[ Post a Response | PGCA Glass Collectors Message Board main index ]
Posted by Bob LaSalle on August 23, 2009, 2:12 pm, in reply to "Re: Weekly Finds 8/23"
70.15.28.225
Steve--I think both have their merits. The database is a tremendous resource. It is easy to search and find glasses and then see an individual listing of the other glasses in that set. There are sizes and years included in the database. Pictures are available for most glasses. It is a great tool for research, very well organized, and quite frankly one of the best databases on collectibles anywhere.
Flickr is different. Pictures can be of entire sets, not just individual glasses. Glasses from more than one category can be shown in the same picture, and there is a place for comments to be left. It is more interactive than the database, but certainly less standardized, searchable, or as informative. Flickr also allows for more diversity. The database would never show Brian's yard sale pics, or the pics of buttons or displays. It's a much less formal way of sharing.
How I've used both resources together...I saw a picture of the Superman prototype posted back in June on Flickr, and then looked up the glass in the database only to learn that there were more prototypes in the set. Another example, saw a Grape Ape glass on Flickr. I would never have thought to type in Grape Ape as a search term, but after seeing the glass I did, and learned that it was a Welch's prototype. Alone each is a nice resource with its own merits, together they are quite powerful.
Now what would be nice is that if someone puts up a picture on Flickr of a glass that is not in the database, hopefully they could send a picture to you with the specs of the glass. That way the database is as complete as possible. Do you find that the pics on Flickr show glasses that are not yet included in the database?
Message Thread:
« Back to thread