Форум по искусству и инвестициям в искусство

Форум по искусству и инвестициям в искусство (https://forum.artinvestment.ru/index.php)
-   Appraisal (https://forum.artinvestment.ru/forumdisplay.php?f=16)
-   -   Fakes ... Fakes ... (https://forum.artinvestment.ru/showthread.php?t=48512)

21-03-2012 14:52

Puni, Jawlensky, Polyakov
 
3 Attachment(s)
Unknown Australian Auction WA Art Auctions: Claremont, Australia, Auction Date: April 9, 2012.

 

Lot 79:

IVAN POUGNY [PUNI] Russian /French 1894-1956 "The

IVAN POUGNY [PUNI] Russian /French 1894-1956 "The Orange Vase" Oil on paper, 60 x 48cms Signed lower left

Estimated Price: AUD5, 000 - AUD7, 000



Lot 62:

ALEXEI JAWLENSKY [Russian] 1864-1941 Untitled

ALEXEI JAWLENSKY [Russian] 1864-1941 Untitled Portriat Oil on paper supported on card, 63x44cms.
Signed lower centre Private Collection WA

Estimated Price: AUD15, 000 - AUD20, 000


Lot 66: SERGE POLIAKOFF [Russian] [attr.] Untitled Oil on

SERGE POLIAKOFF [Russian][attr.] Untitled Oil on canvas Signed lower left 21x24cms


Estimated Price: AUD1, 500 - AUD2, 500

Вивьен 27-03-2012 13:37

4 Attachment(s)
Dear forum members, I would like to introduce you to discuss the following story.
In one of the Odessa collection for many years kept the work of P. Nilus (unsigned).
The work is never reproduced anywhere else and not exposed.
Until the mid - 1980s the picture was in a family gathering one of the daughters K.K.Kostandi.
At the end of 2000 - ies in humans, enter into the family, was a photograph of this painting.
Some time later, in Odessa, I saw a copy of the original, written on the picture, also without a signature, only much bigger. Original - 48 cm on the larger side.
I take a picture of that copy was not possible.
After that, I opened a forum on the topic, which showed the true picture, in which participants can discuss who it depicts.
I showed pictures of three close friends - Nilus, and Lepeticha Bukovetskogo.
They came to the conclusion that the picture is Lepetich, Bukovetsky sits, Nilus wrote.
All participants of the discussion topic and is well remembered are still on the board.
After the opening theme, in my private messages, one participant wrote that he saw this painting at auction Corners in Kiev that it wanted to give up for auction, but there were a few controversial issues and it has not passed. To which I replied that it is not a picture of my theme, and a fake.
If this, my dear here many people will want to confirm this, I'll be happy.
Maybe someone from the Four Corners did a photo of that "failed" and will show it here.
I also told this story a few other users three years ago.

After that I asked to delete a theme, because it was a lot of personal information, which, unfortunately, already use it.

And recently, again pops up a copy of this picture Nilus, only this time with a signature at the bottom right corner and not in Odessa, as four years ago, and in Russia.
And with an interesting experimental conclusion in which the work is dated 1930-ies, and has a new name "in the living room."

Photos of expertise you can see below, and you can read it in detail.

I note for you, my friends, only a few fragments.

Читать дальше... 
first. In conclusion, it is written that the film follows the genre of the early P.Nilusa.
In the investigated product Nilus painted two of his friends - and Lepeticha Bukovetskogo.

This is after we have been actively discussing depicted on the forum, and I showed the pictures. Well, I was still not decided precisely with the woman in the picture, but that certainly would have pointed out, and her last name.
Now I know who is this woman has E.I.Bukovetskomu. But Russian experts have not guessed.
And identified only two of the three men.

The second point. corresponds to the interior in the living room in the house Bukovetskogo. It is written in prison.
Link to memories Muromtseva Bunin. Apparently these.
"rode up to him, we entered the main entrance doors high.
 I was impressed by the lobby on the wall hung a huge mural in shades of green. There also was a long kinking sofa, in front of him - a table lamp with a high. The owner took us up the broad staircase with a beautiful dark brown wooden railing.
 A two-storey mansion in Bukovetskogo was all trimmed with dark wood. With spacious grounds a small door led to the balcony, next to a cozy lounge and there was a great workshop - almost the entire window wall to the north - with easels, subframe, and a few portraits. "

And here, on this basis, no clear conclusion that it is an interior room Bukovetskogo.
Lord experts, lobby - is not living. Living room was on the second floor.
I am personally very familiar with all the rooms in the house of the prince, 27.
Since two years ago, was shot on the transfer of the house Bukovetskogo with my direct participation, and on my initiative.
 
Well at least stated that "in contrast to earlier works by the artist, palette and change the system fakturopostroeniya paint layer." Of course, it will change if he wrote for another artist photos at the end of 2000 - s!

The third point. The experts concluded that the product, despite the Russian-language signature, dated 30-ies of the 20th century. Nilus, more than a decade in exile in Paris, suddenly decided to portray his friend Lepeticha, who died from starvation and lack of money in 1922, young and black mustache.
And Bukovetskogo, who in the 30s were under seventy years - thirty-five!
Given the fact that P.Nilus, never returned to Odessa after his departure from it in Bulgaria December 24, 1919, old style, the writing on the memory of this work is simply unrealistic.

Especially since the original, presented here by me, really written by P. Nilus in the late 1890s - early 1900s, remained in Odessa.
I am very sorry that the expert who signs a conclusion, I presented a copy of the picture "might be of interest to an art museum."

Photo 1 - Original P.Nilusa of the Odessa collection.
Photos - 2,3,4 - and a copy of the Opinion.
If necessary, give the following messages in the close-up fragments of the true work.

Eriksson 27-03-2012 14:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vivian (Post 2040861)
The experts concluded that the product, despite the Russian-language signature, dated 30-ies of the 20th century.


Otherwise would be claims for pigments.


A remarkable investigation, Vivian, bravo!

John Preston 27-03-2012 14:46

This is how Irina so wrong ...
<! - ~ 4 ~ ->

27-03-2012 14:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by "Vivian; 2040861 '
If necessary, give the following messages in the close-up pieces of real work.



Vivian, thank you, and everything is clear.
The difference in skill incomparable.
Impudent forgery, and very dead, artificial.

Вивьен 27-03-2012 14:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by OlegTsi (Post 2040911)
shameless fake, and very dead, artificial.

So in fact it did with the photos ...

John Preston 27-03-2012 15:12

And what about the paint could petrify an elementary, if a fake "bungled" in the 2000s?

Is this not paying attention?

Toinen 27-03-2012 15:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by "John Preston; 2040901 '
This is how Irina so wrong ...



My signature allows you to find the answer.

27-03-2012 15:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Preston; 2040981"
And what about the paint could petrify an elementary , if a fake " bungled " in the 2000s ?

Already have the technology. At the eye to distinguish. But at the microscopic level , all the same it will be seen that the paint is old.
The problem is not . The problem is that experts are losing a sense of artistic vision and aesthetic. The blinding effect of money ...

Игорь Гурьев 27-03-2012 19:04

I, Comrade.
Vivian looked at the left picture and think: Nilus, Nilus as it is!

Well, today went poddelschiki not tell the difference!


Well, and then looked the picture on the right - and all became clear ...


All times are GMT +3. The time now is 00:22.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.