http://postimg.org/gallery/1q9411b2w
Hi guys if you scroll down when you click the link u will see 4 photos. I have a figurine says KPM with a cross underneath is. I have conflicting reports of its KPM or I’ve been told it could be -Porzellanmanufaktur A.W.F. Kister. So if anyone can tell me the actual mark and a valuation even (ballpark) would be great. I also have a candlestick with cherubs that has another mark which is posted on the same link. It is 2 lines with a line crossing through the top. Any ideas on the mark and make? Or value? Thank you I am lost on these 2 items and would appreicate any answers.
Thanks for the details !! I probably looked everywhere except that page !! Yes I was aware of Meissen`s use of KPM but was not aware of the difference in quality !! And since I am here in the U.S we have had our share of fake KPM especially back during the 1980`s !!
Even though the mark was essentially correct,, it just didn`t look right to me !! Thanks for correcting me !! And my apology to the owner !! But we are constantly learning and this was a good lesson for me !!
I do like your description of the Napoleon figurine !! Would have liked to see that one !!
[quote]I did not find this mark on PM&M and the item itself just does not look right for any KPM I have seen !!
… Or am I totally confused ??[/quote]
Mark is shown under Scheibe-Alsbach, please take a look here [url]http://www.porcelainmarksandmore.com/germany/thuringia/scheibe-01/index.php[/url].
Anyway, when looking at such items one has to hold in mind that figural aspects like different sculptors or artistic fashions already create a wide scope of different figures created by one and the same maker. Which means that a certain style might feel okay for one maker – depending on which pieces of that scope one first bumped in to – but confuse others which learned about the maker via a different angle of approach.
Long story short: I always saw Karl Ens figures completely overrated as those I knew were bland, badly decorated and often badly cast. Until I met a person which showed me his collection of the older (non-national combine) stuff which had me stunned (needless to say I am now a fan of them).
Another example would be the factory in Volkstedt which has a large variety in design and decoration, many figures of which are not really ‘nice’ or ‘good’ in my eyes. Stil they are genuine and indeed pretty costly. What I want to point out is that the pure look of an item can sometimes be misleading if one does not know the full span of possibilities.
You may ask what that has to do with this case. The answer is that the Kister factory had their own impressive range of figures, but the overall design and quality – especially of the earlier types – greatly varied from year to year. A comparison between the older types and the lines made in the inter-war (1918-1939) period is already quite an eye-opener, but even models from between 1949-1990 can appear grotesque while others from that period look quite okay (I even saw a figure of Napoleon once which had a facial expression that I would describe as “dirty old man after a stroke”. His lopsided smile was haunting!).
Finally, another note on the multiple uses of “KPM”: next to the use of those initials by the KPM Berlin, the factory in Meissen (!) also used those initials for a few years. Then we have the KPM Waldenburg, KPM Kranichfeld, KPM Kister Porzellan in Scheibe-Alsbach, the KPM Kerafina Marktredwitz, or KPM Krautzberger, Mayer & Purkert from Wistritz … just to name a few.
Don’t want to break the page by posting all too long passages, I’ll just shut up for now.
[quote]… I have conflicting reports of its KPM or I’ve been told it could be -Porzellanmanufaktur A.W.F. Kister. …[/quote]
I guess that you have absolutely no idea how many companies legally used the initials KPM in Germany alone? It’s not like anybody can copyright those initials and prohibit their further use. There is no single (or “the”) KPM, but a whole bunch of factories which all legally used those initials.
Shown mark is indeed that of [i]Kister[/i], as can be seen in multiple reference books. And rest assured, what Chris lists on his site (PM&M) can be taken to the bank – unlike most nonsense I have seen on sites like eBay or even on this website (as the Kovels evidently are not he best mark resource in general).
Your second mark appears to be that of the [i]Porzellanmanufaktur Plaue[/i] alias [i]Porzellanmanufaktur von Schierholz[/i], used between 1860 and 1906.
I know enough about the market to know that all kinds of appraisals are worthless nowadays. If you take a look at a dozen closed (finished) auctions on eBay, you will see what I mean … prices are all over the place and hop around regardless of item quality or condition. Sorry.