Featured Royal Epiag portrait platter

I picked up this Royal Epiag porcelain platter yesterday. It's approximately 12" x 8" and a beautiful gradient robin's egg blue. The floral design appears to be hand painted and the image of the woman is (I think) a photo transfer with a bit of handwork around the edge. Although there are scads of antique portrait plates online, I've not found any that feature this technique. I was wondering if it might be a special order or
piece, an aftermarket addition, or... ? The subject's style appears to be very early '20s. Hallmark is from 1920-1939.

Any info/input on this style appreciated!

custom

 

Oh isnt she the prettiest thing ! I think she was applied on top of the floral pattern,so maybe this was hobbiest ? Ive seen portrait plates too ,but dont recall them on a tray.

 

She is pretty! The thing is that there's no break in the surface of the platter. That is to say it doesn't have the appearance or feel (when running finger over it) of a second layer. One of the flowers overlaps the portrait, but I guess the flowers could have been added on, too. I'll see if I can capture a close up detail pic later today.

 

Dunno how early but... bobbed and marcelled. 1920s for sure.

Debora

 

I was thinking it might possibly be waved and pinned up - "faux bob". I can't tweak the contrast enough to bring up detail. Love that era, though!

 

You're right. Could well be. It must have been such freedom to be able to cut off one's hair and take off one's corsets. Comparable to the freedom provided by blow dryers and panty hose in the 1960s/1970s.

Debora

 

I agree. Most women in the 20s didn't cut their hair, but wore it marcelled (those small, sharp waves) and up.

The blow dryer was invented in Germany in 1899, and by the early 50s it was widely used in Europe. It is possible that it was introduced in the US at a later date.

 

A lot of flappers had short hair; I don't see how it matters.

 

Flappers were young women. There were other women too. Even older women.

It matters when talking about the portrait.

 

Yes, so a wide range of women with short or long hair from 1920 onward.

 

I didn't view it as a critical indicator in researching the platter - just a casual exchange about hair styles of the times.

 

It is an indication of what the sitter is, that she is possibly married, and/or not as modern as some of her contemporaries. The wide range doesn't matter in this case, she does.
Vermeer also painted a wide range of similar women, but most of us still look at them with interest.

Some of us use old paintings and photographs to study hairstyles, clothing, jewellery. Photographs are more reliable in that respect than paintings.
You can dismiss a valid part of historical research and our interest in it, but remember that we don't dismiss your interests.

Exactly, which is fine on Antiquers, because it is historic research, so relevant to what we do.

 

I'll bet it was some special promotion: bring in your picture and we'll put it on a fine porcelain tray - a keepsake for generations.

It looks like the photo has been cut to accommodate that one "overlapping" flower.

 

Well, she is wearing a ring and holding a bouquet--does that make it her wedding day? I really don't see that fabricating a backstory for this unknown woman goes anywhere, but, as long as you're having fun.

 

So far you are the only one fabricating a backstory: speculating about a wedding day, when women have been wearing rings for thousands of years and bouquets could be for a number of occasions.

Looking at hairstyles and the women who wore them is not fabricating a backstory. It is well documented. It is a valid part of research, both in period styles and the pertaining demographics. As such it is also relevant to this piece.
And it is relevant to Ninabeth's interest, as is clear from her observation:

If you have a problem with other types of historical research than your own field of interest, I suggest you don't read the pertaining posts, threads or forums.
Don't criticize things you don't know about, that is just petty. I would never criticize anyone's interest or research into ceramics, it wouldn't even enter my mind.

And please stop putting a negative spin on other people's posts, and filling in 'blanks' that aren't there. It is a sweet platter and Ninabeth was looking for answers, not for someone else's personal issues with her quest or with relevant replies.

You seem to be determined to be negative, so this is my last reply to you. Be nice, for Ninabeth's sake. This is not that kind of forum.

 

I had no idea that those waves were called this. I love learning about styles of the time that help us date stuff. I also love a bit of speculation as to the story behind an item. We all know that’s what it is, just speculation but some items do turn out to have amazing stories.

The rather more beautiful predecessor of the china mugs my mum got in the 70s with dodgy grainy black and white photos of us on them

 

It's a beautiful piece! I also enjoy pondering over the hair, jewelry and especially the beadwork on the dress.

 

My mother used to call those finger waves.

 

Some people used to create them by pushing hair up between two fingers, that is probably why.

 

And then placing long clips in the "valleys". I used to watch my mom do this with her hair in the early 50's. She went to the beauty salon weekly and had her hair shampooed and set, then brushed out and sprayed into place (remember Aqua-Net?). But we lived in Southern California (warm) and she was energetic and worked hard. Hence, she perspired and the front of her hair would need work. She called them finger waves as well.

Linda