|
A GLOSSARY of MILLED BANDS
|
|
| How to Post Photos |
REGISTER (click here)
|
|
A GLOSSARY of MILLED BANDS
|
|
| How to Post Photos |
REGISTER (click here)
|
 Topic Closed
|
 SMP Silver Salon Forums
 American Silver before sterling
 Varieties of decorative silver banding
|
 SSFFriend: Email This Page to Someone! |
next newest topic | next oldest topic |
| Author | Topic: Varieties of decorative silver banding |
|
argentum1 Posts: 602 |
posted 02-19-2007 08:58 AM
  
 This is a new band to me. So, the question is: How many types of scenic banding are there? Is there a reference which includes verbal or photographic/line drawings of various types of bands used on items? I have asked a number of fellow collectors but to no avail. With the vast knowledge base here maybe someone would have an answer. Thanks for any help.
IP: Logged |
|
argentum1 Posts: 602 |
posted 02-19-2007 09:14 AM
 These are better photos plus it shows the banding in its entirety.
IP: Logged |
|
FredZ Posts: 1070 |
posted 02-19-2007 02:12 PM
I am not aware of any documentation of the decorative moulding found on silver. I believe I can see where the band is joined with solder in the second image. These moldings were most likely sold by the inch by a manufacturer with a rolling mill that had this and other designs engraved into one of the rolls. This is rather elaborate and it would have been expensive to have the roller carved. It would be great to see other images of for comparison. Fred [This message has been edited by FredZ (edited 02-19-2007).] IP: Logged |
|
FWG Posts: 845 |
posted 02-19-2007 03:17 PM
Yes, to the best of my knowledge no one has done a comprehensive survey of these rolled bands. I've seen occasionally a comparison between two or three pieces to make an argument about manufacture, typically for an unmarked piece by comparing it to marked examples, but a comprehensive photo archive would be an incredibly useful tool. IP: Logged |
|
swarter Moderator Posts: 2920 |
posted 02-19-2007 04:31 PM
Oddly enough, I was thinking about a similar thing yesterday (sounds like an obvious master's thesis in the decorative arts - I would think someone might have done one that was never published). I was musing about something that might be done on the Forum, in the form of an illustrated glossary of milled bands, providing there are examples enough among the members to be meaningful. A list of users of particular patterns could be compiled from illustations in books and catalogs, but we would need original photogaphs of the patterns. IP: Logged |
|
FWG Posts: 845 |
posted 02-19-2007 04:36 PM
A glossary on the Forum would be ideal, since it would be both easily accessible and (relatively) easy to update. Probably would be best to formulate some guidelines for image size to make things as comparable as possible, but that should be feasible.... IP: Logged |
|
Scott Martin Forum Master Posts: 11520 |
posted 02-19-2007 07:00 PM
It would be my pleasure to facilitate this. Please let me know what you need. IP: Logged |
|
ahwt Posts: 2334 |
posted 02-19-2007 09:57 PM
I think one would need a close up of the milled work, a photo of the makers or retailers mark and a photo of the object it was on. Great idea. IP: Logged |
|
argentum1 Posts: 602 |
posted 02-20-2007 09:38 AM
Scott Thank you for your offer. Now for a few questions 1) what file size do you recommend 2) what is the maximum pixel size. The reason I ask is that I have played with the different sizes. For the best quality detail I have found 1200 pixels to be the low end. I am using a Canon 10D set to its next to the smallest file size. This gives me reasonably good detail. That takes me well beyond the stated 640 pixel size. The 640 pixel size still has good detail but would require the viewer to enlarge the image to really appreciate the details. Any suggestions. IP: Logged |
|
Scott Martin Forum Master Posts: 11520 |
posted 02-20-2007 12:11 PM
