Тёмный

FAKE OR FORTUNE 9X03: EDWARD LANDSEER 

mightwenotbehappy
Подписаться 18 тыс.
Просмотров 267 тыс.
50% 1

Fiona Bruce and Philip Mould investigate a painting that could be the work of the celebrated artist Sir Edwin Landseer. If it is, they will have rediscovered a much-loved Victorian masterpiece that was thought to have been destroyed by a catastrophic flood almost a century ago.
The painting depicts the terrible aftermath of battle, with fallen soldiers and horses evoking the horror of war. The scene, known as Time of War, was first painted in 1846 by Landseer, the artist who created one of the most iconic images of 19th-century British art, The Monarch of the Glen, and whose lion sculptures still sit proudly in Trafalgar Square today. Landseer was an infant prodigy who became a favourite of Queen Victoria, and he painted the royal family and their beloved pets throughout his life.
The painting is owned by Kathy and Barry Romeril, who bought it in 1987, when they were still married. Now divorced, the painting has stayed with Kathy at her home in Ascot, while Barry now lives in Florida. The couple first spotted the picture in a sale at Ascot racecourse and had no idea of any connection to Landseer. Kathy explains to Fiona and Philip that she has a love of horses and was moved to tears by the grey horse staring out at her in such a desperate state. She decided there and then that the painting was coming home with her, and she bid £720 to secure it. But if the painting is proven to be a lost national treasure by Landseer, it could be worth as much as £80,000.
The original Time of War hung at the Tate gallery in London and was there in 1928 when the city suffered one of the worst disasters in its history. On the night of 7 January, the Thames burst its banks at Lambeth and crashed through the walls of the Embankment, flooding the houses that lined the river at that time. Fourteen people died, and thousands were left homeless. Water also surged into the lower galleries of the Tate, damaging hundreds of works from the national collection. By all accounts Time of War was destroyed - but was that really the case? Could Kathy and Barry’s picture be the lost Landseer?
Fiona follows the clues through the archives to establish exactly what happened to Landseer’s original painting. It’s a trail with plenty of unexpected twists and turns, including the revelation that other pictures thought to have been destroyed that night most definitely were not. One very notable example is now on display at the National Gallery. Philip, meanwhile, scours the picture itself for evidence that this is the hand of Landseer. As he casts his expert eye over the large canvas, he can see that the painting has unquestionably been damaged in the past. Could it be evidence of the Tate flooding? The investigation gathers pace, and the evidence is presented, but will it be enough to prove that Kathy and Barry’s picture is a long-lost national treasure?

Опубликовано:

 

26 сен 2024

Поделиться:

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист
Посмотреть позже
Комментарии : 486   
@joes9954
@joes9954 2 года назад
That odd border was THE smoking gun. It was an exact match to the original and I suspect Philip's hunch about the damage working against the painting was correct and the "expert" is wrong. Too many paintings are allowed to be authenticated or ruined on the opinion of one person. The West from a previous episode is an example of this.
@Bjy001
@Bjy001 Год назад
I agree. The "notch" was the smoking gun. So obviously the original.
@melanies.6030
@melanies.6030 Год назад
​@Bjy001 I'd be interested to know what the photography expert that pointed out that irregularity along the canvas edge made of the "verdict". To me too, that odd detail from the old photo directly matching up with the picture in question was indisputable proof.
@kittentupointo5867
@kittentupointo5867 9 месяцев назад
pause the video at about 58mins in, spend a few minutes looking at the photo vs painting. They are quite different.
@AndreiGromit
@AndreiGromit 2 года назад
It makes sense that the expert would not risk his neck to recognize the painting and in the process acknowledge how The Tate made some huge mistakes.
@jodienovello5881
@jodienovello5881 Год назад
@Beaudile its a snobbery thing
@orionfoote2890
@orionfoote2890 3 года назад
I was left wondering if the expert had made the right call on this one - we must assume they know things that we don’t - the kink in the frame or canvas appeared to be some kind of smoking gun which appeared to have little or no sway on the outcome whatsoever - it was totally unexplained. Thanks for these uploads - obviously I’m not the only one who’s been hooked on the show from day one.
@Qwijebo
@Qwijebo 3 года назад
Might be because the Tate didn't want to get into a legal battle over ownership.
@philipbloomquist1580
@philipbloomquist1580 3 года назад
I think this one I am ambient about the result I was not convinced it was a fake or real. That it was quality does not mean someone who was able to see it in person, before the flood did not do study of it in great detail and could have done a copy of extreme quality . The main reason it likely was not determined real in my mind was that there was to many unanswered questions. since it was supposed to be destroyed the burden of proof was to have a history of it not being destroyed or so identical to evidence of the known work that no doubt remained and I felt doubt. I do think it easily could have been the original but also feel it was not clear enough to say for sure that it was.
@grekulator1628
@grekulator1628 3 года назад
I can't get over the kink 🤯
@dreamcatcher3861
@dreamcatcher3861 3 года назад
I drew the same conclusions too. That kink spoke so loudly that this was the missing piece. I too am convinced the expert was mistaken.
@garybrewer9059
@garybrewer9059 3 года назад
Totally agree with you. “ The Kink” was totally ignored in the final analysis - hard to fathom that something revealed in the original photograph was also copied by the supposed forger?
