ann

The later transparent swirl . . .

And slag . . . etc.

So, slag . . .

Well, I like this discussion, but it's not really exactly what I was talking about. I wish I had good photo illustrations. I'll see if I can find some. Meanwhile, I'm talking about only the West Virginia swirls that have transparent bases. They're not necessarily like the opaque or the opaque/transparent WV swirls. I didn't really considered the shear marks, mainly because it's only the earlier marbles that have them (the slag 1927-1930 time period), and the later ones (1930s, 1940s) that don't. I was mainly talking about the difference between the two in (1) base glass and (2) white striping glass . . . Back later, hopefully, with some examples --

Oh boy oh boy oh boy oh boy . . .

I think I know what you're talking about when you're describing the "jewel" type (I think I've stumbled across a couple), but I'm not sure. Got a pic or two? Love to see if I DO have a few . . .

So. There are those (I believe Galen is one, although I could be wrong) who believe that machine-made slags (from about 1927 to around 1930) and machine-made transparent swirls (1930s-1940s) are the same thing, in essence. I guess they are in a way, since you can say both require a transparent colored base glass with opaque white (no other or additional colors) swirled in. But I've been asked the difference between the two before, and I know others probably have been too; for a long time I fumbled around with it, and then one day -- and only after I had handled a lot of both of them (but I confess, mainly slags) -- I realized that I DID think of them as two separate types. And although I thought I could separate the two easily enough in hand, I wasn't really sure of how to describe what I had seemed to absorb from the marbles themself. So this is kind of a self-check in a way. What I THINK I'm talking about. Please let me know what you-all think. Same? Different? Machine-made slags: transparent colored body glass, sometimes deep or vivid (red, purple, turquoise, bright green, uranium yellow, cobalt, etc.) with varying amounts of opaque white swirled in. The opaque white can fill a lot of the marble, or very little, If in stripes or ribbons, they can be thick, thin, or both at the same time. Lots of variation. Machine-made transparent swirls: transparent colored body glass, often a light color (light green, light blue, light amber, not a lot of variety), seldom the vivid slag colors, with varying amounts of white swirled in. Although the white is apparently opaque, it frequently is thin (or "dilute," a word I'm not sure can be used with glass as it can with color), and appears to be translucent. Usually in stripes or ribbons, of fairly even width or thickness, and fairly evenly distributed throughout the marble. Not all that much variation, in comparison to the earlier slags . . . ?

Oh, so you wanna talk hand-gathered? Whee! We can do that. But you're right. Maybe we should start another thread with the machine-made slags/transparent swirls thing Steph was asking about . . .

Way cool. I got my toothbrush.

On my way . . .

On thinking about it a little -- very little, really -- more trying to visualize the two types, (1) slags and (2) the later transparent swirls, do you all agree that in general, slags are swirled with opaque white glass, of varying thickness, generally in an irregular pattern, and are very variable? Lots of white to not much white? And, in general, transparent swirls are swirled with white glass that might be opaque but is frequently so thin as to seem translucent, of a more regular thickness and/or thinness, distributed more evenly in the marble, and are not quite so variable? It also seems to me that the transparent-colored bases are not as deep and rich as those used for slags (cost-cutting?) . . . Curious to hear others' thoughts . . .

And all the other stuff he ^^^^ said too.

What he said!

Happy Birthday!

And yes, this is one of the reasons I love migbar, no matter what he thinks about patents. I'm a bird of a feather.

I haven't thought about that, but off the top of my head I might say "not necessarily." Maybe with the CAC flame / Alley flame thing. But some later Alleys, like from St. Mary's, have wide/thicker streams . . . Ron would know more about those. And Champion swirls can be thick-streamed . . . Going off to mull it over . . .

Works for me. And I agree. Also agree about the occasional end-of-stream and / or tongue-type thingie. And I do like a good drizzle on occasion. And the uncommon, striking "tornado" I've found on a very few of the JABO special runs . . .

That's what I was thinkin' . . .

In the third picture, the marble on the top left -- is that baby blue with an orange ring (like I thought at first) or is it (on second, closer look) plain opalescent with an orange ring?

Might have been. Wasn't it dull shears that produced the "eyelashes" found on some corkscrews? Or so the theory goes? (The erroneously-named "pre-Freeze" ones?), Personally, I like them, but apparently Akro had some interest in getting rid of them For my own information -- what do we call shear marks that are visible in the glass but not felt on the surface? Cut lines as opposed to shear marks? Since they really aren't marks? In particular I'm thinking about the clear cut lines visible in the white striations of the Pelt feathered slags . . . Also, for the one- or two-seamed CACs that are smooth? Do you call them cut lines, Galen?

I think MK did produce swirls at one time, early on, probably just when Alley morphed into Marble King. There's a really good article about that by -- Gerald Wichter? Forgive me if I have the name wrong; the author deserves a great deal of credit for pursuing the idea, and presentinng it in a way that is perfectly understandable. It was published first I think in the Texas Marble Collector's newsletter, and then in the WV one? Forgot I had these pics. These are two MK swirls I missed out on, on ebay, a couple years ago. Much to my continuing regret.

In reality, yes. But theoretically you wouldn't necessarily need that to produce similar-to-NLR marbles, if that's what you wanted to do. Not saying it would be easy. But there are so many variables, including things we don't often think about (barometric pressure, drafts), that dang near anything is possible, I think. But the relevant questions for marble makers were, "is it easily repeatable and is it economically feasible?" The set-up you describe would produce NLRs more easily and reliably.

Whew. I was afraid to even suggest that, and I'm not usually intimidated by widespread beliefs. But in my head, where I live, I was thinking something like . . . "but it looks like a cold-roll pattern to me, and wouldn't the rollers do that to glass at a too-low temperature?" But then I am occasionally irrational, and this easily could have been one of those times . . . And I did check my Pelts last night . . . only two of the five "yin-yang" ones had observable cold rolls (and they were not nearly as noticable as on the DAS ones) , and of the five multicolored swirls I have with it, only one exhibited an observable cold roll -- and that just at one pole. Don't know what that means at all. Except maybe that the interior of the marble had enough residual heat to smooth the surface, as you suggested, John?

That's them.

Thanks