As
we all wait for the catalog of the Upcoming Green Valley Auction
of the Powell Collection, Jeff has requested some assistance from
fellow collectors. I think that a discussion would be very helpful
for all and we do need your help, wisdom and suggestions. Please
spend a little time today and make a few responses.
Return all responses to Cupplates@aol.com
and we will communicate with Jeff and post on the forum for all
to enjoy. Below please find all 5 installments of Jeff's questions
and comments. The first installment is on the bottom when you scroll
down. |
| Installment
#6 of my Powell Collection notes. Sorry for the delay in sending
off this final installment. It has been 24-7 here getting the three
November catalogs finished and to the printers. The cup plate catalog
was finished first and should be back in our hands this week to
go into the mail. If you haven't ordered your copy yet do it now
so we can put it in the mail to you as soon as it arrives from the
printers. It can be ordered through our web site at www.greenvalleyauctions.com
|
|
Q
-
|
Bilane's
229-D-X
If this plate is designated it should be 229-B-X. Differences
probably
caused by a thicker plate with somewhat of a fin. Anybody have
this
plate in a thin version with no fin?
|
|
Q
-
|
L/R
# 439A and B - This is the same plate with just a 1/16" diameter
difference. Should combine and delete #439B. |
|
Q
-
|
#455-B-X-1
- Variation with no rivet heads between hearts on
shoulder. Probably just a pressing issue but fairly significant. |
|
Q
-
|
#456-A
- Mrs. Powell recorded no examples offered for sale. Seems to
be mismeasured as Rose suspected. Anybody have this 3 5/8"
size. |
|
Q
-
|
#458
and #458-A - I think these are the same plate. All that I
measured were on either side of 3 7/16". |
|
Q
-
|
#458-B
- Another mismeasured plate? Mrs. Powell recorded no examples
for sale. Anyone have this in 3 5/8" diameter? |
|
Q
-
|
#457-B
- Anyone have this plate. Mrs. Powell recorded no examples for |
|
Q
-
|
#459
- This 81-scallop version seems much rarer than indicated in
AGCP. No example in the Powell collection and she only recorded
an opal
example offered for sale by George Abraham in 3/69. We have not
sold an
example. |
|
Q
-
|
#459-A
- Ditto for the 68-scallop version. Mrs. Powell recorded no
examples. |
|
Q
-
|
#459-D
& E - Same plate with only a 1/16" difference in diameter.
Should delete E. |
|
Q
-
|
#459-D
- Even though Bilane recorded an example in Emerald Green and
I have sales records for five examples supposedly in the color,
all that
I have seen are a rather dull medium green, definitely not a rich
brilliant emerald green. |
|
Q
-
|
#459-G-X-1
- Variation with faint pairs of discs between the hearts
on shoulder. Again probably a pressing issue. See Rose's note for
#455. |
|
Q
-
|
#459-H
- Anyone have this plate? Rose recorded only one in violet
blue. Not in Powell collection and no examples recorded by Mrs.
Powell. |
|
Q
-
|
#459-X-1
- Variation with larger (3 5/8") diameter like #459-V-1, but
also with much coarser stippling, center diamonds are stippled 4x4
instead of 5x5/6 as in the standard. |
|
Q
-
|
#459-P
- Anyone have this plate? Not in Powell collection and no
examples recorded by Mrs. Powell. |
|
Q
-
|
#460,
460-A & B - How many have these plates. No examples in Powell
collection. We have sold one 460-B in wretched condition. Mrs. Powell
recorded only 2 examples of #460-A offered. |
|
Q
-
|
#465-X-1
- Bilane lists several variations including reverse rope
table ring but neither he nor Rose makes note of which direction
is
normal. From previous notes I have recorded (when viewed from reverse)
an X-1 with rope slanting to the left and flat center diamond (like
465-D-X-1 below); and an X-2 with rope to right and center diamond
with point. |
|
Q
-
|
#465-C
- How many have this plate? Not in Powell collection and no
examples recorded by Mrs. Powell. We have not sold an example. |
|
Q
-
|
#465-D-X-1:
very deep cobalt blue - When this plate is viewed from
the back the rope table ring slants to the left as opposed to the
right
in regular version. Also the tiny square in the center of the design
is
flat, not pointed as in the regular version. |
|
Q
-
|
#465-E
& G - I suspect these are the same plate. Most seem to be 3
7/16". |
|
Q
-
|
#465-H
- Bilane lists a reverse rope table ring but neither he nor
Rose notes which way is normal. Powells have toe and both slant
to the
right when viewed from reverse. |
|
Q
-
|
#465-J
& O - Same plate. |
|
Q
-
|
#465-P
- We have sold only one example. |
|
Q
-
|
#467-A
& B - Appears to be the same plate, diameters range from 3
5/8" to 3 11/16". |
|
Q
-
|
#500
- Does everyone agree that this is not extremely rare as listed
in AGCP. Maybe scarce or at best rare. |
|
Q
-
|
#511
- Some of these are deeper, more like a honey dish. |
|
Q
-
|
#522
& 522-X-1 - In 522 the center target is 9/16" diameter.
