A while ago someone posted a question about a shop mark we identified as “Wm. Ritter & Bro.” of Philadelphia, but unfortunately we never saw an actual picture of the label. Nonetheless, a variation turned up on eBay recently, as seen in the comparison below. Clearly the ad on the right (from the Wannamaker Diary 1911 book, which I used to identify the previously described label) confirms the label on the left (which is the recent eBay label).



The eBay seller originally interpreted the mark as Widdicomb. I messaged with a correction and the seller revised their listings (for the 2 chairs they have). Check out how the listings read now:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ANTIQUE-MISSION-OAK-CHAIR-WIDDICOMB...QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

http://cgi.ebay.com/ANTIQUE-MISSION-OAK-CHAIR-WIDDICOMB...QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

So the seller is suggesting the chairs could be Widdicomb from the 1800s, or Ritter, or from someone at a Plantation recorded at Williamsburg in the 1800s, or even Stickley...sigh

some people just refuse to see what is before them.

sounds like he wants to make the chairs 50-70 years older than they really are. afterall, older is always better...

Holy Coincidence Batman - doing a little eBay surfing at lunch and another pair of Ritter chairs pop up as 'newly listed'.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Mission-Oak-Arts-Crafts-Chairs-by-R...QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

Double coincidence - the eBay listing is the same chair as previously discussed in this forum, per my note above - here's the old thread:

http://forum.arts-crafts.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/3916079532/m/2221038971

So per the old thread, the chairs had partial paper labels that needed to be identified, (which we did) but per the eBay listing it looks like they've done a digital reconstruction and attached a picture, because that sure isn't a partial label stuck on the bottom of a chair. The things people do....

Stonecat,

Can't imagine where they would have cribbed that image from. Hmmmm.

Fred

Yes its obvious where the picture is from. It raises the point about copyrighting of pictures on the web. A picture per se is an individual's property but a picture of an original object, such as a label or an ad or whatever, without additional context, meaning a background which could be called 'art' and therefore intellectual property, is in my mind 'up in the air' as to ownership. I have obviously used many images from eBay to build my data base, but I have also cropped virtually everyone of them. Somebody might argue that an individual picture in the data base is copyrighted property but I could say it has no subjective value. I could in turn say that one picture out of hundreds is worth a fraction of a percent of the whole therefore any copyright infringement is negligable per the price of each copy of the entire data base. I'll give them the few pennies it might be worth but their lawyer will charge them hundreds to send the letter!

Anyways, I could care less if people use any pictures I post on the web. I also hope that people will see the value of the data base when its out, and will think that it overshadows the value of any single picture.

Yes, I made a facsimile of the Ritter Label from the paper remanents. I posted
pictures of the remanednt labels as well.
Apparently they did not take with Ebay.
I have a MAC and the pictures sometimes don't
transfer. And yes, I used the Wm Ritter Bros
image that Stonecat posted as a reference
to this newly discovered maker. This is how this info is re-discovered. I also have had these chairsstored for many years and am moving. I am doing them far more danger by hanging on to them than by selling them to some one who has the space, time and interest to tend to them better than I can. I have been the steward since 1976 which is 30 years ago. They really
need a new place -- out of the front hall, out of the attic, out of the spare bedroom and
out of the basement. If anyone is interested
I will be so happy to find them a new Arts & Crafts Home.

I see not foul in using the information from this site. It would have been nice to have credited the site for the information and I am sure Stonecat would gladly allowed you to use the images if asked. It would have been good for you to have taken images of the marks in whatever condition they are in. That way the prospective buyer could decide for themselves if your attribution is correct.

Good luck with your auction.

Fred