Art Appraising and it's Lunacy

picasso
...

Additional information on the Picasso Lithograph
http://art.goantiques.com/detail,pablo-picasso-estate,554061.html

This is the lithograph that i purchased for $15,

SusanAn, the smartest of us re value, at least that I know of at this moment and we alway are open to new people, is Lightwizard. He will probably ask you questions..

anyway, welcome to a2k..

I've seen that piece before and I'm satisfied that it is not signed by Picasso. It's a fake that's been floating around for many years and has shown up in a consignment store in Newport Beach which is about the fourth time I've seen it. You can be assured that if the auction house was selling it at a low price, they were selling it "as is." If they did not issue the C of A, they are not liable as an auction house is not required to authenticate anything. If the auctioneer misrepresented it, you have a case to return it and get your money back. If you somehow paid a great deal of money for this, a visit to your local District Attorney may help.

$15.00? No reputable auction house would not sell this as authentic. It's a reproduction. The "original" print is also a reproduction produced by the estate and signed not by Picasso but his wife Marina and it is numbered. $2800.00 would be a typical retail and I know that dealer, Ro Gallery as I have bought from them wholesale. The piece he has is the authentic print but it's not a good investment. Estate signed prints by famous artists are very questinable indeed, meaning that the heirs have decided to cash in on the artist's name and continue publish images where obviously the artist did not create the plates.

They even outline that they did not create the plates and Picasso, in fact, did very little graphic work that was multicolored. His last great set of prints were the etchings done in 1941, "The Mediterranean Suite." After that, he pretty much produced mediocre Picasso including that awful pottery.

Go to the New York City Public Library (Main Branch in Manhattan 5th Ave. & 42nd St.) Art Reference Desk. Ask For the Bloch volumes that cover that time frame. If it is in there it must be the exact same stated edition, stated size and colors represented. It must be line for line dot for dot. Measure the size of the image (height by width) in millimeters and bring a high quality photo of it. If it is rather small you may be able to bring it with you but you should call the library first and ask them.

P.S. Marina Picasso is Picasso's grand daughter who obtained the reproduction rights for a portion of Picasso's work. Before she was stopped by the rest of the family she issued a lot of reproductions usually signed in green or red "Picasso" by her. They are no better than frame shop reproductions.

I am in such great appreciation of all your advice. Sorry about my subsequent post that was botched up - the price I paid for the Picasso lithograph at the NYC auction was $15,000. In light of the assessment on this message board so far, it's very clear to me that I have made a tremendously bad purchasing decision. I am going to pursue all the recommendations made by you and will update this message board on any progress I make in getting my money back from the auction house in the chance it might assist someone else later on...

Until then, please continue to grace me with your much valued advice, insights, comments, etc.!!

Thank you all very much - this message board is of great comfort to me at a time when I can't seem to find any comprehensible answers at all!

Susan

If, in fact, this is signed "By Picasso," is not numbered, you have a good case to get your money returned. Especially if the "By Picasso" is reproduced and not original. The gallery which issued the C of A is likely defunct.

I wouldn't pay at auction for the piece described by the Ro Gallery more than $1200.00. The retail is a markup and likely four times what the print cost on the secondary market. Nobody inventories these prints unless they can buy low and sell high.

This may not be a criminal case although confronting the auction house with the idea that you will go to the DA to possibly file a criminal complaint that the signature is not real and the information divulged was misleading (they did not state that the piece was a reproduction, an estate print where the plates were made by another master printer, or that it was merely a commercial poster). An attorney may be in order for a $15,000.00 purchase as auction houses are really not required by law to authenticate a work of art or an antique. That burden is on the buyer. You can look at the Bloch and you can also get hold of a curator at MOMA, the Guggenheim or the Whitney and see if they would look at the print.

BTW, is this C of A pasted to the rear of the work or a seperate document?

(People have gotten their money back when a lot was misleadingly described, especially if it says it is an authentic signature).

The Certificate of Auth. was stapled onto the back of the painting. The auction house told me they would mail me documentation of some sort, but wasn't quite clear on what that was since I couldn't speak directly to the auctioneer.

The piece is numbered (Edition 150, ex. no. 115), but the Year and the Title of the piece conflicts with information I receved from Ro Gallery on the same piece. Also, on the Certificate it says is Signed, but I suppose that doesn't neccesarily mean the Gallery is authenticating that is was signed by the artist?

For future reference for everyone, the gallery that authenticated is Yamet Arts, Inc. in NYC. Their number is no longer working. I finally got an email reply from them confirming they authenticated it. Do I have only recourse against Yamet Arts?

Thanks again - I am still incredulous that I paid over $15,000 for a piece valued at $1200. Some lessons are so painful to learn!