@lisaseverance6785
@lisaseverance6785 2 года назад
I have 2 theories. Some higher up at the Tate declared it destroyed and finished. As we could see from the "Execution" painting, the finished/destroyed declaration does not mean it is truly "finished/destroyed" Perhaps, as mentioned, Landseer was no longer considered important in 1928. So it was delclared a loss by the higher up. But someone, lower in the ranks at the Tate, loved the painting and rescued it, not caring that it was damaged. Remember the relining was done in a method known in the 1920s. So they relined it and repaired the damage as best as they could. But since what was done was not exactly legal, no paper trail. The more cyncial theory and just as possible, the painting was declared destroyed and the reccomendation was that it, along with other damaged paintings, be destroyed. But again, we can see from the "Execution of Lady Jane Grey" that they weren't all destroyed as they were told to do. So, assuming insurance existed on the paintings at the Tate, insurance paid out for the damaged/destroyed paintings but someone within the Tate did not destroy the damaged paintings. Instead they secreted them and slowly over time, did some repairs and sold them....off the books. Because as they said, the Delaroche was no longer thought significant. Remember, in 1928, the art movements were trending mor towards Social Realism (Think "American Gothic") and what we would generally over all call modern art...Surrealism, abstracts etc. Landseer may have been considered far too old fashioned and not worth it. All that being said, I believe the painting to be the original "Time of War". Far too many things add up to make it so.
@millawitt1882
@millawitt1882 Год назад
Love your theories and I totally agree - this IS the War of time especially after the mention of the lower part of the picture matching with the foto - No one copying a painting would do that -NO ONE!😉
@michaeljohnangel6359
@michaeljohnangel6359 Год назад
@@millawitt1882 I completely agree.
@couchphotography8861
@couchphotography8861 Год назад
That sounds like a very logical explanation. Someone, as you say, "rescued" it, kept it for several years, maybe passed it onto a friend or family; they would most probably have been a Tate worker, who maybe found it in the "destroy" pile, who knows? But I think its the real one, the work is by a master painter. I've always liked The Arab Tent by Landseer; his horse paintings are just wonderful.
@christianfrommuslim
@christianfrommuslim Год назад
Yes. They did not touch on the ownership issue. If it had been determined to be original, would ownership have been "the nation" or the insurance company. At least this way the couple can keep it.
@larrywakeman4371
@larrywakeman4371 Год назад
WOW perfect! Kimberly
@annettefindlay8076
@annettefindlay8076 2 года назад
That stag is an absolutely amazing painting! What a genius Landseer was!🎨
@melanies.6030
@melanies.6030 Год назад
I had the privilege of seeing The Monarch of the Glen at the Scottish National Gallery a few years ago. It just stops you in your tracks, I must say.
@barryeva9186
@barryeva9186 3 года назад
Prof Aviva Burnstock is always a pleasure to listen to.
@sentimentalbloke185
@sentimentalbloke185 Год назад
Polly Frontbum
@blackboxartistry
@blackboxartistry Год назад
Archivist Mark Palmaroy’s has a twinkle in his eye🤩 excitement! Magic!
@aidand6638
@aidand6638 3 года назад
I honestly am still in disbelief that they say it’s fake, that kink for me Is just too much of a coincidence
@Sparkplug4712
@Sparkplug4712 Год назад
I agree 1000% the kink in the pic is its own finger print
@oblongowl
@oblongowl 3 года назад
Seems highly likely to be the genuine piece. How could the expert ignore the forensic match in idiosyncrasies of the actual painting? To make a judgment on how flat the painting looked, on an unclean , retouched, and water damaged piece seems beyond absurd and even smacks of cronyism given that ridiculous Tate gallery comment that they believed the painting undoubtedly destroyed, based upon scribbled notes that were proved to be unreliable.
@oblongowl
@oblongowl 3 года назад
Also it is hilarious, to think of the pomposity of this gallery today , in protecting its incompetence from 1934 . Talk about protecting your asses.
@AChefkoch
@AChefkoch 3 года назад
Well, it surely is the genuine piece. I'm havinge the same troubles with an painting. These "experts" are afraid to make wrong decisions, an they value their taste or connoisseurship way to high. A painting by XY has to look like this or that (how i, the expert think it has to look like), if not it cant be the artist. Other scientific proof is of no value whatsoever. Thats quite sad, and in my opinion tells a lot about such experts who behave like 18th century absolute monarchs in the artworld ;)
@MrStGeorgeIllawarra
@MrStGeorgeIllawarra 2 года назад
I'm sure it's to not open up a huge can of worms. Something tells me perhaps a lot of works that were "destroyed" by the flood were perhaps in fact straight up taken.
@georgielancaster1356
@georgielancaster1356 2 года назад
So often the experts are just nursing huge egos...
@craigbarron3706
@craigbarron3706 2 года назад
Politics always intervenes on anything seemingly factual.
@dougkelley2781
@dougkelley2781 3 года назад
This was wonderful, regardless of the outcome. Very coincidentally for me, I fell in love with and bought an engraving of the companion painting “Time of Peace” many years ago and had it framed. It’s followed me from house to house and still brings me joy every time I look at it. Though it was sad to hear of the original’s fate in the flood, through this video I’ve learned about “Time of War.” I’ve also just found an engraving by the same artist who did “Peace” (L. stocks) and it will become a pair in spirit. Thank you!