The
522-X-1 has a target that is just under ½" dia. Another
variation has
the smaller do like X-1 but the rays don't quite touch the center
target. All seem to be pressing issues. |
|
Q
-
|
#600-B
- Anyone else have this plate? The Powell collection includes
the very example illustrated in AGCP (from the Cannon collection).
They
bought it at the Philbrick sale who had acquired it at the Doane
sale.
Bilane corrects AGCP's statement "2 known" by noting that
the other
example (Carson's), turned out to actually be a 600-C. Which means
the
Powell's plate is the only known example. |
|
Q
-
|
#600-C
- The Powells have one a noted in Bilane. They thought they
were buying a better example from CS & S on 6/10/97, which turned
out to
be a 601-C. Please make the appropriate note in your CS & S
catalog. |
A
few end notes.
I am having much trouble with the colors Peacock Green, Peacock
Blue,
and Electric (or Copper) Blue. I have read Rose's color guide
in AGCP
but it doesn't always seem to jive with the colors listed
for particular
plates in AGCP.
I believe that many of the peacock Blues listed in AGCP are
actually
Electric Blue in a slightly darker shade. I think actual Peacock
Blue
(with green overtones as noted by Rose) is much rarer than
indicated in
AGCP.
I hope to have the opportunity to get all of the Powell's
plates in
these color ranges together for a comparison. Unfortunately
this color
range is the most difficult to photograph illustrating the
subtle
differences in the colors.
The
Richards removed all of the Elsholz stickers from pieces they
acquired at the sale. I guess they decided the pieces weren't
big enough
for both provenance stickers. The Elsholz stickers draw much
more
respect.
|
Hello
Group.
Hope this fifth installment finds everyone having a good Labor Day.
-
Jeff Evans, Green Valley Auctions
Powell
Cup Plate Collection Notes, (Installment #5) |
|
Q
-
|
323/324/325
WHAT A MESS!
As I'm sure most everyone will agree, these plates are probably
the
same mold with just lighter or heavier pressings. That said, I
have
examined 18 different examples in the Powell collection in colorless,
opal, amethyst and amber and offer the following observations.
Click
Here to See Closeup study submitted by Arch Doty
|
|
A
-
|
PLEASE CHECK YOUR COPY OF THE 2006 COMPANION FOR ARCH DOTY'S
DETAILED PHOTOS WHICH SHOW THE DIFFERENCE IN THE 4 SANDWICH STARS
SURROUNDING THE MIDDLE STAR. WHEN I CLICKED ON YOUR LINK TO DOTY'S
PICTURES IT ONLY SHOWED THE CENTER STAR? I CAN'T TELL WHETHER I
HAVE CLASSIFIED MY OWN PLATES PROPERLY.
THE SANDWICH STAR WAS OBVIOUSLY VERY POPULAR FOR THE NEED TO RECUT
THE MOLD AT LEAST TWICE. BUT DOES THAT MAKE IT A DIFFERENT DESIGN?
SINCE THE RIM DIDN'T CHANGE ASSUME IT WAS NOT PIRATED AND ALL ATTRIBUTED
TO SANDWICH. I WOULD HAVE NO OBJECTION TO CLASSIFYING THEM ALL AS
323 AND DROPPIMG THE 324 AND 325. LIFE WOULD BE ALOT EASIER. HOW'S
THAT FOR CREATING CONTROVERSY! - Dolores Bowler,
Ayer, MA |
|
A
-
|
If
you still don't have a copy of The COMPANION
TO AGCP by Dolores Bowler then you are missing
out on a wonderful resource. Dolores only has 18 of these left
and it includes a Value Guide for 2006. The cost is a very modest
$24.95 for a delivered copy. This is over 100 pages of wonderful
information that you won't find anywhere else. I highly recommend
it as part of any collectors library. To
get your copy please email Dolores at
bowlerd@verizon.net
- Dave
McDonnell, Needham, MA
2006
COMPANION photo showing Arch Doty's detailed photos of the 323
and 324 which show the diference in the 4 Sandwich Stars surrounding
the Middle Star.
