Thread: Escher copy

Originally Posted by doorsch

No sure on that Jimmy, it could be that they offered a "customers Print" for the stones. I mean something youre doing for really good customers....

You could be right that it was an imitation, but it looks to good on the original that i think it could be a special print for the catalogue Company.

Well, I have a stone that is a definite genuine Escher with the label that came before the warning. It says nothing about a signature. An earlier stone. OTOH, could be as you say of course. So long ago and they didn't really keep records of things like that. Who would have thought anyone would care decades later.

Originally Posted by JimmyHAD

Well, I have a stone that is a definite genuine Escher with the label that came before the warning. It says nothing about a signature. An earlier stone. OTOH, could be as you say of course. So long ago and they didn't really keep records of things like that. Who would have thought anyone would care decades later.

Escher (the Company) did a phantastic job creating a brand people still today talk and write about...thats the most interesting for me....

Branding doesn't mean better.
/stirring the pot

My vintage unlabeled ones performed the same as my labeled ones as far a I can tell

Originally Posted by sidmind

Branding doesn't mean better.
/stirring the pot

Originally Posted by rodb

My vintage unlabeled ones performed the same as my labeled ones as far a I can tell

Although I do not own a labeled Esher stone, I have a 1/2 dozen labeled Thurigans as well as that many unlabeled. There is a difference.
You guys will all think I am nuts, but I use my teeth to test, I light rub the stone on my tooth, with lots of practice testing different stones you get that hang of knowing which ones are better quality, The best stone I have feels like glass on my tooth, the others progressively more gritty feeling.

Originally Posted by Kees

Hi Peter,
I knew you would chime in.

Just received a PM from Sebastian (doorsch) letting me know he is not Peter. I mistook him for Peter (hatzicho)

Originally Posted by doorsch

Here is link to the Stukenbrok Catalogue from 1912. those are extracted pages 76-80.

http://www.digitalis.uni-koeln.de/St...tuken76-80.pdf

On page 78 with article number Nr. 1218 they show an Escher Stone. Actually either to be used with water or oil ;-)



no no guys...if you read this never use oil....!!

Price to this time was 1.50 Mark

I am not sure the stone above is an Thuringian. I never saw a Thuringian label recommending use with oil, most of them recommend to keep them away from oil. It does not have a rubbing stone, most Thuringians with a barbershop scene label came with space for a rubbing stone in the box.

Originally Posted by sidmind

You guys will all think I am nuts, but I use my teeth to test, I light rub the stone on my tooth

to the former, yep; to the latter, I tend to use razors

Originally Posted by Kees

I am not sure the stone above is an Thuringian. I never saw a Thuringian label recommending use with oil, most of them recommend to keep them away from oil. It does not have a rubbing stone, most Thuringians with a barbershop scene label came with space for a rubbing stone in the box.

Agreed, Could be one of the stones sold als Ideal Abziehstein

Originally Posted by doorsch

Agreed, Could be one of the stones sold als Ideal Abziehstein

So it is one of the 'artificial' stones made from bonding ground up Thuringan material ? Therefore oil is not prohibited ?