Monday, January 27, 2014

UPDATED Muddy Monday: Silver On Her Toes

As I had opportunity to study more Zaras this month, I started talking to other collectors and restorers about this mystery that has been bugging me. I am using lots of photos with varied lighting, to give you an idea of how these compare. If you can help solve this, please write me, or post in the blog Comments.

On the left are what we consider normal HR decoration on hooves. They are airbrushed, may have a run of underglaze, but are obviously not hand-brushed on.

On the right are "silvery" HR hooves.










How common is the silvery hooves trait, and which molds is it on?

I don't have enough samples to tell you how common it is, versus the normal hooves. "Silvery" hooves occur on 9" Zara, 6" Zara, and 9" Amir models, and possibly other gray Monrovia Arabian models. Unlike the normal hooves, the silvery-pale gray hoof color looks like it was swiped on with a paintbrush, on top of airbrushed underglaze. It doesn't appear to be on top of glaze, unless it has completely obliterated the glaze's texture with its own. 

UPDATE: Dawn Sinkovich sent this the next day, very interesting and backs up my observation of a lack of glaze:




I bought a large white Monrovia Large Amir, and... all four feet had been dipped in a clear lacquer up above their fetlocks!  The lacquer had really yellowed, and definitely looked like they dipped it rather than painted or sprayed - the levels were very even on all four legs.  I stripped it off with something or other, and I sold it a couple of years ago.  The hooves hadn't any clear glaze on, and I've attached a pic of him. 
Also, when I bought my original large group of Monrovia horses, the rose grey lying Fez had a thin coat of red stain or paint on it - it even was on the bottom if I remember right.  I washed it off, if I remember, pretty easily.  I wondered at the time if it had been done at the factory.  Trying to make him even rosier?

So, we may be looking at brush-painted pale gray enamel or lacquer, then dipped in lacquer to "shine" it up, so it would look similar to the rest of the model's fired glaze. 

The coronet bands show airbrushing overspray on both. The airbrush overspray is the same dark gray-black color of underglaze. There, the similarity stops.






For further context, here are the two Monrovia white gray Zaras of the hooves above, showing their stickers, chest vent holes, and relative slip color.




<Normal                        Silvery>











Another Monrovia white with silvery hooves.
Photo and model courtesy Sue Thiessen.



Sue Thiessen reported the following:


... does it have weird silvery hooves? as I've worked on them with those hooves. Also, the factory didn't glaze those silvery hooves, they have a varnish on them, that yellows some with age, and it will come off if solvent or thinner is used. [I] don't know what to tell you about the silvery hooves, except that a lot of 9" arabs have them....and, if you mess around with them, the shine will come off, but not the color. Yes, it is factory, for some reason those hooves aren't glazed like the rest of the model....the color is fired on, but not glazed...however that's not to say some might be glazed! 
I once repaired a 9" rosegrey Zara for a good customer. She really had silvery hooves, and I remember I had to work on one or two of them.... My 9" rose gray Zara does not have the silvery hooves, but my white one does, they look just like yours, they aren't yellow either. I think her hooves may be glazed, not sure, didn't mess with them....


Here, the lacquer gloss is starting to yellow with age.



Lacquer stripped, or incomplete application?





Below, the hard, raised edge of the silvery color along the hoof wall shows it was hand-brush applied, not dipped, nor airbrushed. The green is shelf putty, from a previous owner; the putty has proven difficult to remove. Note that the uneven surface of the hoof sole shows dark gray directional airbrushing... the first application of decoration to these hooves.




Sole of a normal, airbrushed gray hoof.
Note the thorough color application.



It appears to only be on Monrovia DW horses. It is found on both white gray and rose gray horses, but not all of them, so it was not a practice that was continuous for each entire run. It may even have been a "save" decoration, applied only to pieces pulled from the line for correcting airbrush runs or rubs on their hooves. Show evidence of airbrush runs being a problem on HR Zara hooves, you say? Check it out:




The entire left side of this normal, airbrushed hoof is a run.




The darker hard lines on these rose gray hooves are airbrush runs of underglaze.




This "save" decoration scenario could be supported by the continuity of body colors (matching family sets) that can be achieved, despite the hooves. We can only know the answer if someone remembered both colors of hooves coming out of a single factory shipment. 

These are random examples, grouped together for photos as families and pairs, not based on their hoof color:




White Amir and Zara: silvery hooves
Photo courtesy Ed Alcorn, The Hagen-Renaker Online Museum.



Rose gray Zara: silvery hooves?
Photo courtesy Ed Alcorn, The Hagen-Renaker Online Museum.



