A Poll: Which lantern would you choose?

There is a poll at the bottom of the page.

After having some discussion on the site as to what some collectors prefer in a lamps/lanterns condition I thought I'd do a poll so to find out which lamp they would choose under certain circumstances.

The circumstance in this case is:

You have come across a bloke selling two lamps that were once identical. In this case he has cleaned one up and left the other as is.

He is willing to sell ONE of the lamps. He doesn't care which one you buy, they are the same price. The choice is your's.

Which lamp would you choose?

I wish to stress there is no right or wrong answer. It's just a poll to determine how many would take which lamp. So, please vote.


*I've used an Aladdin for descriptive purposes. It's the same lamp.

If you aren't into Aladdins' just think of the bloke as selling two lamps that you like.

 

Great idea, Matty! This reminds me of the sign in the workshop that read:

Labour $10
If you watch $15
If you help $20
If you worked on it first $50

I suppose most of us would like to be the first person to work on a lamp since it was new, or fancy that we would do a better job than the other bloke has.

 

Yes, I never thought about that.

I was more trying to find out if someone would rather take the lamp done up or take the other one because they don't want it done up.

 

A lot of unknown variables make this a non-starter, such as what's the bloke done; how's he done it; and what the asking price is.

But from a personal point of view my instinct would be go for the barn find. That way I get to know what goes into the job, and to control what level I want to go into getting it working.

"If you want to be happy for the rest of your life -

Get an ugly woman to be your wife . . ."

 

My own preference is that I would want it to look respectfully used and lovingly cared for rather than abused and neglected. If that necessarily entails a new original-looking paint job, then so be it. I don't want items in my collection looking like recent refugees from a scrap yard. There may well be special cases like movie props and the like but in general I do not subscribe to the Shabby Chic fad.

But I respect the right of other collectors to differ in their opinion and approach. At least they're not taking them TO the scrap yard...

 

Ed Zachary.

The way the polls going I'm surprised the beat up lamps/lanterns take so long to sell on ebay.

 

I'd probaly go for the one with a handle!

 

Yes, that's a very practical option for a lantern.

 

Yeah, that's what I voted for.

Seemed sensible...

 

Oh, it's got a bail arm, it was in too good nick to put on, I didn't want to scratch it

Ross, I have a first version X246 with a badly pitted hood, poor paint and quite sooty and grubby. Having said that, it's dentless and everything is there and it fires up.

If you, or anyone else, has a same lantern but the hood is too perfect, the paint not blemished enough and is too clean for you, I'm up for a swap.

In fact anyone with lamps/lanterns that are in terrific nick, so for that reason are unliked, I'm willing to sacrifice my battered ones and swap.

If I haven't got the same to swap I'm sure I know a bloke/s that has. If you are going to wan't to swap something that is unlikely I or anyone else has, just list another it alongside one that is likely able to be swapped.

 

Nice to see you were able to gamely struggle through the watermark with just enough strength to chuck a dart Dave.

 

Damn it no water mark, I'll have to replace the photo's to ones with watermarks. They worked well before.

 

Too late, everyone's already downloaded them for personal use.

 

So folk are not liking lamps in good nick AND lamps that have been restored? I did not know that.

I've got a few (I'm counting stoves in that) that are heading from one end of the scale to the other through use. I've also restored stuff on a par with choice 2 & enjoyed them in their restored condition or enjoyed them aging all over again.

If you lift your bonnet the bee may escape! 8)

 

That made me laugh nearly as much as Matts' comment.

Why do you think I have a bee in my bonnet?

Do you think creating the poll, explaining why I created the poll, and replying to flippant remarks means I have a bee in my bonnet? I don't get it.

So far, rather than embrace a forum discussion, 3 or four of the 'leading lights' of this forum and have chucked one liners and I'm the one with problems?

Two of the four avoid me like the plague yet once the owner and moderator have a crack at me they close in and have a bite too.

Seriously, if you don't like the fact that I may have different ideas to all the experts and question some of what I read, don't kill me by a thousand cuts, just tell me and off I go.

 

Definitely the untouched one for me. Even better if it looks like no one else has taken it apart from the day it was made.

 

Matt, I don't get this. You do have the wanted discussion going here, and it's not unlike any other discussions at this forum with some directly related posts and some perhaps less subject focused inputs.
Ross just made a witty remark, which some in its turn commented since we thought it was funny.
That doesn't mean that anything was aimed at you in person.
I'm really sorry you get that feeling.

Now that needs some explanation!
I didn't know that two out of these four avoid you like the plague.
I only know that you and David had a little quarrel in the "water mark post". OK if you take that as if he avoids you like the plague, but who is the other and from where do you draw that conclusion?

And yet once the owner and moderator have a crack at you!?
When did we have that before?
This is not an attempt to being mean. I'm just confused, and would really know when I had a crack on you and even closed in and had a bite.

 

Sorry you feel that way Matty - not my intention.


