Pyrex catalog from from 1938 with hand-drawn lab glassware [pdf]

Posted by speckx 10/27/2025

Pyrex catalog from from 1938 with hand-drawn lab glassware [pdf](exhibitdb.cmog.org)

363 points | 74 comments

coreyp_1 10/27/2025|

I love the hand-drawn illustrations, but I really love the typography.

Does anyone know which fonts (or, probably more importantly, which modern-day equivalents) are used to get this feeling?

graypegg 10/27/2025||

For the body copy, I think it's a version of Rockwell. [0] It fits the time, as well as the lower case "g" always looks quirky to me in rockwell-flavours. Stubby tail + serif on top. The heft on the headings also matches Rockwell Extra Bold with a couple tiny variations. Plus, just simply... slab serifs.

Things working against that are:

- % is wrong. That really looks like a different typeface all together. Not unheard of, might be worth seeing if it matches any other monotype fonts.

- Bolded headings have some differences. Rockwell Extra Bold should still have circular tittles, but unless it's a scanning artifact, the few lowercase "i" examples I can find in those headings seem to be square.

- The Rockwell favour in the tables is tweaked, with no descenders and uses tabular digits. This is pretty common, but the digital copies of Rockwell I have laying around don't have those exact forms... doesn't really say much when we're talking about what specific hot-metal type casts did monotype sell them 90-odd years ago.

---

On the title pages (like page 13), my best guess is Memphis. [1] The R is wrong for Rockwell, but also the lower a in "Brand" is totally wrong for Memphis, and the quote is totally different. Going to take lunch, and possibly come back to this in a bit because now I'm intrigued haha.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rockwell_(typeface) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memphis_(typeface)

graypegg 10/27/2025|||

Comment got deleted, but Gallatin isn't the title page font. That was a digital font released in 2019, which is meant to look like Memphis with a two storey a. https://fontsinuse.com/typefaces/128627/gallatin

That does mention that Linotype had a Memphis flavour with a two-storey "a" though... so maaaaaybe it is Memphis! Most likely their Rockwell typeface was also supplied from Linotype in that case, probably under a different name.

not_clear 10/29/2025||||

I could be wrong, but I think that Stymie is a closer match for the body than Rockwell, particularly due to the serif on the middle arm of capital E (and F). I think that Stymie also matches other details as outlined in the comparison page on Identifont (http://www.identifont.com/differences?first=stymie&second=ro...)

graypegg 10/31/2025||

Ohhhhh! REALLY good catch, I think you're right. Matches all of the features!

There's some really neat uses of it on Fonts In Use. [0]

Also a new-jersey based foundry specimen book, from a few years before publishing this catalog. [1] There's a non-zero chance that these samples were originally what convinced the original designer to go with this typeface, if we believe the designer also worked in Corning New York at the pyrex office.

[0] https://fontsinuse.com/typefaces/4509/stymie

[1] https://archive.org/details/ATFBookOfAmericanTypes1934/page/...

munificent 10/27/2025|||

Agreed, the design is really strikingly beautiful.

The typography is part of this, but I suspect you may also be undervaluing how much the overall design contributes here. The layout, use of whitespace, use of different fonts and sizes to convey hierarchy. It's just really good design made with care and attention by a skilled practitioner.

landl0rd 10/27/2025|||

It's not precisely the same but you may enjoy Berkeley Mono: https://neil.computer/notes/introducing-berkeley-mono/

I enjoy using it for reading and writing code.

dfc 10/28/2025|||

It's a great font but I do not see anything that looks similar in the PDF. This comment is more like "Speaking of fonts, I like this unrelated san serif mono spaced font."

metalliqaz 10/27/2025|||

That's a nice font but... pricey.

wpm 10/28/2025||

$75 for a font is pretty good I thought . I’ve found some other fonts I’d love to use for twice the price, or more, with more restrictive licensing.

ashleyn 10/28/2025||

The cover looks like the Spire typeface.

