Продам: I.Krachkovsky, selling picture

[Дилетант]

Сообщение от alabino2; 2411811"

Worthy - this as a request for " Azaleas "?

I do not know how many searches for " Azaleas ", but I know for sure : first , to request anything (seven times less five times ) - it would be bad to study painting. And make sure it is genuine and not just in the plot similarities. This is - the program maximum. A minimum program - to make at least a couple of high-quality photos. (Minimum-minimorum - not a mobile phone ). Well, at least out of respect for the dead ...

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Сообщение от alabino2; 2411811"

Worthy - this as a request for " Azaleas "?

Why do you need to focus on the huge " Azaleas " with a kind of mad the estimate ? This thing has been sold and is not , of course, has long exhibited .
You better be focused on the price of " Wisteria in bloom " there - and a recent auction, and on the size of your more suitable sold this thing.
But all these pritsenki -estimates are appropriate, as it is said Amateur, after examination , of course.
Photographs by this signature is very similar, but the flowers themselves - not really.

[Дилетант]

Сообщение от Cyril Syzran

Here is the look

Thanks, looked (and even dragged a burrow).
But as well-known character of Jerome, absolutely not understand: what is the relationship between a shark and a bagpipe (well, except the motive and the author's name) ...

This I do not find fault.
This is me - puzzled.
>

[kr555]

Сообщение от Amateur , 2412001

Thanks, looked (and even dragged a burrow ). But as well-known character of Jerome , absolutely not understand: what is the relationship between a shark and a bagpipe (well, except the motive and the author's name ) ...
This I do not find fault . This is me - puzzled . >

Only there is a picture on the site by color is terrible, here in Kommersant much more natural
http://kommersant.ru/dark-gallery.ht...pics_id=661851
And no doubt there is no connection , just like the estimate >

[uriart]

Cyril Syzran, you forgot to specify the size of the work sold .
And that absolutely no little (! ) That the price of a spread on the peak prices of Russian art.
It is wrong to mislead the seller.
Still cute and very small size.
And it is wrong to rely on such a huge price ( it is not clear whether that work is sold ? There will write what was and what was not!) .

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Сообщение от uriart

you forgot to specify the size of the work sold.

Is what?
I gave two examples.

[uriart]

Cyril Syzran, but that's about it:


in 2007 - his "Autumn" then went for 180,500 GBP (375,548 USD)

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Сообщение от uriart

Cyril Syzran, but that's about it:

in 2007 - his "Autumn" then went for 180,500 GBP ( 375,548 USD)

Then read my post carefully.
I advised him not to focus on the estimate " Azaleas " in 750-800 thousand cu, because in fact the most expensive thing Krachkovsky today was sold for 375.5 thousand dollars.
You see my point? >

[uriart]

Cyril Syzran, but those "Azaleas" nobody has bought it!

And all because of an imaginary price.

If the price of putting real, it probably would have found a job and a new host.

And so, to this day ....
and ever and ever and ever!

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Сообщение от uriart

Cyril Syzran, but those " Azaleas " nobody has bought it!
 

Once again you force me to quote myself :

Сообщение от Cyril Syzran ; 2411961"

Why do you need to focus on the huge " Azaleas " with some estimate of insane ?
This thing is not sold and was, of course, and had long been exhibited .

I advise you , uriart, read my posts. Just read the least. >