Dark rose gray Zara: silvery hooves?
Rose gray silvery hooves are tricky to determine by photos. 
They can have thick matte glaze that just looks pale.
Photo courtesy Ed Alcorn, The Hagen-Renaker Online Museum.



Normal rose gray hooves.




A dark rose gray with normal hooves.




Sole of a normal rose gray hoof.



DW 6" Zara: silvery hooves?
Photo courtesy Ed Alcorn, The Hagen-Renaker Online Museum.


It's unusual for a production line to add another layer of decoration (added costs of labor and materials), unless it was serving a very distinct purpose. As a ceramist, I would guess that HR quality control found that some hooves needed an overglaze or enamel touch-up, because airbrushing hooves in assembly-line style is fraught with errors. The edges always want to grab the paint spray, and make runs. The underglaze, after drying but before bisque firing, is very fragile and easy to rub off, like pastels. Additionally, overzealous wax resist application could result in unevenly glazed hoof walls, which would make for seconds. If the hooves frequently had production issues, I can see the advantage of using a low-fire enamel, or a commercial lacquer, to make them all one smooth color, with quick a swipe of a brush!  

Where in the Monrovia timeline does the silvery relate to the normal? I am not sure about the dating-by-sticker method, since I don't know which sticker style is older. They were both used during the Monrovia Zaras' 18-month production run. Did the blue Monrovia stickers come later? 

If so, I would be inclined to say that hoof decoration on the large pieces was a work in progress, at first. Once the airbrushing opacity on hooves was solved, and the process streamlined, the later pieces would not require the extra step of decoration. I would, in other words, suspect the silvery hooves to be among the earliest in the production run. This is also based on my own experience/observations of how potteries adapt and streamline their decoration processes.

If you know more about the "silvery hooves", so far only found in Monrovia DWs, I'd be very interested to learn more.




Monday, January 20, 2014

Zara 3: Electric Bisque-a-loo

The occasional "What is this?" email about an HR finds its way to the inbox, now that the blog is nearing its fourth year. This Zara post sequel began with an email from Sue Thiessen about a mini drafter, and you can just imagine how my brain popped when I read this:


I've also been meaning to contact you about a 9" bisque Zara I acquired many years ago. A friend in Calif. purchased 2 large Zaras, a Crusader, gloss palomino Clover, and an Adelaide from an antique dealer who purchased them at an estate sale in Arizona, just over the border from Monrovia, Calif. I bought the Zaras from her, which were cold painted, and was so excited to get that paint off, only to discover bisque underneath!! One Zara had a leg break, so I repaired it, put a custom paint job on her, and sold her. I kept the other Zara which was mint, the two were identical incredible detail! The broken Zara had the small airhole between the front legs, but this one I kept has a huge hole in the belly, which would make one think it was a Shirmar, but I don't think so, as the slip is just like HR quality... too good for anything else I think. The horse also has the letters cee zee carved into the belly, I believe a factory employee took these Zaras home, or someone got ahold of some bisques, took them home and painted them to look like their horses.


Photo by Sue Thiessen


To clarify, just because something came from near the geographical place of Monrovia, CA, doesn't automatically make it HR Monrovia era. In collecting Hagen-Renaker, it refers to a factory production period; it is a time, not just a space, thing. However, this was a Monrovia era collection. The broken cold-painted Zara had a normal Monrovia vent hole, in the underside of the chest. The other had no chest vent, and an unplugged pour hole.




Photo by Sue Thiessen


If you read A Zara of Two Tales, you might leap to discard any possibility of the unplugged Zara bisque being a genuine HR. First, a little inspection: this one was poured into a dusty or dirty mold, which fairly ruined it for potential glazed product. (It also made it undesirable to sell as a hobby craft blank, had it been a Shirmar.) Its condition as a second was determined when the caster removed the first piece of the plaster mold, before the belly was ever plugged. The torso surface is pocked with holes, which would only make decoration and glazing a nightmare. Any airbrushed color would skim across the surface, leaving white holes in the gray shading (since this was poured to be a White Gray). Every divot in the clay would later enable the development of a glaze pinhole, in the final firing. 



Photo by Sue Thiessen





To illustrate and magnify why surface divots create glaze pinholes, I used a brown paint bottle to weigh down a white plastic cap in the middle of a tray. Imagine that the white cap is a divot in the bisque surface. I added water to the tray, to simulate glaze, both when it is raw liquid in the dipping vat, and when it is free-flowing and seeking its own level during firing. During the dip, if the glaze was water-clear, one would see tiny air bubbles hugging each hole in the surface, preventing raw liquid glaze from filling them. After it dried, all those divots would be tiny holes in the glaze, "pinholes". Surface tension around the edges of the crater prevents the glaze from creeping in, filling, and smoothing out over the crater. Glaze also behaves this way on vertical surfaces. The surface tension of liquified glaze, while firing, will do this around each hole (or crack) in the clay surface. This is why ceramists have to take special pains with bisque bodies that have imperfections, carefully filling a crack or pinhole with glaze in minute, razor-blade applications. A giftware production pottery has no time to waste on such pains!

