Westmoreland #103 Pickle Jar/Tall Vase | ||
| All items37098 of 244525 |  |  |
Vynil33rpm loves this.
verbatim loves this.
MALKEY loves this.
racer4four loves this.
fortapache loves this.
kwqd loves this.
Watchsearcher loves this.
aura loves this.
AdeleC loves this.
vetraio50 loves this.Create a Show & TellReport as inappropriate
Posted 5 years ago
Sharky
(159 items)
Hey everybody :) I have looked everywhere for anything on this Westmoreland item. It is 12 1/2 in tall by 5 in at the top. I can't seem to find the flower pattern that is displayed on the front. I suppose it's a little too small to be an umbrella stand so I'm guessing tall vase? Any help would be appreciated, thanks again.
Create an account or login in order to post a comment.
Why do you think it is Westmoreland? Is marked or labeled? If it is labeled or marked, that would help to date it. I have not seen on of these before.
I see that you posted this 7 months ago and in that post mention that it has the W over G Mark on a the bottom.
Sorry about that lol. I should have mentioned that this was a repeat post. I am cataloging my collection and becoming just a little better with the photos. Yes it is marked but I have searched for a year or so and can't find anything on it.
I've found examples in amber and clear with color stain similar to their Della Robbia but nothing definitive on production period. You might check with the WG club or their facebook group
https://westmorelandglassclub.org/
Thanks TallCakes....judging by the lip it may be a pickle jar, c.1920s.
agree; this form is often called a pickle jar/vase. Just thought to check one reference and was surprised to find an example in crystal as Westmoreland #103 but no given name or AKA with a production date of 1924. Given that WG often reissued pieces in various colors for many years, I can't say when your milk glass version may have been made.
Thank you again TallCakes....I will follow this lead :) I'm content with assuming possibly 40s-60s? Westmoreland was big on milk glass during those years. It's good to have atleast OMN number...I'm using software to catalog my collection.
Have you ever had experience with cataloging/digitizing your collection?
Also could you possibly (and please :) post the link to the crystal version you located?
If it has the W over G mark on the bottom, then it was made ca 1940s-1982....
I started cataloging my collection on ehive.com, until they started charging too much. You could still get quite few records in your database if you did not include images. Images quickly gobble up the space they allow non-paying users. I have not revisited that site for a few years.
Cataloging... It depends on how serious you are about cataloging your collection and the types of objects in your collection. There is an open source set of utilities CDWA (Categories for the description of works of art) and CCO (Cataloging Cultural Objects) especially for this purpose:
https://www.getty.edu/research/tools/vocabularies/intro_to_cco_cdwa.pdf
There are some open source, freeware and commercial tools for using these schemas. I started cataloging my collections using CDWA/CCO but they are so large and varied, that I paused doing so and never restarted.
I keep track of most of my cake stand collection in a MS Access database with images included. The reference I used is a fee based membership which typically requires membership to access; but I might be able to shortcut to the image.
https://eapgpatterns.com/images/Depression/highres/westmoreland_103_vase.jpg
examples found at WP but really no info:
https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/pair-vintage-westmoreland-1735527246
https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/vintage-westmoreland-glass-pickle-jar-vase
Thank you TallCakes and kwqd for your knowledge. I'm not cataloging for sales or insurance purposes, but for personal use and for my family in the future. It will really help me keep track of it all :) I never knew the tools available for this are so varied.
same here, Sharky; I use the database to try to keep up with my collection and future family use. I number everything and affix a small numbered label to each item that relates to the item number in the database; that's why you may see numbers on some of my posting images. That way I can go directly to any database entry based on the number.
would you mind editing this title to include the WG number and pckle jar/vase info?
CCO and CDWA are used by libraries, museums, etc., for cataloging their collections and sharing information about them, not for insurance or marketing purposes. It is definitely feasible for use with personal collections, but the learning curve is a lot higher than learning to use a spreadsheet. It just depends on the depth of detail required and need for sharing of data, transport to other database/display tools, searchability, etc., which is desired. If you look at my art collection web site, I tend to record a depth of detail about items in my collections which would make using a spreadsheet too cumbersome and I would basically need to write several specialized schemas which are already inherent in CDWA and CCO. On the positive side, the tools for using CDWA and CCO are freely available and you don't need to pay for a licence for something line MS Access. There are open source spreadsheet tools. I use only open source operating systems and applications and am not restricted at all in what I can do.
my experience with Access databases goes back decades; it's highly programmable to specific needs; not to be confused with Excel spreadsheets. Yes, MS office suite is a subscription service, but with multiple users it becomes minimal.
Sorry for confusing Access and Excel. I only used them in my workplaces and have been retired for a few years so forgetting MSeese. I have never used anything MS at home since the 1990s, only Open Source at home. My point with CDWA/CCO is that they were specifically designed and created for the purpose of cataloging art and other cultural objects. The data fields for art objects are part of the schema. No need to do customization or programming if someone wants to catalog their collection. This is extremely efficient if a collection is not homogeneous. Especially true if one does not own and/or is not already familiar and expert with a tool like Access. That means building, searching and sharing a database is easier. I have paintings, prints, firearms, books, art glass, sculpture, edged weapons, etc., and those objects, and many more, are easily entered into existing data fields in CDWA/CCO. I didn't even consider using other database tools, proprietary or Open Source, after learning about CCO/CDWA. Art cataloging was part of what I had intended to do in retirement, until I decided to not turn a hobby into work and risk spoiling my enjoyment of it. It (art cataloging, CDWA/CCO) was the focus of a masters degree I earned toward the end of my career when I was still working and preparing for retirement. I am still an advocate for CDWA/CCO, just don't want to do it for money.
If someone has a relatively small or homogeneous collection, then CDWA/CCO may be overkill. If that is the case, and someone is not already familiar with a database tool, or wants to save some money, I recommend looking at LibreOffice, which is Open Source and free and supported on Linux, MacOS and Windows.
https://www.libreoffice.org/
If a collection is expected to grow considerably in the future and is not homogeneous, I would just put in the effort to learn CDWA/CCO if cataloging is a concern.