nickgray 10/27/2025||

This catalog is by Corning. Randomly, they have an absolutely incredible museum called The Corning Museum of Glass https://home.cmog.org/ located about 5 hours drive from New York City.

ian-g 10/27/2025|

You might notice that this link isn't from Corning. It's from the Corning Museum of Glass' excellent library

wlesieutre 10/27/2025||

Old tool catalogs have similarly great illustrations

https://archive.org/details/stanley-catalogue-34-1929/page/6...

burnt-resistor 10/27/2025||

I raise you a Whole Earth Catalog - Fall '69:

https://archive.org/details/wholeearthcatalo00unse_7/page/62...

Where and when else could you mail $1 to Rolling Stone's original hq and have them send you a longer Bob Dylan interview, and then on the opposite side, the publisher reveals their costs?

https://archive.org/details/wholeearthcatalo00unse_7/page/12...

georgefrowny 10/27/2025||

Machine tool manuals too: https://motolab.ru/SIP%20MP-1/

MerrimanInd 10/27/2025||

My roommate in college worked at GE's Global Research lab in Schenectady. As a bit of a relic from the heyday of US corporate research they still had an in-house glassblowing department for producing all the necessary glassware for all the labs and chemical/material research!

mattkrause 10/27/2025||

This is surprisingly common at big research universities! My classmate even managed to take a course on glassblowing--and have it count for her PhD!

s0rce 10/28/2025|||

If your institute doesn't have an in house glass blower and you need one, I've been happy with these guys for the past 20 years https://adamschittenden.com/

jonjacky 10/28/2025|||

The first session in my freshman Chemistry lab was on bending glass tubing by heating it to softness with a Bunsen burner. One of my classmates, with a burned finger, said that the takeaway lesson was "hot glass looks like cold glass".

pumnikol 10/27/2025||

Probably more for repairing than producing, in my experience. That stuff's expensive and breaks easily. An old lab joke: Which daily sound scares a chemist the most? - Krk.

jihadjihad 10/27/2025||

As a consumer, it is important to note that `pyrex` and `PYREX` are not the same thing [0]:

"Corning used borosilicate to produce all Pyrex products. However, the company that purchased the cookware products switched to soda-lime glass, adopting the name pyrex (spelled with all lowercase letters).

Corning continued to make its lab tools with borosilicate, dubbing these products to be PYREX (spelled with all uppercase letters)."

All of the glass examples in TFA are borosilicate all-caps PYREX, while most of what you can buy today in the store is lowercase pyrex (Europe is an exception where the all-caps variety can be found).

0: https://www.corning.com/worldwide/en/products/life-sciences/...

throw0101c 10/27/2025||

> All of the glass examples in TFA are borosilicate all-caps PYREX, while most of what you can buy today in the store is lowercase pyrex (Europe is an exception where the all-caps variety can be found).

Using all-lower or all-upper case is not a good indication of the type of glass used.

A recent video (Sep 2025) from the I Want to Cook channel, "PYREX vs pyrex -- What's The Difference & Why It Matters", went into the history of this:

* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2DKasz4xFC0

Specifically, he found the following at the Corning Museum of Glass site:

> The short answer is that the change from Pyrex trademark upper to lower case signified a re-branding of the trademark Pyrex® in the late 1970s but is not a conclusive way to determine, historically, what type of glass formulation the product is made from.

* https://libanswers.cmog.org/faq/398431

So if someone goes to thrift stores looking for borosilicate via the 'old way' of spelling the name, there is no guarantee it will be borosilicate.

See 16m11 of the video for advice if you want borosilicate glass: in Europe, it is all borosilicate; in US, import it yourself, look for "Made in France", or use another manufacturer (e.g., Oxo names the glass they use).

Normal_gaussian 10/27/2025|||

Its worth noting that in Europe borosilicate PYREX cookware continues to be made and sold.