@zahria
@zahria 3 года назад
Thank you so very much for uploading this episode 🌷 What a treat for the culturally starved outside of Great Britain ; ) Not much can compare to your cultural programs.
@ivorytower99
@ivorytower99 3 года назад
RIGHT ON!
@soniamacdonald9193
@soniamacdonald9193 3 года назад
Ditto from Southern Africa!
@MichaelandCathy1999
@MichaelandCathy1999 3 года назад
Another fantastic inquiry, that painting is stunning. 👍🇨🇦
@dharmaofdog7676
@dharmaofdog7676 2 года назад
If I HAD to choose only One Series to be able to watch for the rest of my Life, surely it would be THIS one. Besides just providing a more in depth look & understanding of an Artist, these Episodes take you through History - the surrounding Culture of the times, Political Climates, Historic Events, unknown details of the Artists Life and the incredible advance of Technology where had I not watched this Show, I would never knew even existed. The Forensic explorations are fascinating. And there are SO many more facets of the Art World I never knew brought to the fore. One's Art History knowledge expands triple fold with each & every episode & One's overall Art Appreciation immeasurable! And then there is simply the underlying mystery and excitement as the information about the Work in question unravels and we wait in honest anticipation and hope that the Work will prove to be credible and original! With some of the Episodes where the answer is "No, sorry", I'm usually in agreement and merely feel disappointed for the Owners. However, I cannot say that about the Nicholson "Glass Jugs with Plates and Pears". That "No" was not only shocking it brought my Mind back to the "subjectivity" of Art overall and the possible "politics" played behind the scenes of our Art Institutions worldwide. Hmmm....I truly felt (& can only assume I was far from alone), that the particular Nicholson was clearly proven and authenticated. That the "No" was attached to human Ego's and I laugh at myself for recalling how angry I became following the conclusion of that Episode! I swear I paced about my room frustrated that I had no idea where I could complain or make MY Opinion known! (lol, as if it mattered!). My Dogs certainly didn't seem to care one way or the other .... There is definitely Passion in Art! I periodically check RU-vid for Seasons & Episodes that I may have missed and when I find one, it is EXACTLY the same feeling as finding a great Master at a Yard Sale! I Thank the people who make the Effort and take the time to post them.
@edgarportraits
@edgarportraits 3 года назад
thanks so much for uploading a new episode of this quality program. Highly appreciated
@milootje007
@milootje007 3 года назад
I am convinced it is the real painting. However, if that would have been the outcome i think the Tate would have claimed ownership and these people would have probably lost that legal battle.. So maybe it's for the best that it wasn't the official outcome. All i can say to the owners is: Congratulations on your Landseer! Hope you get it restored! Maybe contact Baumgartner Fine Art Restoration and make a follow-up on this lol 😂
@SantaBarbaraBiking
@SantaBarbaraBiking 2 года назад
When they showed so many of the damaged paintings I was thinking send it to Baumgartner lol.
@helensarkisian7491
@helensarkisian7491 2 года назад
Forget the Tate. I wouldn’t have sold it to them even if they topped the highest bidder by $1M.
@michaeljohnangel6359
@michaeljohnangel6359 Год назад
Hear, hear!! Congratulations to the owners on their powerful Landseer (that they now get to keep). Well said, milo!
@Laura-qn2nf
@Laura-qn2nf Год назад
I superimposed the images of the painting & the photograph, & the outlines don’t line up, specifically the outer corner of the rug is very different and the man on the right side is positioned at a lower angle relative to the horses head in the photograph. Those are significant composition differences that damage or age can’t explain. Of course I wish someone with better tools than me tries to superimpose the images to see if theirs also doesn’t match up. I really thought they would, but now I believe the expert made the right call.
@palladin331
@palladin331 Год назад
@@Laura-qn2nf Old camera lenses can cause mysterious distortions. And printing can cause unusual warpage. Then there's the retouching process. I think the photography expert would not have said the photo was of the painting if there were even slight reasons to doubt it. Too many things lined up succesfully.
@springgee9763
@springgee9763 Год назад
I just discovered this series and I could not be more pleased! I love every bit of these programs. Thank you for sharing this on RU-vid!
@girlnorthof60
@girlnorthof60 3 года назад
Yes or No, I still enjoy viewing the process of investigation & discovery. Thank you again for sharing this series. 😍
@Time2Fly
@Time2Fly 3 года назад
Cheers "mightwenotbehappy". Really appreciate Fake or Fortune uploads.
@julianmetcalfe1070
@julianmetcalfe1070 Год назад
This show does a medal wining service to the art world ,this was very close,experts they can not have doubts , not enough flood damage it may not have touched water ,.very good work by the team
@gkess7106
@gkess7106 Год назад
Saying a picture is not damaged enough seems like a weird reason to say it is not genuine!
@julianmetcalfe1070
@julianmetcalfe1070 Год назад
@@gkess7106 also when experts get it wrong just because of a very rich provenance that alone some times sways their decision making,as there is so much money on the table
@annabellelee4535
@annabellelee4535 Год назад
@@gkess7106 The real painting was sitting in flood waters for days. Only the highly valued paintings were rescued DURING the flooding, the rest were there until they got around to fishing them out of the basement.
@pNo415
@pNo415 3 года назад
Thank you so very much!
