Glass Message Board
Glass Identification - Post here for all ID requests => Glass => Topic started by: flying free on February 12, 2012, 11:51:16 PM
-
I have no idea about this piece at all despite looking for quite a while. I found a couple of engraved Stevens and Williams pieces where the engraving looked to have similarities in design so I was wondering if it may be one of their pieces?
And is it cut or engraved? there are no 'matt' bits on this, it all looks polished if you know what I mean. Even the base of the foot underneath is engraved.
The underplate is deep in the middle and I think is definitely supposed to be an underplate. It has a beautiful fairly large, polished pontil mark. I think the rim is folded underneath it but can't be certain. Maybe it was just made with a slightly thicker bit at the rim (is that possible?)
All thoughts much appreciated - it's quite a lot bigger than say a champagne coupe. I think it must be a dessert bowl and underplate?
m
-
http://www.millersantiquesguide.com/items/47901/an-early-20th-century-stevens-/
here's an example where I thought the leaves looked similar.
m
-
It is in the style of John Orchard who worked for S&W but others did similar . :-\
-
yes, I saw his pieces as well JP..they are gorgeous. I suppose this doesn't have the cache of being a detailed 'scene' however I still think it is beautifully done - added to which the cutting on the underside of the foot. I think the quality is there for Stevens and Williams.
m
-
Err, is this intaglio cutting? sorry I'm slightly embarrassed asking in case someone says, no it was made yesterday by machine ;D
And could it be Thomas Webb?
m
-
Not sure what you mean M. It's intaglio, i.e., below the surface. The way to tell if it's machine or not is to look at the detail; is everything identical and spot-on accurate. Hand cutting isn't.
-
I was told by a very knowledgeable person that those blossoms were almost as good as his signature .
-
JP are you referring to the blossoms on my piece or his (John Orchard's) blossoms in general please?
Hi Christine - no I'm not sure what I mean either...I have little to no idea about the techniques of engraving really or how it's done, except I've always coveted some absolutely gorgeous pieces (pieces with pictures and huge amounts of detail in them etc) within the books I have. I haven't been able to find my Peter Dreiser book to look at for information :cry:, and I get confused by the terms. In my mind's eye, cut meant straight lines and shiny polished finish and engraved meant flowing, more natural lines and matt finish - I think that was my confusion, because this is flowing and natural but all shiny and polished with no matt areas. I'm going to have another hunt for my book to see if I can understand better.
Having now looked under a magnifying glass each leaf and petal has loads of straight lines very close together and not seen on just looking at the piece without magnification - so would that be wheel engraved?
Thank you both for looking :) and helping
m
-
m, you say its all highlypolished, no matt areas, could this be a piece of 'Rock Crystal' ?
That is always very highly polished. Stevens & Williams did that too.
Andy
;)
-
It's not rock crystal.
Both can be done with wheels. I don't know the definitions off the top of my head but cut glass can be grey (unpolished) too. It may just be geometric versus natural (a bit like parquetry versus marquetry).
-
The blossom on your piece looks just like the blossom on the decanter i had although it had other desings also and SOTHEBYS head of glass at the time said it was John Orchard for sure because of the blossom , you could ask Thomas Mr claret jug collector for his opinion , he is very well versed on that type of decoration .
-
hello m - I have a tazza type thingy with identical underfoot decoration, on which I have written 'Stourbridge Glass Company c. 1920' - because that was what the seller told me - apparently they marketed their production under the name of Tudor Crystal (see 'Art Deco To Post Modernism' - Nigel and Jeanette Hayhurst). I've not really had the time to investigate further, so cannot provide specific corroboration of this pattern from books etc. Decoration on the bowl is a tad less like yours, but has much similarity. I have another intaglio cut bowl with decoration very similar to yours - that sort of stylized daisy and the crescent shaped curving leaves look, which is backstamped 'MADE IN ENGLAND', and on which I have written 'Webb Corbett - c.1930's, which again was the description given to me by the seller.
Not really sure that this is of much help, and hope you don't mind my pix being added to your post :)
-
Thank you JP :) I've looked at some of Thomas's pieces ...incredibly beautiful. :mrgreen:
Close up of engraving attached below
-
Hi Paul
the underfoot engraving looks remarkably similar however I would say the engraving in the bowl is a completely different design :-\ the flowers aren't the same at all.
m
-
o.k. I take your point about the flowers m - so how about this, which I beleive to be Webb Corbett, certainly the flowers are similar, but there is no catherine wheel sort of underfoot design.
