Форум по искусству и инвестициям в искусство

Форум по искусству и инвестициям в искусство (https://forum.artinvestment.ru/index.php)
-   Costs, valuation, attribution (https://forum.artinvestment.ru/forumdisplay.php?f=6)
-   -   Pisemsky, Alexey (https://forum.artinvestment.ru/showthread.php?t=69872)

kornilyev 15.04.2010 15:18

Pisemsky, Alexey
 
Вложений: 3
Help determine the price.
22h26. Oil. Bulletin of mahogany.

аркан 15.04.2010 20:04

This is not Pisemsky.

U_Z 15.04.2010 20:40

Цитата:

Сообщение от kornilyev (Сообщение 1039522)
Pisemsky, Alexei Alexandrovich

Of course, not him. I mean, can the light was still on the artist AA Pisemsky, but we do not think about it.

Артём 15.04.2010 20:48

In general, the work is very pleasant, professional!

Added after 2 minutes 29 minutes
Цитата:

Сообщение от U_Z (Сообщение 1040082)
Of course, he is not.

Arguments. Why did not he? A signature is not his, but it is nothing said. Suppose some Basil signed. And? And here the work itself?

Госпожа 16.04.2010 23:16

Вложений: 2
In my opinion, the work is weak, written in broad strokes without kokogo an attention to detail. In Pysems'kogo all worked out, the first plan always was registered in detail (grass, flowers). The trees in this work, in general, any planar, there is no way of space, a little too primitive, boat, generally feel that a couple of strokes written or nuances or what not.
Here's our two processing to compare:

U_Z 17.04.2010 00:10

Цитата:

Сообщение от Artem (Сообщение 1040112)
Arguments. Why did not he? A signature is not his, but it is nothing said. Suppose some Basil signed.

I agree, instead of "of course, is not he." I ought to write the following: "In my opinion, not AA Pisemsky.
Excuse me, but if some work, but we saw a lot of them here, will be a signature, for example, "Stozharau" I also need to prove that it is not. Anyone who puts his signature on this work and to work Stozharau (Stazharau, in this case, it is a good example) not even close to feeling manner, culture, writing, etc. artist.

PS: I assume already tired of looking at the signature "L. Turzhansky, even in jobs with attribution of experts and organizations.

Артём 17.04.2010 09:44

Цитата:

Сообщение от "Madam, 1042171
In my view, the work is weak

First, (good treatment is obtained :)) job well. What you have shown - this thoughtful picture, and the work shown by the author topic - this is nature studies! You've seen a lot of sketches Pysems'kogo? I'm not. And the fact that it is not Pisemsky I can not say the same as that - it Pisemsky. And what you do not like the boat? Another point that the work cheap, but it could be fooled by him.eksp., Compare paint tree trunks with the signature.

Госпожа 20.04.2010 00:17

In my opinion, it is simply oversubscribed work, Chem. examination will not change anything, it can only indicate that the layer of paint and canvas or older, or younger than the expected date. And even if it coincides with the assumption that this proves not opravergnit authenticity.
Assuming that this sketch, then why sign it once it is either a working version, or not finished.
In any case, the authenticity of the painting can argue ad infinitum, and lead, different argument: the less successful work, but the author, not a finished sketch it.d. Commercial values it represents, not for katolozhnyh sales of such work packs sold, and the more it raises doubts.
Then leave it to your court, but she does not convince me.


Часовой пояс GMT +3, время: 01:01.

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