Alan

I've seen plenty of people who think they do. Right here, no less. (Cue the $3,000 Vacor)

I think they're more like a smoking candle wick....

Steph is correct - no consumer had UV lights in the vintage days. It was about the glass having just a bit of a different look in sunlight. These were penny kids toys. It wasn't rocket science.

Coreless swirl. All cane-cut marbles have an initial gather. Period. People have come to refer to the absence of color or construction as things like "ghost" - which doesn't make any sense. When an initial gather is marvered, it will have some texture or pick up some frit dust etc etc. But that doesn't make it a core deserving of a name, absent some intentional construction that merits it.

Looks decidedly modern to me. Remember: Most fakes usually have a big story that comes with them in order to remove suspicion and hesitation. This one comes with a very big story. The bigger the story - the bigger the inflation. Cheesy fakes usually come with a big price too. Some people can't resist the bait.

Put me down for Jabo.

Think of doing the Florida show.

Its a Master. It isn't jumping out at me as anything more exceptional than some other Masters that come along regularly, even if intact.

On the bright side - you can display it without a marble stand!

Its not old.

Thats new glass.

It is vintage.

Yes - all modern fakes.

I "figure it out" before I buy. I also buy towards a collection theme or goal, not randomly. That way I avoid buying a lot of ballast. But that's just me.

Thats new glass. Vacor.

Current type and condition, cost and result = not worth it (for me).

The Lawnchairs were also made in 3/4" dia., however these are harder to find. One of the people that was there for the run told me that the ~5/8" were far more plentiful.

It wasn't precision process. And yes - the white in this example is the veneer.

As noted - a Ribbon Lutz. The surface wear limits collector interest and thus value.

White paper will cause the opposite problem. As Chas suggests, choose a background that is neutral - neither dark or bright. The method I noted earlier solves the problems of both focus and exposure (mostly) regardless of background.

Looks Jabo from here.

Your camera is exposure-averaging based on the background, which is dark. The result is the marble is way overexposed. If you manually choose center focus, the exposure should be much better.

I got security warnings too.