-
what shape is the piece Paul? and how do you know it is Webb Corbett please?
thanks
m
-
I believe it's finger bowl c. 1930's - 4.1/2" in diameter and 2.1/2" in height. Very good quality, thin glass and has a 'ding' to die for - has a high quality ground/polished pontil depression in the centre of the base, in which (in upper case) is a backstamp reading MADE IN ENGLAND, and the cutting runs into the pontil area. This bowl has a slightly outward curving/flared rim. The woman from whom I purchased this, has some considerable knowledge re glass (at least I think so) and told me it was Webb Corbett. Unfortunately, regret that I cannot prove this to you though.
-
Well its marked England & thats that, but seriously its a dead ringer for several Pairpoint patterns (they had around 40 cuttings) here in the U.S.
-
hi maniacs :-)
really nice finger bowl - finely engraved - i tend to webb corbet .. ! hard to proove .. anyway what a nice thingee :-)
sorry i am not able to say more about this little beauty .. :-(
tommy the claret jug man :-)
-
Hi Thomas
are you referring to Paul's pictures please? or my pictures at the top of the thread i.e. the bowl and underplate?
thanks so for taking a look :)
m
-
hmm .. i think both has been made by webb corbett :pb:
-
Thank you Thomas :sun:
Now just to pin down the engraver and the dates - I get very confused between all the Webb's and their various names.
This is what I have found as a history on Webb Corbett
which I thought was very helpful
http://gorgeousglass.org.uk/webb-corbett/
and here a history on Stevens and Williams
http://gorgeousglass.org.uk/steven-williams/
m
-
I thought most if not all Webb Corbett was signed ? i have oodles of it and i suppose a prunus blossom or a daisy looks more or less the same by most good engravers . :usd: :-\
-
There is a piece on ebay at the moment, beautiful, looks very similar to mine in the engraving, attributed to Thomas Webb and looks to have the flowers and the foliage in a very similar way to mine. And I may be splitting hairs here but I don't think the flowers don't look the same as mine - or is it just me?
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Thomas-Webb-Crystal-Etched-Glass-4-x-piece-Epergne-Silver-plated-stand-/370582736145?pt=UK_Art_Glass&hash=item564873cd11
JP we cross posted...I'm sure that things can look very similar, and I'm sure I probably am splitting hairs but I would swear those flowers on the link are not done by the same hand as my flowers.
-
m - I also don't see the quality in the cutting of the flowers in your link, to be as good as your piece - and how 'sound' is the Thomas Webb provenance, I wonder. Undoubtedly they made epergnes, but so did umpteen other factories. Epergnes were items of table decoration that belonged to the late C19 - early C20 period - quite a bit earlier than the date of pieces of which we are discussing, so most unlikely to be the same hand.
If you wish, I can attach a picture of my finger bowl - but will not do so unless you request it - after all this is your thread.
-
Thomas when you said Webb Corbett I presume you meant post 1953 when the name was changed from Thomas Webb & Corbett ltd to Webb &Corbett Ltd ?
Paul, I'm not entirely sure what we are discussing here date wise to be honest. There are two possible attributions at the moment
a) Webb Corbett ?(which could mean post 1953 when Thomas Webb & Corbett Ltd name changed to Webb & Corbett Ltd, or it could mean Thomas Webb & Corbett Ltd prior to 1953 as items prior to 1953 were marked Webb Corbett, but my piece is completely unmarked and JP has mentioned that most Webb Corbett pieces were marked)
or
b) Stevens and Williams where I have found similar engraving and where my set has been mentioned as being very similar to John Orchard engraving. John Orchard was engraving many years earlier than 1953. and I was thinking late 19th early 20th century for my set :-\ so that epergne I linked to would be around a similar time period for what I was thinking.
However, I have to say, my instinct was that my set was an earlier piece, based on who would be making engraved footed dessert bowls with underplates in the `1950s (not something I relate to the mid 20th century but I am probably wrong) and also that I had found very similar engraved foliage and flowers on items from around the late 19th early 20th.
m
-
M, the cutting on yours is far superior to the epergnes in the auction link.