Files size is best determined by the target display device. For example, on screen (browser/internet) or printer or both. Lets first consider on screen. Accept for now that the maximum image width we want on screen is 640 pixels wide. Most computer screens will only display at 72 DPI (a few do 96+ DPI). So viewing an image at 1200 DPI makes for a larger file size but on your screen the image will only be seen at a resolution of 72 DPI. The extra pixels are not used or displayed but they still have to be downloaded before the image will show up on your screen. Take your picture at the highest resolution as your camera will allow. Your camera will take 1200 DPI resolution image but at what pixel image width? You can crop your image to 1200 DPI X 640 pixels wide Lets call this Image A. If you take Image A and then resample it to 72 DPI x 640 pixels wide (of course save using a different file name). Lets call this Image B. Then Image A’s file size will be larger (longer to download) than Image B. But both will look the same on a computer screen. Edit and crop your images at the highest resolution you can work with. But posting those high resolution images even at 640 pixels wide is a waste of download time/bandwidth since they will only display on screen at 72 DPI. Once you have edited your high resolution image and have it looking the way you want, then resample the image to fit the target display device. For display in a browser on a computer via the Internet, 72 DPI is the default resolution for the majority of users. And for the Silver Salon Forums the maximum image width is 640 pixels wide. File compression is another topic best saved for later. Images for printing is a more complex discussion. Printing images involves many more variables including the type of printer, the printer’s settings, drivers, etc. Since I think we are talking about this being on-line I will skip the discussion about images for printing. My suggestion is to take/edit high resolution images but only post images at a maximum of 72 DPI X 640 pixels wide. IP: Logged |
|
swarter Moderator Posts: 2920 |
posted 02-20-2007 12:59 PM
As it seems there is some level of interest in proceeding, I have placed a suggestion in the moderator's forum; we should have a proceedure shortly. IP: Logged |
|
ahwt Posts: 2334 |
posted 02-20-2007 06:28 PM
I would love to see the object that argentum1's lovely band is on. A very nice one to start with. Photobucket has a preset option of saving as 640x480. Is this the one to use? If one gets much larger than 640 the picture goes off the screen and is difficult to view. [This message has been edited by ahwt (edited 02-20-2007).] IP: Logged |
|
swarter Moderator Posts: 2920 |
posted 02-20-2007 06:46 PM
640X480 is the largest you would want to use. Argentum's images above are 640 wide. Remember that even if you rotate a 640X480 image (turning your camera to fill the frame witha vertical object), it will be only 480 wide, but the 640 height will fill the browser frame, so you wouldn't want it any larger. IP: Logged |
|
argentum1 Posts: 602 |
posted 02-20-2007 09:08 PM
ahwt I will post photos in the AM IP: Logged |
|
argentum1 Posts: 602 |
posted 02-21-2007 07:24 AM
 Bought this as a set just recently. Probably paid too much but I really, really liked the set especially the banding.
IP: Logged |
|
FWG Posts: 845 |
posted 02-21-2007 09:58 AM
And there appear to be at least two different rolled bands there -- leading to further possbilities for tying together different pieces.... IP: Logged |
|
swarter Moderator Posts: 2920 |
posted 02-21-2007 10:38 AM
I can see why you were attracted to it. Are any of the pieces in the set marked? If so, by whom? Can you add a closeup of the narrow band? We will be starting the glossary as a new thread in a day or two, but feel free to continue the discussion of Argentum1's set in this one (we will add at least one of the pictures of the bands to the glossary with a link to this thread to see the others). IP: Logged |
|
argentum1 Posts: 602 |
posted 02-21-2007 10:40 AM
 This is the first piece purchased with a scenic rolled band. The handle is missing but that did not bother me all that much. After all I am not nearly as old as the cup is and I am starting to fall apart. I saw a cup about 25 years ago with the scenic banding and that starting me looking. These are the only pieces I have found over those 25 years.
IP: Logged |
|
argentum1 Posts: 602 |
posted 02-21-2007 10:52 AM
 This is the band for the teaset. The maker is W.B.Heyer of New York and the maker for the cup is B&J of New York (Boyce & Jones).