- https://pyrex.co.uk/pages/a-unique-glass

- https://pyrexhome.com/

It is a source of some annoyance that lowercase pyrex infects the market via imports.

somat 10/27/2025|||

I regard this as a prime example of customer betrayal. The company set up the brand to promote a specific product(borosilicate glass cookware) After many years of this specific promotion, to the point the pyrex was interchangeable with borosilicate glass in customers minds. That brand stopped being made of borosilicate glass resulting in a product that looked exactly the same but with distinctly different mechanical properties.

Final thoughts: I don't think PYREX vs pyrex painted on is enough of a differentiator and my understanding(as the parent post pointed out) both types of glass are used with the lowercase trademark. I think glass cookware should have a standardized indicator stamped into the glass itself as it is very tricky to tell otherwise.

There is the mineral oil IOR test, but... the IOR ranges of the two glass formula actually overlap so it is very tricky to tell for sure. There is the heat shock test, but... that will destroy the item if it is tempered glass. I suspect you could use a polarized light test to identify if it is tempered glass. but none if the threads I have read on the subject have mentioned it probably because it requires specialized equipment.

nancyminusone 10/27/2025||

I've seen the new pyrex in stores and it's readily apparent just how green it is. My old pyrex is clear. But apparently that has nothing to do with the type glass used, both kinds can be green.

electroly 10/27/2025|||

OXO sells borosilicate glass bakeware if you're looking for an alternative in America. The original PYREX is available for Europeans.

OJFord 10/28/2025|||

> Europe is an exception where the all-caps variety can be found

'can be found' is too weak, it just is all-caps & borosilicate. (Perhaps imported lower-case stuff 'can be found', but it's not the norm at all, you won't see it in shops, and - I just checked - I haven't been suckered with it on Amazon either.)

wyclif 10/27/2025|||

Where can you buy uppercase PYREX today in America?

throw0101c 10/27/2025|||

> Where can you buy uppercase PYREX today in America?

Uppercase is no guarantee:

* https://libanswers.cmog.org/faq/398431

* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2DKasz4xFC0

WaitWaitWha 10/27/2025|||

second hand stores where i find them.

aj_hackman 10/27/2025|||

Not to be confused with Pyrex, which has been forked into Cython.

leoh 10/27/2025|||

[flagged]

lm28469 10/27/2025||

Actually as a "consumer" you shouldn't know the difference, you'll be a better "consumer" that way.

As an informed human being who happens to buy things from time to time you should definitely know the difference though.

bayindirh 10/27/2025||

Beautiful.

I believe it's interesting that these kinds of intricate, hand made objects float to the front page of the HN while at the same time many people glorify how AI can handle these jobs and can do an "arguably better job" in less time.

It's evident that these hand-drawn diagrams or any artifact with high levels of human effort (for lack of a better term) contains something we lost in today's world.

Maybe we should reflect upon that, a bit.

91bananas 10/27/2025||

I definitely get this often vibe that: somewhat comparable things that take a lot more time often end up a lot better than things that take less time. It's like that commitment you make when you're doing something like this, the amount of effort, care and focus that must be exhibited to finish something like this document.

We should definitely reflect on that a lot.

bawolff 10/27/2025|||

This is also a catalouge to sell products in an era where producing them is expensive and you can't easily change it after the fact.

Its quite a different situation compared to your average clickbait.

People are more careful when you really only have one shot to make a good impression and you can't (cheaply) redo stuff if you mess it up.

ian-g 10/27/2025|||

Ironically with glass itself, it's the ones that take less time that tend to be better.

Especially any borosilicate glass with a hard edge

srmatto 10/27/2025|||

I had the same thought but I also wonder if these highly trained illustrators were happy with making corporate renderings or if they had imagined themselves working in a more creative capacity?

I also don't think its gone. We still have great illustrators but someone somewhere has to decide to use illustrations instead of a photo, CGI, or something else and then they have to pay the premium for that service.

OJFord 10/28/2025|||

I know nothing about the industry let alone in the era, but I imagine 'drawing glassware for Pyrex catalogue' wasn't a full-time job - but either a temporary contract, or just one project for an agency. So you might view it as an opportunity to perfect your drawing of glass, or just a boring gig but paying the bills.