I would trust the id of the ones in the link - that's Tracy Opie and she really does know her stuff.
-
Hi Sue :) I would as well - I wasn't disputing the attribution in the link (see my post above yours where I was thinking both the epergnes and my piece come from the same period) - I was just thinking what you have said, which is that the cutting on mine seems to be by a different hand even though the design is very similar.
I'm still thinking my set could be engraved by John Orchard :-\ basically.
Quibbled slightly by mention of it being a much later piece (possibly - depending on whether Thomas meant post 1953 by his mention of Webb Corbett or whether he was just referring to the company as Webb Corbett which could mean Thomas Webb & Corbett ltd per se) and potentially by a completely different house (where myself and John had though Stevens and Williams)
....mmm, so no certainty there then ;D
m
-
still not sure about the fingerbowl .. but i wouldn´t think its John Orchard .. because his best time was around 1880/1900 ...
so this one looks like John Orchard and that one is about 1890 ..
http://img.inkfrog.com/click_nelarge1.orig.php?image=tifjug_(7).JPG&username=fearthepug&aid=015956476
http://www.ebay.de/itm/160724974651?ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1439.l2648
-
Thomas thank you for a great link :) if that looks to be Orchard (the jug you linked to) then I would say my leaves and flowers are completely different. The ones in the link have an extra 'circle' of dots around the centre dot in the flower on the link, the petals look different somehow, and the leaves look different, more detail on them or something, I'm not sure, but not 'the same'.
mmm, so...I have a set which (I think?) is:
- high quality engraving but so far not Orchard fairly definitely.
- And it seems the consensus is it is not of the late 19th/early 20th century.
- And possibly Webb Corbett but maybe not Thomas Webb & Corbett as a) it's different engraving to a very similar engraving epergne I linked to attributed to Thomas Webb &Corbett and b) also is not marked which most Webb Corbett is.
ok, knowing what it probably isn't, is important also ;D
Paul, I'm off to look for footed bowls with underplates c.1930's and yes please, do post a pic of your piece side on if poss as well - I'd like to see the shape of it and thank you.
thanks again everyone for your help so far - much appreciated.
m
-
as requested m - here is a side picture (plus view of the backstamp) of my finger bowl.
-
Interesting Paul, I'm not sure that is the same either :-\
m
-
Looking for a reference for Leni's vase I happened upon the cut glass piece in CH's 20th Century British Glass again. On page 31 there is a decanter on the right that has the little blossoms on and they don't appear (although I find it quite hard to see detail in the pics) to have the second row of circles round the middle. It also has a scooped line around the bottom with three cut leaves 'holding' the drapes up in a similar way to my bowl (although the draped line appears to be the other way up to my bowl). On page 30 plate 56 vase on far left appears to have (although again difficult to see if there isn't more on there as well as the leaves) the same cut leaves waving out from the centre as on the foot as my bowl and Paul's footed bowl marked MADE IN ENGLAND. I'm not trying to 'make' my bowl S&W but thought these were relevant observations.
m
-
apologies, that was a slightly garbled post as being interrupted by children - I meant that I happened upon the Stevens and Williams pages in the book, so all those references above are discussing Stevens and Williams pieces.
m
-
I have just been looking up various topics on Webb's and a member has commented on another thread that Webb's signed their items from 1907.
If this is true then either a) I have a rare unsigned piece of Webb's post 1907 or b) it could be a Webb's piece from earlier than 1907 which would mean Thomas Webb & Corbett Ltd or c) my footed bowl and underplate are not Webb's.
Question - Is the shape of the bowl with the widely flared rim, a shape that Webb's or Thomas Webb made?
M
-
quote "and a member has commented on another thread that Webb's signed their items from 1907"..........if you're referring to Thomas Webb m, then I believe we have discussed here before the fact that this factory sometimes signed, and sometimes didn't .......just to confuse us all. I certainly have pieces that are, and some that aren't. :)
-
mm, before I saw your reply Paul I realised I may have been confused again. I was trying to find the reference as you replied. I shall find it an check.
m
-
:-[ yes I believe though the reference only said Webb, that reading through again it was referring to Thomas Webb signing all from 1907.
m
-
Even a smaller company such as Tudor still produced quite a lot of various design in intalgio engraved glasses. Here are three intaglio glasses all marked Tudor made in England at the base. All the base engraved pattern are also completely different as well. None of the these are sign by Jack Lloyd (the man for intaglio at Tudor).
m. So it is very difficult to find out who made you bowl. Could be Tudor or the two Webbs unless somebody got the same pattern and marked.