|
|
A
-
|
If
we all agree that the 323, 324,& 325 are all the same mold just
re-cut than I would have no problem using one number. I have 10
plates in my collection also in same color range plus one clear
with olive streaks and even with Jeff's excellent pictures it is
difficult at best to number. I have plate from wolf #326 that might
be a 324 also have one plate with much finer lines. Size varies
between 3 3/16 &3 1/4. - Charlie Tucker,
Hooker, OK |
|
Q
-
|
323
- AGCP illustrates a plate with shorter center rays. Eight in
the
Powell collection (colorless, amber and opal) that I have ID as
this #. Center rosette: all rays are well off the center dot,
each middle ray
is 7mm long and are 2-3mm from touching the side rosettes.
|
|
Q
-
|
324
- AGCP illustrates a plate with longer center rays. Nine in the
Powell collection (all colors) that I have ID as this.
Center rosette: rays are slightly or nearly touching the center
dot,
each middle short ray is 8-9mm long and within 1 or 2mm of touching
the side rosettes.
|
|
Q
-
|
325
- Not illustrated in AGCP. One in Powell collection (colorless)
that I am giving this #. Its diameter is same as 323/324 so it
doesn't
match AGCP in that aspect, but the difference is very noticeable.
Center rosette: all rays are completely imbedded into center dot,
each
middle short ray is 10mm long and lightly touching the side rosettes.
|
|
Q
-
|
337
- Bilane says probably foreign, I don't agree. Other opinions
please.
|
|
A
-
|
OF THE 15 PLATES OTHER THAN LR 337 WITH 55 EVEN SCALLOPS, ALL
ARE NEW ENGLAND OR POSSIBLY SANDWICH EXCEPT FOR ONE. 210 IS FORT
PITT. SO I AGREE THAT IT PROBABLY IS NOT FOREIGN - MORE LIKELY SANDWICH.
- Dolores Bowler, Ayer, MA |
|
A
-
|
#337
I'm not sure why Bilane felt this was foreign, the scallops seems
to be the same shape as other plates and waffle center looks very
close to 140 to 145 - Charlie Tucker,
Hooker, OK |
|
Q
-
|
399-X-1
Variation with longer (3/16" as opposed to 1/8") rays
at rim
which do not touch the cap ring edge, Roman Keys with beveled
edges,
cavetto rays more defined and with longer points.
|
|
Of
course lots of the plates between 342 - 418 are either late, not
cup
plates, foreign, or sometimes all three. But I don't have time
to tackle
that right now. Maybe later.
All
for now. I'm finishing up the Heart group and will send it later
this week,Thanks.
-
Jeff Evans,
Green Valley Auctions
|
Dave,
After
several diversions I am back to cataloging the Powell collection.
Here are my most recent notes (Installment #4). -
Jeff Evans,
Green Valley Auctions |
|
Q
-
|
Bilane's
229-D-X
If this plate is designated it should be 229-B-X. Differences
probably
caused by a thicker plate with somewhat of a fin. Anybody have
this
plate in a thin version with no fin?
|
|
A
-
|
My
229B is .175 thick less than 1/4 inch. - Charlie
Tucker, Hooker, OK |
|
A
-
|
229DX: WHAT ABOUT THE WIDER CAP RING? ALSO IF YOU ALREADY HAVE
A "B" ASSIGNED YOU SHOULD NOT HAVE A "BX" .
- Dolores Bowler, Ayer, MA |
|
Q
-
|
232-A
Seems to be very or ext. rare. This is the first example we have
sold
and Mrs. Powell only recorded 2 offered for sale. It was on Elsholz's
want list. |
|
A
-
|
I
sold a 232A when the Page Collection was offered for sale in 2005
-
Dave
McDonnell, Needham, MA |
|
A
-
|
I
bought a 232A from John Watson on his ebay sale Sept. 2002 - Charlie
Tucker, Hooker, OK |
|
A
-
|
I
THOUGHT I HAD 232A BADLY CHEWED BUT NOW I THINK IT IS 232BX. Also:
ROSE HAD ONE LISTED IN 1940 FOR $10 E; ARMAN SOLD ONE 9/03 FOR $163
G.