@rondifrankel
@rondifrankel 3 года назад
Thank you so much for uploading this! This series is sooo fascinating in so many ways! It's a real-life detective story with wonderful art as the object! Fiona Bruce's investigative abilities, and Philip Mould's enthusiasm and expertise make this both gripping entertainment and a great learning experience. Thanks again!
@007EnglishAcademy
@007EnglishAcademy 3 года назад
Philip - ''Hello Aviva!''. Aviva - ''Oh, hello Philip!'' sounding surprised even though the camera crew were already there :)
@sentimentalbloke185
@sentimentalbloke185 Год назад
They are probably getting it on.
@larrywakeman4371
@larrywakeman4371 Год назад
I LOVE Landseer's paintings :) Kim
@AJShiningThreads
@AJShiningThreads 3 года назад
Thanks!!
@elizabethannegrey6285
@elizabethannegrey6285 2 года назад
A fascinating journey in search of a missing art work. I learned a lot, not least of the 1928 Thames flood. Having grown up in London and spent many happy hours at the Tate, I am surprised at my own ignorance. A great video - thanks - and I nearly passed it by because of the plight of the war horses.
@emmahardesty4330
@emmahardesty4330 2 года назад
Outrageous. What forger, what copyist could be shown, or is known, to have the skill to duplicate this powerful piece. Future sleuthing along with this documentary evidence will prove this is a genuine Landseer. I hope....
@thecicerus3615
@thecicerus3615 3 года назад
This is not a fake! It is impossible to replate such details and symmetric. Just time the picture will be recognized as Edwin LANDSEER works
@monkeytennis8861
@monkeytennis8861 2 года назад
Cuckoo
@MsIndigo74
@MsIndigo74 2 года назад
Edwin not Edward
@harkinsclark1417
@harkinsclark1417 2 года назад
You do know that on the RU-vid update the comments flash up wether you like it or not, so thanks a lot for spoilers.
@sasantinordewati111
@sasantinordewati111 3 года назад
Thank you again for uploading new episode :)
@mightwenotbehappy
@mightwenotbehappy 3 года назад
I think this had the potential to be another Winslow Homer debacle if it had been found to be an original Landseer
@jeffstation70
@jeffstation70 3 года назад
I think that's one of the reasons why it wasn't found to be original. Those paintings must have been insured, so there would have been a payout to the owners - big hassle. Then there's the question of if the painting wasn't destroyed, how did it get out of the Tate to be sold? After all, the others reported as destroyed were still in the hands of the gallery. It's all a bit fishy.
@1songlover
@1songlover Год назад
(SPOILER ALERT) Fiona and Philip and their team are the very best art detectives on the planet. And these shows are wonderful to watch. Every program is a gem. There is nothing else like this show. There are so many issues in this episode´s story. And I get the feeling that some details, are not completely presented here. Maybe it will be continued some day. Fingers crossed. The kink itself is confusing. Yes it was certainly present in that photography, predating the flood, when the painting was sitting on the original stretching frame. And it was the stretching frame that had an imperfection that caused the kink. But the painting canvas in the program was cut along the edges with knives or razor blades, to remove it from it’s original stretching frame (and was then glued on to a new canvas). By doing so, they would have had to cut the kink also (only a craftsman with incredible attention to detail would do that). The kink should have been examined down to the millimeter and compared with the kink in that photograph, in the program. I am also missing a detailed overlay comparison between the photo and the painting. The outlines of pretty much everything in the painting, should match the photo. Using all the x-ray methods and other technology they always have in FOF, all the numerous touch-ups that have had to happen to the painting (should it be the flood damaged painting) would have been visible and presented in the program. And many of the touch ups would have been done with paint available in the 1930-ies (I doubt that a restorer back then thought ”let’s make sure to only use pigments that were present in 1850, so that they can run this painting through a Star Trek-like pigment scanner in the future, and find nothing strange with the painting (while simultaneously asking himself ”W-H-A-T is Star Trekkkk?!!”)” . Touch ups and alterations would actually add credibility to the painting in this case. So either the conclusion is that someone refrained from the legal issues that would be raised, were it to be the real painting, and just wrote it off as a copy. Or some art student painted a copy of the real painting, while it was hanging in the museum, before the flood. And did such a good copy, that people living in the 2020-ies can’t say for sure, if it’s a copy or the original.
@feliciagaffney1998
@feliciagaffney1998 9 месяцев назад
I was also wondering why they never brought up details about restoration paints. But, Fiona was talking about "overpainting" being removed. Was that from the restoration of flood damage?
@dawn5227
@dawn5227 2 года назад
I think it is the genuine piece. And reasons given as to why its not by the artist could very easily be explained by water damage from the flood. I just dont think they want to put their name to authentication because there are still unanswered questions. Even 'experts' get things wrong and I honestly think in this case the expert is wrong.
@allisonjae3152
@allisonjae3152 Год назад
Even if this painting is a copy, it's a great one and keeps the spirit of the original alive.
@ivorytower99
@ivorytower99 3 года назад
At the opening, the auctioneer woman in the purple dress, "At $42 Million....": I'm afraid she might try to bite my neck!~ lol Another *Amazing* episode; especially from the perspective of a professional restorer. Whenever a new episode air's, I will watch it 2,3 times and then give a summation. Again, *Thank You, mightwenotbehappy!!!*
@TheThoress
@TheThoress 3 года назад
Thank you for uploading this video. I have owned several prints of Sir Edwin Landseer. Landeer’s paintings with animals are truly breathtaking!
