Sackcloth being worn — but the Photoshop’s kerning is just as shabby as Microsoft’s.djewesbury wrote:I made the image using Adobe Photoshop.
Sackcloth for you.
Cockburn 1957
Re: Cockburn 1957
- djewesbury
- Graham’s 1970
- Posts: 8166
- Joined: 20:01 Mon 31 Dec 2012
- Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
- Contact:
Re: Cockburn 1957
I didn't attempt to kern it. I wasn't preparing this for a client. I was showing the letterforms to port nerds! Surely nobody would use automatic kerning in any other circumstance?jdaw1 wrote:Sackcloth being worn — but the Photoshop’s kerning is just as shabby as Microsoft’s.djewesbury wrote:I made the image using Adobe Photoshop.
Sackcloth for you.
Daniel J.
Husband of a relentless former Soviet Chess Master.
delete.. delete.. *sigh*.. delete...
Husband of a relentless former Soviet Chess Master.
delete.. delete.. *sigh*.. delete...
Re: Cockburn 1957
:whooshoverheademoticon:
- djewesbury
- Graham’s 1970
- Posts: 8166
- Joined: 20:01 Mon 31 Dec 2012
- Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
- Contact:
Re: Cockburn 1957
Please could you sign up for the Geek 503 refresher course in the appropriate forum?flash_uk wrote::whooshoverheademoticon:
Daniel J.
Husband of a relentless former Soviet Chess Master.
delete.. delete.. *sigh*.. delete...
Husband of a relentless former Soviet Chess Master.
delete.. delete.. *sigh*.. delete...
-
- Dalva Golden White Colheita 1952
- Posts: 3707
- Joined: 17:45 Fri 19 Oct 2012
- Location: Somerset, UK
Re: Cockburn 1957
Quite. However I have a suspicion that not a few folks on this site will be delighted with the turn this thread has taken. *sigh*.flash_uk wrote::whooshoverheademoticon:
- djewesbury
- Graham’s 1970
- Posts: 8166
- Joined: 20:01 Mon 31 Dec 2012
- Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
- Contact:
Cockburn 1957
I think the relevant point is that the typeface is a modern one, much more modern than the supposed vintages in the (peculiarly shaped) bottles. I was distracted into an arcane discussion of typography by an admin who really should know better. If the labels and selos are contemporaneous, then these are also very very leaky bottles!LGTrotter wrote:Quite. However I have a suspicion that not a few folks on this site will be delighted with the turn this thread has taken. *sigh*.flash_uk wrote::whooshoverheademoticon:
In conclusion I do not think that this is evidence of a Cockburn 1957 ever having been made. I believe that we have answered the original question.
Now, Sir, I invite you to withdraw your slur.
Daniel J.
Husband of a relentless former Soviet Chess Master.
delete.. delete.. *sigh*.. delete...
Husband of a relentless former Soviet Chess Master.
delete.. delete.. *sigh*.. delete...
-
- Dalva Golden White Colheita 1952
- Posts: 3707
- Joined: 17:45 Fri 19 Oct 2012
- Location: Somerset, UK
Re: Cockburn 1957
Zzzzzzzzzz......zzzzz.....zzzzz.....
And you Sir may have proved something about the typeface, I am not sure you have proved much about the bottles and their contents. My bet is that they have something porty inside, maybe not exactly as advertised. Good day to you!
And you Sir may have proved something about the typeface, I am not sure you have proved much about the bottles and their contents. My bet is that they have something porty inside, maybe not exactly as advertised. Good day to you!
- djewesbury
- Graham’s 1970
- Posts: 8166
- Joined: 20:01 Mon 31 Dec 2012
- Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
- Contact:
Re: Cockburn 1957
O thou thuggee, do you question my train of thought? Dodgy looking labels = rather incredible claims re contents. Does anyone know of any bottles this shape containing porty things? I don't think I do. If the bottles look so wrong and the labels look so wrong why would the contents somehow be right?LGTrotter wrote:Zzzzzzzzzz......zzzzz.....zzzzz.....
And you Sir may have proved something about the typeface, I am not sure you have proved much about the bottles and their contents. My bet is that they have something porty inside, maybe not exactly as advertised. Good day to you!
Daniel J.
Husband of a relentless former Soviet Chess Master.
delete.. delete.. *sigh*.. delete...
Husband of a relentless former Soviet Chess Master.
delete.. delete.. *sigh*.. delete...
Re: Cockburn 1957
Next, go to Phil’s images of the labels of the 1960 and the 1963. Random lines come in from the left hand side. Looking at the top-left it is very obvious that these are different. I don’t know by what analogue printing technology the pattern was done, but it was re-done for the ’63. Then return to the ebay.fr image, and the left-hand sides of the ’55 and ’57 seem to be identical. Interesting.
