Perspective: Cracking the Code of Old Masters' Artworks
Vložit
- čas přidán 7. 06. 2024
- Journalist Fiona Bruce teams up with art dealer Philip Mould -- dubbed "the art detective" -- to investigate remarkable stories beneath the surface of paintings. From a £1 still life painting bought in a junkshop to a rumoured landscape of Thomas Gainsborough.
1: 00:00:00
2: 00:58:29
3: 01:55:27
4: 02:52:27
Subscribe and click the bell icon to get more arts content every week:
/ perspectivearts
Perspective is CZcams's home for the arts. Come here to get your fill of great music, theatre, art and much, much more!
Discover the past on History Hit with ad-free exclusive podcasts and documentaries released weekly presented by world renowned historians Dan Snow, Suzannah Lipscomb, Matt Lewis and more. Get 50% off your first 3 months with code PERSPECTIVE: access.historyhit.com/
📺 It's like Netflix for history... Sign up to History Hit, the world's best history documentary service and get 50% off using the code 'PERSPECTIVE' bit.ly/3zj7Soo
Any queries, please contact us at:
perspective@littledotstudios.com
#Painting #Art #History
4 hours well spent -the algorithm proved wrong: we can have long attention spans when the quality is good. Thanks @perspectiveArts
It was good, but 4 hours? Really? Do you feel like it was necessary to get all of that? I don’t think I can watch another of these. I was even on 2x speed.
@@user-pt1cz4ot1e I enjoyed this a lot. I played it in the background while doing household chores and it kept me very entertained. I might not be able to sit down and exclusively watch this in one go, but I find it better than stopping after every video and scrolling for something else to watch. It's a personal preference. You might enjoy something different. There is room for everyone's preferences
I watched a documentary by a forger who said quite a few "fakes" are now considered real and vice versa, officially. Maddening!
And the art world would know especially the experts.. but greedly keep there mouths shut because there either paid to shut up or there career would be damaged so they don’t say anything.. I’m my opinion there are very few experts just a lot of people faking it
That's mostly the auction houses and dealers responsibility,.... Money overrides morals ....sadly.
What i love about these investigations is the intelligence of non-native English speakers their ability to tell us in our own language what is needed to be known. I dont care how broken that language may be, just that it enables transferring of knowledge. It also helps me identify expressions that my limited exposure can integrate into how i say something.
Plot twist. The owner of the other Gainsborough Gipsies painting is that expert.
So the painting underneath the “barker of bath” that they said would never be able to have an attribution, miraculously has been attributed to an artist that’s more valuable than the barker or Bath effort !!! Are they trying to suggest that the owner removes the Gainsborough!!??? Funnily enough ensuring it never comes back to bite them 🤦🏼♂️
wow, the authenticated painting was relined and had no labels on the back, but the guys painting has ALL that and yet it's not the original???... geez
Art expertise is pretty corrupt sadly
Cui bono ...who benefits ...
Yep and they just tacked the provenance on to the other one once “authenticated “, with no evidence or paper trail whatsoever. They fully glossed over what the scientists found in the end as well. That episode really made me not want to watch the rest.
I have been in bed for 2 days sick and these episodes have completely captivated me
They’re so good!
Hope you are better❤
I've been sick in bed for 11 years now and the episodes have enticed me too😊
@@Ty-1452 I fell very ill and became bedridden when I was 17 I'm 29 now. I wish it was a typo!😂
@Ty-mq7xm Thank you, that is very kind of you♡ I am alone with my mother she is also very ill. I love her dearly, but she is dying of Altsheimers. Soon, I will be all alone. I must admit it scares me. I have no income and don't own anything of value either. I honestly have no idea what will happen to me then. Until my mother dies, we have her tiny rent, but that will stop when she passes. She took care of me when I fell ill all those years ago. Now, I do all I can to help her with her failing mind and try to make her passing as easy as possible for her by comforting her and enveloping her in love.♡
@Ty-mq7xm I appreciate your words 🙏 I'm sorry about your parents💔 I only ever had my mother. No friends or distant relatives, unfortunately. My best friend died when we were 14, and I was too heartbroken the years after she died to make any new friends. Then I fell ill. I know very nice people online ,but they are all spread across the world and not in a position to help me. Thank you for being so kind♡
so they company that authenticated a possible fake is the one deciding if his is real or not?!?!... what a conflict of interest... i hope this guy doesn't sell it for 1000 because he should get another opinion and it probably is real
Not an art enthusiast by any means, but the investigations, the process, and the knowledge is fascinating.
