Saracen d846 Kelston Ceramics

Photos courtesy of Marcus..

Here's my saucer!

I'm calling this one Saracen as it's Kelston

What colour is that pattern Glenys?

It makes me wonder if Batik is correct now .....
Here is Batik - http://newzealandpottery.forumotion.net/t2171-saracen-brown-no-it-s-batik-d347?highlight=saracen

Brownish and fawn. Rather like your picture of Batik d347!
What evidence do we have for Batik d347? Do we have a piece with a backstamp or a pattern on file?
PS Looking closely at my saucer and the gold plate - the plate doesn't have the tiny dots all over it. Could that be the difference?
Yes, your Batik plate does have the dots.
What is the back stamp on it?

Hmmmm I will have to check the Patterns book at the Museum next time I go re the dots !
Yours looks more grey than brown, which made me wonder if there was another pattern as well .... ?

Its one of those hard to define colours. Definitely not grey, not brown but in the range of brown to fawn, quite light really. I thought it looked like the colour of the Batik photo.
When you see my photos with a thumb in them it means I'm photographing them in the shop under awful lighting conditions. The lady in that shop has become quite a friend and lets me photograph as many as I like. So I photograph all the ones I think may not be in the gallery. However, I don't think I can go so far as to take them all outside and set them up properly. She laughs at me anyway!!!
Needless to say I don't buy them all, just the really curious ones.
Keep watch over the next few days, I have more!!!!
I have to check them in the gallery first.

Cameras and lighting can be very tricky regarding colour comparisons.
I'm going with Batik for both of those from here .....

Me too, but check those dots.

One of my finds from today happens to be ? I really think its Saracen as it doesn't have the dots like Batik

Wooops how did I miss that last post?
I found 2 bowls in the same pattern as the one above.
Yes it has the dots just like Batik does and Kelston Ceramics on the back,
but the toning is Oyster just like Clematis, whereas Batik is in Browns and have Brown 3019 cups to match.
So into the No Names Gallery it will have to go as .....Like Batik but in Oyster

Ev.. we can't argue with the first post being Saracen 846 as it has a back-stamp
But... the portage records have Saracen 846 - Low sol - glaze - 402/1 (greeny colour) also 8022 oval dish, and no dots, that batik has. Matched up with olive green cup.
So I think the last two posts on this thread could also be called 'Saracen 846 '
What do you think?

Yes I agree that Saracen has different colour tonings.

So shall I take it out of the no names and re name it " Saracen 846 ( no.2)"

As I'm not sure what to do, I will let you edit it. Perhaps Saracen Oyster ...?