Rockwell found to be fake, but original uncovered after 30 years

Create a Post
FramerDave

FramerDave

PFG, Picture Framing God
Joined
Jan 1, 2001
Posts
5,415
Loc
Houston, Texas
Pretty interesting story here about a Rockwell hanging in the museum that was found to be a forgery, but the good news is that they found the real one safely hidden away.

Here's the story: Rockwell forgery exposed

And for a side-by-side comparison:
rockwell_large.gif
 
Dave,

That's way cool how those two alternate. Did you make that happen or was it them. I guess I should click the link to find out.
 
I think I prefer the other image.

Framerguy
 
I totaly agree that the switching images effect is a great way to see the comaprisons of the fake and the REAL thing.


However at the risk of Frankenthreading this to some degree,the most amazing thing about this story and others like it is that with all the EXPERT Art apprasiers and Conservators at this and other Museems ,and with the host of True Rockwells to comapre things like style and technique,The EXPERTS were still wrong .And remained fooled until the original surfaced.

With that in mind I'd like to ask agin what makes some art more valuable then others ? Is it just who produced them( Rockwell)? Or is there some special style and technique that make these painting more desireable than others ?

If it is style and technique WHY isn't the fake just as valuable as the original? And if it is just the name of the Artist could it be that some very valuable (Monitarily) works really are poorly done?

So Why do we pay more for some work than others in todays markets and who sets their dollar value and why?

BUDDY
 
Well, they did suspect that something was wrong for years, but the painting had a good and proven provenance. It had passed straight from the artist to the owner, then to the museum. An unbroken, documented chain of ownership.

It was really a failure of imagination, as they say, since who would have suspected the guy would have about eight fakes made to keep them from the wife in a divorce?

As for value, the market sets it. Quality of work, the artist's name, marketable images, the artist's reputation, and what people are willing to pay. Plain and simple, if people are willing to pay a million bucks for something, it's worth a million bucks.
 
Buddy,I think the value of anything is an abstraction at best. Why is gold at $600.00?

If you purchased a painting in a thrift store for five dollars and someone offered you ten thousand dollars for it, would you turn them down? Not likely. The question would be what is your five dollar painting actually worth, $5.00 or $10,000.00?

Hypothetically lets assume that the new owner is a single person with no heirs. The owner dies, the painting ends up in another thrift store, what is the painting worth?

The value of anything is determined by what folks are willing to spend on it today. Tomorrow that amount can change dramatically.

To answer your question, what would you rather purchase for fifty thousand dollars, an original Picasso or an original Ozz Franca? The name of the artist is the primary factor in determining what a painting is worth, today.

We can take this a little further, what is a dollar actually worth?

This is just my opinion, what the heck do I know for sure?

John
 
Dave when I read "the painting had a good and proven provenance. It had passed straight from the artist to the owner, then to the museum. An unbroken, documented chain of ownership. "

I may have totaly misunderstood but from that I got the fact that it went from the artist (ROCKWELL) to the person having it in their ownership and then was sent in some way to the museem. A PROVEN PROVENAANCE would to my understanding indicate Undenieable proof that thses facts were true.Add to that ,that you stated it was documented and the paper trail was UNBROKEN. So two question spring from that,first Why with all that proof of authenticity did they still doubt it's truth? And having found that the ART WORK is a fake doesn't hat also presuppose that the documentation was also? So with all their suspicions and experts which should have also included a handwriteing or signature annalyst they still got fooled what makes any appraiser opions or apprasial anything more then a hunch?

Doesn;t the old cliche go something like "Fool me once shame on you.Fool me twice SHAME ON ME."?And they seemed to have been fooled at every turn despite their fears.

And I knew that demand dictated increased prices ,but my question was what does that have to do with the work being of FINE ENOUGH QUALITY to called FINE ART? Isn't that more a definition of what makes an item COLLECTABLE? And no different than anyother LE print?

John I also understand your point about a $5 purchase being resold for $10,000 dollars and I also understand that Picasso's name is worth more than the artist you name . But My question is how does that all relate to the quality of the work?

i.e. An original piece of art done by any historical celebrity might draw a very high price,but does that indicate that that same person had true art SKILLS that will make an image from them worth more than another historical person or a known Old Master?

I too would pay for an in demand Art object also but it wouldn't be proof that Art work merited that price. Does that make my points any clearer with out offending anyone else?
BUDDY

[ 04-07-2006, 11:22 PM: Message edited by: BUDDY ]
 
I'm just glad someone goes to fark.com besides me.
 
Buddy, what difference does it make? Is it art? Is it garbage? It's all in the eyes of the beholder. It also has a lot to do with presentation and how much wine the collector drank at the opening of the show. A piece of fine art will bring a much higher price at a New York gallery than it will at the neighborhood thrift shop.

John
 
John you and I can debate the honesty of the Fine art priceing system some other time. What I have and still am asking ( Especially in light of this revalation) is what and who and why is any piece of Art considered FINE or better than others or OF GOOD QUALITY?

As I have said often, I have been associated with a Fine art Auction on a local PBS station for over 13 years. One of the Auctioneers who is also a qualified Apprasiser once told me about some small pieces done by a well kown Deceased Local artist who residede in the Up Town section of town "That all the Up town Collectors /Art Snobs/Uppies would pay almost anything for these pieces since if you were a memeber of the 'Up town in crowd 'you had to have one of these works in your collection .Fortuneatly they were well done while very small in size. These 5x7 water colors drew from $600 to $2000 unframed . So I fully understand what demand does to asking price as welll as where the price is being asked.

My question is What is the Criteria for determining that the work of an Artist is Well Done and why?

Before anyone knew who Norman Rockwell or Picasso was ,some one looked at their work and said they were exceptional.Since then I totaly agree that just the mention of their name adds $$$$$ to the sale of anything that bore their name in any place on earth. So what made them so appraised? And what does the fact that the experts couldn't tell this was a fake say about the QUALITY of the annoymus Forger's work and will their Art now draw a big price ( If they allow them to sell it from prison or after their release LOL)?

BUDDY
 
Create a Post
Back
Top