If you reflect on your own profession & career though... Well, rather than speak for you, I too 'had imagined [myself] working in a more [x] capacity'!

iamtedd 10/27/2025|||

Who says they're not also being more creative elsewhere?

Plus wouldn't it be a sense of creative pride knowing that you can create an illustration that perfectly depicts refraction through glass, such that people find it hard to differentiate it from a photo? (which did exist in 1938)

To you second paragraph, the output of a CAD model is often used for line art of a product, and sometimes for an illustrated parts breakdown.

tokai 10/27/2025|||

The quality of layouting and print publications dropped off long long before AI slop became a thing. Already in the 80s it was mostly lost.

amonroe805-2 10/27/2025||

My heuristic is that quality is largely a function of human attention during creation. The transition to digital layouting etc meant less human attention could be spent on it while still achieving “acceptable” results, and so market dynamics ensured that less attention was spent on those tasks, lowering quality.

Whether or not you personally would make this cost/quality tradeoff comes down to the individual, but to me it is also quite clear that something was lost in the transition.

data-ottawa 10/27/2025||

I think another thing is a lot of modern stuff is under thought, either in trying to be overly broad or just misunderstanding the user.

Google Shopping is an example. It has enforced opinions about what a product looks like, so you have to force a square peg through a round hole.

They’ve got a lot of stuff about pricing and loyalty and quantities, but if you dig into tons of categories they have almost nothing that represents the real categories sellers and buyers care about.

Look at the collectibles category. If you sell Pokémon cards and collectibles there is zero merchandising info that actually matches your products or how they’re sold.

That means your analytics, automatic listings, ads, etc. are too generic for your customers. All your automated stuff is going to come through wrong.

Meanwhile niche and deep sellers who avoid that forced genericisation, like McMaster-Carr[1] can have these incredibly valuable, useful, and compelling catalogs.

I’d say that deep user knowledge is why Aperture had such a strong fan base too.

I struggle with this buying from Lee Valley. Their caralogs are fantastic, but I have trouble finding things on their website.

This turned into a rant, but maybe a TL;DR is a lot of modern software has no skin in the game of specialization, and so they inadvertently limit these experiences.

[1] mcmaster.com

cnity 10/27/2025||

Totally agreed. And as the sibling comment points out, it started before AI slop became a thing. I think it's because technological progress in typesetting means you don't have to "care" as much (it is automatic). Of course as a result, this means modern typesetting is "careless".

Extend this metaphor however you please.

ChuckMcM 10/27/2025||

Nice, page 13 has the 'standard' chemical labels which happened to also be the contents of a 'standard' chemistry set (minus a couple for me, like no concentrated sulphuric acid and only dilute nitric acid.)

One of the things that has always impressed me was mid 20th century laboratory equipment, lots of clever ways to achieve the required accuracy.

wyclif 10/27/2025||

I almost didn't click through to the catalog, but boy am I glad I did! Some of those drawings are so aesthetically pleasing.

etaioinshrdlu 10/27/2025||

My new theory, developing for a while, is that as technology makes things easier, the perceived average quality goes down over time. I've yet to fully understand the factors that drive this trend, but feel certain AI will put it in overdrive! I'm not a luddite or hater actually - but this trend is pretty apparent...

chrismorgan 10/28/2025|

Software typesetting/layout. Software music engraving. Hot-melt glue in bookbinding. Those are my three favourite examples of the definite trend. Technology has made good enough easier, at the cost of actually good.

robk 10/27/2025|

After college I got a Pyrex 5L erlenmeyer flask as a wine decanter and it's served me well two and a half decades later. Always a fun topic when people see it for the first time.

mNovak 10/27/2025|

I got a set of 25ml Erlenmeyer flasks to use as shot glasses. Also fun, and with the bonus feature that if you can't pour into the very narrow neck, you probably don't need a shot.

More comments...