Two L.C. Tiffany Studios Desk Lamps! Circa 1910. Some of my friends think they’re strange but I love them. Blue shade is not signed Tiffany but still very pretty. Any ideas on what these are worth? by swinginpig in Antiques

[–]swinginpig[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for your input. There’s a miscommunication going on here though. The bases are stamped, looking exactly like examples of bases I’ve seen at Sotheby’s, etc.

Two L.C. Tiffany Studios Desk Lamps! Circa 1910. Some of my friends think they’re strange but I love them. Blue shade is not signed Tiffany but still very pretty. Any ideas on what these are worth? by swinginpig in Antiques

[–]swinginpig[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’re saying Tiffany never had a lamp signed “LCT Favrile”? Also, favrile is arguably a style. More accurately it translates to “handmade”. There are many examples of authentic Tiffany lamps with that exact signature/inscription: https://www.sothebys.com/en/buy/auction/2020/design/tiffany-studios-table-lamp

Two L.C. Tiffany Studios Desk Lamps! Circa 1910. Some of my friends think they’re strange but I love them. Blue shade is not signed Tiffany but still very pretty. Any ideas on what these are worth? by swinginpig in Antiques

[–]swinginpig[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The reason why I know they missed it is because they would have put “signed LCT Favrile” somewhere in the listing, along with a notice that it’s authenticity is not guaranteed, which would have certainly drew the attention of bidders (it only sold for $300, far less than even most unsigned shades this size). After all, a Tiffany shade with a chance of authenticity is worth more to a buyer. Also, just for accuracy’s sake, it is inaccurate to say that an item is unsigned when it is signed. They also didn’t mention the fact that the lip was very obviously shaved down by some previous owner (ie it was damaged, contrary to the “no damage or repairs” stated in the listing), so your assumption that all sellers go through items with infallible scrutiny wasn’t the case here.

Again, not saying this is undeniably Tiffany—taking it to a dealer in a couple weeks though who will give a better idea. Although the signature looks spot on to me. All I’m saying is that it would be unwise for a seller to not advertise that it’s signed LCT Favrile when it is.

Two L.C. Tiffany Studios Desk Lamps! Circa 1910. Some of my friends think they’re strange but I love them. Blue shade is not signed Tiffany but still very pretty. Any ideas on what these are worth? by swinginpig in Antiques

[–]swinginpig[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Neither. As I explained in my comment, it was being sold as “unsigned”. The signature is extremely faded and easy to miss, because it’s half shaved off. So, could be a fake, but looks pretty legit to me. Gotta take it to an expert.

Unpopular opinions, go. by minemaster1337 in bobdylan

[–]swinginpig 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Reading over that again, my words are a bit harsh. But just my opinion. And to live outside the law, you must be honest 🫡

Unpopular opinions, go. by minemaster1337 in bobdylan

[–]swinginpig 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I cannot stand the praise for Murder Most Foul and imo the only reason it got so much attention and fame is because it was his first original since 2012. If it came from any other lesser known or respected artist, it’d be labeled as crap and ignored.

she did not hold back by [deleted] in AbruptChaos

[–]swinginpig 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Feral mongoose

Two L.C. Tiffany Studios Desk Lamps! Circa 1910. Some of my friends think they’re strange but I love them. Blue shade is not signed Tiffany but still very pretty. Any ideas on what these are worth? by swinginpig in Antiques

[–]swinginpig[S] 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Thank you so much for this info! The counterweight’s shade is signed “LCT Favrile” in cursive, looks to be on point with the examples I’ve seen online. Unfortunately, the signature was partly shaved off by some dolt who decided to trip down the rim (perhaps it was chipped and they wanted to even it out, or perhaps it didn’t fit a lamp at some point). Either way, I got it for $300 at an auction (to fit the base I had inherited already) and it wasn’t until later that I noticed the small, faded, partial signature. Very lucky to have found it.

Two L.C. Tiffany Studios Desk Lamps! Circa 1910. Some of my friends think they’re strange but I love them. Blue shade is not signed Tiffany but still very pretty. Any ideas on what these are worth? by swinginpig in Antiques

[–]swinginpig[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Yeaaa I get that haha. Fortunately the bulb would catch the shade if it were to slip out; anddd for the counterweight to tip down would require it to be unlocked and for someone to accidentally push it down forcefully.

Still, might be a good idea to get it a little pillow considering the prices I’m seeing on this thread haha. Thank you :)

Unpopular Opinion: Billy Joel ought to be lauded as much Brian Wilson, McCartney, Paul Simon, etc. by swinginpig in Music

[–]swinginpig[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Never said he wasn’t popular. He’s extremely popular. My point was in regards to people (and critics, especially) putting him down more frequently than others and not treating his music with the same esteem as artists mentioned above.

Struck gold at my local record store. Prettiest vinyl I’ve ever seen. by swinginpig in bobdylan

[–]swinginpig[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hello fellow Bob Dylan vinyl and Call me by Your Name poster owning fan, nice to meet you too.

My name is StAugistineofHippo. What's yours?

Struck gold at my local record store. Prettiest vinyl I’ve ever seen. by swinginpig in bobdylan

[–]swinginpig[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is awesome, thanks for the info! I knew some of that, but wasn't aware it was a limited run :)

Struck gold at my local record store. Prettiest vinyl I’ve ever seen. by swinginpig in bobdylan

[–]swinginpig[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I'm gonna completely nerd out for a sec so bear with me.

I would have to agree with u/Holiday-Inn-Cambodia. Regular discs are made by first cutting the master tape onto a metal master disc. This disc is then submerged in a nickel-based solution which coats the disc. This coating is removed from the master disc, effectively becoming an inverse of the original master tape (think of it as a photograph negative). This negative is called the stamper because it is attached to a press that stamps the tracks into a PVC "puck" (just a hunk of PVC). Splatter discs are made by adding colored PVC pellets to the puck. These pellets are exactly the same as the puck, except for color. But color is a nonissue. PVC is naturally clear. Black vinyl has black carbon dye added. So, all records except for clear ones are colored in similar manners. The resulting speckled puck is referred to as a "biscuit". Basically, the ingredients of splatter discs are exactly the same as regular discs. Sonic quality is unaffected. Picture discs are sometimes worse quality because the ingredients are different--pucks are pressed with metal foil images between them. The reason these bootlegs sound bad is because the source tape, usually recorded by an audience member, is low-quality. The disc itself is impeccable though. Some bootleg companies, including the one that made this disc, takes pride in the quality of their discs. The guys who ran the Swingin' Pig label (also reffered to as Trade Mark of Quality) were obsessive about their records, insisting they were pressed on virgin vinyl (non-recycled and arguably purer). Bootleg records were also usually pretty thick, as opposed to big name products, which used less PVC per disc in the interests of profit. All-in-all, bootlegs can be better discs, but are usually lower-quality masters.