ACG, I think, you're wasting rests. Details raspisyvaya your methods, you will only convince a neutral-minded people, that these methods do not work, or at least, does not always work.
Sorry, you again carelessly read my text. In the previous text number 1997 - is, of course, no year directory, but the number under which the defective work that you entered into the catalog-reason (Maria Jawlensky, Lucia Pieroni-Jawlensky and Angelica Jawlensky "Catalogue Raisonne of the Oil Paintings. Volume Three 1934-1937.) other directories, reason for Jawlensky not exist.
By the way, you should not have resulted in his message to the link. You want to draw attention to the scandal with the fund Yavlensky, which emerged at the exhibition. The scandal, in fact, occurred, but the fund Yavlensky quickly enough to deal with this matter, and these pictures from an album ever in the catalog, a reason not included. So, fund its authority did not drop, but at the same link, there is mention of the Rozanova Blue fan, confirmed by examination Artkonsaltinga, and it is in vain: What do you think, why this masterpiece can not sell so many years? If at some gallery appeared real butter Rozanova of this size, collectors would be recorded in line with the night.
Dear Denis Lukashin, I'm not in any way trying to create a forumchan negative opinion about your great company, just sometimes better to admit mistakes, than to insist on them. I am very glad that you are not standing still and improve your my laboratory, and I wish you every success. By the way, I think everyone will be interesting if you tell a popular forum about your methods of Research, on the status of technological expertise in the west than you are superior to old Europe, and what lies ahead. I hope the site administration considers it advertising.
