Jan van Goyen (1596-1656)? - Форум по искусству и инвестициям в искусство

roman99 · 30-10-2012, 23:33

Your opinion?

Board oil.

Size: 30 x 25 cm

Bottom left is a monogram, but I can not read it and there are figures - 16

Thank you in advance!

Игорь Гурьев · 31-10-2012, 02:25

I have the impression that this is based on the 18-19 age Dutch 17th.
Though why would a 18- 19th century, it was necessary to write on the board ...

Strange and everywhere onaya board shines as if there is no ground was not.

Washed away ?
Valid.
But oddly washed out .

In Jan van Goyen , too, so the reception was when the board is translucent.

... In general , the further you look, the more I like this veshchichki .
Maybe all of the 17th century?
But do not believe that ...

roman99 · 01-11-2012, 01:40

Many thanks to Igor, for your opinion.

I offer to buy it, and I'm in doubt.

Тютчев · 01-11-2012, 01:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by roman99

I offer to buy it, and I'm in doubt.

This is not it.

Добавлено через 16 минут
And this is it: ....

Добавлено через 27 минут

Quote:

Originally Posted by Igor Guryev

Though why would a 18-19th century, it was necessary to write on the board ...

To pass for the 17th.

Added after 4 minutes

Quote:

Originally Posted by Igor Guryev

Strange and everywhere onaya board shines as if there is no ground was not.

Washed away ?
Valid.
But oddly washed out .

In Jan van Goyen , too, so the reception was when the board is translucent.

It is not only " welcome" , but the result of aging pattern. I thoroughly that's another topic [/URL].

Тютчев · 01-11-2012, 02:05

And this is it: ....

Тютчев · 01-11-2012, 02:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Igor Guryev

Though why would a 18- 19th century, it was necessary to write on the board ...

To pass for the 17th. Common.

Added after 4 minutes

Quote:

Originally Posted by Igor Guryev

Strange and everywhere onaya board shines as if there is no ground was not.

Washed away ?
Valid.
But oddly washed out .

In Jan van Goyen , too, so the reception was when the board is translucent.

This is not just a "reception ", but the result of the aging pattern. I thoroughly that's another topic [/URL].

Балагур · 01-11-2012, 02:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Igor Guryev

I have the impression that this is based on the 18-19 century Dutch 17th.
Though why would a 18- 19th century, it was necessary to write on the board ...

Strange and everywhere onaya board shines as if there is no ground was not.

Washed away ?
Valid.
But oddly washed out .

In Jan van Goyen , too, so the reception was when the board is translucent.

... In general , the further you look, the more I like this veshchichki .
Maybe all of the 17th century?
But do not believe that ...

You pay attention to the painting - the sky is not registered , just smeared , that smears are not only because of the translucent. No soil , cursive - spotting ! To bullshit pictures should be able to draw a little bit . IMHO.

Тютчев · 01-11-2012, 02:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Balagur

You note on the painting - the sky is not registered , just smeared , that smears are not only because of the translucent. No soil , cursive - spotting ! To bullshit pictures should be able to draw a little bit . IMHO .

Are you saying that the picture I posted in this thread is not the work of Jan van Goyen ? Or something I did not understand? < - ~ 3 ~ ->

Балагур · 01-11-2012, 02:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyutchev

Are you saying that the picture I posted in this thread is not the work of Jan van Goyen?
Or something I did not understand?
<- ~ 3 ~ ->

Sorry, I'm talking about the picture presented by roman99

But, in both craquelure not see.
It's weird.

Replace quote.

Тютчев · 01-11-2012, 02:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Balagur

Sorry, I'm talking about the picture provided by the roman99

Thank you , now clear.

[color="#666686 " ]Added after 3 minutes[/color]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Balagur

But, in both craquelure not see. This is strange .

go here [/URL]. There, I wrote in detail about the technique of the painters of the 17th century. Of the writing is clear why no craquelure.

30-10-2012, 23:33	Original language: Russian #1
roman99 Пользователь Join Date: May 2011 Posts: 48 Thanks: 48 Thanked 5 Times in 3 Posts Reputation: 10	Jan van Goyen (1596-1656)? Your opinion? Board oil. Size: 30 x 25 cm Bottom left is a monogram, but I can not read it and there are figures - 16 Thank you in advance! Attached Thumbnails

01-11-2012, 02:05	Original language: Russian #5
Тютчев Гуру Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 5,529 Thanks: 4,883 Thanked 11,836 Times in 2,947 Posts Blog Entries: 8 Reputation: 22525	And this is it: .... Attached Thumbnails

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Ян ван Гойен (1596-1656)?	roman99	Цены, оценка, атрибуция	16	01-11-2012 07:30

31-10-2012, 02:25	Original language: Russian #2
Игорь Гурьев Гуру Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: город П. Posts: 4,939 Thanks: 6,544 Thanked 6,620 Times in 2,829 Posts Reputation: 13305	I have the impression that this is based on the 18-19 age Dutch 17th. Though why would a 18- 19th century, it was necessary to write on the board ... Strange and everywhere onaya board shines as if there is no ground was not. Washed away ? Valid. But oddly washed out . In Jan van Goyen , too, so the reception was when the board is translucent. ... In general , the further you look, the more I like this veshchichki . Maybe all of the 17th century? But do not believe that ...

01-11-2012, 01:40	Original language: Russian #3
roman99 Пользователь Join Date: May 2011 Posts: 48 Thanks: 48 Thanked 5 Times in 3 Posts Reputation: 10	Many thanks to Igor, for your opinion. I offer to buy it, and I'm in doubt.