Thus, a first glance at this Zara, as she was demolding, set her destiny as a second. An employee, possibly "Cee Vee", rescued, reattached a broken hind leg, seamed, and bisque-fired it. It also has the Monrovia right-side face muzzle "ring", a line in the mold that appears in only some Monrovia Zara castings. I suspect that it was a single damaged production mold that had this flaw, used for white slip, since I haven't seen a rose gray with the pronounced muzzle line mold defect. 



Even a very crisp rose gray shows no hint of mold line defect.
Do you have a rose gray Zara with the defect?



Monrovia white with muzzle mold defect line.
Photo courtesy Val Tudor.



Another example of a Monrovia white with the muzzle line.
Photo and owned by unknown, from eBay, years ago.



White and rose gray slip ideally would have been poured in different production molds, to prevent cross-contamination (staining) of the slip colors. If it was a Shirmar, it would have been molded from the perfect master, no muzzle line (see here as to why). Collector Laura Behning, who had a set of all three Shirmar family Arabians, confirms that this was absent on the Shirmar Zara.




Photo by Sue Thiessen


Photo left by author; photo right by Sue.



Sue wrote:
I find it hard to believe though, that one bisque would be an HR and the other not, since they came together, and were identical. 

I agree, and it is further hinted by the Monrovia provenance of the entire group in which it was purchased. When I mentioned the muzzle line as proof of Monrovia, Sue wrote:


On her left rear leg, there is an extra line that shouldn't be there.... My glazed Monrovia white Zara has the same line around her muzzle too, I wonder how many are like that.....


This, too, would make a fresh casting a second before its belly got plugged.
A mended greenware break, bisque fired.
One can immediately tell that is not the hand of Maureen in that tendon.




Slip "chill" lines, visible from below (nose line is less noticeable from this angle).
These are more noticeable on tinted slips in HR Monrovia pieces, 
but chill lines can be found in all factory eras (and all potteries).


Slip chill lines and sponge swipes (from greenware cleaner).


Slip chill lines, and debris in mold when casting was poured.
Organic debris will burn out in the bisque firing, leaving holes.


There was a momentary excitement when Sue had mistakenly typed "cee zee" as the belly inscription. The employee custom white gloss Monrovia Zara has the initials "CZ" carved in a hoof. For a minute there, I thought the same employee rescued both my Zara, and Sue's!




Photo by author


 Sue wrote: I was wrong about the initials too, they are "cee vee".



The brown color in the divots and inscription is what is left of the coldpaint.


Sue:
I am not fond of unpainted models, so either I paint this Zara, the [primer] would fill in the flaws, or part with her to someone who appreciates bisque models, and would love and treasure her! like you!!!! 
....the only thing that makes it hard to part with Zara, is I got her from a very dear friend, who recently passed away from cancer, Arlene Winter...I think I already said it, but Arlene got the Zara's along with other HR's from a dealer, who had gotten them from an estate sale, near Monrovia Calif. Arlene lived in Fresno Calif. and I was living in Madera, just a few miles away, around 1986... Arlene was the first friend I made, when we moved to Calif. and we went on to be very close. She was a sweet, wonderful person, and I miss her so much!!! I think of her, when I look at Zara, she would be happy to see you have her though, and thrilled for me to have one of your horses!! 


Sue is now the proud owner of one of my personal custom glaze sculptures, which was a NAN Top Ten, out of extremely limited showing. He is an Arabian stallion the size of Amir, and is filling that display role in Sue's HR 9" Arabian family. As a collector of bisque Hagen-Renaker, trading for this piece was pretty darn exciting for me. I never imagined I would add a bisque 9" Zara to my shelf. I am very grateful to see her lovely face, every day. She will never be glazed by me; I hope whoever owns her after me will have the same inclination to leave her factory bisque, since she has so many interesting artifacts. This Zara is a good example of why some bisques, left "naked", can offer insights into production.




Thank you to Sue Thiessen for sharing the story, photos, and this unusual Zara.




References:

Behning, Laura. Pers. comm. 12/31/2013

Francis, K.L. (11/18/2013). A Zara of Two Tales.
     [Web log comment.] Retrieved from:
     http://muddyhoofprints.blogspot.com/2013/11/muddy-monday-zara-of-two-tales.html

Thiessen, Sue. Pers. comm. 12/22/2013 - 1/8/2014


Tuesday, January 14, 2014

Muddy Monday: Pint-sized Drafts On Tap

This is no pub, but the Drafts are on tap today. 

