Beware of fake

[Тютчев]

Сообщение от Guriev, Igor

I can give you plenty of examples where graphic sketch copied in oil painting.

If you found such a brilliant forger Kustodiev, why do we not see the other "Kustodiev", as distinct?

Or do you think that he got the money and calmed down?

But with such talent, and his paintings can write on kustodievskie theme perfectly go!

Igor Guriev, I just write and that the artist can move from sketch to the picture image, but that he does not mechanistic, as in our case. This applies especially to the artist Kustodiev BM. Not his level!

Forgery of good quality, but still shows that it is a fake.

And it is written not as did Kustodiev. Kustodiyev created, and this is a Kustodieva done. You see, there is a difference. Compare!

And then, imitation is made not only with the use of the work that I brought. Usage and other works Kustodiev. She gathered by the constructor of its various activities.

That's compare this work Kustodieva and counterfeiting:

[artcol]

Сообщение от Tjutchev

Igor Guriev, I just write and that the artist can move from sketch to the picture image, but that he does not MIHANISTICHNO, as in our case. This applies especially to the artist Kustodiev BM. Not his level!

Forgery of good quality, but still shows that it is a fake.

And it is written not as did Kustodiev. Kustodiyev created, and this is a Kustodieva done. You see, there is a difference. Compare!

And then, imitation is made not only with the use of the work that I brought. Usage and other works Kustodiev. She gathered by the constructor of its various activities.

That's compare this work Kustodieva and counterfeiting:

Yes, emptiness работка kind. Like everything, but there is no Kustodieva. Do not feel the hand of the master, such as robkovato. My IMHO.

[Кирилл Сызранский]

The auction house gives buyers a guarantee of 5 years. If during this time, two experts recognize the product of false and their conclusions will be approved by the buyer and Christie's, the money paid for the work will be returned.

In the "Catalogue of fraud" was another job, sold at Christie's, - the landscape winter sun in the pine forest ", allegedly written by the artist Andrew Schilder. Landscape was sold for 8,5 thousand pounds at auction, held in July 2000. Shortly after the auction from the new owner began to doubt the authenticity of the paintings, and he turned to the experts. May 30, 2001 Christie's to cancel the sale.

Among the other forgeries - "Summer fishing lake in the woods" Elijah Ostroukhova, sold at Sotheby's in May 2002. Auction house spokesman said that over the attribution of the painting to him nobody addressed.

http://artinvestment.ru/news/artnews...kustodiev.html

[artcol]

Сообщение от Cyril Syzranskiy

http://artinvestment.ru/news/artnews...kustodiev.html

I hope there in the queue do not need to stand for getting money back and fill the cloud reference.

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Сообщение от artcol

I hope there in the queue do not need to stand for getting money back and fill the cloud reference.

No, of course.
I went in, as the time chosen, pulled out bags of the picture, got my 3 lemons and went on to London for a walk.

[Wladzislaw]

Сообщение от Tjutchev

But in all these cases the "transfer" still should not be mechanistic (at least this is true with respect to Kustodiev). There is always a difference. I mean, should not be mechanistic copy, and it is always visible, if it is. In our case, just a place to be is mihanisticheskoe copying from another work Kustodieva.

I like it, not particularly impressed by such arguments. In contrast you can write something that is not less twisty, such as - "the artist has developed successfully found a way, strengthening the visual display of character move to the interior, using the scratch iskustno the prescribed environment to focus on the central image composition. Or any similar nonsense ...

[artcol]

Сообщение от Guriev, Igor

He died?

Well report back.

Where buried, at what age, etc.

**************

[Тютчев]

Сообщение от Wladzislaw

I like it, not particularly impressed by such arguments.

Sorry, but you do not enter the number of people to whom I would like to make an impression.

Added a 53 seconds

Сообщение от Wladzislaw

In contrast you can write something that is not less twisty, such as - "the artist has developed successfully found a way, strengthening the visual display of character move to the interior, using the scratch iskustno the prescribed environment to focus on the central image of the song" . Or any similar nonsense ...

Based on the fact that I have written you call "nonsense", I conclude that you do not understand. But on the other hand, why did you have to understand it? We know that everyone has at least some relation to art, consider themselves in it. Believe me, it's dangerous delusion! In the consolation you can say that these people very much. And, oddly enough, many of them, and this is particularly dramatic among those who have special education and forced to work professionally in this field. Believe me, I know whereof I speak. I constantly have to deal with such "experts".

Why does the mere existence of a diploma does not guarantee penetration into the subject? That's the mystery? Why is the inheritance of some - limited knowledge of the biographical data about the artist, and another is given something more? Here's how I explain to you what it means to "mechanistic image transfer" if you do not understand them? If not understood, it is hardly ever understand. This does not mean that you have some narrow-minded people. Surely you are smart and well read. But there are things that need more than to know. It is necessary to feel. However, there is ample professional term - "see"! If you see something - you see, but not see - nothing is done.
 
I assure you, I'm not going to answer. I refuse to explain to you what you do not understand. I'm just genuinely puzzled about your difficulty. I think that it is easier than I had written, impossible to write. There are artists who circulate the once found a good image, transferring it from a picture of the picture. Yes, it really happens. But even here, as a rule (it depends on the level of the artist), there are no stupid transfer modules from one job to another. So it was unusual for Kustodiev even so-called "replicating the image, not to mention the" dumb move modules.
     
I hope now you understand?

[Wladzislaw]

Сообщение от Tjutchev

From what I have written you call" nonsense ", I conclude that you do not understand.

Brad, I called what I wrote for a few seconds. Art criticism reasoning, though not very far. And education, as you rightly pointed out, not particularly often. I know two such professions who have no correlation with their education - journalists and critics. Empty phrases. Oh sorry, but your maxim no less empty than my inventions (discussed on the picture).

[Тютчев]

Сообщение от Wladzislaw

Brad, I called what I wrote for a few seconds. Art criticism reasoning, though not very far. And education, as you rightly pointed out, not particularly often. I know two such professions who have no correlation with their education - journalists and critics. Empty phrases. Oh sorry, but your maxim no less empty than my allegations (discussed on the picture).

You absolutely made it clear he believes what I have written about counterfeits Kustodiev, delirium. I was not hurt. I'm just surprised that you do not understand such obvious things for me. And I tried as best he could, to explain why this is possible. Although, of course, explain this in two words can not. It's too complicated question and I myself do not understand everything. Let's not tackle the overburden ...

The best answer, two questions, please

1. You always, you can not understand, call the "emptiness" or "nonsense"? Or you have in reserve, there are other words?
 
2. And the most important question you what I wrote about the forgery, understand? Or, still, still, believe it "nonsense"?

If something is not clear, formulate questions and I answer them.