Naaaa! I bet it is a Gainsborough! All the evidence and the registration number etc. I would want to see the evidence on the other one. Also I feel, that this one had far more depth than the other so called Gainsborough.
I think they didn't want to loose their reputation which is a massive conflict.
(😯 Oh and would cost them a lot of money. They would have to somehow buy this one to replace the fake, but what if he didn't want to sell etc. Very awkward. Bet they try to get it on the sly cheaply to save themselves.
Exactly! The expert gave his opinion on style alone basically, he didn't give any explanation for all the scientific evidence for it being a Gainsborough.
Totally agree! 😠
Thinking the same!
Reputation was at stake, but most auctions do not guarantee attribution. Read the fine print before speculating on legalities
@@GOLDVIOLINbowofdeathgood point too
The Gainsborough - The Gypsies picture, to me the final verdict can only been given when the two pictures are hung side by side!
The scientific evidence, like original 18. Century colours, 18. Century frame and the markings of Christies, who even in the 19. Century made sure they sell an original. Or didn't they? Then the portrait under the picture, all point to an original. The final verdict by the "expert", I wouldn't be impressed too much by it, it's just a "feeling". The uber master faker Wolfgang Beltracchi, and "creator of additional originals", proved how much the "opinion of an expert" are worth. Nothing!
One last point, thankfully the filmmakers didn't declare the Gainsborough a fake, but a perfectly fine copy by the Barker of Bath painter, so their verdict. Now, who can give me a sane explanation why this supposedly copy was reframed as the original was reframed? Don't tell me it was Bath. For cheating reasons, no, he just copied pictures as so many other masterful painters did? The pictures were in the possession of rich distinguished persons and part of an art collection. This picture we followed in the documentary was a Christies proven Original. The other "original" doesn't even have its original frame. How can that be? That doesn't make any sense to me. Pictures hang innocently on walls, and get transported every other decade in picture transport boxes, by professional picture transporters, how could a frame break? To fit it into a new outer, smaller picture frame? Is there another reason for reframing?
The "art experts" opinion is up against solid scientific evidence. I would go with the later any day! According to the scientific evidence, the shown painted picture is a true Gainsborough!
Ohhh yesss. Pump those 4 hours of quality content into my veins.
Yes! Well said! ❤😂I agree
@@LEM19284 ❤
Marc’s is the real Gainsborough. No way that non-provenanced canvas with inferior detail is the real one - that’s your Barker of Bath. They just don’t want to admit they got it wrong.
I like when I fall asleep, and this program wakes me up. I was especially captivated by the nuclear wood analysis, and the last piece, that was imaged 20,000 times. I’m going to have to track down the Marieschi, next time I’m in Chicago. The forged seal, the composition of the linen. The layers of the under pigments. Very fascinating, indeed. And I wish more artists would paint with tempera. That medium is translucent lay delightful. And the host, Philip, looks like his whippet. The journeys through the great houses in the UK, is the best part.
I disagree with the art expert that it is not an original Gainsborough especially with the fact that the original was given personally to the man who had a sale and the paper trail with the original back and all the registrations. I totally think this is original.
Fantastic program! Discovered by accident and now I am a follower.
I hope that fellow pursues another opinion for the Gainsborough.
And I definitely hopes he doesn't have it removed from that underlying portrait!
