And yet, one of them a real van Gogh?
 

I'm reading now, Van Gogh's correspondence with his brother, he was a wonderful man, a special insanity did not notice. Yes, a lot of personal experiences, loosely health ... through it are not only creative people, but also the most ordinary, so that his suicide, is a step, but rather a moment of weakness, IMHO of course. And re-read the topic about forgery in LSR, thanks to her very much for all threads created by it:)
I want to ask everyone who is of the Van Gogh, this, in your opinion:)
"Portrait of Dr. Gachet." Arles, June, 1890., Oil on canvas, 73x60. Private collection, or "Portrait of Dr. Gachet." Auvers, June 1890. Oil on canvas, 68h57, Paris, Musée d'Orsay, France

I think the first real, but one that in Orsay fake:)
What do you say?;)

And what you were guided by expressing such an assumption?

Carefully examined the backgrounds have different images and have Orseshnogo he was already very smooth. Well, of course, intuition;)
OOO! And not only I noticed, that's from an article translated LSR:
"The second version of the famous portrait of Dr. Gachet, which is stored in the Museum d'Orsay, which in the artist's letters, there is absolutely no mention, is very questionable authorship. Jean-Marie Tass, the critic in Le Figaro, which we are obliged to identify inconsistencies in the" Garden at Auvers "I am confident that this work is a fake, as well as the Van Gogh self-portrait from the collection of the Metropolitan in New York."

And he could not do two portraits?

eva777, I look at both and the second, more with the dark background does not cause the desire to become its owner.

I too think that first, due too russet and somehow especially torchashchikh from under caps hair. So specially not invent. Regards letters I too agrees, his correspondence impresses.

Mog and the two do, but the second is not mentioned anywhere and, as noted
uriart, you do not want to hang myself on the wall. Intuition resist:)

Amusing discussion.
Oh just for connoisseurs of art, Van Gogh.
But I also wanted to "insert their 5 kopecks" (sorry for the banal phrase, but it very accurately on the site).

I would never have thought that one of the pictures - the possibility of forgery, if it were not for this topic. Looked more closely, and that's what drew the attention of:

- In the first scene, though the whole situation goes to show that it is - the room (a table with books, and light on a figure similar to the light from the lamp "on top"), von registered soon as a landscape - the slope of the stroke as on the surface of the landscape, and a the upper edge of the landscape \ sofa no zakorugleny smear "the wall" that would be needed if it were a couch (after Van Gogh when he writes, distinct strokes, always puts them "in form"). Also - for the couch already very shapeless. And given the fact that the figure is illuminated from above rather, the horizontal surface of the back of the sofa, too, must have had to be illuminated by more than a vertical surface of the back of the sofa. And so, again, more like "aerial perspective" - the gradual darkening of the illumination of distant hills.
And behind the head - much like the way he wrote the sky, and a great depth of feeling. Well somehow the sofa with the wall so do not write.
  And the second scene, the line between the hills \ heaven (or the sofa \ wall?)
  become more amorphous, the upper plane (the sky \ wall?) spelled out exactly how the wall (ie, as Van Gogh wrote, flat surface) - strokes, reaching under 90 degrees to each other.

Of course, if one painting - the landscape, but on the other - a sofa and the wall, it does not prove anything. But all the same gives the hook - copier did not see that written in the landscape, and made room.
And that, would not run up against possible inaccuracies, made his "flaccid" (well, kind - where he was - I do not remember). And Van Gogh is usually very relishing the situation.
Here's a IMHO.

netserg, In my opinion you are right! But fear now is that they both now causes me to doubt, because, in fact, and in another pile of any inaccuracies, for which Van Gogh, by definition, was not able to!:)
And now with this order them to do ?!:);)

I drew attention to the expression of the person (s) of both doctors. At first it was just sad, but the second one (presumably bogus) - very sad ...:)

We have opened the book with black and white illustrations of "Masters of art about art" selected excerpts from letters, diaries, speeches and treatises, Moscow-Leningrad, 1939 It also published a letter from Van Gogh. So, in her portrait of Dr. Gachet number 2.

"Are currently working on his portrait: his head in a white cap, very bright and very bright hair, hands, too blond, blue jacket and cobalt background. He sat leaning against the red table, where is the yellow book and a sprig of purple foxglove flowers. Thing is to make with the same mood as my self-portrait that I took with him when he left here. Mr. Gachet in a crazy excited about this portrait, and demands that I, if I may, wrote to him exactly the same as me, and most want to done. Now he was finally assessed and the last portrait "Arlezianki" - you have a pink version of this picture. Whenever Gachet watching my studies, he returned to these two portraits and unrestrained admiration for them. " excerpt from a letter, I was beginning to bow down to the fact that perhaps I was mistaken, but then read as described in detail paints a portrait, again returned to their opinion. Perhaps a portrait of Dr. written by Van Gogh, but then he rewrote or finish, or I was completely confused: confused: Do not be me VanGogovedom: D
And yet, first I like, here's nothing I can do.

Here, he wrote him another such portrait, jerry ... Yellow over, and everything was in a sad blue-blue ...:)

I give my opinion as it draws people.
Call portraits of yellow and brown.
The yellow buttons are, and they were a little crooked pririsoval, especially the top, T e is likely not from nature. And they were added due to the fact that against the author let the green lines. Green buttons of the same color created a game - lines, circles. Also, fill in these buttons in Photoshop and see that the background will come out, it must be something to balance large in the foreground. Balance the buttons.
If the buttons were on the portrait, which was written originally, copyist would certainly have their pririsoval-case quite simple enough.
Same with digitalis. Dark blue foxglove barely visible on a blue background, so was the idea of two-color - pink and blue. Bichromatic naperstyanok not happen. There are gradations of color, but not from pink to blue.
A hand holding up the person on a brown painted a portrait of better quality and realistic. Cap on a brown portrait, too, is better on the yellow, it just does not fly down from the head. Eyes on the brown-realistic in red at this age, they are burnt, they are on the yellow portrait of a dark-blue-red with these do not happen.
Thus, all indications are that the first portrait was painted brown. The author then saw all their shortcomings - his hair does not burn, foxglove merged, background does not give perspective. He has written a new picture, where everything is taken into account. Probably already written to the first portrait.
Coloristic you to receive calls. For the sake of coloristic glare he recorded the red table, so there was no plane in red.

The second portrait was painted early first-bright.

[color="# 666686"]Posted 1 hour 53 minutes[/color]
tested this theory very easily, should call the Department of Health and to ask in a particular year, in the form of a doctor in an overcoat buttons were out and what color?

Van Gogh often did repeats his paintings, especially when bestowed, because that felt a responsibility to his brother. This is in his letters. The first portrait he gave the doctor it seems, while the second could easily be done. Or vice versa. For fakes too deliberately-known work. The paint eventually dries up and utonshaetsya and he sometimes tried to "try".