Posted 11 months ago
I always split my sides over the unbridled feeding frenzy unfolding anytime a piece of glass on a mount comes to market. 90% are unmarked, not silver or even bronze, but pathetic, cheap white metal, which do not deter prices from going through the roof, and pieces immediately labeled "Loetz". Even the mounts on Loetz Empire are ridiculously tacky, which does dot stop dealers and collectors from swooning.
Even more alarmingly, some are actually SCREWED into the glass, making them irremovable and therefore useless for use with other vases. And try to get rid of vases drilled for lamps or with holes for screws!
For the record, some of the marked mounts were made in noble metals (and also junk gilded white metal), by Argentor (there is a catalog), Van Heuten and Orivit (search the internet). Companies such as Rindskpof and Kralik routinely used cheap metal mounts for their glass.
My take: I want multiple use mounts, hopefully found with real cheap glass, so I don't get fleeced. I also make a mount of anything that offers a possibility. I have some metal frames that are really miraculous: they fit everything I place in them. And who cares? Perception is reality.
1. Picture of the original set: Kralik Pearl glass, showing a ridge that clearly indicates it was made for this mount. Flat scar pontil. 7" tall. Currently mountless.
2. The mount itself. Unmarked, but of reasonably good quality. 5.25" tall; 6.5" top diameter. Pads on each leg.
3. Enter the Loetz. Stunning (try tulips. A great, ageless, useful design, though collectors and dealers have been hospitalized for stress due to strictly verbotten water marks . . . ) Spit-polished pontil. A hefty 8.25" high.
4. The final match. A top shelf, look-what-I got piece. It could fool anyone . . . including newbies.
Now, for a Description: "Rare unsigned Late 30's Loetz Schaum Deco glass in an unsigned Van Heuten mount".
As I said, an endless source of picaresque amusement.