Glass Message Board
Glass Identification - Post here for all ID requests => Glass => Topic started by: flying free on June 19, 2011, 04:35:48 PM
-
In the last few weeks at the car boot I spotted a large and very beautiful battuto cut vase, picked it up and on the bottom it had Made In China Marks and Spencers.
Then this morning I picked up a lovely ball shaped vase with a short neck that looked as though it was constructed of all the chunks off the Bo Borgstrom Bark vase (I think that is what it is called), in a gorgeous pear green just like mine - and the lady told me it was from Marks and Spencers. I didn't buy it but I had picked it up wondering if it was an Aseda vase perhaps. There are some nice but recent pieces out there, that are going to be confusing me in the future I see :-\
m
-
You do have to keep your eyes peeled in all sorts of places to see what's coming out. I've recently seen a whole load of battuto cut stuff - Chinese, in TKMaxx - which I find to be a very good place to see what sort of stuff might end up on antique stalls and other places which sell collectable stuff.
-
glass is all things to all men/women - and as has been said here before, much new material is just as attractive as the older pieces (which they copy, sometimes). But isn't the point that if we do want to be able to determine whether something is older, shouldn't we be using our skills to look for those clues that are there and waiting to be found.......i.e. surface wear on the extremities, internal wear/staining, quality of the glass (bubbles and imperfections etc.), colours etc. that would not have been used on older pieces - a good quality pontil mark etc.....just some thoughts :).
-
Yes but the problem is that the clues themselves aren't necessarily time/age specific, even wear and pontil marks. You need to have a much broader overview of glass and the current market and wider knowledge base to make even an educated guess by putting the clues together.
-
And I've got at least one bit from circa '69 in mint condition, not one smidgin of age-related wear on the base - and a load of much newer bits with loads of wear.
Given the interest these days in a lot of modern and contemporary glass, one needs to know the difference between the real thing and "look-alikes".
It is best to have a good overview of as much as you can, from museums and art galleries to TKMaxx!
-
I think both Sue and Christine have hit the nail on the head and along with that, I would add that the only thing left is 'instinct'. I only have a handful of true tat as most of what I was attracted to when I first started collecting turned out to be Sklo Union pieces fortunately. Sometimes it is very difficult to tell. The pieces I saw genuinely were lovely pieces, nicely made with no overt eek factors. I was suspicious of the battuto vase because it was so large. But the 'bark like' vase was fab - I was tempted I have to say... and I regret not buying it now as it would have looked great, but I needed to save the pennies to spend on the rubbish 'spitoon style' bowl I bought on the other thread ;D
m
-
I had in fact just typed a reply, although Sue just pipped me to the post. I do appreciate that a comprehensive overview quite obviously gives a better all round knowledge of glass - no one would doubt that - and the more I re-read the comments on this thread am coming to the conclusion that this issue is more a case of modern quality production versus modern cheaper copies of similar designs, I could be wrong of course. However, indulge me........I will post what I had in fact typed, as feel still has some relevance.
Actually, this is third attempt - m just pushed me out again. :thud:
"It's probably a disadvantage if someone is in the habit of buying material similar to those pieces mentioned already - from what I hear much of this seems to be copied (although haven't been in TK Maxx for years). Don't know about others, but I always (consciously or otherwise) assess every piece I buy, and have made few mistakes (when determining whether new/old) in comparison with the quantity bought. Although it's rare for me to know exactly what it is that I'm buying, I almost always know that it has age is not recent - I'd envy anyone who knew always exactly what they were buying at the time of the deal. Perhaps it is just that there is far less copying of the type of glass that I collect. But coming back to the point about 'reading' a piece of glass for clues. The attached pictures are of a clear/blue tinted, ribbed/wrythen bubbled smallish lamp base, with bottom hole, from yesterday morning's boot sale: cost £1. I was assessing........old style brass, stained, fittings (with ceramic insert saying MEM Made in England), and attached with plaster of paris), bakelite on/off switch (showing much wear from use), noticable wear/small chips to lamp base, abrasion to the outer sides of the ribs, dirt/grime lodged deeply between the ribs, and the flex (now removed) heavily nocotine stained. Haven't a clue as to origin, or exact date, but based on age related factors am thinking somewhere between 1940 and 1960, and although (probably) of no value, quite attractive. HOWEVER, if this had plastic fittings, no age related wear, etc. etc. I would simply have left behind - the point being..................that originality always has a greater value than a cheap copy. I'm well aware that these comments are slightly off topic re the subject heading, but the point is you don't need to be a Phd. from the V. & A. to begin making common sense assessments of most pieces of glass (to determine age, not necessarily attribution) and it really does get better the longer you collect. To never make any effort to understand the difference between old and new - simply because it's deemed necessary to have an encyclopedic knowledge of glass plus many years of collecting experience, is to miss a great part of the enjoyment. Incidentally, anyone recognize my lamp base (and please don't say it's :or:) - and apologies for putting pictures on someone else's thread."
-
I think what I'm saying is that you have to know/learn how to put the clues together, as you have done. You don't get that without some sort of study, and we're not talking encyclopaedic knowledge. Now I am fairly confident that your lamp is Murano and not worthless (damage being acceptable) from the style of the glass, and think that the fittings were added here. I might be wrong, but I reached those conclusions from the information you gave and many hours of general overall study.
Clues don't always work. I assessed this as 1960/70s Italian http://lustrousstone.co.uk/cpg/displayimage.php?pid=26, a very reasonable assumption and one that no-one argued with until Craig dragged a vague memory up (The mark is very hard to see).
