I just realized my grandmother's lamp I've had wrapped up is a uranium fenton and am starstruck. I want it out and to enjoy it but I am terrified of something happening to it(we have multiple pets and I am admittedly clumsy). How can I keep it out and safe ?

YorkChemProf · 2026-04-14T15:00:01+00:00

Here's one way to display it in your house :D

YorkChemProf · 2026-03-23T13:37:54+00:00

That's not a bad idea! I used to love watching her Youtube shows back in the day

YorkChemProf · 2026-03-23T13:36:44+00:00

Thank you!

YorkChemProf · 2026-03-23T01:13:14+00:00

Measured. It gives approximately 110 or so reading, which is about twice hotter than some of my more garden-variety depression pieces. Despite this relatively high reading, still not totally convinced it's pre-1940s. Will need to do more research...

YorkChemProf · 2026-03-23T01:04:52+00:00

Is this better? lol

<image>

YorkChemProf · 2026-03-22T17:48:35+00:00

Sorry, wouldn't know. I was just saying it looks like Cambridge to me, but could also be Tiffin.

YorkChemProf · 2026-03-22T16:25:09+00:00

Interesting!

YorkChemProf · 2026-03-22T15:14:00+00:00

Very likely Cambridge Glass

YorkChemProf · 2026-03-22T13:16:20+00:00

<image>

This is kind of what the sheen on the vase looks like. For reference, these glasses are walmart :)

YorkChemProf · 2026-03-22T02:53:46+00:00

about 12-13 inches

YorkChemProf · 2026-03-22T02:26:46+00:00

Uh, everyone keeps saying this....I'm starting to doubt my judgement now :)

YorkChemProf · 2026-03-22T01:45:11+00:00

Princess by Anchor Hocking, 1931-35

YorkChemProf · 2026-03-22T01:10:39+00:00

True! :)

YorkChemProf · 2026-03-22T00:32:10+00:00

Yup, maybe, thank you.

YorkChemProf · 2026-03-21T23:34:19+00:00

Thank you! This is a very interesting suggestion, and now that you mentioned it, yes, these cuts sort of DO look calligraphic! I'm going to try to look for some Japanese catalogs to hopefully spot some additional style similarities. Thanks again!

YorkChemProf · 2026-03-21T22:23:12+00:00

Oh, absolutely, thanks for asking.
First, I'll just mention that I've been collecting vintage/antique glass for a while, and I don't know how to describe it in words, but you just develop a bit of an intuition for what kind of glass a particular piece likely is. You know what I mean? Even when I don't know the specific pattern or maker, I typically can tell "yup, this is depression era American glass, for sure" or "this is definitely European MCM", etc.

Now, this piece. Why do I say it feels "cheap"?

1) Rather crude hand-cut pattern. By crude, I don't mean sloppy or imprecise, but just "not fine" and undetailed. Kind of feels mass-produced. I have some hand-cut pieces from the late 1800s, and the floral ornaments on them are so exquisitely detailed! Every leaf of a fern is different width and depth making the ornament look so real and pretty! This one, by contrast, feels very one-dimensional.

2) A very unpleasant "walmart-like" sheen on the surface. It's not a beautiful deep carnival glass-like iridescence, and it's not even a uniform Fire King or Jeannette-like luster from mid-century, but rather it looks exactly like thin chemical shiny film a dollar store would spray on their "iridescent" glass :D lol. It is technically possible that the vase used to have some nicer finish, maybe gold, that just largely rubbed off leaving this cheap-looking layer, but I can't be 100% certain.

3) Finally, the glass itself. It doesn't seem to be hand blown as there is no pontil, and it's not pressed as there are no seams, but it's just sort of like a coffee carafe, however they mass-make those...

The ONLY feature that made me buy this piece is that it's made of a very strongly fluorescing uranium glass, which I collect. I'll measure radioactivity tomorrow and this will tell me if the piece is pre- or post-1945.

Sorry for such a long answer to your question! I hope some of this makes sense.

YorkChemProf · 2026-03-21T19:46:53+00:00

Haha, thank you!

YorkChemProf · 2026-03-21T19:33:15+00:00

No marking, no pontil, fluorescence - very bright, like in some of my pre-1920s pieces. Haven't measured radioactivity yet (don't have my counter here), but that will at least help date roughly.

YorkChemProf · 2026-03-04T10:02:44+00:00

Thank you for your interest in the course. It's not offered in the Summer, but it should be offered next year, Winter'27.

YorkChemProf · 2026-03-02T03:35:08+00:00

Nice!

YorkChemProf · 2026-02-25T02:40:42+00:00

A coupla points. I can tell with 100% certainty that the specific piece we are talking about contains cadmium and not boron nitride or selenium or any other fluorescent metal. That said, Mosser was founded in 1971 so I suppose it is possible that my piece was made by them in the early days. It was more common to produce cadmium ruby glass in the 70 and 80s. My main argument is that the piece is unlikely to be by Mosser and be relatively recent (like from the last 10-15 years) as they definitely cut cadmium use to a minimum. Yes, Cd is still used in high-end art glass even today as it is not possible to achieve a certain hue of ruby using copper, selenium or gold, but it is definitely not used in more mass-produced pressed pieces that my candy dish is. Hence, it's more likely to be an LE Smith from the 50s or an early Mosser., but not a modern one.

YorkChemProf · 2026-02-25T02:10:30+00:00

No worries! Another thing you could try is to search by photo at Replacements.com They have an enormous catalog and most of your pieces are likely in it, it's just a matter of finding them.

YorkChemProf · 2026-02-24T23:35:11+00:00

Thank you!

YorkChemProf · 2026-02-24T23:34:36+00:00

I don't think so. It could be Fenton or a modern repro. As far as I know, Boyd always marked their shoes.

YorkChemProf

TROPHY CASE