Unfortunately, that painting can't be sold as a Gainsborough. That's the thing about art. One so called expert can control so much which is bullto me. Like Jackson pollack is shat to me but what do I know. His eye is better that all the data presented. I saw one episode a few years back where a painting was outright rejected by "the foundation" eventhough every expert and science say it's real except the secretive Foundation Seems to me a scam. Infact a painting my niece did when she was 3 is a masterpiece.😅
@@autummsun I agree with you.
I will bet 10lbs that the leading "expert" on Gainesborough IS the one who purchased the actual fake from Mr Day, and is in no way ever going to denounce his own investment by giving this ACTUAL Gainesborough its merit.
Good thinking ! For sure he’ll have been involved - he and Philip would have clearly made a pretty penny from it. This is such bull….
I'm with you on that.
@@kittenkorleone2918sssrsdtztuzxyzuxiu te😅😅ur😊😊😊😊😊eee😅
I agree that some this sounds fishy with his assessment.
very reasonable conclusion tbh. it seems impossible that Marc’s isn’t real
Loved this. I can't stop watching no matter how long a time it takes. The scenery is so lovely. It takes us all over the world from our living rooms. I know I'll never go to Europe but I feel like I got a good view of it here. Yes, I've got my share of illness too like so many other commentators. It might be a good thing somehow because I had the time to devote to watching this in its entirety in a short time.
Wow! So, 'The Gypsies' Repast' has been judged to have been by Barker of Bath. How utterly coincidental that B of B *also* reused an earlier portrait canvas of a lady as the foundation for his painted copy in the same manner that Gainsborough did for a similar work during the period in question. I don't believe that. B of B didn't have x-ray technology to know what Gainsborough did and the chances that B of B did it by coincidence must be very remote.
And how do you explain all the tags and gallery markings behind the portrait that match the provenance to a T?! From what I heard, the other painting that is supposedly the real 1 where the former owners son appears in the show.. the only provenance they had was a letter from some old expert. I’m so annoyed! Ahhhh
Came to comments to see if anyone else was as annoyed as I was. I made a longer comment at the top of the comments. 😉
Oh, and then insinuate the owner should have the 'fake' Barker work removed [destroyed] because the portrait underneath is so much more valuable! 😂
We're the two ladies painted by the same friend of Gainsborough?
After watching the entire video, I think Fiona is the perfect work of art!
There's a Sir Thomas Lawrence painting at The New York Metropolitan Museum that absolutely took my breath away. It was if the models could just walk out of the canvas.
The portrait of lamb has absolutely beautiful eyes and the complexion is so striking! Good on Philip! Fiona is the perfect picture of a well-educated, well-grounded, modern English woman, such a class act.
Well said, your description of Fiona.
😅😅😅😊p@@bethbartlett5692😅
She has a long established career as a news personality, and also appears on the BBC show Antiques Roadshow. She is thoroughly a class act. I believe she met Phillip through the Roadshow.😊
That Gainsborough is probably real, just like the Giorgio de Chirico is probably real. If there's one thing this show has illustrated, it's that the art workd hates to admit they were wrong.
Absolutely!
AGREED 😢
If it sounds like duck, walks like a duck, and looks like a duck it must be a …. Those people’s reputation were in the line and they would hate to loose it. Sad to see they can’t admit the evidence.
Admitting would meant the foundation loose reputation and artwork of Giorgio de chirico might dropped in value as the foundation that were managing the artwork of Giorgio de chirico was not informed of drawings that were sent to the Vera by Giorgio de chirico secretly. After this episode being aired, other unsigned artworks of Giorgio de chirico would surfaces and don’t think the foundation would want that to happen, thus; denied the authenticity of this fruit drawing from the start even though it might real. 😅😅😅
I hope they revisit this somehow.
obviously the third 5 is covered, you can see a tiny piece of the 5
The main thing this series is doing is undermining my faith in art "experts."