-
- Dalva Golden White Colheita 1952
- Posts: 3707
- Joined: 17:45 Fri 19 Oct 2012
- Location: Somerset, UK
Re: Cockburn 1957
I think too much is being made of the labels. I have bought and drunk with satisfaction bottles with facsimile labels, Wylie fine wine (local to me) are often explicit about this. As to having odd shaped bottles it is not so unusual, perhaps these are odder than most but I think private bottlers would use what they had. I have heard of, but never seen, port being put in burgundy bottles. The things which strike me about the bottles is the presence of selos and the identical capsules on three disparate vintages.jdaw1 wrote:Next, go to Phil’s images of the labels of the 1960 and the 1963. Random lines come in from the left hand side. Looking at the top-left it is very obvious that these are different. I don’t know by what analogue printing technology the pattern was done, but it was re-done for the ’63. Then return to the ebay.fr image, and the left-hand sides of the ’55 and ’57 seem to be identical. Interesting.
I think your train of thought is faultless. As are you. Hic.djewesbury wrote:O thou thuggee, do you question my train of thought? Dodgy looking labels = rather incredible claims re contents. Does anyone know of any bottles this shape containing porty things? I don't think I do. If the bottles look so wrong and the labels look so wrong why would the contents somehow be right?
Re: Cockburn 1957
I just read this thread from start to finish and finally came across the only sentence that makes any sense.LGTrotter wrote:I think too much is being made of the labels.
Owen, I'm your +1.
"The first duty of Port is to be red"
Ernest H. Cockburn
Ernest H. Cockburn
- djewesbury
- Graham’s 1970
- Posts: 8166
- Joined: 20:01 Mon 31 Dec 2012
- Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
- Contact:
Re: Cockburn 1957
You're in the greenhouse.DRT wrote:I just read this thread from start to finish and finally came across the only sentence that makes any sense.LGTrotter wrote:I think too much is being made of the labels.
Owen, I'm your +1.
Daniel J.
Husband of a relentless former Soviet Chess Master.
delete.. delete.. *sigh*.. delete...
Husband of a relentless former Soviet Chess Master.
delete.. delete.. *sigh*.. delete...
- djewesbury
- Graham’s 1970
- Posts: 8166
- Joined: 20:01 Mon 31 Dec 2012
- Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
- Contact:
Re: Cockburn 1957
I'm afraid you've hopelessly latched on to the most tenuous statement in this whole thread. A facsimile label is just that: a facsimile. Or, it's a very simple label with no attempt to reproduce or imitate the design of the original. These are precisely that, an attempt to 'pass off' as Cockburn labels. What reputable dealer would do that?DRT wrote:I just read this thread from start to finish and finally came across the only sentence that makes any sense.LGTrotter wrote:I think too much is being made of the labels.
Owen, I'm your +1.
Daniel J.
Husband of a relentless former Soviet Chess Master.
delete.. delete.. *sigh*.. delete...
Husband of a relentless former Soviet Chess Master.
delete.. delete.. *sigh*.. delete...
Re: Cockburn 1957
There was a time when I was creating facsimile labels on demand for people here. Most notably AHB. There are therefore lots of bottles in TPF member's cellars with non-original labels, non of which were created or applied with the intention to deceive. Owen has already mentioned a well respected wine merchant who is renowned for doing the same.djewesbury wrote:I'm afraid you've hopelessly latched on to the most tenuous statement in this whole thread. A facsimile label is just that: a facsimile. Or, it's a very simple label with no attempt to reproduce or imitate the design of the original. These are precisely that, an attempt to 'pass off' as Cockburn labels. What reputable dealer would do that?DRT wrote:I just read this thread from start to finish and finally came across the only sentence that makes any sense.LGTrotter wrote:I think too much is being made of the labels.
Owen, I'm your +1.
Speculating about whether or not there would be variability in the style of bottles used in the mid 20th century is quite laughable. Off course they were. 150 years of recycling bottles in the trade resulted in exactly what you see in that picture. The landed gentry, university colleges, gentleman's clubs, livery companies, etc. all recycled their bottles by handing them back to their wine merchant to be re-filled with the next vintage. The picture above is therefore utterly unsurprising for the time period.
Is it Cockburn 1957? Unlikely. Did someone decide to create a fake of something that never existed? Equally unlikely.
"The first duty of Port is to be red"
Ernest H. Cockburn
Ernest H. Cockburn
-
- Dalva Golden White Colheita 1952
- Posts: 3707
- Joined: 17:45 Fri 19 Oct 2012
- Location: Somerset, UK
Re: Cockburn 1957
Whist I do not think these bottles are in any way sinister and I am reluctant to alienate my only current supporter but it was through making fakes of burgundy that never existed which led to Rudy Kurwinian being nabbed.DRT wrote:Did someone decide to create a fake of something that never existed? Equally unlikely.
Re: Cockburn 1957
So what is your explanation?DRT wrote:Is it Cockburn 1957? Unlikely. Did someone decide to create a fake of something that never existed? Equally unlikely.
