Продам: Picture Zarubina

[AlexSpb]

As can be seen from the inscription on a label with the exhibition from private collections , the picture is called " Windmill " (not " rustic toilet ", as one might expect at first glance ). Of course , there is at this artist thing and better, but , but the price is quite reasonable - $ 4,000 .
By the way, the label error, in fact, oil on canvas on cardboard .
Bother with a great desire there is no confirmation - from the topic of Stozharov I firmly learned that the publication of any age Tretyakovsky bills. Directory of St. Petersburg's first show under my hand there , but I'm sure this is all right , and if anyone really set his face to get the thing , the right information will be found quickly. In addition , the subject comes from a respectable house, where he watched from the moment I first got there , it is already 15 years .
In this regard, I consider that to question the authorship Zarubina not make much sense .
PSVprochem , any creative fun , as well as assumptions such as that under the letter "Z" is not hiding who anyhow , and the great Zalupkin - welcome!

[Казак]

Сообщение от AlexSpb

According to the inscription on the label with the exhibition from private collections , the picture is called " Windmill " (not " rustic toilet ", as one might expect at first glance ). !

Do not want to sound " clever ", but if written by a mill, and I see that the mill , then why should the seller at his thing (which he wants to sell) to say the toilet ?

A new marketing ploy ?

[serj]

Fuflyachoks ....

[Art-ort]

Сообщение от serj

Fuflyachoks ....

and pochemus?

[Казак]

Сообщение от serj

Fuflyachoks ....

There is no reason at this stage, so unreasonable to characterize the work.

[Art-ort]

there was a new breed of "Internet based experts" - "fuflicheks" and into the bushes <! - ~ 1 ~ ->

[serj]

This is my personal mnenie.Zarubin (especially in the late 90's) I came across quite often.
When you make a positive assessment, I admit that I was not prav.A so far I have this opinion.

[Toinen]

Сообщение от "serj; 2015981 '

This is my personal opinion

This is what we learned!
But I would like some specifics, that it was not like it?

[Тютчев]

Сообщение от serj

Fuflyachoks ....

Сообщение от Cossack

There is no reason at this stage , so unreasonable to characterize the work .

That's right, no reason to doubt the authenticity of the pictures there . It is currently Zarubin . And besides, on the back of a exhibition label, the text of which coincides with the text of the catalog :

[serj]

Convincingly.
But often for such directories and do falshakov.
We need all the same assessment, though ....
maybe nature)