IP: Logged |
|
Dale Posts: 2132 |
posted 02-21-2007 09:09 PM
Excellent idea! There are loads of quite interesting bands out their. The ones in silverplate appear on pieces by a variety of makers. Question. There is an old Tiffany china pattern with a band filled with items very much like this one. Any possible connection? IP: Logged |
|
argentum1 Posts: 602 |
posted 02-21-2007 09:40 PM
These silversmiths pre-date Tiffany. The practice of copying other makers designs was a common practice. I do not think there were copyright/trademark/designs patents at this time; however, one of the attorney menbers would be better at addressing that issue. IP: Logged |
|
doc Posts: 728 |
posted 02-22-2007 01:06 PM
Not to get too off track, but federal copyright and patent law has been around since 1790. IP: Logged |
|
ahwt Posts: 2334 |
posted 02-22-2007 10:56 PM
James Madison and credited with including Article III, Section 8 - the Patent and Copyright Clause - in the US Constitution, providing the basis for IP in the basic US constitutional system. This provision provides: Other nations have granted this privilege, and it has afforded mutual satisfaction alike to the public and to individual applicants. Many who visit the Patent Office learn with astonishment that no protection is given in this country to this class of persons. Competition among manufacturers for the latest patterns prompts to the highest efforts to secure improvements, and calls out the inventive genius of our citizens. Such patterns are immediately pirated, at home and abroad. A pattern introduced at Lowell, for instance, with however great labor or cost, may be taken to England in twelve or fourteen days, and copied and returned in twenty days more. If protection is given to designers, better patterns will, it is believed, be obtained, since the impossibility of concealment at present forbids all expense that can be avoided. It may well be asked, if authors can so readily find protection in their labors, and inventors of the mechanical arts so easily secure a patent to reward their efforts, why should not discoverers of designs, the labor and expenditure of which may be far greater, have equal privileges afforded them? The law, if extended, should embrace alike the protection of new and original designs for a manufacture of metal or other material, or any new and useful design for the printing of woolen, silk, cotton, or other fabric, or for a bust, statue, or bas-relief, or composition in alto or basso relievo. All this could be effected by simply authorizing the Commissioner to issue patents for these objects, under the same limitations and on the same conditions as govern present action in other cases. The duration of the patent might be seven years, and the fee might be one half of the present fee charged to citizens and foreigners respectively." In 1842 a statute was passed to provide for the grant of patents for "any new and original design for a manufacture or for printing on a fabric. IP: Logged |
|
outwest Posts: 390 |
posted 02-23-2007 12:49 AM
Is this the sort of thing you're talking about? Or maybe not, because these are sterling and not coin. [pictures removed by me-posted elsewhere a long time ago [This message has been edited by outwest (edited 02-24-2007).] IP: Logged |
|
swarter Moderator Posts: 2920 |
posted 02-23-2007 11:19 AM
Milled bands were impressed on strips of silver passed through a rolling mill, cut to size, and then soldered on the surface. The most elaborate ones were produced during the 1810-1840 period, with some simpler patterns 20 or so years earlier. Similar patterns could appear later, but were not necessarily produced by the same process, and are not the subject of the present project. We will start the glossary thread in a day or two with a few examples illustrated that should help clear up any uncertainty. The candlestick does not appear to have any milled bands; the candy dish is harder to tell about without examination, but based on the period, probably does not, either. Argentum1's examples, on the other hand, are milled. IP: Logged |
|
outwest Posts: 390 |
posted 02-24-2007 12:25 AM
Should I then remove the post? Or, maybe leave it to show the difference, eh? Thanks. IP: Logged |
|
outwest Posts: 390 |
posted 02-24-2007 12:52 AM
How about these? year 1843 (just past your year range of up to 1840, but the item is handmade coin) Edward Kinsey, Cincinnati, Ohio: This one meets your requirements. It is definitely rolled and soldered on as a band. If you need a better picture let me know and I can try to get a better one: IP: Logged |
|
ahwt Posts: 2334 |
posted 02-24-2007 09:53 AM
Outwest, I think the bands you have shown are rolled. On the bottom one the joining of the two ends can be seen. If this thread is successful another project could be a study of finials and handles. I believe there is some thought that handles and perhaps finials were only made by a small number of silversmiths and wholesaled to others in the trade. Also I forgot to mention in the note on laws relating to design patents that in 1842 only U.S. citizens or those becoming U.S. citizens could file for a U.S. patent. Times have changed as today close to half of the patents issued by the U.S. Patent Office are to non-U.S. citizens. Actually today the U.S. Patent Office is awash in applications from all over the world and the time for a decision gets longer each year. IP: Logged |
|
swarter Moderator Posts: 2920 |
posted 02-24-2007 11:06 AM
quote: Yes, these are OK. The date range is only approximate. New techniques require new tools and machinery, which not everyone gets at the same time, and their acceptance by buyers can take time as well. You can usually tell by looking for the solder joint where the ends of the strip meet; there also may be a mismatch of the design elements a that point as well. Better images would help - simply edit out your old ones and replace them with the new. IP: Logged |
|
argentum1 Posts: 602 |
posted 02-24-2007 11:52 AM
 This is from a teapot as shown. The band is appx 7/8 inch wide and the maker is Rockwell.
IP: Logged |
|
argentum1 Posts: 602 |
posted 02-24-2007 12:10 PM
 Three different bands appear on this teapot. The maker is Fletcher & Gardiner.