Unlikely to be S&W l think your glass is likely to be 1950s.
Above infor just my personnal view.
-
Thanks Ming, your bottom one looks the most similar I think.
It seems like finding one exactly like mine will not be possible then - it's a minefield out there. Perhaps it will just sit on the shelf like my blue vase ;D
m
-
Yes it is a minefield as several of the best cutters went to Tudor when their firms closed down .
-
Hi John, I'd read a little about some Walsh Walsh personnel going to Tudor, and I was aware of the Stourbridge Glass co because I'd read about it regarding another piece. But to be honest the whole set up is so confusing (I mean I can't even keep the various Webb's and their son's in the right order ;D in my head) that I lost the will to live somewhere along the line today - without even going into which other factories closed and who went where.
I shall use it as a learning curve. I want to find a good, old piece of decorative (rather then geometric) cut/intaglio glass so I shall keep searching. In the meantime it will continue to sit on my shelf looking very beautiful. Thanks so much for your help and to all who have replied so far though. It is much appreciated.
m
-
Hadn't intended to show this plate, as the method/style of engraving is sufficiently different from m's original pieces........however, since Ming has now mentioned Jack Lloyd - and as this one does have some design features similar to Ming's - thought it worthwhile, especially as this piece is signed J. Lloyd - I've written "Stourbridge - Jack Lloyd c.1935" on the plate.
This is not Rock Crystal engraving, which is defined as possessing deep cutting, with polishing within the cuts etc., but am I correct in suggesting this might be a style of intaglio cutting called 'Polished Bright', which may have had its origins at Thomas Webb earlier in the C20?
Pieces shown earlier in this thread showed standard intaglio, i.e. areas within the cutting were very smooth (although not necessarily highly polished). On this plate, the engraved areas retain the lines made by the wheel, and which have then been highly polished, producing a sort of bright watery effect. The flowers have been left slightly matt. I can't see from the pix, whether any of Ming's pieces show polished grinding lines within the cutting, but the series of short dashes (middle piece) are certainly a common feature with my bowl.
This style of cutting appears to be very much in the minority, when compared to the overall volume of intaglio cut material - but it may not have been confined to Thomas Webb and Stourbridge Glass Co., only, although I don't know who else produced it.
However, none of this helps m - and it's possible we may not get an id for her piece due to the variety of producers of intaglio cut pieces :)
Ref. '20th Century British Glass' - Charles R. Hajdamach - Chapter Fourteen.
-
Paul, I just wanted to clarify as I still don't really understand all the differences and nuances, but on my bowl and plate all the cuts are highly polished and show no matt surfaces at all on any of the cut bits. The photos I took of close ups were to show the engraving lines which can be seen when greatly enlarged, but otherwise the pieces both look to be cut and highly polished afterwards in real life, though they have the same kind of 'watery effect' as yours close up. I thought rock crystal engraving was where the surface was cut in a raised effect as well as using intaglio where it is cut into :-\ I need to investigate more but I still can't find my lovely little book :cry:
m
-
I was getting in a right tangle with getting hold of what exactly Rock Crystal cut is with my decanter (which is possibly John Orchard for S&W).
I believe one of the cardinal features is that the whole thing is acid polished. I had thought that cutting which borders on the sculptural was neccessary, but it's not.
This is a pic of an Edinburgh Crystal "Iona" wine glass, my decanter and a Tudor wine glass.
(sorry my decanter pics are not good, and I don't have it to take more)
-
there's quite a good resume re rock crystal glass in chapter eleven in Hajdamach 'British Glass 1800 - 1914' - too long to quote here, unfortunately. It seems to be characterized by a naturalistic and flowing style, rather than the angular fairly straightforward mitre cutting we know from so much boring C20 cut glass.