@Sugarplum2025
@Sugarplum2025 3 года назад
This is my favorite show. So exciting to see some new episodes, since I live outside the UK and can’t watch it when it actually airs. I love that the entire “drama” of the show is simply whether the work is real - if this was a US show, they’d create some other angle, focus much more on the owner, make it a sob story somehow. I appreciate British TV so much by comparison. Also I love Fiona Bruce and I covet that fuzzy blue jacket she’s been wearing in these. Oh and where’s Bendor? I miss him!
@couldbegood
@couldbegood 2 года назад
You must watch ‘Britain’s lost masterpieces’. Bendor and a lady (whose name I forget) host it. It is just as good as this and actually very similar. They go to art galleries or stately homes and find paintings that they believe are incorrectly attributed. They go though similar processes to find out.
@andreaandrea6716
@andreaandrea6716 Год назад
I too miss Bendor!! There's a great big gaping hole where once he was to be found! (although I love all the experts who weigh in ... minus the ones we never see!)
@kyleanuar9090
@kyleanuar9090 Год назад
@@andreaandrea6716 he deserves his own show or make him a trio to this team
@andreaandrea6716
@andreaandrea6716 Год назад
@@kyleanuar9090 Nina, above, says he HAS his own show! : 'Britain's Lost Masterpieces' I found one and watched it. It was good! But I like the chemistry when they're all together.
@BlackKettleRanch
@BlackKettleRanch Год назад
I find your US comment a highly speculative and prejudice thing to say. There have been plenty of high-drama sob stories on this UK show. Human beings are emotional creatures regardless of continent, so it stands to reason. And we art nuts are some of the most emotional. Take a look at the drama, egos, and politics among the art "experts" and the museum administrators...please.
@poetryqn
@poetryqn 3 года назад
Thanks for uploading the episode. If there's one thing I have learned from this series it's that attributions are surprisingly fluid - what is considered genuine today can be downgraded tomorrow and vis-versa (depending on the 'authority' of currently recognized 'experts' and advances in science). Ultimately, the spread in monetary valuations between excellent 'copies' by other artists and the genuine article will color any valuation question. As the owner in this episode observed, she was moved by the grey and vowed that the picture would come home with her. It was a fair price to pay thirty years ago for a well executed painting that moved her. At least now, her insurance premiums won't be crippling!
@ivorytower99
@ivorytower99 3 года назад
PS This is so thee "War", by Landseer!!! "Destroyed beyond repair", =the Board at the TATE, at that time, needed funds after the flood. They probably sold-off a bunch of Masterpieces that suffered -some- damage in the flood of 1928. One *big* question, is "why" did they not take the photograph of war and superimpose it over the painting? That would have been a dead cert.
@red.aries1444
@red.aries1444 3 года назад
Maybe it would have shown to much differences between the painting of this episode and the photograph of the original painting which is probably destroyed in the flood... They used retouching in early photographs to show more details, but they wouldn't change a complete painting if it's mostly for documentation. The differences between the photograph and the later retouchings should match. But I really wonder why they don't talk more about the x-rays of the painting: It's a very complicate composition. But they don't talk about underdrawings. There is not one mention of a change in the composition or of pedimenti, something you will normally find if it's an original and not a copy. They only talk about the strong use of lead white around the head of the horse... I think this picture is really a copy. A good one, but still a copy. But it's a more interesting ending for the public to leave the case unsolved.... And there is still a chance, that the original painting has really survived the flood. :-)
@pommerhutabarat8666
@pommerhutabarat8666 Год назад
It's so amazing how people in western kept record of almost everything that one day Will be so important.
@seanobrennan2372
@seanobrennan2372 2 года назад
Another wonderful episode. I took note that no one addressed what seemed to me an important ethical question, if this was indeed the Landseer of the flood, was this painting sold 'on the sly" or simply taken home, by someone at the Tate after it had been deemed damaged beyond repair. I believe the question of how this painting left the gallery and who owned it until it was sold at the auction to Kathy was deliberatly overlooked because of the security and the moral questions this would bring up, casting doubt on the integrity of a Tate employee and perhaps fate of many other 'stored away' paintings?
@sentimentalbloke185
@sentimentalbloke185 Год назад
Absolutely. Hence why it's more likely that the original canvas was destroyed and the picture we're seeing is a very good, and very old, copy.
@arthurblundell6128
@arthurblundell6128 3 года назад
they have not had much luck in last couple seasons. The landseer had water damage and still rejected bit odd
@DirahEvans
@DirahEvans 11 месяцев назад
I love this show.❤
@heerp.4023
@heerp.4023 3 года назад
Clearly we are dealing with insurance fraud here.
@PS-vm3we
@PS-vm3we 2 года назад
How so if I may ask?
@ronmcknight5300
@ronmcknight5300 2 года назад
Love this series
@thomasmagda4580
@thomasmagda4580 Год назад
Love this show and I used to indirectly work for Barry Romeril! Small world.
@jmcclintock
@jmcclintock 3 года назад
What a captivating piece of art!