IP: Logged |
|
swarter Moderator Posts: 2920 |
posted 02-24-2007 12:25 PM
quote: Nice pot, good photos. Edward Rockwell, I assume?
IP: Logged |
|
outwest Posts: 390 |
posted 02-24-2007 02:27 PM
Argentums middle band above is EXACTLY the same as one of my bands, even down to the number of petals on the flower and the ridging for the background. Cool. How old is your pot? IP: Logged |
|
argentum1 Posts: 602 |
posted 02-24-2007 02:36 PM
Outwest Fletcher & Gardiner worked 1809-1827. The pot is appx. 1815-1825. IP: Logged |
|
argentum1 Posts: 602 |
posted 02-24-2007 03:12 PM
 I must like teapots. A & G Welles of Boston.
IP: Logged |
|
swarter Moderator Posts: 2920 |
posted 02-24-2007 04:47 PM
These are all great additions -- keep them coming -- but please pay attention to the "rules" and do not duplicate pictures from other threads in the Glossary thread. There is a limit of 8 pictures per post, so I need to be able to shuffle things around, which I cannot do if there are too many intervening posts. I will move images into the glossary from the other threads myself. The glossary will have links to the original threads in which a pattern was posted, as has been done for Argentum's first two. You can start new threads, too - it is not necessary to overextend this one. The star-like pattern on the F&G and Kinsey pieces is a standard pattern, I think called "etoile" (asterisk or star), which I will add to the glossary list when I figure out how best to get around that 8 picture limit. IP: Logged |
|
outwest Posts: 390 |
posted 02-24-2007 05:38 PM
argentum, You have some fabulous tea pots. If you feel you have a few too many I'd be happy to take a couple off your hands. IP: Logged |
|
ahwt Posts: 2334 |
posted 02-24-2007 06:35 PM
Swarter, the argentum1 harvest pattern has one section that includes bee hives. Could this section be included with the other section that is already shown? Bee hives are very common on Staffordshire figures, but must be pretty rare on silver. Also, I think you are saying that duplicates should not be shown. If the duplicate has a different maker or mark can the new name be added to the original post? IP: Logged |
|
swarter Moderator Posts: 2920 |
posted 02-24-2007 08:00 PM
In order to keep the list manageable, no duplicates will be included inthe glossary thread. You are of course free to post as much documentation and as many examples as you like in other threads. Additional maker names will be added in the glossary, along with links to the threads in which examples appear, except for the standard patterns, which could have been used by any number of makers in different geographical areas. IP: Logged |
|
outwest Posts: 390 |
posted 02-24-2007 11:03 PM
I wanted to check and see if you had this one, but, alas, you must be working on it because it disappeared: IP: Logged |
|
argentum1 Posts: 602 |
posted 02-25-2007 08:13 AM
I second that Thank You for all your work on this. The Oscars are coming shortly and they should add one for Moderators, you all desire one. IP: Logged |
|
swarter Moderator Posts: 2920 |
posted 02-25-2007 04:33 PM
quote: No, we don't. The picture is good. What is it on? The Kinsey floral band is too unsharp to use. Don't worry about the curvature, just so long as the center section is sharp. IP: Logged |
|
swarter Moderator Posts: 2920 |
posted 02-25-2007 04:50 PM
This thread is continued in Varieties of silver banding part 2 IP: Logged |
All times are ET | next newest topic | next oldest topic |
  |
|
Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.46a
|
1. Public Silver Forums (open Free membership) - anyone with a valid e-mail address may register. Once you have received your Silver Salon Forum password, and then if you abide by the Silver Salon Forum Guidelines, you may start a thread or post a reply in the New Members' Forum. New Members who show a continued willingness to participate, to completely read and abide by the Guidelines will be allowed to post to the Member Public Forums. 2. Private Silver Salon Forums (invitational or $ donation membership) - The Private Silver Salon Forums require registration and special authorization to view, search, start a thread or to post a reply. Special authorization can be obtained in one of several ways: by Invitation; Annual $ Donation; or via Special Limited Membership. For more details click here (under development). 3. Administrative/Special Private Forums (special membership required) - These forums are reserved for special subjects or administrative discussion. These forums are not open to the public and require special authorization to view or post. |
|
copyright © 1993 - 2022
SM Publications
All Rights Reserved. Legal & Privacy Notices |
)
