![]() |
Pisemsky, Alexey
Вложений: 3
Help determine the price.
22h26. Oil. Bulletin of mahogany. |
This is not Pisemsky.
|
Цитата:
|
In general, the work is very pleasant, professional!
Added after 2 minutes 29 minutes Цитата:
|
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: |
Цитата:
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. |
Цитата:
|
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.