Hello, I picked this up at a local thrift store today. It appears to be real, but so much fraud with his works. It has EA on bottom left and his signature on bottom right, both are in pencil. I believe it is an etching, any help would be greatly appreciated
Salvador Dali, is this real?
- Thread starter Mybestie
- Start date
It might be an "actual lithograph", but there was a scandal back in the 70s I believe, where Dalí had signed a bunch of blank sheets of paper, and then his images were added later by others... or something like that.
Rick
Rick
Nikodeumus
SGF, Supreme Grumble Framer
It's pretty easy to find resources to do a little bit of research on your own.
Then if there is still some possibility of it being authentic, take it to an actual art appraiser with the relevant expertise.
I found this forum thread that might help you get started:
www.quora.com
Then if there is still some possibility of it being authentic, take it to an actual art appraiser with the relevant expertise.
I found this forum thread that might help you get started:
How would I determine if my signed Salvador Dali lithograph paintings are authentic?
Answer (1 of 2): First of all, lithographs are not paintings, but prints produced in multiples. Second, Dali was infamous for pre-signing paper, and letting others do the printing. It is possible that your lithographs are little more than posters. I hope you did not pay much.
He did a lot of etchings before the pieces Rick is referring to were made. This looks like one of them. There's a obvious plate mark in the photo of the signature.
Best thing to do is get authenticity from the Salvador Dali Museum in St Petersburg, FL., or from some other recognized authority.
Best thing to do is get authenticity from the Salvador Dali Museum in St Petersburg, FL., or from some other recognized authority.
As a former appraiser, the odds are that it is not an authorized image. I have heard as many as over 350,000 blank sheets were signed in addition to similar numbers of knockoff reproductions sold as authorized reproductions. Fake platemarks are easy to reproduce.
Last edited:
If you like this, I have a bridge in Brooklyn you might be interested in. Comes with a genuine copy of a COA.
Here's the book that covers the whole sordid mess.
It should be required reading for wannabe collectors.
The fraud included works by Miro, Calder, Leger, Matisse, Picasso, and others.
The estimate at the time of publishing was that about 90% of the works attributed to Dali on the market were forgeries.
It should be required reading for wannabe collectors.
The fraud included works by Miro, Calder, Leger, Matisse, Picasso, and others.
The estimate at the time of publishing was that about 90% of the works attributed to Dali on the market were forgeries.
That is a cool museum. Nice building, and a great collection of definite originals.
Or feel free to just use this one...
I get inquiries about CA's from people who are concerned with a piece's authenticity. I tell them that a CA is easier to forge than the piece of art was.
Authentication by a museum is almost impossible to get. They cannot afford to be wrong.
Authentication by a museum is almost impossible to get. They cannot afford to be wrong.
cvm
SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God
I was in Chicago a few years ago and met a guy from New Jersey. His name was Paul and he was kinda crazy - but a genius marketer. He said he sold the Brooklyn bridge - twice, lol. Yeah, right, hahaha. He said "check this out"...
https://www.iboughtthebrooklynbridge.com/ Now You Can Own An Authentic Piece of the Original, World-Famous Brooklyn Bridge and Claim Your Unique Piece of History!
Are you sure that she didn't find them in a garage in London?
https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/28/style/dali-prints-discovered-garage-gbr-scli-intl/index.html
A friend has what he believes is a genuine Miró, that he "rescued" when a neighbor threw it away. I told him essentially the same thing about his print. Even if it is lithographically printed, it is likely out of a European art book or some similar source.
Rick
Web Picture Frames
Grumbler in Training
Check to see if the paper has an infinity symbol embossed or watermarked into the paper. It if does, it's fake. Here's the reasoning: Salvador Dali used Arches watercolor paper for all his prints, but they were all produced before Arches started embossing the infinity symbol into their papers. So if you see the infinity symbol, that's the primary indicator that you have a fake Dali.
Interesting insight on that. Welcome to the Grumble.
Rick
Rick
Web Picture Frames
Grumbler in Training
Thanks for the warm welcome, Rick! I used to prepare exhibits at a major art museum, and I took a workshop on fakes and forgeries when we had an exhibit dedicated to them. That knowledge about the infinity symbol has come in handy a few times now! Unfortunately, not to my benefit...haha.
Hi, Mybestie. Welcome to the Grumble! 
My apology for the extremely long delay, but I just wanted to say thank you for taking the time to help me figure this out. It did not have the infinity sign as you indicated. I went back to that same thrift store and purchased the other two. None of them do. I paid $5 a piece for them, so either way I am extremely happy with my purchases. I will let you know what they appraise at, if anything. Thanks again!
Rock knocker
Grumbler
My parents bought two Dali prints in Hawaii back in 1980.
After reading the book and researching the subject, I think most Dali’s are fake
After reading the book and researching the subject, I think most Dali’s are fake
I'm ok with that, after all the reading I have done as well, i have decided to search out a local museum who can authentic them. I know they would not be able to appraise them, but it would be wonderful if I can finally get some answers
cvm
SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God
Bernard Ewell
Bernard Ewell Fine At Appraisals LLC
International Salvador Dali Expert and the Dean of Fine Art Appraisers
bernardewell.com
At that price, even if they were only decorative they would still be a bargain.
