I hope this thread is not dying.
Beautiful shot guru #:)
Post #160: The lighting is perfect.
Thanks, guys. :)
I call this one "Shuffle Chess". It hangs as a large framed print in my office. The original image file is almost 35 Megapixels AFTER cropping.
I call this one "Shuffle Chess". It hangs as a large framed print in my office. The original image file is almost 35 Megapixels AFTER cropping.
This is neat. At first glance it does not look as though it is a complete set.
Stumbled upon this looking for Charlemagne chess pieces. Just wanted to point out the chess set in #141 is mislabled. It's an Anglo-Chinese import set probably from Canton. It may be c. 1880 but it's not by Jaques, and those definately aren't "Harwitz" style knights. Also the pic in #140 is mine (though not my best work,) and I'm not huge on having my pics reposted without credit or permission.
I took a quick glance through all of these posts. A lot of good stuff to look at when I have more time. I have a few more credit quibbles and corrections in the meantime, though.
****
Credit:
163 is mine (I guess "Ty's collection is *some* credit there.)
164 and 165 are not only my photos, I designed and built that chess set. I did it in the Thai style (mostly for the joke on my name,) but it looks different enough from other Makruk sets (compare it to 185 for instance) I do want some credit there.
173 is my picture as well.
Most of those have the credit from Ty's collection, which is something. My name is Ty Kroll. My collection is up at http://www.tykroll.com/chess I took down the pic of the Indian Lotus set, but I guess it lives on. Yeah, when you put something online it's up there forever, but I'd appreciate more copyright respect. I must have a million "email Ty" links on that site, and if you *ask* to use my pics and give me credit for the pics and chess sets I designed and built I'd like that much better.
I see a few other pics I recognize as coming from collector friends of mine and I imagine they have the same concerns. We can respect information rights even on the Interweb. Please give credit where credit is due in the future.
***
Factual Quibbles:
187 is not a Turkish design and it's very unlikely as early as 1900. It's a 20th century design by English turner Bertram Jones based on ivory rosewater sprinklers. These have been sold for years as antique Turskish pieces, but it's a myth to hike the price, or maybe just a mistake as old rose water sprinklers have also been sold as chess pieces. The one in the pic is not by Jones, so it must be a great deal later than 1900. I don't imagine Jones (who made up this design) was even making them that early.
195 is not an antique German ivory set, it's a (probably 20th century) copy of antique German design, an original looks very different from this.
196, 197, "Spanish Pulpit" chess sets are very likely from England, not Spain.
Ty
tmkroll, I checked out your sets. What a wonderful collection.
Thanks crosspinner. I have like four new sets waiting to photograph now, but my pictures depend on the sun and it's been white winter skies here most weekends, not to mention busy with the holidays. Anyway, updates coming *eventually*.
(I missed one, 202 is also one of my pics.)
Thanks crosspinner. I have like four new sets waiting to photograph now, but my pictures depend on the sun and it's been white winter skies here most weekends, not to mention busy with the holidays. Anyway, updates coming *eventually*.
(I missed one, 202 is also one of my pics.)
You do excellent photography, too. The lighting on the 202 in really neat.
I have a set collection, but it's minor compared to yours. I never set out to collect sets, I just kept buying them. They are not expensive, but I enjoy them.
A friend just sent me this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXM3wrIhcwY&feature=player_embedded
My 7-yr-old grandson really like this. It is really creative! Hey, I like it, too.
Embroidered chess set and board, 19th century, Morocco, Africa.
(found this at http://www.colourlovers.com/blog/2009/02/03/the-colors-of-chess/print/ )
I submitted this because Man Ray was a significant figure in the art world in the early part of the 20th century - a Dada and Surrealist.