- Dolores Bowler, Ayer, MA |
|
Q
-
|
235
Three in collection, all with faint central rivet head. |
|
A
-
|
I
have one with the faint central rivet head, and one without - Matt
Hardesty, New Hampshire |
|
A
-
|
My
four 235's all have depressed rivet head in center - Charlie
Tucker, Hooker, OK |
|
A
-
|
No
rivet head on mine. Arch
Doty |
|
Q
-
|
240
Seems to be very or ext. rare. This is the first example we have
sold
and Mrs. Powell only recorded 3 offered for sale. It was on Elsholz's
want list. |
|
A
-
|
Arman's
had a 240 from Philbrick they sold in sept 2003 lot 109 havent seen
another. - Charlie Tucker,
Hooker, OK |
|
A
-
|
I have a 240. ROSE HAD ONE
LISTED IN 1940 FOR $5 G; ARMAN 9/03 $15 G; ARMAN 1/02 $25 F.
- Dolores Bowler, Ayer, MA |
|
Q
-
|
243-B
How many have this plate? It is not in the Powell collection and
Mrs.
Powell did not record any offered for sale. It was on Elsholz's
want
list. Seems to be ext. rare. |
|
A
-
|
I
HAVE 243, 243A IN CLEAR AND OPAL, 243BX1.
- Dolores Bowler, Ayer, MA |
|
Q
-
|
243-C
Seems to be very or ext. rare. This is the first example we have
sold
and Mrs. Powell only recorded this single example offered for sale.
Unfortunately she did not record a provenance for her plate so we
don't
know if it is the same one that Bilane reported or not. |
|
A
-
|
ONE
AT SANDWICH GLASS MUSEUM. AND AS BILANE REPORTED MRS DAKIN HAD ONE.
- Dolores Bowler, Ayer, MA |
|
Q
-
|
263
All appear to have a tiny stipple-size dot in center |
|
A
-
|
I
DON'T SEE THE DOT.
- Dolores Bowler, Ayer, MA |
|
Q
-
|
Bilane
271-X-1
I compared this variant to the standard and believe it is just wear
to
the mold. Probably should be deleted |
|
A
-
|
I
HAVE 271, 271A, 271X1. THERE SEEMS TO BE A DIFFERENCE OVER THE TABLE
RING.
- Dolores Bowler, Ayer, MA |
|
Q
-
|
279
I think this number should be for all examples with the rope shoulder
ring slanted to the right when viewed from the reverse. On all I
examined the ropes seem fairly indistinct. |
|
A
-
|
On the 279 and 280 this would do away with the variants? If so I
agree it should also be noted that the 279 has a larger center dot.
- Charlie Tucker, Hooker, OK |
|
A
-
|
I
have one clear and one lavender. On both, the rope shoulder ring
is faint (or I should say fine) and slanted to the right when viewed
from the reverse.- Matt
Hardesty, New Hampshire |
|
A
-
|
I CAN SEE TROUBLE COMING: WHICH 280 DO YOU HAVE: AGCP OR EVANS?
I HAVE 279 IN CLEAR AND GREY, 279X2 IN LIGHT BLUE GREEN, AND 280.
NEED TO VERIFY.
- Dolores Bowler, Ayer, MA |
|
Q
-
|
280
I think this number should be for all examples with the rope shoulder
slanted to the left when viewed from the reverse. Comes in a 1/8"
wide
coarse rope and a 1/16" fine rope variation. All ropes seem
to be pretty
distinct. |
|
A
-
|
ALSO
SEE COMMENTS UNDER 279 |
|
Q
-
|
291,
292, 293
Much confusion on these. Use photos in AGCP and not measurements
as they seem to all vary between 3" and 3 1/8". |
|
A
-
|
I HAVE 291 IN CLEAR AND TINT, 292, 292X1, 293.
- Dolores Bowler, Ayer, MA |
|
Q
-
|
321A
How many have this plate? Not in the Powell collection and Mrs.
Powell
only recorded one offered for sale by Rose, 5/70, where he noted
it was
rare. |
|
A
-
|
I bought Bilane's 321A Green Valley Auctions block lot B229. Bilane
bought from Rose in May 1970. Notes on envelope reads "James
Rose a practically proof speciman of this plate and to my surprise
since I said in AGCP that it was common, the first in a long long
time .Seems Rare to me but not so priced $9.00" This is the
only one I found listed .- Charlie Tucker,
Hooker, OK |
|
A
-
|
I HAVE 321A APPEARS TO BE A TINT UNRECORDED? ALSO B AND D
- Dolores Bowler, Ayer, MA |
That's
all for now. I'll be sending the next installment next week. It
will include what I hope will clear up some of the confusion on
the
323/324/325 series including close-up photos of what I deem the
differences to be. -
Jeff Evans,
Green Valley Auctions |
|
Dave,
Here is my Cup Plate Notes Installment #3 up through plates #225.
