posted on August 11, 2002 09:22:38 AM new
I've tried a "search" but came up with nothing. Can anyone help me identify this? I have a heavy cream-colored covered glass bowl...it's on a short pedistal base. There's a matching footed bowl with a scalloped edge. On the bottom of the covered bowl is the name "R. Parry" and the date "1979." Any assistance is greatly appreciated. Thanks a lot!
posted on August 11, 2002 09:58:48 AM new
Blueyes, R. Parry is the decorator.
The piece is Westmoreland, I believe. Will check my book in a little while. (There isn't a "G" superimposed on a "W" anywhere?...even on the underside of the lid?)
That particular color is very high dollar in most pieces.
PS - If you will post a pic of the other piece, I'll look it up too.
Ed. to change 'blueeues' to 'blueyes'. I asked my fingers "How did you do that?" and my fingers said "It's Sunday morning". I said "Enough said".
posted on August 11, 2002 11:53:08 AM new
Okay, Blueyes - the piece is Westmoreland's #753-1 (line 753) - "Cameo candy with lid, footed". The color is almond; the decoration is "Beaded Bouquet".
The color is one of the three rarest in this piece; the decoration is the rarest.
I don't update my price lists anymore - eBay has pretty much made them obsolete.
I'm not sure Westmoreland is bringing what it was a few years ago - doesn't seem like it is as "hot" right now.
But I had two (yes, 2 - found separately 2 days and many miles apart) fairy lamps in the almond Beaded Bouquet (one artist signed and one not) several years ago. If memory serves, I had 75.00 each on them - think I sold them together for one price - maybe 125.00 - 135.00. Shortly thereafter I had a bell (in almond Beaded Bouquet) that went for 20.00-25.00.
posted on August 11, 2002 05:43:08 PM new
Hi gc2...You're WONDERFUL and a treasure trove of vital information...I really appreciate your taking the time to look these items up! I'm posting a photo of the other bowl...It is unsigned but DOES have the small "GW" you mentioned on the bottom. I couldn't find a "GW" anywhere on the other piece but the lid, too, is signed with the artist's initials. Any information you can give me about this second bowl will also be greatly appreciated...it's about 3 1/4 inches tall, 5 inches in diameter and has 3 "feet". Thanks again...you're an angel!
posted on August 11, 2002 07:54:03 PM new
Btw, during the years that these were made, marking was the rule rather than the exception. But frequently the mark is not centered on the bottom of the piece...sometimes off to one side for some reason. (Same applies for the underside of the lid, too.)
Also, it has been my experience (and it may only be mine) that the artist-signed pieces of Westmoreland (and Fenton) hold no more interest for collectors than the unsigned pieces. (I'm sure someone will come along and challenge that statement, so take it or leave it.)
So on your two pieces...that would be good news, and bad news, huh?
posted on August 11, 2002 08:06:20 PM new
GC2...I can't thank you enough for the invaluable information. Identifying glass is so difficult since so many of the manufacturers didn't put their names on them...so, since I'm not an expert, I doubly appreciate the expertise of those who are! These pieces belong to the mother of a friend of mine...Mom is moving to a retirement home and is having to "downsize" her considerable collections! I'll be putting these pieces on eBay around the middle of September...my user ID is the same as what I post under here so might be worth checking out. Thanks again...
posted on August 11, 2002 11:05:28 PM new
One more thing:
The production numbers mean very little to Westmoreland collectors, and the "Cameo" shape is not a big thing either.
Although you will probably want to mention those details in your description (they'll feel more comfortable that you know what you're talking about), they aren't the "key" words for your title.
They will be more concerned with glass color and decoration - as well as the fact that the candy has its lid.
posted on August 11, 2002 11:21:00 PM new
Perfectly...and thanks for the guidance. I was actually wondering about that very thing...and, in fact, would probably have listed the number figuring (incorrectly, as it turns out) that would be what interested buyers would search on. See? Guess I've just proved that I'm most definitely NOT an expert...but I know more now than I did yesterday...Thanks to you! You're another example of AW-ers at their BEST!
[ edited by blueyes29 on Aug 11, 2002 09:26 AM ]
