Reproduction Glasses

[cprljohnivey]

Folks,

I have been doing a little research on vendors that offer period correct reprodcutions of eye glasses to update my unit's authenticity guidelines. Our guidelines instruct new recruits on selecting appropriate original frames as the primary preferred choice. However I wanted to also add a few sources of repro frames for the perosn who does not want to use originals (or find it hard to get someone to work on originals for fear of breaking them which I have personally experienced).

I have found the following vendors. Can anyone speak of the specific products offered by these four vendors? Have you seen these products first hand? What is the quality of the craftmanship? If you have expertise on historic eye glasses (i.e. you are a collector/researcher/etc...) please inject thoughts on the authenticity of these items. Some of these repro's are pricey so I can't afford to buy them all just to check them out.

1. Vendor: Focusers Model: The McAllister model $45+ S&H http://www.focusers.com/mcallister.html

2. Vendor: The Grand Spectacle Model: 1984-1860 Rectangle $85 frames + $85 for your prescription lenses.
I understand these are a little pre-period and out of style but I am sure plenty were around.

http://www.thegrandspectacle.com/

3. Vendor: Jas Townsend Model: Rectangle Glasses $30

http://jas-townsend.com/index.php?cPath=46&osCsid=821323787898898a1394e60c012b92\

56

4. Vendor: Historic Eyewear Company Model: Various styles $179

http://www.historiceyewearcompany.com/products

All of his styles have the slide back temples. I know them to be period correct but it is my understanding not as common as the straight temples with no slides.

Thoughts? Comments? Am I missing any vendors?

Thanks for your help.

[Michael Comer]

Re: Reproduction Glasses

I personally have a pair of the McAllister from Focusers and like them a lot. They sit comfortably and meet my needs for any reading that I do. What was best for me is the fit is better. I have tried several period frames and they were all too small for me and I could not find anyone locally who wanted to tackle putting lenses in them.

[J.H.Berger]

Re: Reproduction Glasses

Number 1 McAllister is not so well suited for our purposes as the nose bar is shaped in a post war fashion. This model is correct for around 1900. the glasses seem to be pretty large too. Besides the sources you have stated you can find period originals that work well on ebay every week for a pretty fair price!

[dixieflyer]

Re: Reproduction Glasses

Jan, finding original frames is not the issue, but often finding a person that will fit modern prescription lenses in them is. I know I've experienced this with historic, and even modern reproduction frames for another, more recent period myself. (FWIW, I have seen period eyewear with a similar bridge.)

[J.H.Berger]

Re: Reproduction Glasses

Mmmh, bad for you, here in Germany it is not a problem to get an optrician fiting the glasses into the frames.

[crabby]

Re: Reproduction Glasses

1. Vendor: Focusers Model: The McAllister model $45+ S&H Overall the shape is not too bad, however the 'chrome steel' finish is a huge problem as well as the hinge at the temple.

2. Vendor: The Grand Spectacle Model: 1984-1860 Rectangle $85 frames + $85 for your prescription lenses I agree with his dating of this model (1840-1860) however I believe you have a typo in your description. I can not make the photo large enough to see much detail though.

3. Vendor: Jas Townsend Model: Rectangle Glasses $30 Of the 4 styles offered, none are quite right for CW. Top ones are 18th century, next ones with curved ear piece are post-CW. Bottom you could get away with if you are an older fellow and knowing your eyewear is "outdated".

4. Vendor: Historic Eyewear Company Model: Various styles $179 I take issue with ALL the finishes shown and several of the shapes. And their "Certificate of Authenticity" ....... what kind BS is that? I think their certificate of authenticity is worth maybe the paper it is printed on.

Now my above statements are more than just personal opinion. I am acquainted with two gentlemen who have done extensive research on eye wear, both pre and post Civil War. That research was then presented at a museum conference.

I have attached some photos of original glasses that have correct features for 1860-1865. The first photo is of 'new' old stock. That is they are old store stock that never sold and was packed away. You can see what the original finish was like. From existing examples I have seen, the blue/black or Japanned finish appears to be most common. The second photo is of worn glasses (left one has no lenses) found in an antique store.

I understand the problem in finding an ophthalmologist or optician who will put your RX into antique frames. I have had numerous folks tell me that it is easier to convince them if the lens is held in place with a screw at the temple. When I look at old frames that is one of the things I check out first.

[dixieflyer]

Re: Reproduction Glasses

Beth, you're right, if there is not a screw, they won't touch them, the reason being that they will have to drill out or break the brad/rivet holding the frame and usually don't have the skills or tools to replace that.

Jan, I had my nephew go to one well known chain here in the U.S. with a set of frames, and got told "no way" and then I went to a different store within that chain and was told "yes, no problem". I think the problem has more to do with lack of skilled labor and some of these establishments. Just basing it on my experience and those of friends.

[Fritz]

Re: Reproduction Glasses

I bought a pair of period glasses with the slider ear piece and took them to my indepent optician. Since they had the screw temple he had no problem fitting my prescription. Might have better luck with the non-chain store opticians.