I don't think that one of the prerequisites though was acid polishing, and not sure that there is a need to get too involved in rock crystal glass just now, as none of the original pieces here come under that heading anyway. Sorry Sue :kissy: luv your bits tho. ;)
quote from m........"I thought rock crystal engraving was where the surface was cut in a raised effect as well as using intaglio where it is cut into. I need to investigate more but I still can't find my lovely little book"
and a quote from Hajdamach........."Because the cutting is later covered by engraving"...........is possibly what you were thinking about m??
and what is the lovely little book that you can't find :)...........Hajdamach is NOT a little book - too bothery heavy. ;D
-
I dug out the pic as much for the Tudor wine glass as the decanter, (although r-c stuff was mentioned too) perhaps it is inappropriate. :pb:
But it does show three different cutting styles!
I have been trying to follow this thread. :ooh:
-
Sue, I have also been trying to follow this thread ;D and your Tudor Glass again has similarities and I think this thread is a good place for it. There are now quite a few items pictured and I'm still no further forward on my piece - except that consensus seems to be that my bowl is getting younger by the minute.
I do think especially given John's observation of cutters moving companies, that I will not get a definite id possibly.
I'm also hard pushed still, to understand why someone would be making footed bowls with underplates into the 50's....unless they were high end pieces. I can understand the engraving patterns being similar, but a footed bowl and underplate? I don't buy that many people were purchasing these as regular items mid century.
I think it has turned into an interesting thread. We don't get to discuss much cut glass on the board really and certainly when I've posted a piece before it received no replies, so thanks for adding your beautiful pieces.
m
-
Are footed bowls with underplates not for grapefruit?
The underplate for the pips and to place the spoon when finished.
I love this set of Tudor wineglasses I have. They originally belonged to my Grandpa, have been in the family since I was a tiny tot. I have nearly 8 of them.
The "nearly" one is one which my Dad repaired with Araldite epoxy resin. It's just the foot - the glass is usable - just not presentable.
My Dad loved his Araldite.
-
I can say with some certaintly that I dont' think it is a grapefruit bowl. It is the wrong shape, the half of grapefruit would perch precariously in the top and wobble around and it flares out widely with a narrower base. It may have been a dessert bowl I think, but with underplate to look good?
there is a something interesting on it, where the bowl narrows into the stem at the bottom, if you feel it, it is perfectly and deliberately ridged in an undulating way - as though it has been 'gathered' into a point to match the stem...not hugely, not clumsily, but very lightly and deliberately and impossible to photograph to get the effect. A nice piece of design.
-
Other types of fruit with stones or pips?
-
sorry for sounding a little insensitive Sue - I was rushing, as usual. Looking again at Hajdamach, it seems that RC was intially cut very deeply, often showing massive wrythen-shaped pillars, gadroons and roundels - and the really skillful part then involved creating a lot of wheel engraving within those deep intial cuts - just have a look at some of the decanters in Hajdamach, they're mind blowing. If you wish, please continue talking about RC for as long as you care ;D
I could be way off target, but get the impression that underplates were more a relic of the C19 - if you look at C20 pieces (the standard grapefruit bowl for example), the 'pip' tray is an incorporated part of the unit, and not a separate item.
Is the role of these two pieces of m's such that one needs must stand upon the other??
If you look in Jackson (Whitefriars) there are illustrations of shallow plate type pieces (from the late C19) that are described as ice plates and figer bowl stands.
Don't see why m's item couldn't just as easily be something like the plate on which a finger bowl would sit. I'm just not entirely happy that the comport part must sit on the plate - size wise it seems a bit of overkill. Just my thoughts you understand. :)
-
I've only got the 20th century Hajdamach, Paul.
I'm trying to avoid old and/or cut stuff, it's just my interest in all things glass keeps dragging me into this mire of death-by-thousands-of-cuts on cold glass surfaces. :grrr:
:ghug:
-
The Glass Association has some great booklets on cut glass and rock crystal with good pictures and text , i believe they will be in the foyer at Cambridge and you can get back issues . Good value for money and even better if you join . jp remember its one week tomorrow . SUNDAY 26 FEB . Wear some ID so we can avoid the ones we dont like . ;D or :pb:
-
An underplate gives you somewhere to put your sticky spoon and your pips and saves the table cloth. It also catches the dribbles. Glass bowls tend to be less spoon friendly that ceramic ones. Lots of glass dessert sets had underplates and not just cut glass ones. There are quite a few Davidson ones, for example, made well post war. And of course you could use the plates for gateauxy type things.