-
Yes Christine, but you still assessed it as "something wonderful" - and you were wise enough to grab it! :thup:
-
Sue, I think that is a combination of assessment and 'instinct' though. You can assess all you like but that just makes it into a science and takes the 'art' out of it for me. Sometimes, I just go on 'I love it' and then assess, and even if found wanting my heart overrides my head and I still buy it ;D
m
-
:smg:
I go on "loving it" too. I've learned to trust my guts. They have served me well!
But learning about as much of the stuff as I can teaches my guts more.
-
It's all of it, but not necessarily in equal measure. If you are buying for research or to sell on you start with the knowledge-based gut reaction then add in the assessment before yay or nay. Here the assessment is important and can mean the difference between loss and profit, buy or leave. If you are buying to keep, you start with the heart-based reaction, then you consider the knowledge-based assessment. If you don't care about its failings that's fine.
Yesterday I bought a horrible brown, vaguely streaky looking paperweight. My knowledge guts knew what it was before I assessed it, but I'm never going to love it. It's a Malta Decorative Glass PW with a label and sand-blasted for Malta Insurance Co. Ltd, neither of which I could see before I knew I was going to buy it. It's uncommon and a research item so it will stay.
-
thanks :) I certainly don't envy those who are collecting contemporary high end pieces - because I get the impression it is precisely that material which is giving the most difficulty - an almost complete lack of age related factors - and then yes, you do need to have a mind's eye full of images in order to make a worthwhile assessment. I would have agreed with you on the Loetz jug and tumbler, so full marks to Craig. As a collector only, I'm obsessed with originality, and combined with the areas in which I collect, have perhaps an easier job than some, and have no objection to reasonable wear - even to the point that I find it comforting to see signs that something has been around for a while, although I appreciate there are those who avoid the slightest mark. I had also thought of Murano for the lamp base, with this 'bullicante' effect of the bubbles - but have learned to be a little cautious in making attribtions in areas of scant knowledge, and yes, agree fittings attached in the U.K.
-
The best place to get hold of high-end contemporary glass is to get it directly from the makers who go to the fairs.
:thup: :thup: :thup:
-
and here's me sympathizing with what I thought was your penury ;)
-
My position of "distressed gentlewoman" is fairly recent. :P
-
Paul, your lamps may be Seguso... compare with those in this topic...
http://www.glassmessages.com/index.php/topic,4048.0.html and this one:
http://www.glassmessages.com/index.php/topic,40707.0.html
-
I had in fact just typed a reply, although Sue just pipped me to the post. I do appreciate that a comprehensive overview quite obviously gives a better all round knowledge of glass - no one would doubt that - and the more I re-read the comments on this thread am coming to the conclusion that this issue is more a case of modern quality production versus modern cheaper copies of similar designs, I could be wrong of course. However, indulge me........I will post what I had in fact typed, as feel still has some relevance.
Actually, this is third attempt - m just pushed me out again. :thud:
"It's probably a disadvantage if someone is in the habit of buying material similar to those pieces mentioned already - from what I hear much of this seems to be copied (although haven't been in TK Maxx for years). Don't know about others, but I always (consciously or otherwise) assess every piece I buy, and have made few mistakes (when determining whether new/old) in comparison with the quantity bought. Although it's rare for me to know exactly what it is that I'm buying, I almost always know that it has age is not recent - I'd envy anyone who knew always exactly what they were buying at the time of the deal. Perhaps it is just that there is far less copying of the type of glass that I collect. But coming back to the point about 'reading' a piece of glass for clues. The attached pictures are of a clear/blue tinted, ribbed/wrythen bubbled smallish lamp base, with bottom hole, from yesterday morning's boot sale: cost £1. I was assessing........old style brass, stained, fittings (with ceramic insert saying MEM Made in England), and attached with plaster of paris), bakelite on/off switch (showing much wear from use), noticable wear/small chips to lamp base, abrasion to the outer sides of the ribs, dirt/grime lodged deeply between the ribs, and the flex (now removed) heavily nocotine stained. Haven't a clue as to origin, or exact date, but based on age related factors am thinking somewhere between 1940 and 1960, and although (probably) of no value, quite attractive. HOWEVER, if this had plastic fittings, no age related wear, etc. etc. I would simply have left behind - the point being..................that originality always has a greater value than a cheap copy. I'm well aware that these comments are slightly off topic re the subject heading, but the point is you don't need to be a Phd. from the V. & A. to begin making common sense assessments of most pieces of glass (to determine age, not necessarily attribution) and it really does get better the longer you collect. To never make any effort to understand the difference between old and new - simply because it's deemed necessary to have an encyclopedic knowledge of glass plus many years of collecting experience, is to miss a great part of the enjoyment. Incidentally, anyone recognize my lamp base (and please don't say it's :or:) - and apologies for putting pictures on someone else's thread."
Your fitting is more likely 20s/30s/40s but is could have been old fitting stock when base was produced.
-
Looks like you are spot on Anne - my sincere thanks for your help :) - and the base is identical, with the slight 'cut out' on one side through which to channel the flex - just a shame that I don't have the label. It seems that I was in the right area date wise, and maybe worth a little more than the £1. purchase price, so I will definitely keep. My thanks again. Frank may well be correct about the old fitting stock going onto a more recent base, I'm unsure of the date line for changing from metal fittings to plastic ones, although would have thought not too much later than the date of this base perhaps.
-
Plastic fittings came in in the 1920s and metal fittings are still in use. So not really a changeover just different manufacturing techniques, styles and so forth. But at least these are reasonably consistent and progressive, making dating easier than with glass.