Konchalovsky

[Игорь Гурьев]

I am afraid that the real thing.

[Серафима Вершинина]

Interestingly, while the number on the back of the same number from the catalog Raisonné-Konchalovsky?
If yes - have to take <! - ~ 1 ~ ->.

[Eriksson]

Price is right , even a little understated for the 30s . The size is quite " Konchalovsky ." Provenance mutnovat.V registry fund such work there , but it means nothing. I also think that too clearly in those years did not write the RFP , but it can be blamed on the photo ... It seems to me - quite a PPC ...

Posted 15 minutes

Сообщение от Seraphim Vershinin ; 2133551"

Interestingly, while the number on the back of the same number from the catalog Raisonné - Konchalovsky ? If yes - we must take

Am submitting clarity. Konchalovsky has no complete reason. There are so -called registry works, which is constantly updated . Over a lifetime, PPK has written more than three thousand works, and in the registry until at least a thousand . The number on the back indicates that the film has passed through the family and the fund , but otstutvie number is not evidence that the work is not true .

[Игорь Гурьев]

From the book.
Konchalovsky.
The artistic heritage.


A hunter with a dog.
In 1933.
Located in Paris.


Number is the same.

Size is not there.




So now Peter.

What, however, and can be seen.

Added after 3 minutes

Сообщение от Eriksson

number on the back indicates that the film has passed through the family and the foundation,

Not at all.

This is the artist had in mind.

[Серафима Вершинина]

Сообщение от Eriksson

otstutvie number is not evidence that the work is not true.

Clear the stump!
But better still and calm, when the number is, and it coincides with the existing, though not complete, it is reasonable ...
<! - ~ 1 ~ ->

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Сообщение от Eriksson; 2133561"

price is correct, even a little understated for the 30s .

First, it's all the same estimate , is old , I think it will be around 80 tons
And second , the " too low " : a lot of things now exits Konchalovsky's second quarter of the twentieth century?
'33 , Of course , better than the 55 th , but not by much , if the commercial side to watch.
And how has being discussed by looking at the thing? From an artistic ? So there, in my opinion, and there is no art .

[Eriksson]

Сообщение от Kirill Syzran

a lot of things now exits Konchalovsky's second quarter of the twentieth century?

A little bit.
They go well early work, but without the hype.
Example - Christie's last.

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Сообщение от Eriksson

example - Christie's last.

And Sotheby's.
But there were in '10 and 18th.

[Мира]

Сообщение от Cyril Syzran

And how has being discussed by looking at the thing? From an artistic ? So there, in my opinion, and there is no art .

You're right , from the artistic side of the picture does not capture the spirit can not be said about the price. In the authorship doubted , because I remember his other work , " meat " where the artist can be seen a mile away .

The picture all this time the family was a French diplomat , who bought it in Moscow before leaving.
The number on the back - 1078.
After a couple of months , I think it will pop up in some Moscow gallery .

[redbor]

Сообщение от World

picture of all time was in the family of a French diplomat, who bought it in Moscow before his departure.

In what year it bought a diplomat, it is unknown?

If you recall, what kind of things are sold to foreigners, it is likely antiprovenans.
<! - ~ 1 ~ ->