What auction house was this? Stapled onto the back of the frame dustcover? It's a print, not a painting BTW. They're going to mail a new C of A/ Good luck, 'cause that's like saying "the check's in the mail" I'm afraid. If they are foolish enough to offer a new C of A with the obviously scant information they have, they are sticking their neck into a gillotine it would seem.

The C of A must state "Signed and Numbered by the Artist," not just "signed." Cleverly worded, that.

You have a claim agains the auction house IMO but it will be hell to try and find the gallery and the principals that owned it.

The $1200.00 price would be a fair price at auction for the piece Ro Gallery is listing. Paying their retail of $2800.00 is paying full on retail but I would guess that many galleries might try and place a wall retail as high as $5,000.00. Print art prices are just all over the place. It's an extremely volatile market and those who are highly educated in art avoid modern prints. This pratice of restriking or even with permission making a reproduction is dubious as best. Estate produced prints if you get a good price are okay for one's own enjoyment but not worth of investment. In fact, only 1% of all fine art has appreciated over the last 100 years. Stick to the stock market (and these day, one has to be resigned to hold stock for at least 20 years unless they are a specialists).

These are, of course, opinions based on 40 years experience in the art business as I am not an appraiser not a musuem curator.

Sounds like some threatened police involvement from an attorney will get your money back.

I found the auction through an ad in the NY Times. It was held in the Plaza Hotel on 9/6/04 and their license number is 0821306. That's the only info they provided, along with a 1-800 number, which I called but of course it's just an automated recording. Is this enough information to start talking to the DA office?

Yes. Hotel auctions are notoriously unreliable as well as cruise ships. Never, ever buy from these auctions. They only have basically junk art to sell that they likely have bought at a bargain price. There is no name for this "auction house?" It wasn't Parkwest, was it?

Caveat emptor.

I have learned my lesson well Lightwizard. I have yet to track down the auction house, but I've registered a formal complaint with the NYC consumer affairs office and I'm hoping that this was will be helpful in ultimately getting my money back from the auction house.

If you could so kindly answer another question: What book or other resource can I turn to in order to find the original print and other information on this particular lithograph? The picture of this print that Ro Gallery has on their website is different from mine (missing Picasso's signature), but I don't think a print-out of a website photo and information found there will be adequate by itself in building my case for why the signature on my print is fake (or can't be authenticated).

I am in true debt to your kind assistance.

Susan

Ro Gallery is near you in Long Island. Link:

http://www.rogallery.com/

I would offer to sell this to Robert Rogal at the gallery and see what he says. I wouldn't not approach him that you believe this is a fake or was misrepresented. Always be sceptical of everyone in the art business, especially prints.

You might have a problem if the "auction house" is one of those fly-by-night outfits out of your state. This could be a case for the FBI, believe it or not. If the "auction house" is not returning your calls and does not stick their neck out and send their own documentation, I'd certainly follow through.

Yamet Arts Inc. are well known peddlers of Fake paintings and fake prints. If the work of art bears it's name it is probably a fake
Steve

I should know Yamet Arts burned me big time on a painting

Susan, Twenty five years ago I also lost $15,000 in a crooked limited partnership land deal. Lessons well learned. At least I've been invulnerable since.

art appraising
I have a Dali Don Quixote that is a gift from a friend who bought it at a now-closed gallery in Oregon approximately 25 years ago. I have been trying to find out about it. In order to get it appraised I was told to contact a Dali expert, a Bruce Hochman, whose number is 800-275-3254 and whose email is [email protected]. A fine arts appraiser in Minnesota gave me his name as an expert on Dalis.

I called Mr. Hochman, described the Dali, and he told me to e-mail a photograph of it to him. He insisted it could appraise it by the emailed photograph.

I did so and received a two word response: "Sorry Fake."

Yesterday I saw an identical one on a web page called goantiques.com. The one on the web page is 152/225 and mine is 163/225.

Can anyone tell me about this? My Dali is the same as the one on the web page. If mine is a fake so is it, along with, I expect, the entire series of 225 lithographs.

Yes, it's likely a fake but the image is probably one where the crazy Dali signed thousands of blank sheets for money and the publisher printed whatever they pleased, having plates made from a reproduction of an existing drawing or print, but also by photo offset. It's difficult to get an appraisal on the signature itself.

Link:

Dali "fake" prints

"Levine and Levine," BTW was one of the founders and President of Martin Lawrence Galleries, a composite of two last names, and that's how the gallery chain got started. Dali lithographs that are even authentic are often now marketed at $ 2,000 or less and much larger than the Don Quixote print.

Link to Dali prints available