-
my thanks to Lustrousstone for clarifying the situation - although in Surrey one doesn't dribble, don't you know ;D
Cut glass appears to get less of a good press here than most other types - which might be down to the unrelenting boredom of the zillion pieces of bog standard mitre cut material churned out over the last 100 years - and it's difficult (in ordinary circumstances) to find things like Queensbury or Luxton designs unless you pay an arm and a leg. It seems obvious from the pieces posted on the GMB, that there is a mega fold greater interest in coloured glass of whatever quality, as opposed to clear material - maybe we human beans just have this thing about colour, or perhaps it just that old thing called fashion :)
What's wrong with old Sue, you get real history that way. :)
-
I'm off to start a new thread on coloured glass v colourless :thup:
otherwise this will get diverted
m
-
History ain't my subject, Paul. I failed my O-level. :thud:
My taste in art seems to encompass mediaeval work, then it briefly skims Art Nouveau before diving head first, deeply and profoundly into modernism, post modernism and contemporary. (skipping minimalism and a great deal of "brit art")
Of the period of several hundred years I miss out, I only like the romantic classics in music. All other art forms leave me cold. I have tried them - I do try all art - you never know when it might happen that something you think you might not like, turns out to be something you do. :thup:
-
sorry to hear your views on history Sue - 'history' is a fate that befalls of all of us (and everything around us) - it's so much a part of life that to 'not take an interest' seems to me to avoid deliberately those very things that make us what we are. Surely, Boswell and Johnson taking a trip round the Western Isles can't fail to bring a tear/smile to your eye, and the injustice toward the Tolpuddle Martyrs must make you despair of fair play, and doesn't William Wallace at least bring out the nationalism in you - Scots uniting against the bullying Sassenachs (bit like Salmond and Cameron right now ;D). History aint all Romans and pillaging Vikings ;)
Art Nouveau is too good to briefly skim (correctly it should be 'skim briefly' - adverb at the end >:D), it leads on into the whole vogue of Symbolism, Arts and Crafts, Mackintosh -but when you say Medieval do you mean like Morris that you are into the pre-Raphaelite what's its. You must surely like Durer, and how about Bosch?
As for the C20 - too many 'isms' - too much conceptual art, Jackson Pollock, Warhol and soup cans and the like....ughhhh.
But I do agree that we should try many things, otherwise you might be missing out on something that appealed, massively.
Sorry Anne - please delete or throw us into the cafe. :)
-
Bosch is my very favourite artist.
And the problem with history is that is is written by the winners, so it's all lies and nobody EVER learns from it, despite the whole point of the study of history being to avoid doing the same stupid things over and over.
I suffered from history lessons being nothing more than tons of dates to be learned off by rote.
I'm taking more of an interest now - particularly in lost bits of history - such as the Picts and the most important battle in british history ever - the battle of Dunnichen, which defined the border between Scotland and England, when the Picts drove the king of Northumbria back. AD 685.
-
Interesting conversation! A lovely little set you have there, and others have shown some very nice glass as well. Engraved glass is my thang, and it's nice to see a long thread about it. Haven't been around for a while.
Glass definitions are so tough because they're so variable. Take "rock crystal." Originally it referred to a style of deep engraving that covered much of the surface of a piece and was entirely polished, as others have indicated. I guess that's still true in the UK, but over here it has been used differently, so that some companies came to call all entirely polished patterns, rock crystal. Libby had a line of stemware called Rock Crystal, though the engraving is nothing like what was originally meant by the term.
Intaglio has always been a tough one to pin down - it seems like everyone has their own definition. Based on a keen interest and resulting research, to me intaglio can in general be described as deep engraving, usually done with a stone or diamond wheel, followed by copper wheel engraved detail. There isn't always a clear distinction, but generally if a design is engraved entirely with a copper wheel it's probably not intaglio. The engraving in the OP I wouldn't consider intaglio. This could be another geographic difference, but Hajdamach also describes intaglio as being stone cut. He doesn't say anything about copper wheel details, but they were certainly added to a lot of what is now known as intaglio, which includes a lot more than the type of pieces he discusses (in the 1800-1924 book).
