• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

November 2015 Heritage Signature Auction Thread
1 1

Started by delekkerste,

630 posts in this topic

J.Sid

J.Sid

Posted
Posted
But is Heritage claiming them to be the same painting? As I read the description they are claiming the one they have is a formerly undocumented prelim. Naturally it would have differences.

 

Good point! They are indeed claiming it's a prelim.

 

(I got a little too exited to bust out the photoshop)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rotembk

rotembk

Posted
Posted (edited)
But is Heritage claiming them to be the same painting? As I read the description they are claiming the one they have is a formerly undocumented prelim. Naturally it would have differences.

 

Good point! They are indeed claiming it's a prelim.

 

(I got a little too exited to bust out the photoshop)

 

 

I thought in his first message on this point Joakim indicated that the prelim HA referred to was actually uncovered several years ago and is a different piece.

 

Edit: Just to clarify, I'm not even a Carl Barks fan, just found the particular discussion to be interesting.

Edited by rotembk
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Joakim

Joakim

Posted
Posted (edited)
How on earth is that piece still being offered? Have you called them about this??

 

I'm now in touch with one of the guys at Heritage and have sent him a mail where I give my arguments.

 

Here's part of what I wrote. (To sum it up for those of you not having read the previous posts.)

 

-------------------------

Let me give you my arguments why I don't believe this to be the work of Barks.

 

But first of all let me make a note about the 1974 painting of Scrooge.

The original source for the info about a 1974 ”Uncle Scrooge portrait” comes from a letter Carl wrote to Matti Eronen in 1992:

"This small painting is an "unknown". I did it in 1974 and gave it to somebody. I kept no record of it in my files, and have only one small photo of it. I think it is 10" x 8", and that I gave it to […].”

It has since seen print and is called "The Tycoon". We printed it on page 182 in "Carl Barks Målningar och teckningar".

It's not the one you have at auction.

 

Now, with "The Tycoon" painting out of the picture what do we have here?

A painting with the exact dimensions as the 1975 painting "Oh, Oh!"

It's interesting to note that he 1975 painting wasn't available as a good repro when the fine arts book was made and still wasn't in 2011 when we did our book.

It wasn't until October 7 this year that a slide of the painting (from the Barks Estate) turned up in Denmark.

It's also interesting to note that the painting up for auction looks more similar to the previously printed image than the image on the slide.

To me that's an indication that someone might have used the printed image to do his/her own version of a Barks painting.

But that's of course just speculations.

Here you can see the three images side by side: http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-3YW2KxMy-Uk/VhgGNyAWbWI/AAAAAAAAJJQ/Lk_iLEfia5k/s1600/Ska%25CC%2588rmavbild%2B2015-10-07%2Bkl.%2B20.00.40.png

 

Let's take a closer look at the painting.

Compare the images. The one to the right show how Barks handled drawing beaks etc.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-RyAQ-s9IKc0/VhgFiFZyCOI/AAAAAAAAJJA/usu5m_umUbo/s1600/Close%2Bup%2Bcompare.tif

 

The highlights on the painting you have suggests that the painting is finished, but at the same time the scratchy lines suggests that it’s not.

Look at the use of unblended colors like the white highlights, the blue on Scroooge’s glasses and the black on the beak.

Barks would have used blended colors like the old masters.

Follow this link to see what I mean:

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/--fbunmfLURY/VhgFqUrFojI/AAAAAAAAJJI/_Ex-T3amTJI/s1600/Close%2Bup%2Bnotes.jpg

 

I have never seen color been used that way on any known confirmed Barks painting.

The same way goes for the brush strokes.

Another give away that it's not Barks is that the person who painted this didn't know how to connect the leg with the feathers at the upper part of the leg.

Take a look at the painting you got and compare to other images of confirmed Barks paintings. See how the feathers are painted just wrong on the painting you have?

-----------------------

 

For those of you on the Collectors Society Forum who does not know me:

I have studied the work of Barks for many, many years. I'm also working at Egmont Publishing in Sweden and we published a book featuring the oil paintings by Barks back in 2011: "Carl Barks Målningar och teckningar".

A 400+ pages thick book covering much that was not in the american book. A great reference source when you want to study his paintings.

I also work as a -script writer and artist for comics. As a professional in this business there's not one artist that I have studied more than Barks.

 

Now, we'll see what happens. At least I have said what I think. :-)

 

/Joakim.

 

Edited by Joakim
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eric Seffinga

Eric Seffinga

Posted
Posted

The only thing I see that goes against all that is the comparisons are being made of a prelim against finished pieces. The lack of blending, the cut corners, hastily unattended areas could just be the nature of it being a prelim, could it not? The only true comparison that makes any sense here would be of this piece against a stack of other prelims, correct?

 

I'm no expert, but I would expect someone knowledgeable with Barks' brush work specifically in regards to his other loose prelim work would be able to say fairly definitively what's what, though it might require actually laying eyes on it. A persons signature painting technique is pretty hard to forge. As much or moreso than a signature, when experts are involved.

 

My somewhat uneducated .02¢

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bronty

Bronty

Posted
Posted

Look at the color choices though eric.

 

On the old reproduction, the shadows look black, and the heritage painting has them black.

 

On the slide (a truer image of the final) the shadows are blue, the way most artists would paint a shadow.