It was kind of a joke but also my genuine answer. I felt from your subsequent comments that you're trying to get members to join one camp or the other with regard to restored or natural. I don't think it's that simple.

I've got a couple of cracking lamps in fine condition. I'll not swap them for your battered ones but I would chose the battered one in your poll. I guess I have a foot in both camps if they exist.

 

Seriously, there is no point in explaining any of the above any further. What I said is how I see it. I don't expect you or the others to see my point, it won't happen.

Witty remarks are fine, I like a good laugh. I think David says some funny things often directed at me. I can't match him, he's the champ. (I suspect while I'm typing this he's lining me up again.) If he followed up with something related to the topic, without trying to be witty, that would be nice too.

 

Sorry you felt that way - not my intent, seriously.

I'd have about as much chance of influencing members of this site, on anything to do with lamps, as I do of flying to the moon.

Once the one liners started to come I put my offer to swap and it was genuine. I thought the one liners belittled the thread and a person that's trying to contribute to the site.

It's not about having a thick skin. Why should I need a thick skin? One liners and witticisms are great but a constant flow, seriously....

 

Matt, you are in your replies above suggesting that people don't like lamps that are in good order.
That's to simplify things a bit.
I don't think any one in here doesn't like those.
Of course most would choose a NOS lamp before a rustbucket, but that was never the case here.
You are comparing an old, complete not dented lantern with one that has been polished by another person, and I would guess most people in here would prefer to either fix it up themselves or perhaps just keep it rough after a simple clean-up.

Personally I would have payed much more for the un-tampered no. 1 in your question, because from what I can see from the images (which is the only thing presented for us), that one has the biggest chanses to be absolutely original.
The second one doesn't.
And if I want the first to look like the second, well, it's just better if I make it myself and to my own preferences.
I would have done things a bit different than you, and if I take the second, well I'm stuck with the things already done afterwards with that one.

Just my thoughts without being sarcastic, mean or having a bite at you.

 

Are you including me in that?

 

Christer,

When someone takes the time to explain their point as you have above - before the one liners begin - it's much easier to accept a person joining in with the one liners later on. The one liners prior to substance feels belittling. Hey, I've said previously, I'm uneducated, perhaps I don't make my self clear in initial posts.

It was never about the two lamps posted. In fact I had placed this in the original post: *I've used an Aladdin for descriptive purposes. It's the same lamp.

If you aren't into Aladdins' just think of the bloke as selling two lamps that you like.

So, if you were at the markets and saw two SL3's. They are identical except for cosmetic appearance. They are selling for the same price but the bloke would only sell you one. Maybe I should have said you could afford the lights or he was selling them for $10, I didn't think I needed to be that cross every t and dot every i.

I wanted to see, if push come to shove, would members seriously pick the worse looking lamp/lantern. I know I'd pick the SL3 with great paintwork and clean.

The two lamps I showed was meant to describe one in great condition and one in poor condition cosmetically. It wasn't meant to show one that had been fettled by someone, just in better condition.

 

Why do you ask? If you have a point, get to it.

 

Hopefully this snarkiness can come to an end.

Same price - both original but one cleaner. I'd go for the cleaner, if it had a handle.

 

Yes, I suppose I really should stop attacking everyone. I won't again.

Perfect. A reply of substance and a witty remark.

 

Hello Matty,

I'd personally go with the unfettled one myself, the fun is in learning about the lamp as you bring it back to life according to your preferences.

I see a brass tank. I would of course have to check the base; many American manufacturers used steel base plates so it's a habit. It's running so it's not a lost cause and I see the original globe so I'm sold.

 

Me too. Every time.
If it is two identical, unfettled lamps... well of course I would go for the cleaner!
Who wouldn't

Matt, I know you just used the Aladdin as an example, but you really mislead us by showing those before and after pics.
I got the impression you meant a fettled compared to an untuched one.
What you really ask is a good looking original vs. a not good looking original, right?
I think you'd get another answer there.
It's just the thing that someone has fixed an item up before I get it that I have an issue with, and most collectors I know are of the same opinion.

 

Because if your going to make accusations against people you should names names and stand by your convictions. You've referred to them as "leading lights" which I would never consider myself. In later posts you've made it pretty clear who you mean but I wanted to clarify.

As above and I want to know where I stand with you. If your going to pick us off one by one over such small trivial things as one line jokes your only making it harder for yourself to learn, which as I understand is what you want to achieve?

Out of respect for Ross and his last post, I will not be adding anything further to this discussion.



If you still want my opinion on your original poll then I'd go for the original untouched lamp simply because I enjoy making the decision how far I want to go with the restoration. But, offer me new in box and I'll be tripping over myself to get it.

 

Same money? I'd have the fettled one, who wouldnt?!

I generally go for scruffier lamps though, more character to my eyes.
I only have 4 well-polished examples in my collection.

Alec.

PS, life's too short to be snarky, go with the flow, if you don't like a particular comment, ignore it, karma baby!