Pyrex Catalog From From 1938 with Hand-Drawn Lab Glassware [pdf]
Key topics
A 1938 Pyrex catalog featuring hand-drawn lab glassware has been shared, sparking appreciation for the craftsmanship and nostalgia for the past, while also touching on themes of quality, technology, and the value of human effort.
Snapshot generated from the HN discussion
Discussion Activity
Very active discussionFirst comment
25m
Peak period
53
0-6h
Avg / period
10.6
Based on 74 loaded comments
Key moments
- 01Story posted
Oct 27, 2025 at 11:04 AM EDT
2 months ago
Step 01 - 02First comment
Oct 27, 2025 at 11:29 AM EDT
25m after posting
Step 02 - 03Peak activity
53 comments in 0-6h
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03 - 04Latest activity
Oct 31, 2025 at 12:14 PM EDT
2 months ago
Step 04
Generating AI Summary...
Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns
Want the full context?
Jump to the original sources
Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.
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.
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.
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
We should definitely reflect on that a lot.
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.
Especially any borosilicate glass with a hard edge
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.
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.
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'!
Extend this metaphor however you please.
"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/...
Uppercase is no guarantee:
* https://libanswers.cmog.org/faq/398431
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2DKasz4xFC0
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.
'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.)
As an informed human being who happens to buy things from time to time you should definitely know the difference though.
- 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.
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).
Does anyone know which fonts (or, probably more importantly, which modern-day equivalents) are used to get this feeling?
I enjoy using it for reading and writing code.
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)
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/...
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.
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.
https://archive.org/details/stanley-catalogue-34-1929/page/6...
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...
To me, they all look like valid beer vessels.
>Within its 128 pages will be found 2353 individual items, 737 of which have not been listed previously. From the many advances made in the field of glass laboratory apparatus during the past few years, we have attempted to select for listing in this catalog those items of proven worth, and for which there is a definite demand on the part of chemists.
A lot of the same PYREX items used for routine lab testing today are also identical to the ones in this book.
At Florida the original Chemistry Building was from 1917 and when I got there in the early 1970's the full glassblowing department was still there from when most of the specialized items were not available commercially.
Plus research always needs custom work.
Starting my career I always had big old kilo-sized hard-bound catalogs from suppliers of more generalized apparatus, in addition to being PYREX dealers, where plenty of the random illustrations were the same decades-old original art. And that was well into the 1990's.
It was just not that unusual for art like this to remain unchanged for decades.
In the early 1970's the UF labs themselves had never been rebuilt since original construction [0], no air conditioning of course, and as a freshman there were still quite a few pieces of glassware having the old logo about this age or older. Right in some of the drawers of each undergrad's PYREX, stocked for that semester's "experiments".
The old logo is basically exactly as shown on the cover of this catalog, as that baked green colored circle containing fine print around PYREX, strongly marked onto the glass.
I would estimate about 10% or more had survived for decades under assault by butterfingered freshmen without breakage. Anecdotal statistics tell me that a sizable percentage of those had been dropped more than once, and survived. IOW, they bounced :) Overcame the same type impact that had destroyed many of their less-robust brethren.
Last but not least:
>Type 930 Tubing "CORNING" Brand Electrode Glass No. 015 (Mclnnis & Dole)
>Furnished in tubing form with a wall thickness of about 0.5 to 1.2 mm, depending on diameter, and in 3 foot lengths. Of proper composition for use in the fabrication of thin glass membranes for measuring the hydrogen-ion activity or pH. Reference: The Determination of Hydrogen-ions, W. M. Clark, William and Wilkens, Baltimore, 1928; Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, Analytical Edition 37 (1929); Journal of the American Chemical Society, 53 , 4260 (1931); Public Health Reports, Vol. 45, No. 38, Sept. 19, 1930.
>Since " CORNING " Brand No. 015 Glass is not a stable glass , it has a tendency to deteriorate when stored. For this reason it is advisable to purchase this particular glass only in such quantities as are required for current needs.
By the following year (1939) Beckman would commercialize his first instrument, a pH meter, ushering in the era of electronic pH meters using glass electrodes where the glass itself is the high-impedance electrochemical contact.
[0] Remodeling was long overdue after fifty years, even the stairs in the stairwell were halfway worn out. There was an excellent new building right adjacent to it though :)
Edit: Not my downvote, btw, corrective upvote instead :0
Today these are like $300 at least, and I'm guessing they cannot be made in the USA. (I would be glad to be wrong)
edit: ok with inflation from 1938 it's not so incomparable. But still.
It's still one of the major glassblowing countries. In fact, if you remember when folks were worried about those two quartz mines in Spruce Pine, NC that are the only place with pure enough quartz for chips? That's also the home of Spruce Pine Batch, one of the big glass suppliers in America.
https://gallery.lib.umn.edu/exhibits/show/pre-separated-art/...
It's incredible to a layperson, and if you've ever done any glass working whatsoever you'll be moved close to tears.
One of the things that has always impressed me was mid 20th century laboratory equipment, lots of clever ways to achieve the required accuracy.
You don’t know what you have untill you lose it.