@benfel9403
@benfel9403 2 года назад
I love all these episodes, but not being an art historian, I go along with whatever they decide. This one though however, something in my gut says this is the real one. No idea why, but a very strong feeling that is the genuine one. But what do I know..... Great story as ever.
@michaeljohnangel6359
@michaeljohnangel6359 Год назад
You obviously have better gut feelings than Richard Ormond has!!! I'm an artist and an art historian, and this is obviously a Landseer.
@benfel9403
@benfel9403 Год назад
@@michaeljohnangel6359 not in anyway being knowledgeable about art, I think it was the body language and reasoning in ALL the other experts that made me think so. Madness is it not! Hopefully in the future when there is a erm.... different authority on Landseer someone will try again and things can hopefully be put right!
@edsimnett
@edsimnett 3 года назад
I feel like they should have, for at least one test, simply overlayed the photo and the picture. If the entire canvas is a precise match it makes it really hard to see how it could have been faked.
@ginacrusco234
@ginacrusco234 2 года назад
Right! I thought the same.
@angusstewart3183
@angusstewart3183 2 года назад
I agree. They could have tried to superimpose a negative of the photograph on the canvas of the painting ( this could also be done on a computer screen). If all the details match exactly then it is extremely unlikely to be a fake. The devil is in the detail!
@edsimnett
@edsimnett 2 года назад
@@angusstewart3183 Great idea. I wonder if you put a negative over the top, with 50% transparency or something would it go all white (or all black?) if it was a match?
@trevortighe
@trevortighe 2 года назад
I paused the video while both images were side by side. Then did the cross eyed trick where you can superimpose the images. The 2 images were exactly the same scale all the way across the painting. It was much more accurate than you would expect. I am surprised that the camera used in the 1800s and the camera that took the image when the series was filmed had the exact same lenses distortions. I think the painting is the one that is in the photo. This painting has been stated as 'not one of Landseer best' as indicated by Frederic Stevens. (See the Wikipedia of Edwin Landseer ref section and link to google books) Maybe Richard Ormond would not have said it was ever a Landseer. Maybe it was a fake when the photo was taken in the 1800s. Its so much fun tiring to guess if it real with so little information, .. and so little knowledge in my case.
@edsimnett
@edsimnett 2 года назад
@Beaudile thnx for that- it's unclear- it looks like they might have done, but they did not treat it as an important point- it happens almost as a color shift. tbh if that is what that is then it is inconclusive, it looks very close everywhere but it is not a crisp precise match.
@cruisepaige
@cruisepaige Год назад
Was nice getting such a good look at the Monarch of the Glen! ❤
@sarahpassell226
@sarahpassell226 Год назад
Love listening to Mould talk about the painterly qualities of paintings he investigates for this series. He and the editors make sure the aesthetic value comes up BEFORE we have any evidence that it's by a famous artist. For that reason alone, I find myself pulling for Mould's assessment every time. His connoisseurship is freely offered and convincing, which is more than you can say for the official arbiters who are usually are stingy with their critiques..
@philmorton4590
@philmorton4590 Год назад
All you can hope is the next expert believes differently, which could happen if this painting is continually place before the public in a gallery. We really need a wing for unauthenticated and mysterious works that are proven real by aid of scientific analysis. Otherwise we are cropping history and losing valuable insights of the past. Edit: I wonder if AI programs might one day be used instead of a human expert in the effort of removing ego from the decision.
@crawfordconservation3624
@crawfordconservation3624 Год назад
They didn't discus the removal of wax residue that would most likely have penetrated the paint and ground layers during the lining process. They also did not discuss the removal of the grime layer below the varnish that was not fully removed during a previous cleaning. You can see it in the light areas of paint in the detailed images. The residual grime layer would have been locked in by the wax and the varnish. It didn't appear in the cleaning that the residual grime layer was removed and the surface would be dull and the colors unsaturated if there was still a wax residue on the surface. I think there still is hope. I enjoy these programs but sometimes I think the condition isint discussed in enough detail, there are many things that happen to paintings that change their appearance, unfortunately not all curators and art historians have enough experience looking at paintings in this way.
@Lambert7785
@Lambert7785 Год назад
a wild ride.... - thanks for doing all that work :)
@PSPguy2
@PSPguy2 3 года назад
Thank you! I live in the U.S. and have been waiting a long time for new episodes!
@darreno9874
@darreno9874 2 года назад
If you view both images as a stereo pair there area a few minor areas of difference, part of the trumpet banner, part of the black horses head and the upper right clouds. But these are small changes. The rest of the image (more than 90%) are so close as to create a full stereo effect. All the dimensions exactly line up. Someone talked about the horses noses being different but this and the other areas may have been retouched either in the negative or the painting, and may have been done with materials contemporary to the artist. I belive the expert was wrong. Love the program.
@vivabec
@vivabec 3 года назад
thank u so much for uploading!!
@LiveInSydney
@LiveInSydney 3 года назад
I’m not buying it. The kink is too real. It’s too good a copy
@fool4singing
@fool4singing 3 года назад
What about that kink on the lower left hand side of the painting? How did the authentication committee overlook that detail? It's such an odd defect, and I find it highly unlikely that both paintings would have this flaw in the canvas just by chance,...I'm not convinced that it's not the original in a very restored state.
@catsmith7234
@catsmith7234 3 года назад
Needs a conservator to apply washicozo to the front and remove the lining and see if there anything hidden on the back blocked out by the lead paint.
