "Lamp base"????????
-
Or maybe even, "Lamp base"????????
Sorry here it is, we might be able to steer it back :thup: ;D
http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a361/WhiteRose1649/DSC00194.jpg
-
Thanks, For what it is worth, that is a label I have seen on known Kralik decors, although the label has not been definitively linked to their production.
I would add the additional comment that I have not seen that label on a piece of glass that is known to definitely not be Kralik...... for what that is worth....
I am not saying it is because of the label.....
Kralik's production is amazingly diverse, and like I said initially, I would not be surprised if this is theirs. They also used mica in some decors.
Craig
-
When did glass first start getting signed / marked / labeled Czechoslovakia (and other spellings for the same)? Does anyone know?
-
Czechoslovakia was formed at the end of WWI and officially proclaimed a nation on October 28, 1918. Use of the name on glass likely started in early 1919, at least that would be my assumption. I doubt it started immediately.....
The only other real spelling that is seen, that I am aware of, is the French version of the country name. There are variations of the name which are hyphenated or not , and generally hyphenated examples be used (quite loosely) to date production to the 20's.
It is my understanding that the use of the hyphenated country name was uncommon by the very late 20's..... but this is not written in stone and should not be used as a formal dating method...... As an example, I believe the Loetz oval, which is hyphenated, was used well into the 30's.....
Hope this helps, Craig
-
Just to say that the label that has been added by Shugdens is the same as one that I recorded (through drawing) from a similar lamp base with mica inclusions many years ago. I have the drawing somewhere on file. Sadly, I was unable to photograph it at the time, and it was sold before I could access the camera. So, unless this is one and the same, there are at least two of these lamp bases bearing the same label that have been recorded :)
Nigel
-
Just to say that the label that has been added by Shugdens is the same as one that I recorded (through drawing) from a similar lamp base with mica inclusions many years ago. I have the drawing somewhere on file. Sadly, I was unable to photograph it at the time, and it was sold before I could access the camera. So, unless this is one and the same, there are at least two of these lamp bases bearing the same label that have been recorded :)
Nigel
Where did you see the last one?
-
Shugdens,
I owned it, back in the early 1990's and sold it then. Can't remember where I bought it, but in the UK. I am stretching the little grey cells, and seem to remember that it was the same shape lamp base, but a different colourway.
Nigel
-
Shugdens,
I owned it, back in the early 1990's and sold it then. Can't remember where I bought it, but in the UK. I am stretching the little grey cells, and seem to remember that it was the same shape lamp base, but a different colourway.
Nigel
I'm reluctant to say where I by things, it could well be the same one. Items have a habit of circulating.
-
the same shape lamp base, but a different colourway
The point being, I believe that makes two ;) :)
My memory suggests that it was a far scarcer colour with red being part of the design.
Nigel
PS. Given that it would have been about 18 years ago, I wouldn't have a problem divulging where I bought it, if only I could remember - too much water (stock) passed under the bridge since then ;) I may well have sold it at Portobello, when I was based there. N.
-
The point being I believe that makes two ;) :)
My memory suggests that it was a far scarcer colour with red being part of the design.
Nigel
PS. Given that it would have been about 18 years ago, I wouldn't have a problem divulging where I bought it, if only I could remember - too much water (stock) passed under the bridge since then ;) I may well have sold it at Portobello, when I was based there. N.
Portobelo prices, I wish what.... Its certainly not £20 at Failsworth mill & strugling to pay the rent... Then again London rents get London prices.
I'm realy strugling athis month & buying prety vases on a blind whim dont help :'(
-
How wonderful to finally lay this one to rest. I am fairly certain the inclusions are mica.
Maker may still elude but at least getting the country is good!
-
They are mica, Frank. It's definitely from that unknown stable. (I've studied the one for sale near me, and I even put a thread in British and Irish glass about this one with label. :thup: ) It is good to get the country of origin sorted, isn't it? :rah:
-
Its getting put away this piece, I'm going to get it wired up & give it a good clean. Its a realy beautiful piece.
Now with the other bits of the lot mostly sold it stands me at just a few pounds so I can aford to keep it a while. I am still deciding which lamp bases to sell & which to keep :ho: :ho:
This mika thing has me at a loss, whats the diffrence between foil & mika then glitter & aventurine?
-
Foil that is used is just that, thin metal sheets of silver, (most common) although gold foil is used on occasion.
Mica is a naturally occurring mineral of the sheet silicate family, known for it's ability to split very into very thin sheets, This property is referred to basal cleavage.
Aventurine is technically the result of a process involving the creation of copper crystals within glass, which are then used in pieces in other glass. This term is also been commonly applied to the use of metal particulates in glass, most commonly Italian glass. It is a term that through misapplication has taken on a broader common meaning when referring to glass in a non technical terms. The use of gold powder or silver foil within some glass is referred to by many as "Aventurine", although "technically" the use of that term would not be correct to describe those decors, but it has become for many, a commonly accepted term.