Rick
Ricknot8st
Grumbler in Training
Yes you are correct "Center art gallery" on the big Island in/on Hawaii were the culprits, however that's not one of the Dali's that was not licensed for printIt might be an "actual lithograph", but there was a scandal back in the 70s I believe, where Dalí had signed a bunch of blank sheets of paper, and then his images were added later by others... or something like that.
not8st
Grumbler in Training
not all Dali's were printed unlicensed, but the fact that they purchased these two in Hawaii is a fairly big red flag.
not8st
Grumbler in Training
also the time frame is exact
not8st
Grumbler in Training
But technically it is a Miro, just not a Miro that's worth more than a few dollarsA friend has what he believes is a genuine Miró, that he "rescued" when a neighbor threw it away. I told him essentially the same thing about his print. Even if it is lithographically printed, it is likely out of a European art book or some similar source.
not8st
Grumbler in Training
If they purchased the two pieces from "Center Art gallery" in the 80's then I would be surprised if the two were not unlicensed
Tomasnomas
Grumbler in Training
My mother bought 4 of his “Dante…” lithos while on vacation in Hawaii. She paid about $100 each. 10 plus years later I had them evaluated by an expert (professor/collector/dealer) and they were about the same. He explained about the scandal. It’s true. Dali signed hundreds of sheets of paper (arches, I believe) to be printed later. To me they looked like offset prints.It might be an "actual lithograph", but there was a scandal back in the 70s I believe, where Dalí had signed a bunch of blank sheets of paper, and then his images were added later by others... or something like that.
glamorsidhe
CGF, Certified Grumble Framer
The problem with "authenticating" a work of art, even by so-called experts of the piece(s) in question, is that without actual provenance for the individual piece, it's all a matter of conjecture/opinion, perhaps "educated" opinion, but not actual knowledge of it. Without the aforementioned provenance (very difficult to usually prove), only the actual artist or apprentice/friend to same can say, "Yes, that's genuine." Otherwise, at best, a label of "Attributed to" such & such.
If you like the piece, enjoy it, frame it, perhaps even insure it. Certitude is oft like chasing the wind . . . .
If you like the piece, enjoy it, frame it, perhaps even insure it. Certitude is oft like chasing the wind . . . .
Glamorsidhe, I gather that you do not know how forensic and scientific analysis are done in conjunction with authentication in many cases.
Examples of which are chemical/microscopic analysis of the paint/ink, paper, canvas, wood, etc. There is also research done at times of historical documents/photos.
Examples of which are chemical/microscopic analysis of the paint/ink, paper, canvas, wood, etc. There is also research done at times of historical documents/photos.
glamorsidhe
CGF, Certified Grumble Framer
I'm well aware of what you say regarding forensic & scientific analysis done within many, if not most, art authentication situations, & the various chemical & electromagnetic analyses performed on the diverse substrates, paints, inks in order to determine the materials' specific historicities (eg, whether a specific ink/paint color was ever used by the artist in question, or if some of the materials were even available during a specific time frame, etc.), but none of these things actually "prove" that a specific artist created a specific art piece: all this data helps, but specificity is never proved so much as inferred (was it artist "A" or artist "B" working in the manner of "A", particularly when dealing in "forgeries" or "imitations" of specific names, paintings, etc. who did the actual art piece?). If it was simply a matter of scientific examinations of artwork & research therein authenticating things, you wouldn't need the "judgements" (opinions) of so-called experts determining if the art in question was actually done by a specific artist at a specific time & hence "genuine" as opposed to labels of "attributed to" or "working in the manner of" or a plethora of other semi-namings or classifications but not full "authentications" of artworks --- nor would there still exist, as many professionals attest, within many museums & art galleries questionable if not actual copies or forgeries of art being exhibited! Art authentications deal virtually with inferred conclusions based on a plethora of data, but rarely certitudes deduced from that data.
Corbin Dallas
Grumbler
The authentication/appraisal process for a Dali lithograph would probably be very different than that of an original Rembrandt. It would more likely take place in a library than a science lab.
glamorsidhe
CGF, Certified Grumble Framer
Actually (& I could be wrong in this), I'd guess that authentication or appraisal for Dali's lithographs or sketches, or those of Andy Warhol's, or for that matter, similar items of Roy Lichtenstein, Jasper Johns, Peter Max, Jackson Pollock, Gustav Klimt, et al, would value forensic & scientific analyses more than many "expert" appraisers/authenticators for "original fine art" paintings --- for the latter, such analyses are often only supplemental, not primary.
But yes, as you state, many of the aforementioned lithos, sketches, drawings would usually be appraised within "libraries" rather than laboratories.
According to the appraisers on Antiques Roadshow, authenticating works ostensibly by some of the artists mentioned here must be done by foundations or similar entities related to the specific artist.
Rick
Rick
For Dali prints it would be the Dali Museum in Sarasota, FL., but even if they say it is authentic, getting that in writing is nigh on impossible.According to the appraisers on Antiques Roadshow, authenticating works ostensibly by some of the artists mentioned here must be done by foundations or similar entities related to the specific artist.
Some of those that manage the Catalogue Raisonne for any particular artist may have their own interests involved with their job of verifying or denying authenticity. Family members and huge amounts of money being involved often only help to make the process even more difficult.
glamorsidhe
CGF, Certified Grumble Framer
That's why I stress "so-called" experts or authenticators: Very often there's more politics, egos, would-be reputations & appearances at work than adherence to research & viable presentations in the final "authenticating" of something --- not that there aren't decent people doing such work, just that the former, particularly if involving group-thinking, muck-up or complexify many assessment situations.