Posted 9 years ago
Budek
(313 items)
Hello Again,
I hope this finds you well.
I found this little treasure this afternoon and am guessing that it's Czech.
The colors are incredible, gorgeous body and cobalt handle.
I don't see a mark, but maybe someone knows the origin?
It's 6" inches to the top of the handle.
I hope you enjoy seeing it, as I enjoyed discovering it in the dim corner where it was displayed, ( no one puts baby in the corner! )
Thanks for taking a look,
Best to all,
Tony.
it looks like Czech to me , and its stunning!! I would say someone better than me would know !! love this very much Tony!!
Thanks for the love, Kevin and SEAN! right back at ya!
and SEAN, no one is better than you!,( or you, Kevin :)
your very welcome Tony !! and Thankyou Tony ;)
I have another beautiful piece that I found yesterday, at the Goodwill.
It has some damage, but it gave me a thrill, and it IS marked,( it's Czech! )
I'll post it tomorrow.
goodnight all!
CANT WAIT TO SEE IT!! Goodnight!!
The handle and rim look Kralik but the decor looks to me like Welz.
I should say the trim on the rim looks Kralik-y, but the tooling of the rim is Welz again.
Beautiful, and I too would say that the decor is Welz.
I would say Welz all the way...known decour and is not uncommon for Welz to have colored rim and handle. Cool piece...and I don't know how you do it...but i have never even remotely found a piece at goodwill. ..look forward to see you found piece... :)
I concur with Jags and Sklo... Welz! Great piece !!!
Thank You Ian, Ivonne, mike, Pat, robin, surfdub, David, agh, Manikin, Anne, scott, and Moonestone, for the wonderful loves!
Thanks also for the excellent and helpful comments, much appreciated!!!
Happy Sunday all,
Tony.
Beautiful colors:)
Thank You for the loves, Alan, Trey, blunderbuss, Vladimir, and racer,
all much appreciated!
I agree that it looks like a Welz decor. I am curiou if there is a ground or polished pontil mark on the underside of the pitcher.
I would also comment that in my opinion there is no way something as simple as double rings could be used as a reliable production marker fot any glass house. It is highly probable that rings were used as a design detail in many configurations by almost every glass house of the region and period.
Big Thanks for the loves, Rick, antiquerose, Mac. & Michelle,
all appreciated!
Thanks for the love, Inky!
and Happy Easter.
Looks like kralik to me because of the handle work, Welz and Kralik seem to share patterns. These are probably related to the “kralik related” pieces with punch in shapes
For what it is worth, the applied rim and handle, along with what appears to be the absence of a pontil mark, would at a minimum, at least in my opinion, kind of exclude Kralik as the production house. I am unaware of any identified Kralik production having been produced using this technique involving gadgets.
Maybe you could support that claim with a visual aid.. you know... like a picture...
Sorry, but the multitude of those claims in this forum and others through the years have never been supported with any actual evidence. I for one, kind of like some actual "evidence" to support such claims.
Call me a "Doubting Thomas" if you must. :-)
Since many people here do not do Facebook, and some of us have you blocked in that forum, maybe you could post it in this forum where you are making that claim.
In other words, you don't have the evidence to back your claim here. I am sure you will understand if I simply don't believe what you claim.
It is not my problem Leah. I always provide evidence to support my claims.... You.. Not so much.
It is always a pleasure to have you chime in with random claims you won't support.... :-)
I find this a really interesting example. I commonly see it in solid tango colours, such as orange, yellow, red..... but I have always doubted the usual Kralik attribution. It would be great to see some real evidence one way or the other to assist with a solid attribution. I am not on FB, nor am I on anybody's 'side'.
I love this spatter jug and I claim it is Kralik.
There is a whole series Kralik pitchers or jugs produced in this style family, with bulbous bodies and straight ringed bodies, but usually with the tango single color of yellow or red with the cobalt glass handles and rims. Ian Brighton had several examples.