Re: Cockburn 1957
I'm with you two, too.DRT wrote:I just read this thread from start to finish and finally came across the only sentence that makes any sense.LGTrotter wrote:I think too much is being made of the labels.
Owen, I'm your +1.
Because there's never been a case where new labels were affixed to old bottles of Port after the original labels fell off and were lost (or were never present in the first place).
Never.
Glenn Elliott
Re: Cockburn 1957
Cockburn 1977.jdaw1 wrote:So what is your explanation?DRT wrote:Is it Cockburn 1957? Unlikely. Did someone decide to create a fake of something that never existed? Equally unlikely.
Glenn Elliott
Re: Cockburn 1957
someone made a mistake.jdaw1 wrote:So what is your explanation?DRT wrote:Is it Cockburn 1957? Unlikely. Did someone decide to create a fake of something that never existed? Equally unlikely.
"The first duty of Port is to be red"
Ernest H. Cockburn
Ernest H. Cockburn
Re: Cockburn 1957
3 mistakes - broadbent, the author of jdaw1's excerpt, and whoever labelled the bottles?
Rob C.
Re: Cockburn 1957
Ah. Didn't pick those up. Cockburn 57 existed.
"The first duty of Port is to be red"
Ernest H. Cockburn
Ernest H. Cockburn
- Alex Bridgeman
- Fonseca 1966
- Posts: 15036
- Joined: 13:41 Mon 25 Jun 2007
- Location: Berkshire, UK
Re: Cockburn 1957
Errr, yes. Calem 1935 is contained in thoroughly non-porty-thingy-shaped bottles. And it contains porty stuff. Only the person who put the Calem 1935 into the non-porty-thingy-shaped bottles didn't bother with anything as facile as a facsimile label. No label at all, in fact.djewesbury wrote:Does anyone know of any bottles this shape containing porty things? I don't think I do. If the bottles look so wrong and the labels look so wrong why would the contents somehow be right?
Oh God! I've just realised what you're saying. Tom's Calem 1935 is as fake as a bottle of Cockburn 1957. Oh no! I've been duped! Rudy Kurniwan is alive and kicking and churning out more fakes from his prison cell in Alcatraz. Damn him!
Top Ports in 2023: Taylor 1896 Colheita, b. 2021. A perfect Port.
2024: Niepoort 1900 Colheita, b.1971. A near perfect Port.
2024: Niepoort 1900 Colheita, b.1971. A near perfect Port.
- Alex Bridgeman
- Fonseca 1966
- Posts: 15036
- Joined: 13:41 Mon 25 Jun 2007
- Location: Berkshire, UK
Re: Cockburn 1957
At one time I had 13 bottles of Cockburn 1912. All of these were relabelled using the kind services of DRT. Many of these have been drunk but if you search the review thread for mention of Cockburn 1912 you might well see a picture of a bottle with a facsimilie label. These were produced to order and were made to look like the Cockburn 1963 format label.DRT wrote:There was a time when I was creating facsimile labels on demand for people here. Most notably AHB.
I'm sure that original labels (if any) on Cockburn 1912 were normally whatever the merchant / club / country house butler decided to stick on the bottle.
A dodgy label does not mean a fake wine. A dodgy bottle does not mean a fake wine. We've seen at least one example of where a cork branded with one shipper / vintage combination was used in error in a different port! It is really tough to differentiate a well intentioned and genuine effort to make your bottles look nice so you can cuddle them when you visit your cellar, from a malicious and deliberate attempt to mislead a potential buyer in an effort to extract more cash from them.
On the whole, I believe that this is probably the former, that the 1957 Cockburn is an unofficial vintage which was probably blended, bottled and shipped in very small quantities probably for a single customer. Similar to Taylor 1947 and 1950 or Dow 1946 - none of which exist and all of which I have drunk.
Top Ports in 2023: Taylor 1896 Colheita, b. 2021. A perfect Port.
2024: Niepoort 1900 Colheita, b.1971. A near perfect Port.
2024: Niepoort 1900 Colheita, b.1971. A near perfect Port.
Re: Cockburn 1957
I second the excellent opinion in the previous post (hereafter written as “+1”).
Except that I haven’t had Dow 1946.
Except that I haven’t had Dow 1946.
Re: Cockburn 1957
Daniel,
You have some nerve, in 24 hours you are serving a so called Taylor's 1970 with no label dodgy bottle, no provenance etc. shame on you ! Mind you I'm really looking forward to it and my (tom's)dodgy bottle as well. And I know the full story on yours (all will be revealed tomorrow night).
You have some nerve, in 24 hours you are serving a so called Taylor's 1970 with no label dodgy bottle, no provenance etc. shame on you ! Mind you I'm really looking forward to it and my (tom's)dodgy bottle as well. And I know the full story on yours (all will be revealed tomorrow night).