Fakes and Forgeries

[Britrail]

I have just found this very interesting site that deals with authenticating paintings. It is well worth a look at. It is a bit of an eye opener.

.http://www.freemanart.ca/ROGUES.htm

[Britrail]

There is also a lot of other interesting material on this site.

[Bringer]

Hi Bitrail,

Going to send you a pm concerning this theme.

[loft artist]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-concerns.html

Like the chaps from our kneck of the woods Britrail .
also made into a drama for TV
It makes you wonder what are the qualifications of the so called experts .

the son actually exhibited his forgeries 'Legally' in Exhibitions around the world
its a strange old world
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaun_Greenhalgh

loft

[Horsa]

The truly great quote is this bit: Detective Sgt Rapley of the Metropolitan Police Arts and Antiquities Unit said "Looking at them now I'm not sure the items would fool anyone, it was the credibility of the provenances that went with them."

It seems that the Movers and Shakers in the Art, Auction, and Museum worlds neglected to apply the good old Mark I Eyeball Visual Detection and Ranging System. Especially funny since provenances can also be faked, and it was in fact a phony provenance that caused the whole scheme to unravel.

[vmrs]

There's over 5000 "Picassos" on Ebay. He must have been a busy man.

That British family of forgers was something. I remember reading somewhere that many museums don't test their artworks because they're afraid of finding out how many fakes they actually own.

[cjorgensen]

I read a book about Van Meegeran (a famous forger who make a fortune in Holland forging Vermeers during WWII.) The book said at the time that the art experts WANTED to find "lost art", because it would increase their fame and prestiege as well. So it was in everyone's best interest to overlook the flaws and delcare the forgery to be authentic.

[Alessandra Kelley]

Originally Posted by cjorgensen

I read a book about Van Meegeran (a famous forger who make a fortune in Holland forging Vermeers during WWII.) The book said at the time that the art experts WANTED to find "lost art", because it would increase their fame and prestiege as well. So it was in everyone's best interest to overlook the flaws and delcare the forgery to be authentic.

It was definitely a prestige thing. Wasn't it also done to curry favor with (sorry, not Godwinning, honest!) the Nazis, who were in control of Holland at the time? I seem to recall Hermann Goering being especially pleased at Van Meegeren's "discovery," and of course, after the war part of Van Meegeren's defense was to claim that he had deliberately set out to con the Nazis.

[Horsa]

I remember that as being part of the Van Meegeren story as well.

If anybody out there becomes rich by producing forgeries of my paintings, just let me know how you did it. I'm sure not getting rich selling the real thing.

[brianvds]

Originally Posted by Alessandra Kelley

It was definitely a prestige thing. Wasn't it also done to curry favor with (sorry, not Godwinning, honest!) the Nazis, who were in control of Holland at the time? I seem to recall Hermann Goering being especially pleased at Van Meegeren's "discovery," and of course, after the war part of Van Meegeren's defense was to claim that he had deliberately set out to con the Nazis.

As far as I know his main purpose was to con the art experts, whom he considered to be a bunch of frauds, and I'm sure the money he made in the process didn't hurt either.

Rather ironically, because of the publicity the case attracted, his works became sought after, both his fakes and the "honest" ones he signed with his own name. And then, in a further ironic twist of fate, his own son started to fake daddy's fakes, making a lot of money in the process.

Now considering that "authentic" works by famous artists are worth a lot of money, usually out of all proportion to the artistic value of the work itself, the production of fakes amounts to fraud and as such cannot be condoned.

Still, I kind of wish the art market will become so flooded with so large a number of such well made fakes that even experts will find it difficult or impossible to tell the authentic works from the fakes. If this happens, all confidence in art as an investment will be shaken to pieces, and the art investment bubble will burst.

What will happen then? Well, people will start looking at and buying art again, instead of looking at and buying signatures. The likes of Damien Hirst will likely sink like a stone, and even the most humble painter will be able to successfully compete with any of the great names, simply because only the inherent quality of the art will matter instead of the signature on the canvas.

[Horsa]

Brian, I think you are on to something. I could name a large number of famous painters who in my opinion couldn't paint their way off a blank sheet of canvas.

But because they did something different to what was popular and accepted at the time they are now hailed as masters and great innovators. Sometimes their best innovation seems to have been the art speak they used to make themselves sound brilliant.