Featured CAMEOS: Show & Tell or Ask & Answer

I think she may be signed.

 

No, there are scratches but nothing that looks like letters. I was thinking of you while I was checking them out

 

I was surprised to see scratches because most of the ones I see similar to this setting/style have the acid etch signatures that are impossible to read.

ah well, back to staring at @KSW's.

 

Is it marked as sterling somewhere I'm not spotting? Think it was probably set in Italy & likely to be 800 silver.

Another thing to consider in dating cameos, particularly pretty ladies, is whether the hairstyle would have been well known during the time period you are considering. I would put this lady post WWII, before the move to the increasingly turned up noses. Italian cameo manufacturers are still putting findings on brooches that are vintage in design.

 

I can't find a mark on it. Unfortunately, the inside of the mount along the cameo is so black I can't see anything. I tried using a Q-Tip with silver polish to get it clean but I can't seem to get anywhere with it.

It could be 800 silver, I tested it and it tested the same as a known piece of sterling I have so I assumed sterling.

I know how they ladies look date them, I was going by the tube hinge and roll over clasp thinking it may date it early 1900s. Though I suppose older unused mounts could be used on newer cameos. So you think it is just post WWII, thank you, I will make sure to mark it properly

I think she is lovely, I like the flowers in her hair and the pearl necklace!

 

My understanding of a simple acid test for silver is that it is A) not highly precise & B) does not require a purity of 925 of more to give a positive result. I don't know what lowest quality would give a positive result. It would be interesting to test a piece of Egyptian silver with a 600 mark.

You have to keep in mind that a piece can't be any older than the newest element in it (repairs being the exception). In this case, the clasp is also more recent than Edwardian & the hairdo really does give a terminus post quem. And she is pretty. My newest pretty lady is having a bubble bath. Will show her when the last of the grime is out.

 

OOOHHH, a bubble bath, makes me want to get out the bath salts

 

In this weather, want to spend all my time in the shower. Alas, the turtles have a time share on the tub. Still see a teensy bit of crud at the heart of a rose, but after 4 rounds of soak 'n' brush, think my girl is ready to meet the public when the sun comes back for photos.

 

As promised, latest member of the family, Flora type, signed by Charles Schmoll with the 'Silz' variant of signature.

As sold:



Seller got a good photo of the signature, speculated it was Saulini. There is a numeral 5 to the left.



As she looks after time at the spa:

 

She's quite sweet.

Oddly, every time I've seen a "Saulini" signature, it was quite easy to read.

 

Not odd. They both engraved the name on the front, on shell as well as on hardstone cameos and it is always easy to read. Think seller was aware of the name, just not familiar with any examples.

You would think the Saulini signature would also be difficult to miss. This cameo appeared for auction without any photo of the back but a note in the description that something illegible was scratched into the back & no mention of anything written on the front:



A few months later it reappeared at a prominent auction house, described as a Saulini, no mention of anything on the back, looking like this:



An inquiry to second auction house produced this photo of the back:



The discrepancy was pointed out to me by another cameo hound, who cautiously tried to raise the matter with his contact at the auction house. They decided the first auction house, which noticed the scratchings on the back, had overlooked the Saulini name on the front. Because is has their imprimatur, cameo will be widely accepted as a Saulini. Fortunately it is not really a very good forgery & does not stand up in comparisons with other examples.

 

That was said in my sarcastic voice.

wowsers. I'm not surprised that there are forgeries, but the more I learn about auction houses, the more I continue to be disappointed in their acts of complicity.

 

Hey, there is nothing that says you have to use hot water

 

If I want to keep my toes, Woodside has to be relocated, and Eddie would be freaked out to find my feet in his pond.

 

Gave me an opportunity to expound on the topic though, so it's all good.

 

A chicken and a... stoat?

I find these oddball animal cameos rather interesting. I agree, they do seem to be exhibiting a "type". There don't seem to be many of them, I wonder if they're done by one rogue cameo carver.

 

Cameo coveting...

After the Horace Vernet's 1826 painting Mazeppa and the Wolves, which was inspired by Lord Byron's 1819 narrative poem Mazeppa, which was inspired by the story of Ivan Mazepa.

Any ideas on the signature?

 

As always, wait for @Bronwen, but I wonder if that's some jeweler's/owners mark vs a sig.

 

PS: Seller should be applauded for those pics!!!

 

Think this is the best, most complete cameo rendering of this subject I have seen. Rare subjects seem to turn up in packs: will suddenly see 2 or 3 close in time, then not again for years. Will add to my Mazeppa file. Thanks for showing us!

I'm not home where I can access my photo files, but in my signatures file I have a subfolder called 'Ann', which is my name for this mark. Think the first time I saw it I dismissed it as being the owner's name, then realized I was seeing it again on a different piece & began to save pix. Think this is another example. Will get back to you on it.