Comoy's Extraordinaire 235 & Kaywoodie 235 Uncle Paul

[ssjones]

That does look like a 1940's Comoy's to my eye. I'd love a close-up of the London, England side.

 

[mawnansmiff]

Of the 8 options on the Photobucket screen not one of them offers a URL.
Why oh why cannot one just upload from the hard drive? It would be so much simpler. Have now wasted far too much time just to get to where I am and that's not very far. Now to top it off this page keeps freezing on me with a script error message!
I am also a mineral collector and a member of Mindat and posting images to that site is a doddle.

 

[mawnansmiff]

http://s328.photobucket.com/user/Bildeborg/media/14%202_zps3xd0hyu3.jpg.html?filters[user]=144932038&filters[recent]=1&sort=1&o=1
SSJ, I'm afraid I don't understand your instructions for posting images but here are two close ups of the nomenclature as requested.
Regards,
Jay.

 

[dmcmtk]

From local hard drive Home>My Account>Album>Upload Picture>Title>Description>Browse (local hard drive)>Upload>right click Copy Image Location>click the IMG icon in the toolbar above>backspace out the default blue highlighted http:// ,right click and paste the copied image location>click OK. The image will show when you click Send Post.

Using Photobucket, DON'T use the IMG function in this reply box. Copy and paste from the right Photobucket screen the URL of the IMG option. Photobucket formats it for direct insertion, so just past that right into the thread as below.

Al, I didn't even notice the URL at photobucket...I never use it.

Look, it works!

 

[dmcmtk]

Like I said, Pre WWII. Now, the same up close of the markings on the other side.

 

[mawnansmiff]

"All modern cell phones take great close-up pix of nomenclature. Put the pipe under a light, turn of the flash and zoom in. All of my nomenclature pix are taken with my cell."
I have microscope/camera equipment here for taking images of minerals/crystals less that 1/4 mm (my other hobby). Taking the picture is not the problem this end, posting it is.
Dave, I did post both sides. This is my issue, such a simple task as uploading pictures should not be this problematic. I have already been forced into signing up to Photobucket (which I would rather not have done.
I shall try again.
Regards,
Jay.

 

[mawnansmiff]

 

[dmcmtk]

This is my issue, such a simple task as uploading pictures should not be this problematic. I have already been forced into signing up to Photobucket (which I would rather not have done.

This I would have to agree with...

 

[ssjones]

From Photobucket, see the hightlighted URL by image - copy and paste that directly into the thread reply. (Photobucket then adds the img function automatically.

 

[mawnansmiff]

 

[mawnansmiff]

EUREKA!!!
On another tack I just got an e-mail from Neill Archer (after mentioning what was said here) stating thus...
Send me pics.
I really doubt it. Comoy made almost no pipes in the 40s. Based on your description, the nomenclature sounds wrong for an early pipe, but I will look.

 

[ssjones]

That is a definitely 1940's era pipe.
My gripe with sites that allow you to upload a picture is that most have very small size restrictions. Modern digital cameras and cell phones take much larger pictures than can be uploaded. So, every photo has to be resized and resaved. To me, that is a royal PITA. I post to many pipe forum sites, posting that single URL line from Photobucket is a simple 3 button affaird (highlight, copy - paste). Once you get the hang of it, it's very easy.
Using the right click copy/past, and the IMG feature on this reply thread, I can post any non-copyrighted picture, from Ebay, etc. They do not have to be stored on my computer (like the first picture of the Kaywoodie I posted earlier, that was right from Ebay).

 

[dmcmtk]

That does look like a 1940's Comoy's to my eye. I'd love a close-up of the London, England side.

I would agree. I'd be interested to her Neill's thoughts, also from Jon Guss.

 

[dmcmtk]

What is a little strange, is what looks like an overstamp on the shape number 235 area...

 

[dmcmtk]

Notice the difference in stems (235 from pipedia) it may, or may not, be an original stem here. Jay, your's is more what I would expect to see.

 

[mawnansmiff]

Four images including both nomenclature pictures are winging it to Neill. I shall post his response once I receive it. Hopefully he may buy it which is why I contacted him in the first place and which led to this posting as it was only then that it occurred to me it matched in number, shape, size and quality of briar with my Kaywoodie.
For whatever market reasons I suspect the Comoy's will be worth more than the Kaywoodie. I will be sad to see it go if indeed it does as I really like it but funds are needed for more estates to refurb & smoke.
Regards,
Jay.

 

[mawnansmiff]

Dave, you are correct regards the overstamping. The number 2 is overstamped on a number 3 or 5 and is fractionally smaller than the 3 & 5.
Re3gards,
Jay.

 

[mawnansmiff]

If it helps with dating, the 'C' inlaid on the stem is in three parts.
Regards,
Jay.

 

[mawnansmiff]

Message from Neill Archer....
"That nomenclature indicates that the pipe is almost certainly a 1960s vintage pipe. It could be late 50s. It is definitely not earlier in my opinion."

 

[ssjones]

Coincidentally, a buddy recently sold a 235 Extraordinaire last month.
http://m.ebay.com/itm/1930s-Comoys-Extraordinaire-235-Oom-Paul-Pre-Cadogan-Wow-Restored-/172113210804