AP Bogolyubov (1824-1896). Ship

[SergeiSK]

John Preston,
Working with the auction or dealer offers private?

[John Preston]

Сообщение от SergeiSK

John Preston,
Working with the auction or dealer offers private?

Private ...

[SergeiSK]

John Preston,
Buy absentia is always a risk ... But we know - nothing ventured ....
You are given the correct advice - let the dealer write provenance of this picture, it is desirable to know who she was before. It is also desirable that the dealer, but there the best art critic described it in detail, a gap in the UV-rays, etc., ie, made an initial inspection and description. If the dealer wants to sell now, then he will do it.
I bought in absentia in France, the Russian artist now the 19 th century. At my request, all of the above made the expert from the Louvre. Especially liked the fact that at the beginning of the description he gave his entire biography, work experience, what, where and when finished, and that his father was also an expert restorer at the Louvre the same
I was in your picture is one troubling - the signature is absolutely identical to the model of the signature contained in the directory hierarchy Soloviev (p.48). Simply twins signature. It's more bad than good. Although I may be wrong ...

[Тютчев]

Сообщение от SergeiSK

John Preston,
Buy absentia is always a risk ... But we know - nothing ventured ....
You are given the correct advice - let the dealer write provenance of this picture, it is desirable to know who she was before. It is also desirable that the dealer, but there the best art critic described it in detail, a gap in the UV-rays, etc., ie, made an initial inspection and description. If the dealer wants to sell now, then he will do it.
I bought in absentia in France, the Russian artist now the 19 th century. At my request, all of the above made the expert from the Louvre. Especially liked the fact that at the beginning of the description he gave his entire biography, work experience, what, where and when finished, and that his father was also an expert restorer at the Louvre the same
I was in your picture is one troubling - the signature is absolutely identical to the model of the signature contained in the directory hierarchy Soloviev (p.48). Simply twins signature. It's more bad than good. Although I may be wrong ...

You are not mistaken. Unfortunately. Everything else is too logical. Let him do due diligence and do not fool our John. Dodger!: Mad:

[uriart]

Ah, those French dealers, traders!
They like to hear Russian speech, immediately submit their pockets full of euros!
And will you cajole and sweet singing voice! As Sirens of myth of Odysseus. And then devour! In the sense of your money, and you never see them again ever (money!). But the memory remains the picture of dubious origin.
Not teshte myself that this Bogolyubov!
There, all roads are open to all auction houses!
And why sell the work for cheap Russian, if you can sell at auction for expensive, again, the same Russian.
I once went to one aukts.dom before selling and asked to sell me a job. Estimate was 2-2500evro. I asked him immediately ready cash 50 000. He did not return. Started telling me stories about different customs, etc.
At the auction, I stopped at $ 103 000. The work was sold for 110 000 euros.
Do you believe different tales?
Blessed is he who believes!

[John Preston]

Provenance in pictures rather shaky, indeed.
The dealer told me that he won this painting in the American auction (in Ohio) in 2004
He sent me pictures with a signature under ultraviolet light.
What are the views on this?

And what exactly is wrong in this picture that some might say on this subject dear Tjutchev and uriart?
A bad drawing of the ship, weak syuzhetets?

[uriart]

My opinion is that the alien need not sell to an individual picture of such a famous and sought after today, the author. When the auction (if it's him!) Profitable. Perederutsya!
Second.
I looked through the entire collection from the Saratov Museum. No there is such "sentimental" works.
Nothing much to add.

[Тютчев]

John, signature means absolutely nothing in any given case, nor in any other. The presence of even the most signatures will not make this painting better. It happens that the signature "suggest" to the real thing. To make the subject matter of significance. The reason that the picture may appear the most unexpected autograph abound. (Counterfeiting, smuggling, inheritance issues, etc., etc.). If the paintings attributed only to the signature, then all would be too simple and not interesting. Painting this picture (at least) and not a signature. Older collectors joked: "The picture is real, despite the presence of a signature". Signature - this is nothing. Forget it. This is fufel.