Studio or Amateur Piece?

A little rough on the base which would say to me amateur or hobby piece although the vase itself looks rather well made and more studio.  I am most probably wrong as always lol.  Any ideas please

At least we can say that it's 1950s and without the date I suppose the decoration gives it away.

Difficult to see what the initials are but it looks well made and I just get a feel as if it was made by someone who had trained as a fine artist before taking up pottery.

Any guesses at the initials?

I'm always wary of pots that have signatures like this , would a pro really feel it needs the actual year IE 19?? whatever , looks like a student with help piece imo as the actual initials are just not there   

Looking to see if 1957 was a significant date, it is the year that Sputnik was launched. Maybe that has a bearing on the style of decoration?
It looks to be competently potted, and I wouldn't be surprised at a date appearing on it from that time, other potters have done it (I'd be more concerned at seeing the day, month and year together, than just the year). Might indicate a foreign potter, eg, from USA or Australia.

mmmmm more research required on this one me thinks. It's a lovely well made piece so I shall keep looking thanks

big ed wrote:I'm always wary of pots that have signatures like this , would a pro really feel it needs the actual year IE 19??  

The Martin Brothers tended to.

Celtic_Fan wrote:

big ed wrote:I'm always wary of pots that have signatures like this , would a pro really feel it needs the actual year IE 19??  

The Martin Brothers tended to.

I've seen several this week, all made in the 50s by different potters. Seems to have been the fashion.

Celtic_Fan wrote:

big ed wrote:I'm always wary of pots that have signatures like this , would a pro really feel it needs the actual year IE 19??  

The Martin Brothers tended to.

Yes true , fair comment , but you could just about read theirs