Topic: NOT SCHNEIDER OR WMF BUT WHO/ PLUS SIGNATURE

[Morgan48]

Hi

Would certainly appreciate some opinion regarding the maker of this glass sphere. I call it a sphere because although it has a throat ( see photo ) it is only about 5cms deep therfore has no apparent practical function....unless one uses it as a carpet bowl!
It appears to  be red glass with colour either mixed in or laid on and then cased in clear glass. It is 15cms high, 18 cms diameter and weighs in at a fairly respectable 2.7 kilos.
Underneath it has a concave and fairly irregular grinding out where snapped off from the rod.... not unlike WMF but without the quite precise manner.
It is signed but this may be erroneous ( or so a couple of auction house "experts" have advised me ) so I have not included that for the time being.

http://tinypic.com/69hk6v.jpg
http://tinypic.com/69hkht.jpg
http://tinypic.com/69hkoz.jpg


Regards


Gareth


Morgan48

[Jo in Australia]

Maybe a candlestick?
There was a very similar WMF piece on ebay recently:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=7481&item=6539757908&rd=1&ssPageName=WDVW
Whatever it is it's very nice.

- Jo in Australia

[aa]

Hi Gareth, Can we have a look at the signature please, if only to concur with the experts' opinion? Or if no photo available, what does it say?

[nigel benson]

Hi Gareth,

If you're using the book "WMF Ikora and Myra Glass" by Carlo Burschel and Heinz Scheiffele - as I suspect you are - I don't think you can assume that it is fully comprehensive. Like any book there are always things missing.

Although you say the globe doesn't have a typical WMF pontil I am sure that you must have a hunch that it is in fact by that company

My feeling is certainly that it has characteristics of WMF Ikora. In my experience, just like Monart, WMF Ikora has a number of differently finished pontils - go on give us all a look at the base!

Nigel

[Morgan48]

Hi

Many thanks all for the contributions...particularly the link to the small WMF candlestick... very nice piece but much smaller than this...although that does not exclude that being its function.
Nigel...your comments regarding the diversity of WMF becomes even more apparent with the various rarer and one off pieces that turn up....but while there appears initially to be very direct comparisons with WMF there remains the gut instinct that it is not.
These signatures have to a certain extent clouded the issue but not necessarily excluded a WMF link. This is a pastiche of the 2 marks not just a single photograph of the base

http://tinypic.com/6e2451.jpg

Experts have advised these are spurious but on the grounds that it is not pate de verre
I can understand someone who wishes to mislead putting a signature to a piece but not then confounding this by adding a reg reference number, that to my knowledge does not correspond to this artists work,.... something really quite illogical.
I have googled for hours looking for further information on Walther and quite surprised that there is none detailing his output once he left Daum and set up his own workshops.... has anyone any links or photographs to a period of approx 20 years plus of a man who could not be considered obscure remote nor average .
In the early nineties I saw a reference to him in an encyclopaedic reference book on glass where it briefly mentions his divergence into more freeform pieces..... but I dont remember the name of the book nor read anything similar since...... Just doesn't make sense. Any further help would be very much appreciated

Again many thanks all


Regards


Gareth


Morgan48

[Jo in Australia]

If it really was by Almeric Walter it would seem strange for it to be signed Reg. des. in English.
 -Jo

[Jo in Australia]

... sorry... reg. no.  :oops:
It's very late here is the only excuse I can give for my lack of reading ability.
- Jo

[nigel benson]

I'm afraid I still favour WMF Ikora. The base and pontil finishing is consistant with pieces seen over the years.

As to the subject of the signature. It does not have that feeling of confidence that comes with a genuine signing, which although not conclusive by any means, does give rise to suspiscion. I have to tread carefully now. There is one dealer, to my knowledge, that not only has items signed up, but also often includes a serial number - which to his eternal "credit" he at least tries to concur with the production numbers of the given fatcory/designer in question. He cannot be the only one!

I think one has to ask searching questions about something that appears to be what it is not, or might not be.

I am sure we have all bought a piece of glass with characteristics that point toward a direction that we'd like it to be - only to find out in the course of time that it ain't what we hoped for. Sometimes it's better, sometimes worse. I'd be very wary of that serial number Gareth.

Nigel

[Frank]

Perhaps the Reg No refers to the fakers filing system in this case.

[Ivo]

i agree that it is a piece of Ikora with a crudely done fantasy signature done by someone who has no clue about glass, or about Daum, or about Walter, or about 1910s. 20s and 30s styles. I also think the sig detracts greatly from the value of the Ikora piece  because it has been carved in too deep. You can not polish it out without regrinding the whole thing.  The pontil finish looks consistent with most Ikora pieces, as does the colouring technique. :evil: