Beware of fake

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Сообщение от Vyacheslav

What to take away there is always, even in such "roam the mountain" like dealing with buying and selling antiques.

Yes, that take away, you're right, maybe there is, but here it is "business" to take away something like "How to seize the" buying and selling antiques?

Сообщение от Vyacheslav

Strange - You can remember the antiquary himself positioned !!!

What's strange?
What I do not understand your phrase? That's something I really do not understand:

Сообщение от Vyacheslav

antique business is not just vulnerable, it is specifically excess vulnerable.

What ev, this way of earning so "over vulnerable"?
I can not understand.
I looked around and nothing too "vulnerable" does not see.
What? Where? Open your eyes ... And I live on a volcano may not veduyu about it.
Eyyafyatlayokudl! Oh!

[тата]

You're all about fakes but about fakes, the mysterious super specialists. One forumchanin in excitement called the Rylova with one of the auctions acid and false, and he was then present. Sorry could not buy, apparently someone has wandered into the auction. Be kind, show at least one high-quality forgery, so much as shuddered! Waiting .<!--~ 10 ->

[Тютчев]

Сообщение от Tata

please show at least one high-quality forgery, so much as shuddered! Waiting .

Hammer price GBP 1,500,000
EUR 2,192,400 - USD 2,569,500 - GBP 1,500,000
  
Estimate GBP 180,000 - 220,000
   
Medium Oil /canvas
Sales date 11/30/2005
Location London (GB)
Size 34.8x47.7 cm - (13 3/4x18 3 /4 in)
Auction house Christie's
Dated 1919
Lot number 122
Distinguishing marks Signed dated Bas Gauche
Illustrations P. 131 of the catalogue


shuddered?

[Евгений]

In 2004, the day before the auction, Sotheby's, the auction was removed a picture of Ivan Shishkin, since it was discovered that she was a fake and is made on the basis of paintings by the Dutch artist Marinus Kukukka "Landscape with a stream." (The painting was placed on the cover of the directory as Top-lot).
 Preliminary cost canvases over 1000000 ue + "experts" from the Tretyakov Gallery's outstanding expertise of authenticity pictures ..
-------------------------------------------------- -------------
But this is the aerobatics fakes, the bulk of it at the "Golitsyn" ..

[тата]

Often, counterfeiters do not have a serious education, although there are many talented people. When the outer "similarity" (imitation of style, selection of the plot), they have little understanding of drawing and often lack basic logic, such as folds in the drapery does not express a form error term, interest contours of objects, which leads to distortions in the perception of wholeness.
Tjutchev I understand this work is sold as Kustodiyev? Is it too she licked for this size, and yes even oil? I do not remember a Kustodieva things like plot in oils such a small size. Maybe I'm wrong? I'm not a big fan of this artist.

Added after 9 minutes
Way. A year or two ago at Sotheby's or Christie's (can not remember exactly), a huge Kuindzhi for big money on this rang and on the radio and on TV. They showed the old pre-revolutionary black-and-white catalog with a small image, allegedly with this work. But the work was complete rubbish and the blind to see that the catalog was a different thing. Surely it was a lot of expert opinions.

[Тютчев]

Сообщение от Tata

Very often the counterfeiters do not have a serious education, although there are many talented people. When the outer "similarity" (imitation of style, selection of the plot), they have little understanding of drawing and often lack basic logic, such as folds in the drapery does not express a form error term, interest contours of objects, which leads to distortions in the perception of wholeness.

Counterfeits are very different. Different quality. Computed for different customers. Among the buyers of art may be people very well versed in the subject, but there is absolutely nothing of it. At each level there is a falshak. Somebody is bought at an inexpensive picture, carefully packed in a legend like "Survivor of the mad old lady. Someone is willing to pay millions for the "masterpiece" from the prestigious collection. You understand that each of these cases, falshaka different. Fakes are buying not only private collectors, and museums. There are very professional people and even groups of people working in the "smart" field. Each of them is a virtuoso in his field. Beginning with the artist-producer falshaka and ending with "gallerist-seller." These people have been and will always. Masterpieces do not become more just increases the number wishing to buy them.

[Тютчев]

Сообщение от Tata

Tjutchev I understand this work is sold as Kustodiyev? Are there too, she licked for this size, and yes even oil? I do not remember a similar story Kustodieva things in oils such a small size. Maybe I'm wrong? I'm not a big fan of this artist.

Tata, for this size it is not too "licked". In Kstodieva is "licked" the work and smaller and it is oil. As for the plot, then Boris Mikhailovich work with such a plot, but strangely not much at all. But they do not afford much, but very little. In so little that we can not say that he had a something special rule in choosing the size to work with such a plot. On a well-established rule, we can say that when pictures of a plot and size very much. Yes, and then a stretch. Kustodiyev in all his work was original. I do not see any reason to suspect it in automatism. Why did not he write a naked woman is a size? He's an artist, not a machine!
 
Personally, I believe that the discrepancy between the size of the plot and the argument is very minor. And it can be considered only as an auxiliary in the reasoning. Yes, and then applied only to certain artists. Artist with a special method.
 
In our case, we could help other work Kustodiev. Which is very similar to our fake. This is a striking similarity and should have been alerted of the potential buyer. The fact that Boris even in the creation of small-sized works were an artist, he never repeated. To imagine that he simply copied his own work to create another impossible. This is not the quality.

Here, the work of Boris Mikhailovich Kustodieva and falshak.:

[Игорь Гурьев]

Сообщение от Tjutchev

Hammer price GBP 1,500,000
EUR 2,192,400 - USD 2,569,500 - GBP 1,500,000
  
Estimate GBP 180,000 - 220,000
   
Medium Oil /canvas
Sales date 11/30/2005
Location London (GB)
Size 34.8x47.7 cm - (13 3/4x18 3 /4 in)
Auction house Christie's
Dated 1919
Lot number 122
Distinguishing marks Signed dated Bas Gauche
Illustrations P. 131 of the catalogue


shuddered?

And where did you get that falshak?

What follows the pattern of assembly Brotskava?

So what?

Even if it falshak, it is written better than Kustodiev, that's the case.

[Тютчев]

Сообщение от Guriev, Igor

Where did you get the idea that it falshak?

What follows the pattern of assembly Brotskava?

So what?

Even if it falshak, it is written better than Kustodiev, that's it.

The argument which I quoted in the post above (#27) committed enough. I was there all clear outlined. For Kustodieva was not peculiar blunt (mechanistic), copy (move), that either one of the other. Typically, this is generally not characteristic of great artists. This follows from the logic of their creation, so to speak.

The artist can portray something or someone that the way he is portrayed in the earlier case, in the first place - the artist wrote the option previously created works, and secondly - the artist creates original copy, in the third - the artist uses the sketch to create another piece. 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 exists. In our case, just a place to be is a mechanistic copying another work Kustodiev. That is stupid transfer previously shown in a new job.

[Игорь Гурьев]

Сообщение от Tjutchev

should be mechanistic copy, and it is always visible, if it exists. In our case, just a place to be is mihanisticheskoe copying from another work Kustodiev. That is stupid transfer previously shown in a new job.

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!