Ever heard of "anthropogenic climate catastrophe" expert, who like to blubber us full of nonsense on TV?
Remember, it works AGAINST the auction house to admit something is a fake. Auction houses DO profit from fakes.
If you pay the “authentication experts”, you could get them to validate a Mr. Bean painting.
We were all rooting so hard for the underdog John green in Gainsborough gypsies …it is an unconvincing anticlimax ….I mean if they were going to base their judgement on “bold” strokes…what was all the evidence for?
I love how the owners of the painting in the 2nd episode insist it is by Cosway although that would make it moneteraly less valuable. Because they appreciate this wonderful peeoneering painter and because this is what the familial identity is attached to. So so good! And a curious exploration on the nature of attribution.
Hate is such a powerful word…
@@Jcarolinajr ~ Who said hate?
The old lady was the only stubborn holdout insisting it was by the artist who was way less valuable. She sounds rich, probably grew up rich and could afford to have this painting not be valuable since she’ll soon be dead. Notice the young woman was more excited that it be a Lawrence painting-she’ll live long enough to profit from the sale of this masterpiece. Lol.
so, the guy at the end who said it wasn't a gainsborough, why?... what evidence disapproved it?... literally mounds of evidence says it IS real... i think this guy is corrupt and bought by that other guy who would've been "wrong" with his authenticated evaluation... why are we trusting either of them
💯 !!! The old expert was clearly pushed by Philip to give it his approval. With zero collaboration to the provenance - yet now they’ve found a printing that DOES have the provenance right on the back. What are we missing - it seems pretty clear they made an error here.
@@deethebee80I 100% agree!!! What are the odds that the same exact artist portrait found in another Gainsborough is behind this painting?! The other alleged real painting didn’t have any gallery markings behind it. You’re telling me there’s a huge conspiracy that years later in the late 1800s people added the various markings and tags to a fake? If I were the owner of this painting, I would have demanded a 2nd opinion, also to see if the forger has any other paintings where he painted over the same artist Gainsborough did.. lastly, if this is a fake, than certainly the painting shown in the recently published book with the re-purposed canvas had to be fake as well.. I am mad! LOL
That Giorgio de Chirico is probably real. The foundation was too prideful to admit they were wrong in the 1997 evaluation.
That dude made at least twelve still-life paintings containing a walnut that the "experts" of the foundation weren't even aware of.
And then the pieces of fruit are clearly all over the place in those different paintings.
Yet they conclude it's not a real de Chirico because fruit wasn't in the correct position?
Those guys are clowns.
Each episode is as if i was watching crime scenes in art. Love your great and ambitious work.
The most fascinating for me by far is the scientific evidence segments - to often the expert have nothing more than their subjective opinions that they think "this is not in the style of", or "not as good as" and seem to revel in giving absolute statements instead of just admitting that they can't be absolutely sure and the trust in their opinions is way to high specially when they can't give objective evidence to their subjective opinions.
I don't understand when Henry was on the back and the Christie's number was on the back I just wonder if somebody was trying to save face. In my opinion it's a Gainesboro and the other one is a fake
Agreed. The Giorgio de Chirico still life is a prime example of this. Rejected 30-odd years ago by one member of the committee who didn’t think de Chirico painted walnuts… and now when presented with a dossier that includes several examples of de Chirico still lifes featuring nuts - not to mention scientific analysis revealing the very unusual ingredients of oil and honey in the tempera as well as proof that it was painted on a board from before 1950 - and the current committee rejects it simply because in their estimation it just isn’t good enough to be by de Chirico!?!
@@nerdbot37
I did an image search for Giorgio de Chirico still life paintings and he painted fruit all over the place. In bowls, neatly stacked, on a draped tablecloth, on bare wood, all kinds of ways.
Then they decide this one isn't authentic because the fruit is placed unnaturally?
They just couldn't admit they'd been wrong. So they decided to be wrong twice.