Again, I want to thank the group for all of their great responses.
-
Jeff Evans,
Green Valley Auctions |
|
Q
-
|
#169-B
See our discussions in notes #2. It seems to be a consensus that
AGCP is mistaken in describing the rim as "plain rope, top
only." This should be changed to "plain rope rim, top
and bottom." Pressing difficulties seem to determine if the
bottom rope is single or double. |
|
A
-
|
I
agree
- Dolores Bowler, Ayer, MA |
|
Q
-
|
#175-X-1
New Discovery
Noticeably smaller center dot (2mm as opposed to the standard 4mm)
which is encircled by a 7mm light ring. This is a lower mold issue.
If it wasn't for the added ring (it is very light) I wouldn't even
consider this a variation. |
|
A
-
|
I
dug out my extra 175 and one in collection one has 4.44 mm center
and no circle the other one has a 3.16 mm center circle is 7.28
mm and is shifted so that the lines don't meet. It would seem
that this center is maybe the rivet that holds the design plate
to the plunger. Dave below is the 175 with shifted center I'm
not saying it shound be a variant just sending for all to look
at - Charlie Tucker, Hooker,
OK
|
|
Q
-
|
#176
Thin (1/16" to 1/8") and thick (3/8") rims. Again
I am only recording
thickness for the record as it seems we have come to the consensus
that it is an unimportant factor. |
|
Q
-
|
#178-B-X-1
Unrecorded variation with short feet and poor impression. I only
record this because Bilane records a 178-A-X-1 variation with short
feet. Again both of these are a pressing deficiency and probably
don't deserve a designation. |
|
A
-
|
Should
it be 178AX2 ?
- Dolores Bowler, Ayer, MA
|
|
A
-
|
178B
AND 178A ARE TWO DIFFERENT PLATES SO IF WE ARE USING A DESIGNATION
FOR THE SHORT FEET IT WOULD HAVE TO BE 178BX1
-
Jeff Evans,
Green Valley Auctions
|
|
A
-
|
On
the 178's after comparing all of mine a 178 and three 178B's the
feet are all differant sizes from underfill, unless there is a differant
mold used I question if we need more numbers. - Charlie
Tucker, Hooker, OK |
|
Q
-
|
#184-B/#185
Other than the 1/16" difference in diameter, I can find little
difference between these two plates. Any insights? |
|
A
-
|
The
185 is a completely different plate from the 184B. I think viewing
from behind is the best way to appreciate the difference. I
included pics of the two for comparison. The area between
the scrolls on the 184B can best be discribed as a canyon, but
on the 185 a plain. Also the 184B has a depressed cavetto whereas
the 185 is flat. - Walter Moore
click
photos to enlarge
|
|
A
-
|
Thank
you very much for the explanation and photos of #184-B & 185.
It
is now perfectly clear. My problem was that the supposed #185 that
the
Powells bought from Armans (ex-Caleb Ewing) is actually another
#184-B,
so I was comparing two examples of #184-B.
Need to save your photos on the web site for future reference. When
you
examine AGCP closely and know what you are looking for you can see
the
difference, but your photos are a much clearer illustration.-
Jeff Evans,
Green Valley Auctions |
|
A
-
|
See
the explanation at the top of page 155 in AGCP -
Dolores Bowler, Ayer, MA
|
|
A
-
|
184B/185:
WALT MOORE'S PHOTOS ILLUSTRATE THE DIFFERENCE NICELY. MY PROBLEM
WAS THAT I WAS COMPARING TWO 184B EXAMPLES AND THE AGCP EXPLANATION
MADE NO SENSE. THE 185 THAT THE POWELLS BOUGHT FROM ARMANS WAS ACTUALLY
A 184B -
Jeff Evans,
Green Valley Auctions |
|
Q
-
|
#191-E
Does anyone have this plate (53 scallops)? It doesn't appear that
we
have sold an example and Mrs. Powell did not record any offered
for
sale. Could this be a miscounted #191-D (52 scallops). A unique
#191-E in light green is recorded in AGCP. The Powells have a #191-D
in light green which is not listed. This also makes me think they
are the same plate. |
|
A
-
|
AGCP
listed marble #745 as a 191E looking at plate 110 in set of Marble
proofs his plate also has 52 scallops. I checked the plate I have
as a #191E, counted and recounted only 52 scallops, so now have
room for one more plate - Charlie Tucker,
Hooker, OK |
|
A
-
|
I
don't have it, but recommend that you let it stand. I think they
were quite careful when it came to counting. Have you tried counting
in three's?
