Vintage, Antique and retro used wrongly

pauline

pauline

Registered Guest
I do not want to get on my soap box too much <b>NOT</b> relevant to the member here selling , but I find it annoying when you find clothes been described as "Vintage" when even I can tell they are only two or three years old.
In the UK if a antique dealer selling a item the describes as "Antique" if you find out later it's not over 100 years old you can get your money back. and that's true even if they put a date on it that's not right! So like VFG member antique dealers are carefully.
But Mr & Mrs Jo public often use the terms wrongly in conversation and sometimes selling the odd item on ebay.I know it's all about attracting more attention, the same goes for Antique, retro been used wrongly.
Any on else find that annoying?
 
For furniture and decorative objects, yes 100 years is "antique" here in the US as well. But an "antique dealer" may have genuine antiques, and vintage items as well. On this site, and other places, 75 years and older is considered antique for clothing.
 
I know there is wide variety of ranges used for 'vintage'. Personally, my range is 25 - 75 yrs old for clothing. I know for customs pursposes though, Antique is 100 yrs old.

I am having to get used to the idea that the 1950s were 50 yrs ago!

And you are right, Paul - I do see items referred to as 'vintage' that are no more than 5 yrs old or so.

Hollis
 
Paul, this annoys me as well! Ebay itself says vintage clothing should be at least 20 years old, but you see 1990's stuff listed as "vintage." To me, retro is a newer piece designed to look old, which can be a vintage item made in a style of an even earlier age, but for purposes of eBay, I think "retro" is more commonly associated with non-vintage made in a vintage style. Or should be, but again, sellers misrepresent a LOT of supposedly vintage items on eBay!!!! As far as non-clothing items, I have always been told that if a piece is more than 50 years old, it can be considered antique, but I don't know that that is an accepted standard here in the U.S. I have not heard of the 100-year standard for antique furniture--75 years would seem to be about right.... I have furniture pieces from the early 1900s and have always called them antique, pre-2000, and have had other collectors term them antique as well.
 
From what I have now worked out:-

Originally Antique refer to furniture or items made before 1830, this was changed at some time to items over 100 years old, then in the 80's again it has been changed items made pre WW2.

Which date is used as it's been pointed out it also depends upon what the item is. I do not have so much of a problem with that it's , it's been updated that's ok .
Vintage been used on a item only a few years old when retro would be the right word is what gets me ,
Then Ebay pull the auctions for small links when their are dozen's of other which are giving the wrong age to the item with words in the description.
 
its all over the show just now...even a 15 yr old valentino dress on julia roberts at the oscars was described over and over again as vintage! pah!!
l have a note on my website that this is the generally agreed timeframes..

'I am often asked how I define items as Retro, Vintage or Antique...and in general my yardstick is...

Retro is the last 25 years 1975-2000, Vintage is between 1920-1975 and anything before that I classify as Antique!'


there is soo much handbag stock, from china on ebay described as vinateg, if you search JUST vintage bag..you get pages of the junk!!!(it may be evry nice actually, but do l care!!


HTH
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top