@@Cautionary_Tale_HarrisYesssss and their explanations in the letter didn’t seem to be that great. I agree, they just didn’t want to admit that they were wrong in the past because it would open them up to the possibility of being wrong for the last however many decades.
What a croc on the 1st episode... that was 100% a Thomas Gainsborough painting they were investigating. Then the dude at the end just walks in without only proof and declares he "thinks" it's not a Gainsborough because stylistically lol... unbelievable and laughable lol. Poor guy has genuine Thomas Gainsborough, but some snob thinks it's fake lol.
Let me see if I’ve got this right. The original Constable had no provenance on the back of the painting and even when it was sold there wasn’t confirmation in the sales information that it definitely was a Constable. Yet this fake has scientific data confirming the age and the back of the painting confirms the history of the painting going back to the early 1800’s.
Something seems drastically amiss here. Or maybe the complications of attributing it too Constable is too much of a problem due to the legal implications.
Gainsborough you mean. But I totally agree. Massive conflict of interest involved. And also I felt there was far more depth in the painting style than the other one. And the providence is all there. I would want to see the other one the same research done on the other one, but apparently its missing in action.
@@AHD2105
Apologies and thanks for the correction. It just doesn’t stack up if you take a rational perspective. I think there’s an industry line you don’t cross in these circumstances because they know what the implications would be if they do what they should.
Even Philip appeared to be guarded and reluctant to state the obvious. The owner looked incredulous that no one actually asked a direct question of the so called original painting that didn’t have any provenance.
@@MarkBriers369 Yes! I'm actually disgusted. I'm starting to think their are many mistakes in claims of paintings that could cost these people a lot of money. Mostly because of advanced forensics that could cost them a lot of money in reparations. Just because they make a tv discussion of it, doesnt make them right in a court of law. And with so much money involved, this is what it should come down to. And if the other owner doesnt come forward, then they should have no licence to sell unless its proven to be an original. And these days they could likely compare DNA with the DNA on paintings they know to be painted by artists. Well idealy. I've just lost faith in these episodes now. Too many alterior motives for trying to clean up mistakes etc. Sad for those who get duped. And I hope they had on to these paintings until more advanced technology comes into being. These d cronies are protecting themselves. Imagine the cost to go back 🙄
@@MarkBriers369 sorry. In short I should've just said, there is a lot of money in determining a painting to be real or not and conflict of interest was present in this case.
@@AHD2105
Completely agree.
How can they not investigate the so called legitimate painting and put it through the same stringent tests, to justify their claims?
Probably because they’re worried it won’t tick as many boxes as the fake. Then they do have a problem and so does any experts credibility.
The presenters on the program do a great job, but it’s pretty obvious they are under instruction not to rock the boat. They know that 90% of the viewers are probably screaming at the tv, WTF.
As for that expert who made the decision. Phew! I’m surprised the owner of the painting didn’t clobber him.
wow that first painting is hauntingly beautiful
I want a Barker of Barth painting - an affordable, almost exact replica of a Gainsborough - I’m sold!
The vibe of tue owners in 3th ep is the most decent vibe I've ever been exposed to
Thank you so very much for sharing!
An absolutely fascinating investigation! I enjoyed this video so much.
It’s almost indistinguishable from the legit one, it’s just as old and done by a notable painter, and it looks great.
To me that makes it just as cool. Maybe not as valuable to a Gainsborough fan or collector, but as a survivor and a work of art it’s not too shabby.
I think it's even better because of the painting behind it and the whole story! Just wow! And just as you said, it was still done by a 17th century "faker" artist! Some of those artists paintings now have actually become quite desirable!
I wonder why they can’t showcase his art - even as someone who copied other artists - he fooled a lot of people with his talent! Tell the story!!
what a wonderful couple of hours spent watching this..thank you..made my day!
I believe they got it wrong this time.
So happy this was uploaded . Thank you !!!!!!!!!!!!
Love this show!
