Accused seeks to blame ...)

In general, this picture would have to move to the subject of forgery.
Everything is very clear.
There are two fake photos, and original.

OlegTsi
I can not agree with you, because your conclusions do not seem to me sufficient.

The points.

A. Where you saw the canvas? This is not a canvas, how do you write a paper,

Two. How did you know that Hungarian "fake" (if this is fake, it is that has been exposed, where, when and by whom?) Earlier in time than shown me?

You do not see any live or other work, and the original, too, how can you make such a definitive conclusion?

Three. The basis of your "method" is to find an artist notorious original and based on the similarity of all like to declare it a forgery. But this method is flawed, unnecessarily from the artist is and repeats, and development issues. Take Picasso least half of his work can be written in bullshit, if you follow your logic. And then, here you write "I assume that your imitation of Archipenko fabricated with a similar forgery, which was once sold to a private person in Hungary. Unfortunately, nothing more to say you can not."
And why is this picture, and not from the Archipenko "Woman with a Mirror", 1916,?

4. Assert that the prevalence of artistic and compositional qualities of the original Archipenko recognized over the questionable work can probably only a very big fan of Archipenko. For many self-Archipenko malopriemlem a very artistic and compositional side.

Five. And yet, no serious expert and a specialist will not be so categorical, with only uninformative photographs.

I understand that this resource, you are a recognized authority, as you say, so be it, can be written in a fake anything on paper can endure, but that's the base, evidence base, it is just lame, so that such categorization is unlikely will benefit you personally and share as a whole.
Once again, I repeat, the picture is not mine, I also doubt it eriginalnost were asked to put up and ask the experts say so, but your "evidence" seem to me inadequate.

Please protect me from the charge of rudeness from a particularly violent your fans, I was most correct. Nothing personal ...
Would you like to answer, respond with arguments, please, no poetry, such as

"The original work of such a plan has its own history - that's three.
If it was a seminal work, it would be so easy to not get into this topic with a question: "

.........
Mf.7 6 .......

TUNER, I'm sorry , but we just "did not see" the subject to talk about repetition .. etc.
The main argument - ignorance execution.
Further evidence and the argument is meaningless.
And such rough work is not necessarily seen live, to have a definitive opinion about it .

Asked to put up and ask the experts ? Well , you got it.
Look at the amount agreed with the opinion OlegTsi. If this does not convince you , nobody can forbid you to stay with her ​​, only my wish to you - be still more carefully , do not fall to her in a bad history.

A strange kind of theme .
I see in her first request message :
Some of the members of the forum featured a thing seemed fake.
Topic author obyasnyaet :
Well , it would seem , and everything necessary to convey the opinion vladetsu members of the forum , and most remain unconvinced, TB, as I see, the topic was "himself with a mustache ":

 <! - ~ 7 ~ ->

Mt.
5.44




---------------

- Beneficial effect of fasting, not otherwise <! - ~ 1 ~ ->

TUNER, this picture will be yours FOREVER!

Especially with your aplomb!

You are waiting for the big "opening" <! - 7 ~ ~ -> <! - 7 ~ ~ -> <! - ~ 7 ~ ->