-
Dolores Bowler, Ayer, MA |
|
A
-
|
191E:
NO ONE HAS SAID THEY HAVE THIS PLATE. I AM STILL DUBIOUS OF ITS
EXISTENCE. -
Jeff Evans,
Green Valley Auctions |
|
A
-
|
Dave,
I'm sure many are reluctant to change or delete numbers from AGCP
but there were many mistakes made as Mr.Rose pointed out in his
letters .I went back and recounted Mr.Marbles picture and still
come up with 52 scallops.The191D is M654 ( Marble 654 ) and pictured
under the 191E using a digital caliper to measure the scallops,
they are the same plates. AGCP does list size of 2 15/16 and 3 inches,
but you can measure the same plate many times and come up with many
different sizes.- Charlie Tucker,
Hooker, OK |
|
Q
-
|
#192-A
How many people have this plate? AGCP says Scarce but this is the
first one we have had and Mrs. Powell only recorded this single
example for sale. Very or extremely rare? |
|
Q
-
|
#155
and #199
Everybody count the under-rim dots on these two plates (Get out
your magnifying glasses!). AGCP says 108, the Powells #199 has 109
(counted 6 times by two different people). Their #155 also seems
to have 109 dots (can't be 100% sure because of rim flaking). I
suspect AGCP is in error. |
|
A
-
|
On
my LR199 I count 109 dots - Matt
Hardesty, New Hampshire |
|
A
-
|
Just
a point of interest. I have a 198A from the Carpetta Collection,
purchased from Gary Stradling - Unique
- Dolores Bowler, Ayer, MA
|
|
A
-
|
DOLORES,
THANKS FOR YOUR RESPONSE. MRS. POWELL ONLY RECORDED ONE 198A FOR
SALE BY WILLIAM COVILL ON 5/68 FOR $120. COULD BE THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
OF YOUR EXAMPLE.-
Jeff Evans,
Green Valley Auctions |
|
Q
-
|
#200
How many people have this plate? This is the first one we have had
and the only example Mrs. Powell recorded for sale. Has a dot in
center of cavetto. |
|
A
-
|
LISTED
IN LOWELL INNES' PITTSBURGH GLASS. ARMAN SOLD ONE IN 9/03 FOR $15,000
- Dolores Bowler, Ayer, MA |
|
Q
-
|
#202/#203/#204/etc.
Many of the scallop and point rim plates in this group come with
a
single dot under each scallop. Some are easy to ascertain and others
are nearly indiscernible. AGCP makes mention of some, i.e. #207,
and not others. I'm sure these are just pressing issues and not
a different cap rings, thus they don't deserve a designation. Bilane
does give #207 without dots #207-A-X. Should this variation be deleted? |
|
A
-
|
Dots
under the scallops of some 207 dont indicate separate plate designation
in my opinion. - Walter Moore |
|
A
-
|
I
feel that this variation should be deleted, unless you want to list
all of the other variants without dots - Matt
Hardesty, New Hampshire |
|
Q
-
|
#210
Can anyone verify the existence of this plate as listed in AGCP
with 55 scallops (as opposed to Bilane's #210-A-X with 56 scallops).
Marble's example and the one sold by Arman (1/86) are missing so
many scallops that a definite count seems tenuous at best. The other
example that Armans sold (7/86) was bought by the Powells and it
actually has 56 scallops. Elsholz's specimen also had 56 scallops.
I suspect this is a mistake in AGCP. |
|
A
-
|
NOT
UNIQUE. THERE IS ONE AT THE SANDWICH GLASS MUSEUM WHICH WAS SHOWN
AT CORNING IN 1954. ALSO LISTED IN LOWELL INNES' PITTSBURGH GLASS.
ONE SOLD AT SKINNER'S IN THE JEDLICKA AUCTION FOR $700.00
- Dolores Bowler, Ayer, MA |
|
A
-
|
For
what it is worth, I would suspect most of you have already done
this. When I have a plate with several scallops missing, I turn
it upside down and trace the good scallops. Then rotate the plate
so that two good scallops line up, so I can get a good count of
how many are missing. I counted the scallops in my 210 and found
6 missing in one spot and three in another, I assume the scallops
are even and my 210 would have had 56 total scallops.-
Brady
Fitts, Keysville, VA |
|
Q
-
|
#212-A
Another difference from #212 not pointed out by Rose or Bilane is
that 212-A has a rope table ring. |
|
A
-
|
My
212A has a rope table ring - Walter Moore |
|
Q
-
|
#216-A
This flatter scallop version seems to be strictly a pressing issue
and
not a different cap ring. Probably should delete from AGCP. Thoughts
please. |
|
A
-
|
flat scallop version of 216A is just a pressing issue- Walter
Moore |
|
Q
-
|
#225-A,
B & C
This entire series seems to be rarer than indicated by AGCP. |
|
A
-
|
I
have 225, 225B and 225C. Rose had one 225A listed in 1940 for $5.00
in VG condition. re:225C: SHOWN AT CORNING IN 1954 LISTED AS BEST.