The Barker/Gainsborough, please tell me John still owns the painting and hasn't destroyed it! Did Barker paint over others' paintings? Did your expert have an interest in attributing the painting to Barker? How can a painting with the provenance of John's be a fake? Do you think all previous owners were duped? I really think your expert was wrong!
I don’t know if I’ll sleep tonight 😩👀i can’t stop watching
Fascinating! Worthy of great institutional support from all aspects of human valuation. I’m blessed its come my way. Praise Thou.
I loved the bankrupt couple and the happy ending!
Art "expert" is completely wrong. All the provenance points to it being the true Lost Gainsborough. Not his subjective feelings about the style. What a vain, pretentious, and fickle business.
I know! When he finally explained why he "felt" like it wasn't a Gainsborough because of the hesitancy of the brush strokes? I'm not an art expert but I just can't imagine devaluing that painting over one man's opinion. We've come too far to know how the art world works and how competitive these art people are. This and their hubris have destroyed the value of many pieces of art and I think that's awful
In addition the lot numbers 555N written in the book were sharp modern 5's, not characteristic of penmanship of that era.
@@jh-kv6pq now if he would've pointed that out, it may have changed my mind. Good pick up .
@@jh-kv6pq
What era are you talking about?
The 555N was from 1882, right?
I think it was a Gainsborough!
I can see why one would go to bath as an artist. The progressive architecture is enough inspiration.
I believe good old Nick showed he was a good sport after discovering the true value of his painting ...He was disappointed, but it was a gamble to begin with...
Wow this one was a real roller coaster! Thanks! I love these shows.
Roller coaster? It’s called writing and editing. Faked just as much as a forger
Up at 4a.m fascinating!
Who’s to say the modern experts on the Gainsborough won’t be proven wrong in a few decades? Obviously, others have been wrong about it in the past? Just the fact that this investigation was don’t and documented will likely make the painting more valuable as time goes on regardless! Imagine someone watching this in a century or two.
The reputation hit they would take makes the authenticator massively biased, since he didn't compare or use any of the actual evidence in his judgement.
Also By saying it was not a Gainsborough they massively devalue it, probably in hopes that he will sell it for a 'high offer' based on their evaluation which could allow them to covertly acquire it for much cheaper than they otherwise would be able to if they authenticated it as real. Then they'll just say 'on further investigation this is the real one' making the value much higher and making a large profit.
I love your watercolors for your client, too, and also your house portrait!
I prefer the dahl potrait she is very beautiful...😊
I fell asleep watching CZcams and dreamed that a painting I had painted when I was 15 was being discussed as whether it was real or fake. I told the owners I had painted it and given it to Goodwill a long time ago. I don't know if they believed me or was disappointed to know the artist. Then, I woke up to this video. 😂
2:02:18 money money, when people spend, things get serious 😉 (super video, my congratulations)
Good show, another you tube discovery!
Why? Why? Why does Miss Fiona still looks so gorgeous after all these years. ❤ to be fair and respectful to who ever painted the last painting was a master no doubt as it would make a great 1000 piece jigsaw puzzle. Easy way to recoup the cost maybe, for the creative at heart. C.a.n.v.a and e.t.s.y is your way forward. Good luck.
This is just too cool!
I love this show! It shows how one is able to distinguish fake from real! Thank you for your show! Love the intro music as well!
fiona bruce would be such a good screw
My God! It's my dream job!!!! It's soooo exciting!!!
It IS a beautiful piece! I'd be happy to display and look at it.
It is a De Chirico, they didn't want to admit their mistake
Oh I love your channel............................
Damn that rogue Barker of Bath. Fantastic episode just the same.
