"Classical Painting Collection" auction at the gallery "Euro-Art"

[antikuz]

2%3%5%6%45%4%4%4%5%5%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%343 456%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%

[uriart]

antikuz, and that you are number 30, and even on the cover?

Is not nothing better there?


You do not see the similarities in these works?

In my opinion, because of a hand, "they do."

Better yet, we can say this:

VYTVORILA!

[OlegTsi]

http://euro-art.com.ua/?p=607


Go to lot number 50 - Burliuk

Here is another fufel, though without expertise Bureau HTe "ART LAB."
But if a good "ask" $ $ $ $ $, then such would be, huh?

[uriart]

OlegTsi, so there is not the only one!


№ 14 Sergei Ivanov

19 Valentin Serov

35.36 Erno Erb
 
48 Grigory Gluckman

60 Peter Stolyarenko

66 Fedor Zakharov

I think that those who are more versed in contemporary art, will find more than one fake.

[Altim]

This is not Zoria.

This is a remake of two years ago.

[Altim]

And it's not Konovalyuk.

Reference works here: http://culture.vin.com.ua/gal.htm


Added after 2 minutes

In general, your Kiev partners clearly from the start.

[Altim]

antikuz, better to take out the bullshit before the auction - no disgrace .
I was just 2-3 years ago, this "pseudo- Zorya " held it in his hands . Then she was signed as a Zatsepin . The thing smelled of fresh paint and sticking to hands. Although Zatsepin died in 1986 I returned this board back. Now it's Zoria . In fact it is - grapnel , which should be removed from the eye.

Posted 45 minutes

Сообщение от uriart; 2098011 "

60 Peter Stolyarenko
66 Fedor Zakharov

It is not obvious , it continous to these authors thing , IMHO.

[Дилетант]

Ag-ha! A dabbler, Moishe - clever! Amateur first-Moshe, it is not useful, waited until the older will vote! So, let's continue.
A. Repetition - Practice makes perfect. "Kharlamov" - definitely not Kharlamov. And talking about.
Two. "Tales". Most likely - not a legend, and certainly not in 1865. (At this
time, Fyodor Ilyich sat tight in Tbilisi, with the Grand Duke Mikhail Nikolaevich, Viceroy of the Caucasus). What the city is depicted? What kind of characters? Signature - a work not earlier than the last third of 1870 (after his departure for Vienna).
Three. "Brad." The authorship is doubtful, although the water - a good, competent. Bredovs - much less, candy, artificial, and in shape, and color. Even when he wrote, mounted landscapes, still seemed theatrical backdrops painted to Schiller, "thieves" ...
4. Bakalovich-pere - probably true, but Bakalovich-fils makes credit-e-epko rep scratching ...
Five. A.O.Orlovsky, "The Watch". Not "The Watch" and "The ambush", and in general - no typological or stylistically to the work of Orlovsky did not like. And - later. Academic art not before the middle of the XIX. But the picture - the author does not zadurok.
6. "Semiradsky." Then just two questions: why "Semiradsky" and
 why "Hephaestus." Stoker, blacksmith, blacksmith - maybe, but not Hephaestus once. And do not Semiradsky - also never.
A suivre (in the sense - to be continued).

[Altim]

antikuz, and the reputation of your business yours, sell what you want :-)

[uriart]

Now got to put all the pictures in a row.

Well, just a mom to give birth!


Altim

again I say unto you, and Zakharov and Stolyarenko.

By the way Stolyarenko still alive, and to him personally, you can ask a question.