ROSE HAD ONE LISTED IN 1940 FOR $12.50 E; ARMAN SOLD ONE FOR $57
VG; BILANE $22 E; I PAID $40 G. - Dolores Bowler,
Ayer, MA |
|
A
-
|
LR225A,
225B and 225C I have all three, in case anyone is interested.
Arch
Doty |
|
Q
-
|
#225-B
Some have a dot in center of cavetto |
|
A
-
|
ARMAN
SOLD ONE 9/03 FOR $163 VG. BILANE $115; WOLF 5/02 $49.50 G.
- Dolores Bowler, Ayer, MA |
| Dave,
Here is the second group of notes up through #151. As the plates
get later the notes are getting fewer which obviously reflects the
advances being made in the pressing process.-
Jeff Evans,
Green Valley Auctions |
|
Q
-
|
#41
& 41-A
Difficult to differentiate between the two in AGCP. #41 seems
to be around ½" or a little less in thickness. #41-A
is noticeably deeper when side-by-side with #41. It seems to be
around 5/8" thick. Rims can be somewhat warped. Has anyone
found any more definite differences?
|
|
A
-
|
No
other difference - Dolores Bowler, Ayer, MA |
|
A
-
|
I
think the 41 and 41A are just shape variants relating to change
in plunger size or the method of cooling which allowed the 41 to
"slump" more. - Walter Moore |
|
Q
-
|
#47
Thick
variation (1/8" to 3/16" rim) and thin variation (1/16"
to 1/8" rim). Per our previous discussions, I will only be
making notes in the descriptions about differences in plate thickness.
No V designations will be assigned. |
|
A
-
|
Good.
No "V" designation for thickness- Dolores
Bowler, Ayer, MA |
|
A
-
|
I
think all thickness variations of the plates "47 etc"
are specious and unimportant, related only to the gather size, not
even worthy of mention. Same with the "variations" of
mold imprint ie lack of shoulder stippling on some "variants"-
Walter Moore |
|
A
-
|
I
agree, this should not be given a V designation -
Brady
Fitts, Keysville, VA |
|
Q
-
|
#50
& 51
We have covered how these and other pontil marked plates will be
designated in previous discussions. |
|
A
-
|
50
AND 51. AND 52V1: ANOTHER THOUGHT ON PONTILS. JEFF: HOW DO THEY
AFFECT THE VALUE? DAVE: DO YOU REMEMBER YOUR ADVICE ON 26? IT WASN'T
A PONTIL BUT A POOR IMPRESSION. I RETURNED THAT PLATE TO JOE ARMAN
THEN HAD TO APOLOGIZE WHICH I DID IN THE 2006 COMPANION ON THE PHOTO-
Dolores Bowler, Ayer, MA |
|
Q
-
|
#52-V-1
New Discovery
Poorly pressed (or worn out mold) example resulting in areas, especially
on lower shoulder, without stippling. I did not give this an X designation
because it is just a variation of the original mold. |
|
Q
-
|
#53
Many of these plates have a small concave dimple in center of cavetto. |
|
A
-
|
Very
small dimple on mine - Dolores Bowler, Ayer, MA |
|
A
-
|
My
53 has a diimple- Walter Moore |
|
A
-
|
On
mine, the surface of the cavetto almost has a machined look,
including the little "dimple". But the "dimple"
is more like point though,
as if it were a "reverse stipple". Perhaps the machining
on the mold was transferred to the surface of the cup plate? - Matt
Hardesty, New Hampshire |
|
A
-
|
I
have Bilane's and can see no concave dimple. Arch
Doty |
|
Q
-
|
#54
Thin (3/16" to 1/4") and thick (3/8") rims. According
to Mrs. Powell's notes, the thick rim seems rarer. For whatever
its worth. |
|
Q
-
|
#54
Thin (3/16" to 1/4") and thick (3/8") rims. According
to Mrs. Powell's notes, the thick rim seems rarer. For whatever
its worth. |
|
Q
-
|
#56
Thin (1/8") and thick (1/4") rims. |
|
Q
-
|
#57
Bilane records an example with a curious seam across the cavetto.