Hagen-Renaker began producing Maureen Love's design of the Miniature Draft Horse in Harness (mold # A-341) in Monrovia, but only for the year of 1957. The sculpture is just as cute as the dickens, and positively radiates "Old Time Brewery Hitch" draft horse. 




The first appearance of Draft Horse in Harness, on the Spring 1957 order form.


Normally, the Monrovia version looks like this, with silver harness collar and buckles, and red mane "bobs" (technical term in braiding drafts is "rosettes") and ribbons in the mane and tail.




The yellow tint to the clear glaze is typical for HRs of the time.
This is shown on other examples of HR molds in my blog, here.



I'd heard about a couple unfinished examples that escaped the factory, from various collectors, over the years. What is interesting is that they are not all in the same stage of incompletion. Some have no eyes, some have no ribbon color, some lack the silver. 

The unfinished example on the left has eyes, but no silver nor red.




Photo courtesy of Hagen-Renaker: Through the Years 
by Nancy Kelly, Schiffer Publishing Ltd.


This next example lacks eyes, silver, the red ribbons, and a final layer of black on the harness leather, to make it opaque. He has an ear chip that was factory glazed over, then ground with a dremel by a collector.







These exhibit the same level of mold detail and airbrushed underglaze.



The mold detail in the mane is excellent. 
The undecorated version makes it possible to see the tiny hardware Maureen sculpted on the collar.




Fall 1979 order form

San Dimas mini Draft in Harness (Spring 1979 - Fall 1985) is represented by two variations of chestnut gloss. This is the early San Dimas chestnut, a high-contrast, directionally-shaded finish.



San Dimas Chestnut



It is normal for this era to not have ribbons on the mane or tail.
This is not to be confused with the unfinished factory goofs.



The 1999-2002 version of HR's Draft in Harness was a chestnut with no metallic accents, but it does have blue bobs/rosettes and ribbons in his mane and tail. 




Test, regular Monrovia, San Dimas variation, and 1999-2002 version.
Photo courtesy Ed Alcorn, The Hagen-Renaker Online Museum.


Do you see something unusual in that photo? One Draft is noticeably shorter that the others, and the blue-bobs must also be shorter, judging by his hoof placement.





A variant of San Dimas chestnut is a smaller mold than the others. It looks even smaller when it is a thick casting, and it shrinks a bit more. This one is nearly a quarter of an inch shorter!



The thick casting in the middle weighs .3 oz more, but that's not the only reason it's smaller.




The belly sticker gives the smaller version a timeframe of early to mid-1980's.


Note difference in airbrushing style.





Overall, a mold size reduction, due to remolding down one generation. This model would have fishtailed (flattened laterally) if its size was due only to a casting's extreme thickness. The extremities would have remained the same size, if they were from the same mold. The new mold's extremities are in proportion. I do not know why the design was remolded.





The molds differ further in a distortion of the design's right side of face, front of right shoulder, and a distortion in the hooves (flattened out). The 1999-2002 blue bobs version is likewise from the later, smaller mold.

The Maureen Love estate auction sold an old-mold bisque, but I do not have its measurements. I can't tell you if it is a normal factory casting or a casting from Maureen's earlier waste mold.



Photo courtesy Ed Alcorn, estate auction page.



Other competitors for the American giftware market copied Hagen-Renaker. The little Draft Horse in Harness was one of the molds that received this "flattery". When you compare side-by-side images, it's hard to believe anyone was ever fooled by this.






Made in Japan copy.






I'm interested to hear from other collectors, if they have any blue bobs/ribbons decorated on the old mold mini Draft in Harness, or other factory goof variants. There will be a later post about the edited version of this mold, the mold # A-459 Percheron (tail down), so photo submissions of both designs are welcome.



Thank you to Nancy Kelly for the book photo permission, and to Ed Alcorn, for the photos from his web site!




References:

Alcorn, Ed. The Hagen-Renaker Online Museum. Jan. 10-13, 2014.

Benuish, Alison, ed. Hagen-Renaker Research Materials: 1949- Present. N. pag. Salisbury, MD: WMHC, 1995.

Kelly, Nancy. Hagen-Renaker: Through The Years. Page 126. Schiffer Publishing, Ltd.: Atglen, PA, 2001.

Roller, Gayle. Hagen-Renaker: A Charlton Standard Catalogue. Third Edition. P. 296. The Charlton Press: Palm Harbor, FL, 2003.