DBallas464 wrote:
>
> Snipped from Mike's great article...
>
> >What sells these pieces is the fact that the companies that
> >produced them are well
> >documented, providing a provenance to the maker. The Auction
> >market likes nothing
> >better than a iron clad provenance to fame.
>
> This thought brings a recent story from the LA Times to mind. (latimes.com
> 7/17 - B1) It seems that a woman bought what she deemed an "Ugly" painting at
> a local thrift store, thinking that it was silly enough to cheer up a friend.
> It cost her $5.00. Purchased painting did not fit into the friend's mobile
> home, so the woman brought it home and stored it away. She finally decided to
> give it to an artist friend to paint over. The friend suggested that it might
> be a Pollock! Canadian forensic art specialist, Peter Paul Biro, believes that
> it is a Pollock based on technique, materials, the fact that Pollock's brother
> lived in the area where the painting was bought, and most importantly on a
> fingerprint found in the painting which matches fingerprints found on Pollock's
> tools. However, the international Foundation for Art Research argues that they
> do not believe it is a Pollock as they can find no information on the
> painting's history - a paper trail of receipts and records. They say that
> without these records it is difficult to determine if the piece is legitimate.
>
> This argument has not yet been settled!
>
> So, I ask you - what do you think is more important with antiques and art, the
> paper trail, the stories that go with the object, or the materials and
> workmanship involved.
>
> I hope it is a Pollock!
>
> Lauren
Hi Lauren, it's a lot like being a detective and you have to go
with all three and see how the evidence lines up. Quite often the
story is just that, a family fable, but you can't discount it
until you look for identifying factors such as the materials and
methods of construction.
I generally listen to the story, such as " Great-Grandma got it
from Mucha for posing in 1889", then see if the construction
details jive with the date, then verify with a paper trail. This
can involve many things such as receipts, wills, letters and even
photographs.
--
Mike Wilcox
--
Antique & Collectible Appraisals Online
Antique News, Appraisal Tutorials and More
Join our new Affiliate program
http://www.antique-appraise.com
Good to hear you are writing the column!
"Mike Wilcox" <appraisers@no-spam> wrote in message
news:3F19E13E.8FBD77B7@no-spam
> DBallas464 wrote:
> >
> > Snipped from Mike's great article...
> >
> > >What sells these pieces is the fact that the companies that
> > >produced them are well
> > >documented, providing a provenance to the maker. The Auction
> > >market likes nothing
> > >better than a iron clad provenance to fame.
> >
> > So, I ask you - what do you think is more important with antiques and
art, the
> > paper trail, the stories that go with the object, or the materials and
> > workmanship involved.
> >
> > I hope it is a Pollock!
> >
> > Lauren
>
> Hi Lauren, it's a lot like being a detective and you have to go
> with all three and see how the evidence lines up. Quite often the
> story is just that, a family fable, but you can't discount it
> until you look for identifying factors such as the materials and
> methods of construction.
> I generally listen to the story, such as " Great-Grandma got it
> from Mucha for posing in 1889", then see if the construction
> details jive with the date, then verify with a paper trail. This
> can involve many things such as receipts, wills, letters and even
> photographs.
When I am called to give my opinion, I always tell the owners to first let
me look at the item without their comment. I busy myself taking out drawers,
looking, sniffing, feeling, and generally looking foolish. I then start
pulling out my books. If so required, I might even take a quick trip to a
place where I know something similar sits. I then make some notes on what
I think it might be. Then, I look at any documents, photographs, letters,
etc. that they may have, and see what that adds to my notes. The last thing
I do is interview the owner. I find that way, I am never unduly influenced.
If the story from the family is off, I gently show them what I have found,
and why it can not be as they heard. For the most part, they understand and
I leave unscathed. The odd time though, I am beat from the door step.
I note, Mike, you offer appraisals online. That sounds fascinating to me. I
don't think I could ever be good enough to do without a "hands on"
experience. I don't mind offering opinions in a forum like rec.antiques,
but if it really mattered I just wouldn't trust my poor talents unless the
thing was in front of me.
Good Luck with the column! I look forward to seeing more of it!
C.
Cal Beach wrote:
>
> Good to hear you are writing the column!
>
> "Mike Wilcox" <appraisers@no-spam> wrote in message
> news:3F19E13E.8FBD77B7@no-spam
> > DBallas464 wrote:
> > >
> > > Snipped from Mike's great article...
> > >
> > > >What sells these pieces is the fact that the companies that
> > > >produced them are well
> > > >documented, providing a provenance to the maker. The Auction
> > > >market likes nothing
> > > >better than a iron clad provenance to fame.
>
> > >
> > > So, I ask you - what do you think is more important with antiques and
> art, the
> > > paper trail, the stories that go with the object, or the materials and
> > > workmanship involved.
> > >
> > > I hope it is a Pollock!
> > >
> > > Lauren
> >
> > Hi Lauren, it's a lot like being a detective and you have to go
> > with all three and see how the evidence lines up. Quite often the
> > story is just that, a family fable, but you can't discount it
> > until you look for identifying factors such as the materials and
> > methods of construction.
> > I generally listen to the story, such as " Great-Grandma got it
> > from Mucha for posing in 1889", then see if the construction
> > details jive with the date, then verify with a paper trail. This
> > can involve many things such as receipts, wills, letters and even
> > photographs.
>
> When I am called to give my opinion, I always tell the owners to first let
> me look at the item without their comment. I busy myself taking out drawers,
> looking, sniffing, feeling, and generally looking foolish. I then start
> pulling out my books. If so required, I might even take a quick trip to a
> place where I know something similar sits. I then make some notes on what
> I think it might be. Then, I look at any documents, photographs, letters,
> etc. that they may have, and see what that adds to my notes. The last thing
> I do is interview the owner. I find that way, I am never unduly influenced.
> If the story from the family is off, I gently show them what I have found,
> and why it can not be as they heard. For the most part, they understand and
> I leave unscathed. The odd time though, I am beat from the door step.
>
> I note, Mike, you offer appraisals online. That sounds fascinating to me. I
> don't think I could ever be good enough to do without a "hands on"
> experience. I don't mind offering opinions in a forum like rec.antiques,
> but if it really mattered I just wouldn't trust my poor talents unless the
> thing was in front of me.
>
> Good Luck with the column! I look forward to seeing more of it!
>
> C.
Many thanks ;~))As I'm sure some of the people in the trade here
will tell you, it seems the longer you are in the trade the more
"Divvy" you become. Some items seem to catch your eye from the
back of the auction hall, or in the back of a passing truck ;~))
But there really is no substitute for actually holding the item
in your hands. We have had our online service going since 1997,
working with detailed photo's and descriptions. If we are not
quite positive about the item's identification we pass on it and
recommend the client have a local appraiser examine it.
--
Mike Wilcox
--
Antique & Collectible Appraisals Online
Antique News, Appraisal Tutorials and More
Join our new Affiliate program
http://www.antique-appraise.com