Whatever...
Straylight..whatever.
You injected yourself into this thread that asked for info in the first place, and you haven't got squat boy.
This wasn't your thread - you were just in it to try and prove an auction house wrong - and that is your motivation - that sucks.
I've lost count how many time you have done "further research" and then jump up down and say "I know for certain..." and then days later you found something else...
Is it black, or white?
There has been nothing buy an endless stream of opinion from you stating things as cold hard facts without any links or any proof.
Occupy yourself on some other thread or show that you have some credibility as a researcher and post the info - or why the hell bother getting onto a thread and stating you can find the answer - to only not post it - you got nothing better to do? Haven't you got a book to write or something?
You're being a bit of a John Cranium right now and you are not fooling anybody - you are not a professional researcher.
You started this whole thing by claiming you could find out but started with the premise "It is not..." which is not how any professional conducts research.
I guess this is why three or four times you have "provided info" to disprove it. But a real pro just provides it once and it is conclusive.
Anyone on here backing your "research" is backing nothing but a few comments on a blog - that is not proof.
So stop acting like you are a professional.
P.S. Any updates on...
A. Your Nelson Archive
B. Your $9,000 Paul McCobb lamp &
C. Your "One of only two in the world" room dividers by Paul McCobb.
Call it petty to bring these points up, but your telling tall ones my boy and you are being called out on it.
I want to see the proof and so does everyone else here. I notice you have no problem providing this to anyone who talks about your boyfriend Paul Mccobb. Perhaps that is because that is about as much as you actually know - and that is a great thing to know in detail (be a master of one rather than a jack of all trades) - but do not pretend you are some super researcher - if you were, you would be employed by someone for that talent - and you are not.
- A.S.
Incompetent
Since tinyarmada seems incapable of doing a simple google search given all of the necessary information I have pasted a google search link here for all and sundry.
Granted that first hit on this link does not answer the original question which was whether the chairs associated with the tinyarmada's table were George Nelson designs. What it does do is give us concrete evidence in support of my statement that the table itself is not a George Nelson design and seeing that the table itself is now proven to be by Frank and Son I think that the provenance of the chairs becomes a moot point given current information.
Of course Aaron or Maria may refute my information at any time providing they can come up with a single shred of historical proof for their assertions. Curiously though they have both written much in this thread they have not provided any historical facts whatsoever.
I will mention that luck is a big portion of successful research and I would not have found this information were it not for a laughable eBay listing by tinyarmada trying to flog a pair of F.A.I.P. lamps as "Frederick Weinberg" designs (Aaron, Maria it is spelled Frederic btw not Frederick. If you are going to make spurious unfounded attributions as it seems is your mark in trade please do us all the courtesy of at least spelling the name correctly.)
FWIW Frederic Weinberg was an industrial concern manufacturing a large range of goods not a individual designer taking contracts. The idea that Frederic Weinberg designed lamps for F.A.I.P. is not just misinformed, it's downright silly.
and spacepirate1: McCobb as a lover I really couldn't say unfortunately both of McCobb's wives passed away many years before I started my research project.
http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=%22frank+and+son%22+...
The Frank and Son coffee...
The Frank and Son coffee table in the newspaper ad linked at Straylight's Google search url reminded me of the one in this thread from back in April. Thought I would bring it up since Frank and Son does not appear to be mentioned in that thread.
http://www.designaddict.com/design_addict/forums/index.cfm/fuseaction/th...
Perhaps you are all correct
but the coctail table shows the flattened arc the clearest. Also, there is no dining table in this ad. And the step end tables that WHC posted in the other Arbuck ugly welds thread are entirely different. I am sure a graphic artist could draw a simple curve if it was there. I do not have any vested interest in attribution here, but given this ad does not have the table and chairs in the OP, and the form differs as well as differing from WHC's pair posted in the previous thread, I can only conclude that more than one company was making these things, and wonder who the other one is. Thanks again straylight for sharing this fascinating but further clouding ad.
Maybe?
I see that the ones posted in the WHC thread are very different to these but I do believe that this add is only making the case stronger for the attribution not being George Nelson for Arbuck and for the table being Frank and Son. I say this because we have no proof of any Arbuck attribution for these items yet.
also the exact step table in the add is here on ebay and looks it fits with the table the OP has. As you can see the bottom arc isn't as well rounded as the ones in the WHC thread.
Edit: Not to be a stickler or anything but whoever did these drawings was obviously not that well trained or interested, as you can see how horrible the proportions are on the nesting tables.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Mid-Century-George-Nelson-Arbuck-Iron-Glass-Side...
I don't suppose they were dra...
I don't suppose they were drawn by what we would now call a 'graphic designer' in the accepted sense at all, just as likely someone in the sales office who could draw a bit or maybe some guy from the newspaper when he sold the ad or sent it to the compositors for setting - thats how it happened in those days. Its also just as likely that this ad promotes the range as it was launched and full manufacturing found it was slightly easier / cheaper / quicker / stronger to bend the steel rod as a continuous arc instead of flattening it. Again thats how it was done in those days - incidentally the nest of tables does have the arc quite as seen in the other pieces.
With respect to glassartist (who is one of the soundest and most reliable of DA'ers) to suggest that Frank & Co were making this range (by implication one that no one has ever seen) and that there was a separate manufacturer producing another near identical range, examples of which are relatively common today, is stretching plausibility too far. The examples we see in 2011 are the ones in the ad from 1953.
Well I guess not totally different....
They could just be a later variation, but they have gone from two to one back support in the pair shown in the WHC thread, also the bottom arcs are perfectly round in that pair. I mean they do have the same overall shapes but you can see that they are def. a variation.
Read above
I am not claiming any of these variants are either Nelson or Arbuck. I do see two different manufacturers though. Also, Isn't it kind of silly to say the drawing is off when you do not see what you want to see? You are taking the entire ad at face value except what does not fit. Hell, I could draw that curve, and my skills are virtually nonexistent in the 2D department. And still, there is no dining table or dining chairs in that ad. It is just not conclusive. Perhaps it is the other manufacturer that we have not dug up yet that did the OP's table and chairs as well as WHC's step end tables with only 3 supports to the upper deck.
Yes
they could be a later variation, but given the overwhelming amount of knock offs across this field, I would guess another manufacturer first. Otherwise I might imagine an unmarked plywood chair from target might be a later variation of a Jacobsen chair. It does not seem to be the first or best place to start supposing.
Edit: Thanks again straylight. Sad that there is no dining table, chairs or WHC's step tables with three supports in these ads. I can't make out if a manufacturer is attributed in this new batch. Do you see anything?
If you need any help, please contact us at – info@designaddict.com