Glitter, is what you glue to a greeting card, jewelry, clothing, and many other things to make it sparkle.... Usually purchased at a hobby or craft store, it is generally made of a plastic material, and if you were to introduce it to molten glass would burn almost instantly contaminating the gather.
Pictures below are in the order of descriptions, except I do not have any glitter....
-
I first came across adventurine in a huge Strathearn piece I picked up but since than have used the term as you have said incorectly.
-
In the olden days, i.e., when we were children, Christmas glitter was mica I believe. The Ysarts apparently popped to Woolworths for glitter to use in their glass.
-
And this is why the bits with mica inclusions were made in the winter - I don't think they stocked up for the rest of the year.
-
I came across this looking for something else so thought I'd add it here for future ref, as it looks similar I think?
m
http://www.glassmessages.com/index.php/topic,20050.msg114827.html#msg114827
-
I came across this looking for something else so thought I'd add it here for future ref, as it looks similar I think?
m
http://www.glassmessages.com/index.php/topic,20050.msg114827.html#msg114827
its the same design but difrent colour, I've still got my one.
-
The one shown in the link is the colourway of the one that I had with an oval label.
Nigel
-
Hi Everyone, if you've been following the discussion on this link, you may remember that I had been pretty excited a while back about some photos Craig had supplied, believing I had found a connection in some research I had been doing. Alas, after further follow-up, things have once again fizzed out, and I'm back at speculation. But, I wanted to thank Craig for supplying the photos, and everyone else for their discussion and input. Hopefully someday my little mystery will be solved. :) :hi:
-
So very welcome.... Sorry it fizzled out....
On another note related to this discussion. for Sue:
This vase I showed has now changed ownership..... to my house, and the inclusions in the piece are definitely not Mica.... they are white....
Craig....
-
Weird. :-\
-
Mica can appear white.
-
http://www.artvalue.com/auctionresult--wmf-wurttembergische-metallwar-ikora-vessels-3-2757253.htm
tall outward tapering cylindrical vase here with mica and in yellow and blue (apparently although it looks brown to me in the photo)that looks to be the same decor as this lampbase.
m
-
It does and this time quite a bright yellow too.
John
-
Well dare i say i have exactly the same lampbase had it about ten years , if anyone wants to see and handle it i will bring it to the National at Birmingham next month , i believe its Mica or what i have always thought was mica . Its in the Attic.... Rosie told me not to call it the loft ? and she scares me . ::)
-
But that's not WMF - or Monart.
That combed vase with the yellow and grey and blue and mica is also the unknown "Bohemian" maker of these lamps.
-
Sue, I should have clarified that - the advert says it isn't WMF, but that it is Czech.
It is the same decor as the lamps and I thought it might be the same decor as the bowl that Pinkspoons had.
I was just adding it, just in case in the future someone comes across the vase shape and decor with a named label.
m
-
I don't think it's the same maker as the bowls, m. (Just personal opinion)
I've had a vase (exactly) the same as the non-WMF one in your last link, and I know it's the "unknown" Czech maker. (I gave it to D&D)
-
ok, I've now removed the bowl link on my post so it doesn't muddy the waters :)
m
-
:P
nah - you've just left me making irrelevant muddy comments, now that it's gone! ;) ;D ;D
-
;D
I thought best to take them off. You and I know which bowls we were talking about ;D
m
-
Another of the lamps.
The size of the neck and the resulting wide fitting is a feature on these lamps, the metal on this one is a bit thin and not that sturdy - maybe helping to lead to Frank's observation that he kept seeing them without fittings.
Nigel mentioned an oval label.
There is a lamp with what looks like the same fitting and an oval label in Reviews on Glass Nº 2, navigate to page 18 here:
https://issuu.com/icom-glass_reviewsonglass01/docs/review_on_glass_2
Bit of a stretch to say these lamps are also made by ČMS Krásno, just throwing out the possibility.
John
-
mica used in a vase here in this link - left hand photograph
https://www.collectorsweekly.com/stories/283784-ernst-steinwald?in=activity
Ernst Steinwald I think for that photograph.
Just adding this just in case it becomes relevant later. I have a lamp with the graduated colour and feathered pattern on it but no mica in it and thought it might have been Steinwald, but now seems to be ? Kralik again.
Link to my lamp version here
https://www.glassmessages.com/index.php/topic,49627.msg280153.html#msg280153
-
Again yours has that same wide fitting, did you see the ČMS Krásno lamp in the link?
-
yes. I don't 'think' mines the same as the Krasno one (that seems shallower than mine and the mica one) but mine does look like the one on the mica lampbase. And mine also has the graduated colour and feathering as well like the mica one, so I feel that it is possible it's from the same maker.