I suspect this is just an unusually straight "straw mark".
Three of the four examples in the Powell collection have a straw
mark near completely across the cavetto. Two are straight (like
a seam) and one has a slight bend.
Most examples seem to have a slight underfill. |
|
A
-
|
Glob
of glass. No underfill but center has a light rivet head - Matt
Hardesty, New Hampshire |
|
A
-
|
My
57 has no line, but i would suspect those that do have just a straw
mark, doubt this was a bi part mold mark - Walter
Moore |
|
A
-
|
Mine
has no seam and no underfill - Matt
Hardesty, New Hampshire |
|
A
-
|
I
agree with Walter in that this is more than likely a straw mark
and not a seam from a two part mold. I have always considered the
mark on my plate a straw mark.- Brady
Fitts, Keysville, VA |
|
Q
-
|
#58/60
FYI
In the Elsholz auction, the tags on lots 36 and 37 were switched.
The Powells bought lot 36 (L/R #58) but received L/R #60 with a
lot 36 tag attached. Both plates were unlisted clambroth (probably
really just cloudy). In C.S. & S., 8/29/00 auction, they sold
Elsholz lot 37 cataloged as L/R #60 when it was actually the L/R
#58 that the Powells should have received. Everyone confused? |
|
A
-
|
The
58/60 controversy, cloudy is not clambroth and vice versa - Walter
Moore |
|
A
-
|
In
my 58/60 mention of clambroth (or cloudy), I totally agree that
these are not the same. In my experience many (if not most) of
the
earlier plates that are listed as clambroth or clambroth tint
are
actually cloudy.
Just to clarify things for anyone who is not familiar with
the
difference.
Clambroth
is a translucent (ranging from slight to nearly opaque)
off-white within the glass itself, the result of a deliberate
introduction of a coloring agent into the pot during manufacturing.
Originally clambroth was refereed to as Alabaster (clambroth seems
to be
a 20th century term) and is most often seen in pieces from the
1845 to
1865 period. Since this is a fairly late color, I believe most
of the
clambroth plates that we see are actually a failed opalescent
color
which did not strike.
Cloudiness is a degradation of the glass which can be felt and
seen on
the surface. This is the result of some sort of deficiency in
the
make-up of the original metal.-
Jeff Evans,
Green Valley Auctions
|
|
Q
-
|
#61
Thin (1/8") and thick (1/4") rims. |
|
Q
-
|
#71-X-1
New Discovery
Smaller cavetto (1 7/8" d as opposed to 2 1/8" d), single-step
instead of flat table ring, shoulder with longer lancets and larger
diamond point panels. This may be just a change in the plunger size
which caused the shoulder pattern to flatten out a bit which elongate
the designs. But that doesn't explain the stepped table ring which
would have to be some kind of bottom mold change. The rim diameter
is the same as the regular 71. |
|
A
-
|
The
narrow cavetto "variant" of the new discovery 71 is just
a plunger/mold variation, but i guess is worthy of variant status.
- Walter Moore |
|
Q
-
|
#138
-X FYI
Just wanted to let everyone know that the famous 138-X "Japanese
Flag" plate is in the Powell collection. They bought it from
the CS & S, 7/17/01, auction of the Eugenie Philbrick collection.
Originally in the Dr. Grace O. Doane collection and exhibited
at the 1954 Corning exhibit (where it was first illustrated).
It is broken in two and mended but is still an amazing plate.
I still find it hard to believe that another example has never
surfaced, especially considering it is such a unique and distinctive
design. The bull's eye scallop and point rim leaves no doubt as
to its Midwestern origin.
NOTE: All plates in the CS & S Philbrick catalog listed with
"Provenance: Unknown/Purchased 7/4/83" were bought at
the infamous auction (fire sale) of the Doane collection in Kentucky.
LR138-X
Courtesy
Green Valley Auctions
Photographer William McGuffin
click
photo to enlarge
|
|
A
-
|
Never
seen another of the japanese flag plates, but I guess a broken specimen
is better than none - Walter Moore |
|
Q
-
|
#142
How many have this plate? Listed as rare in AGCP and no update in
Bilane. This is the first example we have sold, it was on Elsholz's
want list, and Mrs. Powell only recorded this example offered for
sale. Seems to indicate it is ext. rare. |
|
A
-
|
I
have a LR142 purchased from Dave and have no record of any other
sales- Charlie Tucker, Hooker,
OK |
|
A
-
|
I
have a 142 but with a gnawed off scallop, they are pretty rare
- Walter Moore |
|
|