@jasmin5753
@jasmin5753 3 года назад
Thank you for sharing these episodes. Had the painting been by Landseer.. the original owner Robert Vernon, gifted the painting to the nation.. therefore the painting is public property. Interestingly, there was no mention of this during the episode.
@icandothis1238
@icandothis1238 3 года назад
Yes! I kept wondering about this. Plus, unless I missed it, was the owner of the painting when she bought it at the auction?
@winkieblink7625
@winkieblink7625 3 года назад
I was wondering also about the original owner and no mention thereof and then to not mention what would happen if the painting was authentic. Possibly the owner was spared a huge legal conflict because she bought in good faith at a reputable auction.
@garybrewer9059
@garybrewer9059 3 года назад
@@icandothis1238 but they did mention that all records from the audition house were not retained after they went out of business in the 1990,s .
@garybrewer9059
@garybrewer9059 2 года назад
If the Tate had it insured prior to flooding and received a payout,the the insurance company would be most likely claimants?
@ksbrook1430
@ksbrook1430 2 года назад
Given that they knew the outcome by the time they edited the episode, that conversation could have been taken out.
@Otto72ish
@Otto72ish 2 года назад
The kink in the frame seems like pretty strong proof. The "expert" seems to have got this wrong.
@gulfstream-tvstudios9546
@gulfstream-tvstudios9546 Год назад
when I saw this painting first time , I was crying...😢... not cause of the 2 soldiers, ... cause of the horses ....
@chris...9497
@chris...9497 11 месяцев назад
Couple of things: The Thames flood occurred in Jan of 1928; the Great Stock Market Crash that led into the Great Depression occurred in Oct 1929. 'Unnecessary' industries would fail first, ones like art and charities. I could see those workers not yet redundant or fearing loss of employment being lured by those still insulated by wealth to take away works due for destruction. The new 'owners' would then set about to conserve the damaged pieces and keep them in 'private collections'. Eventually, those owners would pass away and their goods liquidated at auction, passing in the 1970s into the current owner's hands. I am not satisfied with the term 'finished' being correctly interpreted as equating to 'destroyed'. I must wonder is 'finished' a recognized term of art or does it mean something more like 'completed restoration'. 'Finish' can mean the completion of an action and/or the final work upon an object as in a patina, paint, or gold leaf is a kind of finish. "The Execution of Lady Grey" was noted as being 'finished'. The penciled notation 'finished' was (if I recall) added in the 1970s, same decade "Time of War" was acquired by the new owner.
@lalaLAX219
@lalaLAX219 10 месяцев назад
The only bad part of this show is how they never fully explain the reasoning of the experts whenever a painting is not accepted.
@LundyWilder
@LundyWilder 9 месяцев назад
Somtimes they do , if it is included on the rejection letter.
@SantaBarbaraBiking
@SantaBarbaraBiking 2 года назад
If it is a copy, that is one damn good job.
@robynandrews4384
@robynandrews4384 Год назад
That De La Roche is exquisite...as is the Landseer. Its pitiful that some pictures languish in museum basements for decades and possibly centuries, when there's clearly an audience for them.
@LB-gs5vi
@LB-gs5vi Год назад
They ignored the kink in the edge which is a huge point of authenticity!!
@nbcosta
@nbcosta 3 года назад
The kink!!!! A photo of the real work has it, and there is no chance that a forgery would also have it. Thanks for posting and thanks for UK citizens for funding BBC :P
@andreaandrea6716
@andreaandrea6716 Год назад
One thing that was NOT done, is to take a blown up photo (a photo that was taken of the original painting) the size of THIS painting, and superimpose it directly over the top of the painting. THIS would provide another layer of evidence.
@yvesklein5414
@yvesklein5414 Год назад
they need to work on Philip's chatbot. I'm definitely getting a Westworld vibe from him
@rolo4945
@rolo4945 Год назад
A friend of mine Carla Grace who paints the most beautiful realistic animals I have ever seen. Look her up ! ❤️
@SlaterLater
@SlaterLater Год назад
I believe the evidence showed this to be the original painting. And what a beautiful, and haunting, work of art it is.
@annabellelee4535
@annabellelee4535 Год назад
It didn't match the photo. Too much difference for the painting to be the real thing.
@melanies.6030
@melanies.6030 Год назад
​@@annabellelee4535And yet the photography expert who examined it felt certain enough to say on camera that he felt the photo and painting were one in the same.
@annabellelee4535
@annabellelee4535 Год назад
@@melanies.6030 The "expert" also said the photo was manipulated, changed, not the same image because there are visible differences. No, it wasn't the same painting.
@melanies.6030
@melanies.6030 Год назад
@annabellelee4535 That's actually not at all what he said. Go back and rewatch that segment. Yes, he acknowledges there was likely the common practice of retouching and altering the photograph and that the flood damage has altered the painting since the photo was taken. But then he shows side by side at least 5 details the two have in common that convinced him the photo was of the painting, especially the clinching bit of evidence about the painting's physical structure that the retouchers of the photo could not change: the edge of the canvas. After examining both photo and painting, he sums up that even with the probable retouching of the photo, there were so many similarities that he was confident they were the same.
@elizabethannegrey6285
@elizabethannegrey6285 2 года назад
At least she can keep her beloved painting . ❤️🐎🐎🐎❤️
@sentimentalbloke185
@sentimentalbloke185 Год назад
I'll bet that he paid for it though.