Mine also is very similar to that vase I linked to. Graduated colour and the way the colour is laid on from the foot up, the feathering and that same foot. It's gone from Kralik to Steinwald and back to Kralik.
I don't know to be honest but there does seem to be a vase shape link to the white striped one he has as Kralik (based on the Lenora muzeum?)
Link to the vase comparison here:
https://www.collectorsweekly.com/stories/293158-w-kralik--opal-spiral?in=user
Which possibly links to my lamp, which possibly links to the mica feathered one in this thread :)
I honestly do think my lamp is from this maker though
https://d3h6k4kfl8m9p0.cloudfront.net/stories/e9BpB6OYlKo26Vhqo.ve.A.png
I cut and pasted them onto a word doc next to each other and they really do appear to be from the same place to my eye.
-
also have just copied and pasted a pic of the mica lamp versus the feathered graduated vase from CW and my lamp, and this mica lamp you posted on page 6 of this thread is just an exact upside down version of the colouration of the CW vase on the right here. It even has the amber ridges running down the side of it, whereas the vase has the amber applied on the foot:
https://www.collectorsweekly.com/stories/293158-w-kralik--opal-spiral?in=user
https://www.glassmessages.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=38037.0;attach=233842;image
I think they are all three (my lamp base included) linked to the same maker. Larksel on CW has linked the striped decor and the feathered graduated decor vase to other Kralik pieces in different shapes. So probably W. Kralik on that basis so far.
-
Would agree your lamp and the vase will be the same maker, at the moment I am just not up to speed on the Kralik/Steinwald developments. Slightly uncomfortable with the attributions based on the shape of Czechoslovakia etched marks, again lack of knowledge on my part.
-
no, I think he has checked out the decors of the pieces and linked them to the same decors in different shapes which are Kralik in the Sklarska Muzeum Lenora.
He has noted previously that the stamped mark can be linked to both Steinwald and Kralik if I have read correctly. So assume from that, the take-out is that the stamped mark cannot be used just to 'assign' to Kralik.
And I'm pretty certain that the mica lampbase in blue to white is the upside down version of that vase John :) I think the mica lamps will turn out to be from this same maker.
-
Sorry, yes agreed!
There seems to be some complication though when it appears that items with the same decor may have been made by more than one manufacturer at different times. So easy to make assumptions based on say current norms when they may not have applied at the time. The desire to attribute can be a steamroller...
-
Absolutely, I know. And the fly in the ointment is that the colours could have been used by more than one maker (i.e. bought in from a supplier of course) and I think that blue for example was used by Hantich. And Hantich also used the graduated colour.
But I do think it's a good probability that all three pieces are from the same maker. Which one ... well ... who knows yet? ;D
-
First of all, I agree with the idea of the desire to declare attributions becoming a steamroller.... Much more so in today's world of internet information.
I also find it necessary to state publicly that I am of the opinion that many of the "Steinwald" attributions being tossed around right now will not hold up to the test of time.
The gentleman making the vast majority of them has now declared almost every Kralik decor (about 90 of them) he had on his website showing his collection, to be Steinwald and not Kralik. Many of them still show "Kralik, Steinwald" as an attribution, but have been moved to a Steinwald page and removed from a Kralik page entirely. Dual attributions are, at least to me, a bad attribution. Glass can either be Kralik or Steinwald, but not both. Much of the information I do not agree with, although some of it has merit.
Glass, in almost every instance, can be differentiated by makers, even if the decors are similar. As an example, Kralik, Loetz, and Harrach all made a Martelé decor, and the production in almost ever instance can be differentiated.
Kralik glass has been studied pretty intently since about 1995 or so, Steinwald, for the last 8 months or so. If one is to believe the new claims being tossed around right now regarding Steinwald, Kralik made next to no glass post WWI, and what was attributed to them was produced in large part by Steinwald.
I do not believe it is either possible, or actually supportable long term, to overrule 25 years of study with the use of a couple of found ads, a handful of museum examples, and some shape comparisons, and do it in a period of around 8 months or so.
Call me a doubting Thomas if you must, but I think attribution changes and declarations require much more substantiating evidence than we are seeing, to hold up to long term scrutiny.
Just my 2 cents worth, and not really a subject I am all that interested in contesting and getting n the middle of. ;D
Craig
-
And museum attributions with the best will in the world, are just attributions. The same as ours are until there is pattern book proof.
However, I was just trying to link these three pieces together : That feathered blue to white vase with amber, the mica lampbase and my lampbase.
The process of deduction always starts somewhere and at the moment, to my eye I think there is a definite link between them.
I don't have any clue about maker though. I'm just going on decor and colour and style of piece at the moment. :) I know really next to nothing about Kralik stuff and absolutely nothing about Steinwald. I just have a fairly good memory and like to post if something might link to something else or be useful in further searches :)