If These Shirts Could Talk: The Tantalizing Tales Behind Used Clothes
Jockeying for Position: How Boxers and Briefs Got Into Men's Pants
Gloriously Grotesque 19th-Century Pipes
In the Hot Seat: Is Your Antique Windsor a Fake?
Love at First Kite: How Pizza and Pente Led to One Oklahoman's High-Flying Obsession
Blood, Sweat, and Steel: My Afternoon with the Ace of Swords
'The Great Gatsby' Still Gets Flappers Wrong
Say Ahhh: An Oral Surgeon's Quest to Reimagine the Garage-Band Guitar
Forget TV Pickers, Meet the Real Mavericks of the Antiques World
Coveting The Craziest Cat-People Collectibles
Posted 4 months ago
JayHow
(87 items)
I have had this bowl for nearly a week now and I know nothing more about it than I did when it arrived. This is what I consider a large and heavy bowl. Measurments on this are 9" from outside ruffle to ruffle, and 5 1/4" across the bottom and 3 1/2" tall. If you look closely at picture 1 and 4, I tried to show that there are 8 panels that make up this bowl. The colour is tricky too. It looks very close to uranium but does not react to UV light. If anyone out there has seen one like this before or has any information I would love to learn more about it. Thanks everyone!
Art GlassArt glass sprang from a revolution in glassmaking in the mid 1800s, when gl…
Thanks for the Love Greatsnowyowl and you too ks85
Thanks for the love MacArt, Inky, and londonloetzlearner
stunning and very beautiful :) wow love it JayHow:)
I have no idea if it is a Fenton shape, but Fenton did produce a fair share of stretch glass. Either way. It's an unsolved mystery, but certainly is a beautiful bowl. I love the colour and had great iridescent hues.
Fenton never had pontils on their pieces other than a few of their free hand lines. (none of those looked like this)
Thanks for the love Sean, Leah and Justanovice!
You are right Leah, as well as you too Greatsnowyowl. Fenton did produce a fair amount of stretch glass but none of them had pontils as Greatsnowyowl suggested. I think this may just remain a mystery. It is one of the most beautiful pieces I own in my opinion. The colours are AMAZING even more so in person. The photo's just don't do this one justice. A photo tent is going to be arranged in the near futures budget if possible so that I can capture the true beauty of the glass an not all the glare and shadows that come with it...Anyhow, thanks for the love and comments everyone. They are greatly appreciated.
you did? Must have been this morning while the kido had my phone. (My 13yr old daughter) Sorry I missed your call. If you are not busy I can call you in a few?
sure why not :) you can call me :)
Ok, give me a few and I'll give you a ring.
Hello Jerrod was trying to get a hold of you !!!!!
im thinking that this could be LCT GLASS.
The more I think about this bowl and look at it the more I am convinced it is Steuben. The reason why Steuben survived and LCT did not is because Steuben (F. Carder) adapted to the times and LC Tiffany did not. Steuben went to more subtle colors like Verre de Soie to be in fashion during the 20's and 30's Art Deco phase, where as Louis C. Tiffany clung to iridescent finishes which were considered passe, and soon was left behind. The forms are often borrowed from the Art Nouveau but with colors more acceptable to the times. Therefore I'd say this is Steuben from the late 20's or early 30's. I'd say 90% sure. Thanks!
Thank you for taking a look at this most interesting piece. The story behind this is it was listed as Loetz. I knew it was not loetz by the size and characteristics of the glass itself. But I did think it was a great piece to add to my collection and decided to bid, and won. I have since tried to identify this bowl with no luck. I can only find one instance on Ebay where it is selling for almost one thousand dollars and I have contacted the seller and his thinking is it is tiffany, although I am not convinced. I need to be able to see this in an old catalog or have a proffessional dealing in the glass to take a look at it. It is one beautiful piece in my collection that is in a class all of its own. I have nothing else quite like it. I know if you look at it under magnification you can still see the sand in the glass. So that tells me how old it is.
Mr. T said he has no idea what it is. I am still leaning towards Steuben but I have not found anything similar yet, so my 90% sure has dropped to about 75%. I am almost sure it is not Tiffany due to the color, and the greenish-yellow tint to the glass makes me think it might even be European not American, but that is low on my list. The one overseas possibility is Poschinger; because they made similar shapes in similar colors. I will do some looking along those lines to prove myself wrong about Steuben. I'll let you know what I find, if anything. :)
I looked at the Stueben on Google and saw nothing that would compare in size or color. Found a few stretch pieces but they did not resemble this bowl of mine either. I wondered about poshinger myself knowing they did do some shapes in ruffles similar, but still looking into that. I have an example of Poshinger in a glatt decor with a stretched tooled edge. But still hard to say. http://www.collectorsweekly.com/stories/84394-poschinger-eandr-western-germany-jip-vas?in=user
It's not "stretch glass" because it has a polished pontil and stretch glass was pressed in a mold.
I agree that stretch-glass usually refers to cheap carnival glass, that was pressed and did not have a polished pontil, so we can eliminate that. But Tiffany and Steuben both made bowls and vases with ruffled tops that had the same "stretch" effect on the rims. Tiffany also made 8-ribbed/sided bowls with straight sides and stretch rims very similar to this one, so we can't yet rule out Tiffany.
There are two other distinct possibilities; Kew Blas and Nash. The first imitated Tiffany and the second WAS Tiffany (after they closed, renamed). The problem with Kew Blas is they are scarce! But the point here is that Kew Blas was often much thicker and heavier than Tiffany, which fits your description. If this were Tiffany it would be much lighter probably - see my posting for the blue Favrile bowl with a butterfly; it weights about a pound. is 10" in diameter and 3-3/4" tall, is ribbed and has stretch rim. So if your bowl weighs more like 2-3 pounds it might be Kew Blas (which I have seen unsigned). So what do you think?
sorry to be late to this party....no real idea and a guess only...I would say not Continental, leaning toward American made. Not much help on this one.
I just posted a Kew Blas bowl I used to own. check it out!
I looked at a few Kew Blas and this could definetly be a contender. The weight on this bowl could easily be 2-3 lbs. I thought it was crystal at first because it was so heavy. I want to look into this and see what I might find out.