Paperweight

[cat's eye jack]

i posted this 6" paperweight a while back for possible id. i think someone mentioned "jetson" style. i can't find any markings which doesn't help. the main thing i wanted to know is, being so large, wouldn't that be a premium even if unsigned? i've never seen another 6". thanks, jack

[Alan]

While it is styled after a Jetson-like design - in my opinion it is rather crudely formed. Lacking any artist association - it looks like someone's early work.

The size doesn't really come into the valuation until the marble, its design and the artist's execution "is there". IMO - that is lacking in the piece. With no artist association - IME the size doesn't become much of a factor.

Of course you might find a person who falls in love with it and doesn't care about these things. In that case - its just a matter of agreeing on price.

[cat's eye jack]

While it is styled after a Jetson-like design - in my opinion it is rather crudely formed. Lacking any artist association - it looks like someone's early work.

The size doesn't really come into the valuation until the marble, its design and the artist's execution "is there". IMO - that is lacking in the piece. With no artist association - IME the size doesn't become much of a factor.

Of course you might find a person who falls in love with it and doesn't care about these things. In that case - its just a matter of agreeing on price.

thanks alan, i guess you are right when i start thinking about it. just for the heck of it do you have any idea what the maximum size for paperweights is? thanks, jack

[Alan]

thanks alan, i guess you are right when i start thinking about it. just for the heck of it do you have any idea what the maximum size for paperweights is? thanks, jack

The record (I think) is held by Josh Simpson - who under a grant by Corning - created a 100 lb+ planet a few years ago. There is a DVD of it - well worth watching. It took him many tries over the span of a year, changes in technique and a lot of innovation. On the more sane front - Josh and others regularly turn out 5-8" diameter weights... up to 10" dia (the latter being more corporate display pieces IMO).

The problem (I think) with very large weights is both technical and artistic....more of the latter I think. The technical is just mechanics, weight on the punty and a longer anneal. As a weight gets larger - controlling the design very well becomes more difficult.

I own large Simpsons in the 3.5" range, Matthews at 3.25", and Harry Besset and Lundberg pieces > 3" dia. - so my sense is that is around the larger sizes targeted by many artists.

Here are some really large Simpson pieces - the largest being around 10" dia.:

Alan

[Scoop]

Size seems to be a novelty for some artists.... Leaning towards the "Just to see if I can do it" goal.... Once done, it loses it's lustre pretty fast!!!

I know Dudley Giberson did some HUGE stuff (In Bev Brule's collection...) I'm not sure how big the largest is.... Maybe 8"... I need to get together with her son and get pictures of some of this stuff...

Also, Paul Stankard has turned out some big honkin' sphere's.... Seen Here

Some of these have been pieced together... Paul does soft glass torch work... I don't think there's ANY way he could go so big and keep detail (Just going that big on a torch without detail is a serious trick!!)

From what I understand (And, this is probably a rough abreviated description of the process) he creates the inner part and has a glass tech square them up and add (with a type of glue...) clear sections around it... Then, the whole thing goes into a sphere machine and comes out round!!

If you examine the sphere very closely, the seams can be seen.....

In my mind, I have to think, "Isn't that cheating????"

But, it is a process and it does work!! Sooooooo..... ????

(Besides... Whose gonna tell Paul Stankard he's cheating??? ROFLMAO!!!)

[david Chamberlain]

When it's round as opposed to having a paperweight bottom it gets kind of subjective as to value for the category chosen to represent it. Like, is it a marble or just a sphere? When you get beyond 3 inches I've always naturally consigned them to a category other than marbles. Beyond size though I think artistic integrity trumps anything else. David

[Delbert]

i posted this 6" paperweight a while back for possible id. i think someone mentioned "jetson" style. i can't find any markings which doesn't help. the main thing i wanted to know is, being so large, wouldn't that be a premium even if unsigned? i've never seen another 6". thanks, jack

That appears to be a sphere, not a paperweight. I guess if it's a sphere it would qualifiy as a carpet bowler ;-). Among the paperweights I own, 3 inches is about the maximum diameter, though some are elongated and stand as high as 4 inches. A few I have are spherical with a flat ground bottom. Does yours have a flat spot on the bottom?