[dixieflyer]

Re: Reproduction Glasses

Very true Fritz, but sadly in many areas, the independent optician has dried up and blown away.

[D Harrelson]

Re: Reproduction Glasses

I resolved the problem with the chrome steel McAllister glasses from Focuser by taking the lenses out and spraying the frames with flat black spray paint. Them I took 'em to my optician and had him fit prescription lens. I can see ! I actually have two pairs as I constantly mis-place my glasses. $45 ain't bad and they're durable. BTW, Nick Duvall will make glass cases. He's making one for the second pair now.

D Harrelson

[cprljohnivey]

Re: Reproduction Glasses

Folks,

I appreciate all the feedback. Remember... I am looking for reproductions for those who don't want to use originals for one reason or another. As I have stated... using originals is the prime choice and would prefer not to discuss the merrits of using originals or how to get them fitted with new lenses in this thread.

@Beth... Thanks for the reviews and the photographs for comparrison.

@Mr. Harrelson.... Interesting solution? Is the purpose of this to go for the Japanned look? How well does the spraypaint adhere to the frames after a few events of sweating, humidity, and general rough and tumble field use?

I have found these repro frames on E-bay but can not find an actual sutler/vendor that carries them other than this guy. Thoughts on this pair? http://www.ebay.com/itm/Civil-War-Fr...item1e67490e92 Notice the holes at the temple. This could come in handy for tieing string to them to keep them on your face (Mine always fall off my face when I bend over).

Thanks,

[cprljohnivey]

Re: Reproduction Glasses

One more thought... could not the pewter finish on these repro frames be sanded off to get to bare metal? My originals are plain metal and do rust when I sweat.

[Jeremy Bevard]

Re: Reproduction Glasses

Out of the reproductions listed I have only seen the ones from Jas Townsend up close to examine. They would be better then wearing modern glasses but thats about as far as I would go. The frames are much thicker then any originals I have seen or owned and overall they are just bigger and chunkier.

[David Swarens]

Re: Reproduction Glasses

Hello.

While I myself choose to wear period original frames, for a number of reasons, there are very good reasons to not do so, including the concept of wearing glasses at all, as well as sacrficial use of irreplacable items.

Just because you wear glasses now, you may not have then, or if so, only for reading/tasks, and not all of the time.

I have read there was a vogue during the Mexican War for American military men to sport spectacles. I am not sure if that was the case, but there are a couple of good images in the Daguerreian Annual, 2002 -2003 article "Silver Shadows Before the Storm".

Here is an article which goes through features which change over time, which I believe was based on a presentation at an ALHFAM conference, as well as the author's own knowledge: http://www.sptddog.com/sotp/spec.html

There is a great book of 19th century American spectacle patents, and the patent drawings are great documents of features, common as well as "improved" by the inventors.
This book is published in England, and is available through a society of collectors of othomlogical antiques, which organisation has much good information.
Unfortunately my copy is not coming to hand, but well worth looking for!

In my experience period frames appear in German silver, coin silver, brass, as well as blued steel (not raw), as well as gold for the affluent.

All elements are character defining features of any period, but you may need to choose which area(s) to compromise when you choose a replica.
Most people seem to want large frames, more like modern glasses.

Since they sit right in the middle of your face, they are harder to ignore than the size of your shoe heel (which might be too large also), so it is worth doing your best

There is one (hard to find) vendor ("Otter") who makes a frame a little earlier than the ACW period, which stands comparison to originals.

Yours,
David Swarens.
San Diego, Cal.

[David Swarens]

Re: Reproduction Glasses

Hello again.

I did bring to hand the book I had mentioned in my previous post.

It is: "United States Spectacle and Eye-glass Patents 1836-1874", Alan Leach, based on an earlier work by Alan McBrayer. I purchased my copy through the Ophthalmic Antiques International Collectors' Club (the full and corrent title). They also publish an informative newsletter, as well as other monographs.

Another book, in many libraries, is "Fashions in Eyeglasses" by Richard Corson. I did find one "what I believe to be an error" (dating a frame to an earlier period than I believe it could be) but this is a pretty ambitious work, with a lot of material.

The other work I mentioned is "The Evolution of Eyewear, 1750-1920, Robert Stone (Fiber Accents Handweavers) published in the proceedings ot the 1995 conference an Annual Meeting of ALHFAM.
This very useful work provides a matrix of spectacle Lens shape, bridges, temples, and temple finials.

Put these four features together (with finish/materials) and you get a pretty good idea of time frame for frames.

These works will help evaluate replica frames, as well as date originals.

Most replicas have some flaw (or more) which one will need to "live with" to use them.
These sources help organise primary material to help us know what compromises, if any, are being made, to make a more informed decision.

But do also consider "going without" (or wearing contacts), and/or using spectacles for reading (only) as more period appropriate for many of us.

Hope we all see clearly!
David Swarens.