Idle Question For An Expert

[david Chamberlain]

In the early 1990s on my way from New England to the Columbus OH show I set up at the NY Airport semi-annual A&C show but my first evening I went shopping before sleeping in my ever trusty '84 Buick Le Sabre (currently at 288,200 miles). Chanced upon a bottle of mostly Peltier marbles varying in size from 5/8" to 3/4".

A couple doz. of the 3/4" ones were 'Miller Marbles.' At the OH show they created quite a sensation and were recognized by all as Miller Marbles. I've been convinced ever since too! David

[david Chamberlain]

By the way, I really hate posting on this thread because it seems so pretentious to Post on a thread that has as it's subject title: IDLE QUESTION FOR AN 'EXPERT!' I am still very much in the woods when it comes to many marble subjects. David

[ann]

By the way, I really hate posting on this thread because it seems so pretentious to Post on a thread that has as it's subject title: IDLE QUESTION FOR AN 'EXPERT!' I am still very much in the woods when it comes to many marble subjects. David

I think we all are! But that's what's great about a forum like this -- being able to pick the brains of people who are knowledgeable in areas we're curious about, but not necessarily knowledgeable in.

And Mike, I couldn't agree with you more about the respect and tolerance thing. It's a big part of what keeps learning going, IMHO. Salut!

Ann

[ann]

OK, OK, a few last questions (famous last words).

1. Have any non-feathered (hand-gathered) Peltier slags ever been found in original Peltier packaging? Or excavated from the Peltier site?

and

2. Have any of you (Paula? Anyone else?) run across a patent that could be connected, in any way -- however slight --to the "Miller" machine? Mike, do the old machines you've seen at Peltier have any observable features or old modifications that you think might distinguish them as the makers of those crazy swirls? Assuming that any modifications could also have been removed in the intervening years - - -

Thanks,

Ann

[Steph]

Hehe, funny how I feel like I'm about to hijack Ann's question.

A comment about Miller machines probably shouldn't be a hijack to a thread like this, but it is, coz the subject of Miller machines seems so different from the subject of Miller swirls! LOL

But didja know . . . ?

Somewhere it has been said that Miller was a Pelt employee. I believe he had his own company though. And if I recall correctly, some of the marble machines he made were used by a company which made box labels - used to make the glass graining balls for the lithography plates.

Mike, would all of Miller's machines have been "just the rollers"? Or might he have supplied more components for some? Any idea?

[ann]

I don't cosider that a hijack! Absolutely goes to # 2. Keep 'em coming.

Anybody have anything for # 1?

Thanks,

Ann

[migbar]

There were different versions of Miller machines, but they all had rollers for making the glass gobs round, and that is all. Peltier bought the machines from the Miller Company, but Miller was not an employee of Peltier.

What was responsible for the patterns was the feeder set up. These were built up out of kiln brick and various ceramic parts, they were not machines, and these various feeder methods were designed by Sellers Peltier, not Miller.

The feeders' components would wear out and disintegrate with use, and have to be rebuilt.

Ann, some of the slags in my previous photo may be hand gathered types, and they were dug near the factory.

mike

[ann]

Ann, some of the slags in my previous photo may be hand gathered types, and they were dug near the factory.

mike

Thanks, Mike -- I thought that some in your photo looked like they could have been hand-gathered, and I was hoping you'd say they had been found at the site!

Ann

[david Chamberlain]

I have seen Peltier feathered slags in a Peltier bag but only one or two mixed in with other bonifide Peltier marbles but it has been so remote that I cannot bring it into focus. David

[FIRE81]

I have 3-4 Pelts that came from the site that might be of

interest when talking about the feathering in slags.....

which I call "Gill Plates". Which refers to the visual one

gets when they look under the Gill Plate on a FISH !!!

The actual Gills under the Gill Plate are what I think

represents the pattern most call "feathering"

The 3-4 Pelts I have are just transparent baseglass. 3 are

Red and 1 is Powder Blue. They are all 3/4 inch. When back lit.

One can see that the glass flow pattern is the same as the Pelt Slags that most know.

The best one is Powder Blue. The same Powder Blue Baseglass as

the slags. There just isn't any WHITE. The Gill Plates are there.

They are just a different "shade" of Powder Blue....a lighter shade.

B.T. would be the only person I know who could get a good

pic of this one. The other 3....same deal. I gave one of these to GUY !!!

So......I would tend to believe Pelt was gonna crack out some

3/4 inch Slags with these baseglasses....they just hadn't added the WHITE.(?)

Also......which rollers did they use to make the 3/4 incher I have ???

[migbar]

Rollers is rollers, and there is no way to tell which machine made a particular marble. From the beginning, Peltier made most of their marbles in all sizes from 9/16" to 1", and by consequence 1/2", and all I can say is that a 3/4" marble was most likely made on the 3/4" marble machine.

It is possible the marble you mentioned without white happened while making slags, before the white reached the feeder. I suspect, however, that what you see might be the tiniest hairline of a white thread, with not enough volume to show as white.

[machinemades]

Mike, we heard your story so many times over the years Miller machine versus Seller machine. Have you actually read the patterns? Could you post any excerpts from any written document? Paula actually posted some time ago over at LOM paragraphs from the Miller pattern which was very close describing how they made the Miller swirls we all seem to love.

Sami

[migbar]

Sami,

Are you talking about the early mult-color swirls with the nice yin-yan twist/reverse twist pattern ? If so, that is a completely different can of worms, and I don't know how those were made, but I think they were made with a different method than the 1928 patent that Paula mentioned on page one of this thread. The patents were written in heavy legalese jargon, and in the case of the 1928 patent, I can't say with certainty which type marbles would be produced. Some patents are much easier to understand, such as the NLR patent.

Years ago, before I had access to all the documentation, I thought there was only one Miller machine, for making marbles in the 7/8" to 1" range, but I now know that they had at least 7 Miller machines by 1928, of different sizes, so I guess all of the marbles they made up to 1928 could be called Millers, if you like.

Speaking of cans of worms and the 1928 patent, I might as well say what I really think could have been made by that method. Arnold Feidler worked at Peltier from late 1924 until late 1927. I suspect that the 1928 patent was developed and experimented with in 1927, and when Arnold left Peltier to work for Christensen Agate, I think they may have used a variation of this patent to make the Christensen flames and such. Strictly conjecture, of course.

mike

(I'm doing the best I can here, with my little brains, but again, I'm no expert.

I wish some of the real experts would/could weigh in, like Hansel, Smitty, Craig, Peewee, Raymond, Chris, and even Galen, etc....)

Here's some fun pelts