Featured CAMEOS: Show & Tell or Ask & Answer

Weasel probably, the tiniest carnivorous
Here is mine, I called Baby Dracula Articulated jaw, velvet tongue
Skull itself is 2cm high 1,3cm wide, longest superior canine 8mm!!!

 

@Bronwen, you surely saw it...
Set in Brass 1 3/8" Height

Wondering what shell it is carved from, back with leopard's spots looks like what we call "porcelain", a kind of cowry/cauri shell:

 

Absolutely love it.

 

I do have this one in my files for cowrie/cowry shell pieces. In case not everyone realizes, this is very unusual in that carver elected to cut the shell using a white layer for the scene, creating a concave cameo with the shell's spots able to show through, another example of how the translucency of thin shell can be used to create unusual effects. This is the way these cowries (which I keep wanting to call leopard cowries but for some perverse reason are known as tiger cowries) are generally used:


The small African money cowries are also used sometimes:

 

Fun fact to know & tell: The word 'porcelain' comes from an Italian word for a cowrie shell, 'porcellana', which means 'little pig'.

 

Sometimes my brain connects things that are not connected -- or are not connected for the reasons I think.

But I must now walk you through a winding path my brain has/is traveling... please be patient with me as I, undoubtedly, over-complicate things.

This started with @Barn Owl's Beatrice Cenci cameo (henceforth known as "Barn Beatrice").

(those green circles are there to point out that what happens in that area is original to the cameo, not a direct copy of the painting)

After I posted that it was glass, I went looking for others -- sure sign that it's glass is to find more. I found one.

Only one. On pinterest, so no info, but it was blue, so, yeah, probably glass. (henceforth to be known a "Blue Beatrice")

Much higher detail than Barn Beatrice, but check the sleeve.


Then @Bronwen said Barn was dripstone and I was all, "wait, wut?"

Okay so, like glass, dripstone requires a mold. I must find more info on Blue.

I went to pinterest.

But it was worth it.

Found the original auction of Blue.

In 2011, Blue sold for $1K+ -- she was listed as "blue lava stone" -- if there was a picture of the back, it is there no longer. The description (no further info on the cameo) says that the setting tests at 9K. She is 45 mm x 35 mm. Here she is in her setting.



Yeah, I know. She looks like wax to me, too. Long pin, though... hey waitaminnit, didn't I recently post something about a waxy-looking piece listed as lava stone... (henceforth known as GreyLady)

So now I'm getting all up close and personal with both Blue and Barn. And GreyLady.

Though least clear on Barn, they all have areas like this (if not obvious, they look like... unpopped bubbles?):


And areas like this (popped bubbles?):




I'm no longer sure of anything about any of these.

Because Blue is the highest resolution image, I'm posting more pics of her. Because while she looks like wax, she doesn't look like wax.

And I don't know what she is.

Or how Blue and Barn are related.

Or if the ebayer who bought GreyLady for $43 got a great deal? Or if the person who bought Blue for $1K was vastly disappointed in the purchase?

Inquiring minds, @Bronwen, INQUIRING MINDS.

 

@Jivvy Help my depth perception problem: is the shinier streak on top of or below the more matte finish of GreyLady?

 

Wow! Great sleuthing. I doubt mine will get anywhere near that price, but now I have a good idea how much a similar one sold for. I'm pretty sure mine isn't wax; it doesn't feel right for wax, and I don't think it would have that chip. But could dripstone acquire that blue tone?

 

I've seen many versions of Beatrice, some more, some less faithful to the painting. Have never seen one that gets the angle of the head completely right; folds of her robe are sometimes completely the invention of the cutter.

This is a modern one:

 

Best guess: on top.

 

Oh yes. That is why it is so striking to me the sleeves of Barn and Blue. I can explain away a lot of their similarities, but not that one.

 

OK. GreyLady, BarnBeatrice & BlueBeatrice are all molded.

Because I'm seeing it as beneath, I'm seeing GreyLady as lava glass. BarnBeatrice is either dripstone or lava. I'm giving preference to dripstone because of granularity of the material & probable French origin. BlueBeatrice I think was made with porcelain paste not worked into the mold well enough to get rid of bubbles. It is clearly much more fine grained material than BlueBeatrice. The thread-like crack is evidence:



I believe this one sold for such a high price because it was mistaken for turquoise; I have seen sellers of antique jewellery make the same mistake with pieces I was able to handle & find not to feel like stone. The way it has become so very grimy all over, not just in crevices, is another hint that it is something other than stone or glass, whose smoothness gives less purchase for the grunge.

The molds for BarnB & BlueB may have a common ancestor, but were probably not the same mold. As already noted, a lot of detail missing from BB, maybe partly the result of using coarser material:

 

OK, blue, brown and barn aside, this is fascinating. In fact, this whole thread has been fascinating.

Thank you Bronwen for starting it and sharing your wealth of knowledge

 

Thank you, ma'am. You have to realize what a pleasure it is for me to have others with whom to share my obsessions!

 

Agreed. I think there was an Original Beatrice Cameo (let's call it "Eve Beatrice") that was used to make the mold for Blue.

And then there was sin and Eve was destroyed.

And one of the molds made from Eve was used to create Eve2. Eve2 was then used to make molds.

No surprise more sin, more molds, and eventually we're on Eve6, mother of Barn.

So now I'm off rummaging the internet for better dripstone cameo pictures (fat chance) and then found a "described as" dripstone plaque at catawiki.

No idea if it's actually dripstone, but if it is. Look at all the bits that look like unpopped bubbles. Are they a part of the dripstone process?

As you know, Mr. Jivvy was all about the "how do these dripstone pieces stick together?"

What if part of the mystical/magical/secret process is that there is some sort of binder solution/additive that is enough to cause bubbles?

 

Is what we see what Catawiki's got? Would want to see a better close up of the back.

Dripstone cameos are sold as souvenirs of 2 types of places: calcareous hot springs & limestone caves/grottoes. The hot springs are frank about how their pieces are made. The caves seem to like to give the implausible impression that they place the mold beneath the tip of a dripping stalactite until it is full. This is clearly incorrect, but whether the process is in some way different from that used by the springs, I do not know. There are a few different ways the backs look.










I rarely see these with any associated info on where they were made, so don't know if the differences are diagnostic of origin.

Since they are rarely correctly identified, good luck with this. You're likely to wind up back at Cameo Times.

Not really, since the slurry wouldn't ever be very viscous. I'm not sure we are seeing any bubbles on BarnBeatrice.

 

@Barn Owl : Any chance we can get some giant closeups? INQUIRING MINDS.

 

Hmm. I have no other examples that are so starkly white. Have to wonder if this isn't plaster of Paris, even though the depressions on the back are of the sort seen on many dripstone pieces. When flipped, you can see how the hollows on the back follow some of the lines on front:



It also strikes me as possibly not made by traditional methods. Maybe if you rush it any bubbles do not have time to escape to the back & pop.

 

I've found it helps to search on "calcaire pétrifié"... a phrase picked up from CameoTimes, of course.

Still looking, but am quickly coming to the conclusion that outcome is affected by variation in both technique and skill level.