Someone said this was marked as being made in England, but I didn't see where Flying Free said that. Is it the case or not? That design could easily have been done by Hawkes, Sinclaire, or the like (it's not Pairpoint as far as I can tell). It looks quite familiar, actually. Is either piece marked? Some American etched sigs are very very hard to see.
-
hmmm, food for thought and I need time to investigate all the possible many options.
Kristi thank you for taking the time to look and reply in such detail and for adding further names to Ohio's for me to look up. Also to everyone who has provided thoughts, very detailed responses and examples as well :)
Paul, I can see what you mean about the little plate possibly being a stand alone piece and you could be right, but the bowl fits perfectly into the dip in it and somehow in the flesh, they just seem to be right that way. OTOH if you started dropping pips into it, they would just all fall on the foot of the bowl as there is no room round the bowl foot, it 'slots' into the dip and then there is a raised rim for the plate, no spare space in the dip.
I now feel obliged to go and find out more information on this piece - I may be some time ;D
m
-
Looks like what is commonly called over here a mayonnaise set.
-
Kristi - it would appear that m's piece is not marked at all - it was in fact one of my pieces that was being shown for comparison that is marked 'MADE IN ENGLAND'.
-
I had thought intaglio was very simply defined - it's the pattern cut in to a piece - as opposed to cameo, where the pattern sticks out.
-
quote ..............."as opposed to cameo, where the pattern sticks out". So what happened to the good old fashioned description of 'in relief' >:D I think Lustrousstone had already given the definition of intaglio, and would believe this covers all cutting/decoration that goes below the original surface plane of the glass. I don't think, however, that this piece could in any way be described as 'cut glass' (in the sense of deep mitres), but rather as wheel engraved decoration. krsilber is probably right in suggesting this is one of those definitions depending on which side of the pond you live.
-
"Relief" can stick out or in. :spls:
And the words cameo and intaglio refer to relief in other materials as well as glass.
-
Relief sticks out according to the dictionary, so cameo is relief and intaglio is not.
-
Coming to this thread late (lots of grandchildren visiting over half term ;D ) I have found it very interesting and helpful! I collect this sort of glass too, and have many examples of similar flower decoration as in the first post. These are very difficult to pin down to a single company or engraver, as I think many people did the same sort of thing. Also, I find cut and engraved glass the most difficult to photograph! ::)
I would love to find out more information and names of the engravers and cutters responsible for this type of work, and thank you all for the pictures and comments posted so far. Please lets have more about cut and engraved glass! :smg: (Sorry, Sue ;) )
Here's a couple of (not very good) pics of some pieces from my collection which I think have similar (but not the same!) flower engraving.
-
hello Leni - You don't give the size of your 'Webb's footed bowl', but it has the shape and outline of a cigarette holder - not I don't think a bowl, since it's not round. I do know that pieces of a similar 'squashed' shape were used for holding cigarettes, and were something like 3.1/2" tall - there are some shown in one of the Barrie Skelcher books - they date to about 1935, and came with plain and upturned feet.
As a suggestion, how about describing glass showing cut decoration similar to most of the pieces in this thread, as simply 'wheel engraved' - and those (usually larger) pieces with standard mitre type decoration as 'cut glass'.
-
Sorry, I should of course have put the size of the bowl - yes, it's definitely a bowl! It's 6 inches (15cm) high and 8 inches (20cm) across the top! ;D
Re how to describe cut / etched / engraved glass : I wish I knew the correct terms, because I do struggle with this - lots of my pieces are a bit of each! For example, I would tend to describe the bowl (above) as 'cut glass' because it's mainly cut with a little intaglio decoration round the top and bottom, and I named the picture of the flute as 'cut stem' because, as well as the engraved flowers on the bowl and the foot ..... it has a cut stem! ::) :-[
I'd love to find out more about the claret jug. I think it's rather nice. It needs a bit of sorting out (aka 'Basiling') as it has some scratches round the inside where someone has cleaned it over-enthusiastically. I don't know the maker, but I know it's good because Ray Annenberg wanted it, but his missus said he'd bought enough glass, so I bought it instead! :thup:
-
There are a pair of Peter Dreiser glasses on ebay right now ... not mine unfortunately ,,,, i believe Andy is the Fisherman go for em boyo . :thup: