Posted 5 years ago
jericho
(236 items)
This is one from my files that resembles Kralik or Ruckl in style of glass. I am going to go with Ruckl related (I know that wont be popular) because of the kind glass thinness and the feel of the frost finish. This you could call Czech interwar or whatever you feel comfortable with... either way I am fairly sure there are all made by the same maker. A few are signed in a Bronze-metalik "Czechoslovakia" mark. They come in every color of spots but only in this base color. To me the decor resemble a decor in the later Loetz "Schaumglass" series. I am calling them pebbles and threads
Great looking glass!
scott
I like these pieces, but don't think it is Ruckl, neither decors or shape match what I have studied, of course this is as far as I know.
Love them!! especially pic1
I am of the personal opinion that glass should remain in one of 2 categories.
Category 1 is known or "Identified production".
Category 2 is "Unidentified production", or "Unknown Production".
I am also of the opinion that to create categories of Welz related, Ruckl related, Kralik related etc, will be cause for people to read what they want to see, and soon you will find Ruckl related, Welz related, or Kralik related et al, to be Welz production, Ruckl production, Kralik production etc.
I have never fully understood the drive to give all glass a maker's name. Not applying a maker to production does not diminish it's artistic aesthetic, or it's beauty....
I think that the simple approach is the best.... We either know who made it or we don't.
Through the years, I have seen many examples of the type of glass in this post. None of it has been marked and none of it is in shapes that I recognized. To me at least, it is "Unknown Production", until it is determined who made it. If approached in that manner, there is nothing for people to misconstrue about it's origins.
yeah Craig we don't know who made them for sure it is just a grouping. I categorized glass by makers first and came up with great big grouping. that really helped with identifying rare decors. now I am kicking out a bunch of decors based of production methods, shapes and less and less reliability or marks. the word "related" means closest possible attribution- or "in the style of"... . this is a work in progress. The Ruckl folder is massive and it needs to be dwindled down; same for kralik and Welz... but if I only have Identified pieced and unidentified pieces then 8,000 of my images would be unidentified and 2,000 images would be identified
I can see the difficulty of managing 8,000 images. Yes, you'd need to put them into smaller groups, identified by a title that enables you to access a subset. However if that title includes a specific manufacturer, should you use that title in the public domain? Not easy.....
oh no, they are filed in what I believe they are but if we apply the strictest standards of who made what there are very few we know for sure,,, including 80% of kralik. I am not a researcher and disagree with about half of my attributions 10 years ago.... but those were the dark ages ...auction houses are far behind this forum, showing these pieces in groups help people identify the grouping and not necessarily the maker. to me RELATED means this grouping has similarities to ruckl more than any other company I know- thanx for your comments
After more reflection I remembered something Ruckl similar to your 2nd image, a short flower vase with metal frog, the shape of the bowl here also has cousins in the Ruckl family in the red spatter no feet, and the satin pink spatter with 3 black curled feet.
Nice job jericho, you'll always run in to those that think they know more then most ...but don't there just guessing as well and like to hear them self's talk lol ....well done..