This is the first time I see it in the yellow and blue spatter, which was used by the prolific Kralik on other pieces. If there happens to be another producer which used similar spatter color combos, does not negate that in this case it is Kralik.
http://nebula.wsimg.com/14008e8dc9590f33f30a6b0448977b61?AccessKeyId=3A908495ACD7ABD44DFC&disposition=0&alloworigin=1
thtp://nebula.wsimg.com/c489a4e3a1d366988858a1aac57b4abc?AccessKeyId=3A908495ACD7ABD44DFC&disposition=0&alloworigin=1
There is another similar spatter glass decor which is Ruckl, in this small jar shape:
https://www.collectorsweekly.com/stories/147016-zingy-acid-yellow-deco-urn
The attribution which has stood for a number of years is one that I have serious doubts about, as do others. Every variation of these forms was declared many years ago to be Kralik by one individual.
In examining the production technique used to make this, and some of the others, many are found with no pontil mark, applied handles and applied rims. This is not a production technique (the missing pontil mark with applied rims) that is generally associated with Kralik.
As an observation, these forms are the ONLY examples I am aware of which are claimed to be Kralik and exhibit this production characteristic. I am also unaware of any example of one of these being found with a mark which is widely associated with Kralik production and missing a pontil mark.
In the image I am linking below, the comparison of the OP's pitcher, along with a Kralik and a Rückl (I am not convinced it is) examples in comparative decors as claimed by TOD, is one which I think boldly exhibits the reason that she and I disagree on so many observations regarding Czech glass.
The first three images are examples in this post and two links she provided to show "similar" decors. I find the comparison to be noteworthy, but not for the reasons they are being presented. The first three examples in the image are not even in the same ballpark as far as colors ranges and decors, at least in relationship to something I would base research conclusions on.
The last image in the grouping is a Welz basket in a decor similar to the OP's pitcher. To my eye at least, the Welz basket shares a stronger resemblance to the OP's pitcher decor than either of the other examples. There is a missing image, as the 2nd link from TOD was not functional, so I have no idea what that comparison looked like.
As stated above regarding the OP's pitcher, "I agree that it looks like a Welz decor." In this statement I am simply indicating there is a similarity in appearance as will be seen in the linked image. I have not attributed this form to Welz.
I do not believe this to be Kralik, and I do not believe a number of pieces in this family of production are Kralik either. I do not know who they are by, and have tried to figure it out for a long time.
Here is the image link:
http://www.kralik-glass.com/images/DecorComparison5.jpg
To my eye, the decor of the Kralik hexagonal bowl shape is nothing like the decor of the others, which do seem similar, despite the urn shape being more 'washed out' in color. That 'shadowing' element of the spatter seems a typical Welz feature - BUT I am not claiming any of them (except the basket) to be Welz!
I agree. the Kralik bowl is not even remotely similar. The urn shaped example is posted in CW, and Jericho stated that he thought it was Welz a couple of years ago.... I am uncommitted on all but the Welz basket also.... And I agree with "shadowing" you are referring to. It is seen in a wide variety of spatter color combinations shown to be Welz production. But as you know, it takes much much more than some "shadowing" to get me to commit to a Welz attribution.
Although I am not claiming who made this pitcher, a well know Welz basket shape in a similar decor can be seen in the link below. It seems to have been posted as Kralik in an effort to support the claim made here that this pitcher is Kralik.... an interesting approach for sure.... :-)
https://www.collectorsweekly.com/stories/280033-surprise-a-kralik-yellow-and-blue-spatt?in=activity
An image of an off-site attempt to rationalize the Kralik attribution claimed here, but where comments, questions, or opposing evidence can not be presented. Kind of a warm and fuzzy "Safe Place". :-)
http://www.kralik-glass.com/CW/Laughable.jpg
Click on the image once you can see it and the image will enlarge and scroll.