Steph

What is a birdcage, in the context of marbles. There are some really famous/controversial ones, right? Are there old ones and contemporary ones? I've seen many allusions to them but that seems to be all.

Douglas Wiltraut's "Looking At The Moon" the story of the painting ...

from trying out somthing from Birds and Bees 101

FANTABULOUS!

Just for fun, let's put the date on the ad as 1925. Based on average prices of average items bought by average Americans, $1 in 1925 would buy the same as $11.74 now. . . . (See What is a dollar worth?) So, to get a dozen of those Favorite boxes, instead of the 74¢ it would take in 1925, you'd need to fork over $8.69 this year. That's wholesale, right?

That is so fun! Do you know what year that ad is from?

Patry Denton's "Oh no, not my best ....." This is the third marble painting Patry has shown at LOM in recent days! Here are the links: Games of "Keepers" (Post #3) Lucky Marble Oh no, not my best .....

Note of potential interest: the land of marbles thread discusses blacklighting sulfides. Antique ones will have a mild to moderate vaseline glass glow. CA sulphides won't. Also of potential interest: there are a couple of dramatic sets of before-and-after-polishing pix in that thread. That was a look back ... just a couple of notes I wanted to add for my own future reference. Now, I'm really interested in Sue's idea for highjacking the thread. Lloyd, how invasive are the tests ACRN performs? How conclusive? (and what would it take to get an exotic into their hands? )

Thanks, Jane. Without a name, the only category I knew to put it in was "How to take great pictures"!

Jane, hate to bug you ... but you don't really mind this'un making the rounds again, do ya? ... I don't have any idea what it is called ... or how old it could be ... or nuthin like that ... and I "need" to. thanks

Thanks Sue (and Lloyd). Here's the info from the listing, including a clarifying (and fascinating) Q&A exchange: This Item is one of the Infamous CALIFORNIA SULPHIDES. This is Not an Antique German Marble. The Figure is Carved with Fine Detail. There is a Light Amber Tint to the Base Glass. The Marble is in Professionally Polished Condition. The Marble Measures About 1 & 5/16 inches in Diameter. This Well Known Marble is the One Pictured Above in Paul Baumann's Book: "COLLECTING ANTIQUE MARBLES". This is the Specific Marble used by ANTIQUE COLLECTORS REPRODUCTION NEWS ACRN in Conducting Scientific Tests to Challenge the Age of These Contemporary Marbles. ------ Q: How do you know for sure that this is the one in the book? Thanks, Cyndie Dec-15-06 A: Hello Cyndie, This Marble was given to me by a collector of sulphides. He purchased it thinking it was an antique. I supplied the marble to Mark Chervanka at ACRN for testing. I was part of a group of advanced collectors that played an active part in exposing these marbles as contemporary as opposed to antique. Thank you, Lloyd Huffer

Lloyd, could you (or may we) upload the seahorse pix here, and the info about your research into the background? Thanks. Steph

I also was curious about their availability. I didn't ask 'coz it wouldn't be appropriate, 'coz I'm all talk and no buy with marbles right now. But I'm thinking that when I get my first brick, it'd be cool if it were one of Brian's.

But seriously ... have the pix just disappeared from here? or have they been gone for awhile? or are they still there and I don't see them. (Stop it Buddy!) Oh ... okay ... it's old news. That's the 2nd thread involved in the spontaneous combustion Saturday.

I still think he could be covering for someone.

Thanks, Lou. I'll be diligent about not leaving any straggling code in the future. Now can you explain this one: A few minutes ago I was inserting an image in another thread. A picture of four cat's eyes. Hosted by photo bucket. I copied the image name in the usual way (highlight the photobucket web address and "copy" ... you know ... not by hand). And then I "pasted" in the usual way. It's a .jpg image, and the address ends in .jpg. Okay. That shouldn't need stressing, but instead of just "http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e110/leaannd/2-28-07018.jpg" between the "img" tags, I got this: "http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e110/leaannd/2-28-07018.jpgOne neuron short of a synapse" I was so amused and bemused that I copied that into a text file to ponder later. I thought maybe it was some sort of unusual protection feature the image owner was employing to prevent people from linking to her photos. (Like Gutenberg.org does) I deleted the extra words, checked to make sure the picture link worked, submitted my post, then went on to read more on the board. The next post I opened up to was one of Buddy's. And it turns out that "One neuron shot of a synapse" is his new signature line.

Relative to glitches on the board, I think I may be a serial killer ... or Jessica Fletcher. (Any of you ever thought about how incredibly high the murder rate was in Cabot Cove, Maine on Murder She Wrote?) Anyhow, whether I'm doing it or whether I just happen to be around when it's happening, I've noticed another couple of odd and possibly related occurrences. Sue, you already know about one of them. In the End Of Cane Cloud ? thread and one other, where the photos were visible to some people, for awhile. Then they disappeared, and in their place were some text strings which looked associated to the attachments but which weren't functional. I noticed the second yesterday when I went to add a couple of items to my W. I. P. In the Vitro section, the links have been changed to html code, in text form, and no longer function as links. (Same problem in the Champion section, but I didn't register that yesterday.) I can and will go in and change them back, but I want a moderator to see it first. In case it would be helpful. In case you need to describe the situation to anyone. In case spontaneous post changes become the trend more than the exception. (has it been a problem in the past?) Thanks! Steph

It seemed relevant. I'm glad. You really do beautiful work ... as if that needed to be said again!

This is a gorgeous marble. If I were the maker of it, I would not want to put my signature on it. Unless, maybe, if I had a very artistic signature, such as a shamrock. But not ordinary etching. That detracts from the work of art which that marble is. In my opinion. I understand the frustration of new mibs passed off as old. But should an artist be pressured into something he considers to be defacing his art, especially if the pressure is coming from those who want to protect their vintage investments? So, how many people have I offended here? Brian Graham and everyone who is in favor of signatures?

Some pictures? !!!! ^^^^ !!!! I know you've posted several pix already in other threads ... and I'll keep looking for 'em all ... but just in case some are still waiting to be photographed and all you need is an invitation .... ....

gracias

Please expound. (unless you're galen ... ) (if you're galen, please blink once for yes, twice for no. )

thanks everyone!

a name! latticinio! It shouldn't be so hard for me to figure things out about handmade mibs, esp. with one being named after a geometrical construct (i.e., lattice), but it has been. I'll file this thread under "latticinio" since it has at least one, and then maybe I'll pull it back up when I'm finally ready to study it carefully.

In case it isn't clear enough, my question is to more than just JVV. I know he still sticks his head in from time to time, but I'd be glad to hear from any of you guys who love the handmades. Those look like they ought to have special names. Do they? Or are they just cool versions of "ordinary" handmades? Thanks a million!