Let me guess another 5 under the sticker lol
so, gainsbury can't paint over another painting?... mayb they should xray some other gainsbury paintings and see if they have been so... also, they have a letter that he was hard up... i'm not trusting this guy
That first picture from Mark is Authentic and I do not collect Art. Beautiful....I was wrong
Its a shame some countries cannot verify for certain the providence and if a painting is genuine or not. Being sued for being wrong is loosing big money etc. Giving a certificate of providence etc for being a genuine painting and finding out later it isnt is also why some countries wont actually certify etc. The USA doesnt I think.
It’s provenance, not providence.
Yes, they mentioned this in the Willem de Kunning episode.
It could never be the real deal, phil had worked for another some 20 years before.
That painting disappeared and they will not let them see or test it. So maybe that one is false and well they must have paid a fortune, maybe for Barker of Bath.
Amazing…!
omg this is so frustrating, everything is saying this is real!!!!... why don't they get the painting that was "authenticated" and do all this research on it to disprove it's authentication!!!
They don’t know who has it. It’s in a private collection and most of these people don’t want to reveal themselves
Let's say you bought an authenticated painting for £100,000.
Then someone says, "We want to authenticate your painting, again."
You either say, "No, thank you, my painting has already been authenticated." It's still valued at £100,000.
Or,
You say, "Sure." However, once the results come back, your painting will either be worth £100,000, or Nothing.
My point is, the current owner of the other "authenticated" painting has nothing to gain and everything to lose.
100 years later... It is A Thomas Gainsborough! Surprice!!
this why I hate this show. All the evidence points to it being a Gainsborough and yet one dude says its not and all the evidence goes out the window..
So, you don't understand how science works. That's hardly the show's fault.
The Gainsborough decision wasn’t made by objective logic, it was one man’s subjective interpretation.
Perfekt duko ,thangs,key iß th🎉😂❤e
Let's buy those artworks with the scientific attributes and wait the feely authenticators out
Agreed, reminded me of the old nerds that so called disprove newly found polik works. A dumb accent and an opinion.
I believe in the Peniston Lamb portrait, the third was Lawrence. But, the fourth I strongly believe could be a post mortem Cosway.
I love love you both so very much
Ngl i watch dis shi when i am tired at 12 am💀
For decades on TV, crime shows have made it look like many dozens of young college types seem to dash off tons of "copies" of masterpieces as easily as today's kids use photoshop. I always thought this was a wild exaggeration that these young slobs could just turn out these fakes at the drop of a hat. One would have to be even better than the masters themselves in order to recreate fakes by scratch. But after seeing this show, I must admit that there are (or were) more fakers around than I thought.
It seems that the kneaded eraser is the best for all around use, but more than half the times I buy one online they are too hard to be malleable. Does anyone know a reliable place online to get one?
Art… The way rich people waste money. Instead of helping humanity they would rather spend millions on nonsense
Tax write-offs
1:28:57 the corresponding branch of the Family Tree.
wow
What do you reckon Peniston's nickname was?
That Gainsborough is the original!! No question.
brilliant guest with great hair
1:48:57 is it me? Or does Mary Boyle look like Mr. Bean's great great grandmother?
Now you’ve said it… I can’t unsee it!!
Does look like Mr. Bean but I also see Tony Robinson in that face.
Beautifull habit
I bet the royal family saw that painting when it was on exhibit
doskonała precyzja portretu
Honestly I’m also fascinated by the fakers haha imagine someone having the skill and attention to detail to copy an artwork.
👏
What I’ve come to realize from watching these shows is the art world is really a world of self preservation and the almighty dollar. I’m not surprised but I’m always suspicious/disappointed when everything points to a work of art being authentic but the experts either won’t acknowledge it or completely dismiss it.
NO, I HAVEN'T GOT DEMENTIA! I have seen this 2 or even 3 years ago
So, is it attributed to the Baker of Bath? And, One other question not explored is Did the Baker of Bath have the need to paint over anything at all, and especially a Michael Dahl portrait? They explained Bath used a Dark primer. Further Examination of Dahls work to show he did this would be more convincing to me than a last minute critique on the technique being forced rather than Gainsborough's flowing...
Oh my god