Fake Paul Ysart Paperweights
General Notes

These notes are my own opinions, based on personal viewing of many examples of fake and genuine items. However, if anyone has information that shows my comments to be incorrect, or that can add to the details, I would be pleased to learn about this. Please email me.

1. The fake PY signature canes are often quite well set within the design. But if there is an obvious visual misalignment, such as in Butterfly 03, this should be regarded as reason for closer inspection. If the signature cane is large enough to be legible in normal viewing (for example Butterfly 03, Dragonfly 02, Flower 02), this is another reason to be suspicious.
2. In some cases, the signature cane is set in the base of the weight and this is in keeping with many genuine items. Butterfly 02 and Dragonfly 01 both have the cane in the base, but for the Dragonfly it is visible through the top of the weight, which would not be expected for the genuine item.
3. The "glossy" black ground of several of the examples is a feature seen in relatively few genuine Paul Ysart weights. The vast majority of genuine items with a "black" ground are normally seen to be a close-mottled, and very dark, blue or purple which, even with a crystal clear dome, does not appear as a "gloss" surface.
   (Flower 06 was photographed over a black display folder - it actually has a clear ground.)
4. Many of the fake Butterfly weights have the same millefiori wing canes. The is also true of the two illustrated Dragonfly weights. Paul Ysart Butterfly and Dragonfly weights are known with identical wing canes, but not with the frequency seen in the fakes, which often have the purple or orange / yellow canes seen here.
5. In most cases, fake Butterfly weights have the antennae formed from a single, looped thread whereas genuine Paul Ysart examples have two separate elements. However, Butterflies 09 and 11 show separate antennae - in fact, the full structure of both insects is identical.
6. The "marbled" effect of a coloured ground, seen in Butterflies 04 and 08 and Fish 01, seems to be a relatively common feature amongst the fakes.
7. "Jasper" grounds, as seen in Butterflies 10 and 11, Fish 03 and Flowers 10 and 11, are often very attractive and well made. However, they are more "chunky" than in the genuine items.
8. The "filigree cushion" of Butterflies 01, 02, 03, Fish 02 and Flowers 01, 03 are of a "thinner" structure than in most Paul Ysart items that use this feature.
9. Dragonfly 01 has a "filigree basket" (i.e. open at the top). This feature appears to be less common than the "filigree cushion" in the fakes, but is well known in genuine items.
10. Dragonflies 01 and 02 follow a standard Paul Ysart design but come nowhere near the precise setting or balanced placement of the genuine article. The eyes are very bulbous and touch the upper wings - features not seen in Paul Ysart items, which have a clearly defined head above the upper wings and large, but not excessively bulbous, eyes.
11. The Flowers in the examples shown are all quite well made, yet do not have the overall quality of genuine Paul Ysart lampwork. (Even when, occasionally, a Paul Ysart flower is seen with a broken or misaligned element, its general appearance is still of high quality.)
12. In a number of fakes, the alignment or setting of canes and lampwork shows a lower quality than would be expected in genuine items. For example, the two Dragonfly weights have elements that are clearly misaligned. The Concentric (01) is actually very well set except for the gap in the inner row of canes. This is a feature that can be found, to a degree, in some Paul Ysart items, but such an obvious gap in a concentric row is grounds for suspicion.
13. The "Spoke" pattern weight (02) with the central lampwork Swan is very unusual. An almost identical weight was offered ("in the style of Paul Ysart") in a London saleroom in November 2002 as part of a batch of 11 weights. Personally, until seeing these two "Swan" weights, I was unaware of any such design. Perhaps a genuine Paul Ysart lampwork Swan does exist, but as yet I have not heard of one.
14. Regarding the Moth (03), genuine Paul Ysart examples may exist - but as yet, I have personally seen none at all in any literature or in actual collections.
15. Within the selection of illustrated canes, at least the first two in the final row are known in early work from the Ysart Brothers Vasart period of 1946 to 1955. Early Vasart canes are also known, for example, in Strathearn pieces (1964 to 1980) where they would probably have been a natural continuation of usage. They may also be found in other later Scottish items that do not contain a false PY cane, yet appear to be of possible "Vasart" production. The main point with regard to the fake PY weights is that use of "Vasart-style" canes should be viewed with caution - but see also my other articles where I give plausible evidence for "sharing" of some canes in the 1930s period and hence use in both Paul Ysart and "Salvador / Vasart" items.

Please use your Browser controls to close this window