Seikichi Takara

Its good . The only thing that disturbs me slightly is the fact that everything is dead center. Im a nut for asymmetry. Its just me, its not any neg criticism .

I think what he may have had in mind was primordial matter which would seem to be coming from a symmetrical center. It's not a great reproduction of the piece either -- it has an internal motion that seems to have tension and perhaps a calm before a terrific explosion.

Thats a problem with e-art. The painting has to be enjoyed from a correct position and in its real life size. As I look to the bottom right, his dark color helps add a sense of direction but it doesnt come off strongly in the scan

you say it is a limited edition print - is this a reproduction of a painting type print or an artists print? (lithograph etc?)

I like it but would love to see it properly, life size, to enjoy the marks, colours etc

There is a lot of definition and contrast lost -- I wish it were a better visual. I'll try one of his seascapes and see if that comes off better.

Distant Moon

...and another abstract:



Nightscape

It is a studio produced sergraph or screenprint from original paintings but often they are done from his studies and he is very active in the production of the print. He does a lot of monotypes with bold black shapes (painting on glass and then transferring to paper). He was marketed commercially in the 80's and 90's and the gallery I am consulting for right now has a inventory of the print runs. As I've said elsewhere, not really calling this anything more than it is -- reproductions but very good ones and not at unrealistic prices. I did sell his work in my Newport Beach gallery in the mid-nineties (it was adjacent to my lighting showroom). I'm suppose to write some material about his art and thought this would be a good place to get some feedback.

One thing I do like is that the master printer used some low resolution screens and applied some fairly heavy undercoats and overcoats of silkscreen ink to give the surface of the abstracts a very tactile look.

Actually, I sold the original of the first image back in the late 80's and it was more toward the greens. Why Takara decided to have the print run more to the blues I have never asked him. I'll post one of his "ying and yang" pieces that are dominate red and black and is one that was done from a study. "Nightscape" was actually the center panel of a triptych painting which I also had sold in the late 80's.





Red Karma

I really like nightscape and red karma - it was good to see more of the work - it is growing on me more and more!

(I do monotypes as well. I belong to the local Print Workshop where we have all the presses, inks and facilities).

I like the quiet spaces in his work and the way they work with the lively busy, gestural areas - the pacing and spacing is excellent.

One of his strengths is composition and color balance.

I own 6 signed and numbered pieces. He is my favorite artist, but due to the
economy I might have to sell them together. Can you suggest the best way
to do this?

In a bad economy, art really takes it in the shorts. The Takara prints are really third-party published art. The artist created the paintings but did not create the prints. Their value, unfortunately, doens't hold up in the secondary market. E Bay is your best chance but if they are framed, you're going to have to mark the framing down to about $ 100.00. The original wholesale on the prints was around $350.00. I doubt one could get more than $400.00 to $500., but in this economy, as low as $200. Never buy any art for investment -- the market is volatile even in good times. Buy it because you love it an enjoy it. Whether it eventually is in an estate for your descendants and brings some amount of money is also doubtful. These are not museum painters. The only artsts Martin Lawrence sold who were in museums were Andy Warhol, DeKooning, and other pop artists they contracted for work.

I have an original oil by him titled "High Surf" it is framed, about 38x48 inches. Any idea what this painting is worth?

It's worth and its market value can be two different things. The first is only important for insurance reasons so whatever the original invoice value is what the painting is worth. As to the market value, if you try to sell it on E Bay, you might get $ 3,000.00 but that would be in a good economy. You can search E Bay for what is available by Takara. He's had it rough with getting involved with a crooked attorney who decided he was a big art tycoon by buying up all the artist's work. He went bankrupt. To get a document to insure the painting for more than the original invoice value would required a written appraisal by an accredited appraiser which can cost in excess of $ 500.00.

Here are some links:

http://www.herndonfineart.com/takara.htm

http://www.artbrokerage.com/art/takara_7779/Seikichi_Takara_Cerulean_Night

http://www.artbrokerage.com/art/takara/

Bear in mind that a brokerage house or a retail art gallery are going to take a commission from 10% to as much as 50%.

I'm being repetitive but this type of commercial fine art does not appreciate.

If the art salesperson told you it would appreciate, from 1988 on, it was against the law to promise any kind of appreciation or profit from selling fine art. The salespeople have used this as a hard closing technique and it is hard to prosecute but it has been.

My wife and I actually purchased the original Nightscape in Newport Beach and had it enclosed in a plexiglass case, beautiful. We still enjoy this wonderful piece. We also own several other pieces completed by Takara.

Thank you for your response, but I'm confused !! Are you saying that the artist did not sign these prints? They are framed and are very large - they take up every wall in every room of my apt! I was offered 150,000 in 1997 for the set, and I was a fool not to accept, but I believed they would be worth more in the future for my sons. When my husband and I purchased them at Martin Lawrence they were in a room separate from other prints and we spent 3,000 to 5,000 each. It is sad to think that now they are not even worth what we originally spent .