 

Its somebody copying the previous repro, IMO. If nothing else I think its pretty clear Joakim knows his stuff and his opinion and analysis seems pretty good to me!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GreatEscape

GreatEscape

Posted
Posted
Yes, he did several where we could see teeth.

Including the 1975 painting "Oh, oh!"

 

Only a bad reproduction has seen print of that painting, but very recently a slide of the painting turned up in Denmark. Here's a link where you can see it next to the Heritage piece and the old repro:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-3YW2KxMy-Uk/VhgGNyAWbWI/AAAAAAAAJJQ/Lk_iLEfia5k/s1600/Ska%25CC%2588rmavbild%2B2015-10-07%2Bkl.%2B20.00.40.png

 

 

 

 

Here is a shot of the images overlaid onto the one another. I aligned the circles on top of each other so that you can see how drastic the differences are.

 

Note the coins, feet, woman's leg, cane, shadow placement....

 

overlay.jpg

 

Awesome work, that's why our forum ROCKS! :headbang: Super IQ and knowledge all around.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
adamstrange

adamstrange

Posted
Posted

 

Now, we'll see what happens. At least I have said what I think. :-)

 

/Joakim.

Thank you for taking the time to investigate and share you analysis. (thumbs u

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mmehdy

Mmehdy

Posted
Posted
How on earth is that piece still being offered? Have you called them about this??

 

I'm now in touch with one of the guys at Heritage and have sent him a mail where I give my arguments.

 

Here's part of what I wrote. (To sum it up for those of you not having read the previous posts.)

 

-------------------------

Let me give you my arguments why I don't believe this to be the work of Barks.

 

But first of all let me make a note about the 1974 painting of Scrooge.

The original source for the info about a 1974 ”Uncle Scrooge portrait” comes from a letter Carl wrote to Matti Eronen in 1992:

"This small painting is an "unknown". I did it in 1974 and gave it to somebody. I kept no record of it in my files, and have only one small photo of it. I think it is 10" x 8", and that I gave it to […].”

It has since seen print and is called "The Tycoon". We printed it on page 182 in "Carl Barks Målningar och teckningar".

It's not the one you have at auction.

 

Now, with "The Tycoon" painting out of the picture what do we have here?

A painting with the exact dimensions as the 1975 painting "Oh, Oh!"

It's interesting to note that he 1975 painting wasn't available as a good repro when the fine arts book was made and still wasn't in 2011 when we did our book.

It wasn't until October 7 this year that a slide of the painting (from the Barks Estate) turned up in Denmark.

It's also interesting to note that the painting up for auction looks more similar to the previously printed image than the image on the slide.

To me that's an indication that someone might have used the printed image to do his/her own version of a Barks painting.

But that's of course just speculations.

Here you can see the three images side by side: http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-3YW2KxMy-Uk/VhgGNyAWbWI/AAAAAAAAJJQ/Lk_iLEfia5k/s1600/Ska%25CC%2588rmavbild%2B2015-10-07%2Bkl.%2B20.00.40.png

 

Let's take a closer look at the painting.

Compare the images. The one to the right show how Barks handled drawing beaks etc.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-RyAQ-s9IKc0/VhgFiFZyCOI/AAAAAAAAJJA/usu5m_umUbo/s1600/Close%2Bup%2Bcompare.tif

 

The highlights on the painting you have suggests that the painting is finished, but at the same time the scratchy lines suggests that it’s not.

Look at the use of unblended colors like the white highlights, the blue on Scroooge’s glasses and the black on the beak.

Barks would have used blended colors like the old masters.

Follow this link to see what I mean:

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/--fbunmfLURY/VhgFqUrFojI/AAAAAAAAJJI/_Ex-T3amTJI/s1600/Close%2Bup%2Bnotes.jpg

 

I have never seen color been used that way on any known confirmed Barks painting.

The same way goes for the brush strokes.

Another give away that it's not Barks is that the person who painted this didn't know how to connect the leg with the feathers at the upper part of the leg.

Take a look at the painting you got and compare to other images of confirmed Barks paintings. See how the feathers are painted just wrong on the painting you have?

-----------------------

 

For those of you on the Collectors Society Forum who does not know me:

I have studied the work of Barks for many, many years. I'm also working at Egmont Publishing in Sweden and we published a book featuring the oil paintings by Barks back in 2011: "Carl Barks Målningar och teckningar".

A 400+ pages thick book covering much that was not in the american book. A great reference source when you want to study his paintings.

I also work as a -script writer and artist for comics. As a professional in this business there's not one artist that I have studied more than Barks.

 

Now, we'll see what happens. At least I have said what I think. :-)

 

/Joakim.

 

 

First, is there a reason why your book is not available in the US...can you import copies? Will there be a US published version?. Is the book downloadable or sample pages available on the web.?

 

My opinion,based on my seeing Both the nugget painting and the scrooge portrait about 20 times as well as 30 other paintings numerous times..is that is the real possibly of multiple versions of this piece.....being unsigned is worrisome, but the back of the panting is marked similar to the other oils...

for me its 50/50.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pinupcartoonguy

pinupcartoonguy

Posted
Posted (edited)
Looks like they pulled the dubious Barks.

 

Do we know why the McCay panel also got pulled?

 

What's a little scary about the Barks being pulled is the fact that the description for the listing said that Russ Cochran vouched for the piece.

 

Edited by pinupcartoonguy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
1 1
Go to topic listing