@soniatriana9091
@soniatriana9091 Год назад
This painting’s composition is absolutely stunning, it absolutely demonstrates in a beautiful & disturbing way, the horrors of man’s greed & quest for power & wealth through war! I was left to wonder why the expert who made the final decision (by himself) didn’t collaborate in person with all the other experts who worked on this investigation? Together, their brainstorming & analysis would be much more thorough!! It would seem the most logical manner of coming to a valid decision conclusion, on a painting that would take its rightful place in British history! Also, this show’s value & integrity was demonstrated by the fact the the Museum allowed the magnificent Stag painting to be studied as a valid comparison for forensic evidence! Great show! One of the best ways to learn about the famous artist & history of the past!!!
@annabellelee4535
@annabellelee4535 Год назад
It was a well done copy.
@guizoctave
@guizoctave Год назад
I hate silly """experts""" old and pompous who judge a work with their ego and less with an open mind. THIS is the genuine work of Lanseer! This "expert" will die wrong.
@winkieblink7625
@winkieblink7625 3 года назад
I don’t agree. It’s a masterpiece. If Ormand found it…he would feel differently. Flooding of Thames a time of kayos. The painting could easily have been set off to the side..away. It’s the EXACT same Dimensions. Weak reasons for discounting painting. This was a terrible conclusion.
@NyanyiC
@NyanyiC 3 года назад
Chaos
@ucviet1
@ucviet1 3 года назад
The Tate just didn’t want to admit it was wrong
@SantaBarbaraBiking
@SantaBarbaraBiking 2 года назад
Exactly. We have seen previous episodes where museums and experts don't want to admit they messed up.
@PLuMUK54
@PLuMUK54 Год назад
I agree with the decision. The quality is good but it lacks the touch of the master. Admittedly, the kink in the canvas is hard to explain. Had it been verified as genuine, I wonder what the legal position would have been. The painting originally belonged to the nation, and it's disappearance from The Tate would be possibly considered an illegal act. The lack of provenance means there is no evidence of the legality of its removal, and does, in fact, support the idea that it was an illegal act. The photograph of the destroyed painting from The Tate was truly heartbreaking.
@Songbirdstress
@Songbirdstress Год назад
It wasn't nearly as good after the cleaning. A talented artist did it though.
@TonyP602
@TonyP602 Год назад
Seems a win for the couple. They get to keep a picture they love, whereas if declared genuine, ownership may have been claimed by the Tate Gallery or an insurance company. As a Yank, hearing Philip say he was going to take a "torch" to the picture caused me a moment.
@humandoodad
@humandoodad Год назад
yeah, the way the lady teared up recounting when she saw the painting at auction, I'm almost glad she doesn't have to be stressed about owning a masterpiece and can just enjoy the first piece of art that deeply touched her.
@strumdogmillionaire
@strumdogmillionaire 11 месяцев назад
"damaged beyond repair" better go to my house then, can't throw it in the fire. So valuable, Perfect opportunity to swindle yourself a budget masterpiece is during a disaster. Who were these men carrying them out? Lol it ended up at a worker's house and fixed up then hidden or forgot about. It's totally the one ! That kink on the edge!! C'mon!!!!
@christianfrommuslim
@christianfrommuslim Год назад
The jag on the corner did seem very characteristic. They did not touch on the ownership issue. If it had been determined to be original, would ownership have been "the nation" or the insurance company? At least this way the couple can keep it.
@RiverBanksfilm
@RiverBanksfilm 11 месяцев назад
Love your program! The experts statement had little to do with the painting itself but serves apparently a different interest. The result of this is a significantly contribution to the lack of the credibility of this expert. The two arguments for this are first the comparison between the photo and painting of the left edge, there are no differences. Second argument is an economic one, the £ 720,- is an amound that would not be proportional for a painter to the number of his invested hours of labor. Walter Goddijn, the Netherlands.
@maximhollandnederlandthene7640
Me myself think its the genuine or at least a second painting of the artist. The corner under on the left side shows its unmistakenly the genuine one. 🤗
@bscepter
@bscepter 2 года назад
The kink in the canvas should've been enough to authenticate it. I almost wonder if there's some 94-year-old conspiracy going on. Did they claim it lost for insurance purposes in 1928?
@sgw3612
@sgw3612 Год назад
The differences between the heads of the soldiers between the early photograph and the painting are very different. Detail. Mouth open vs closed. Ear shape. Ribbon detail. Head shape. There are stark differences.
@Isabella-nd3rq
@Isabella-nd3rq Год назад
No. That would have been noticed immediately.
@annabellelee4535
@annabellelee4535 Год назад
Also, looking at the painting and the photo side by side, the upper left corner's smoke was in totally different patterns.
@jonkusa
@jonkusa 3 года назад
Many thank yous for continuing to post episodes of this show, especially for those of us outside of Great Britain who have no other means of seeing them. In the U.S., shows typically film 6-10 episodes per season (series). Going back I've noticed for Fake or Fortune there have only been 4, maybe 5. Does that mean there will only be one more new episode in this #9 series?
@mightwenotbehappy
@mightwenotbehappy 3 года назад
1 episode left of series 9
@girlnorthof60
@girlnorthof60 3 года назад
@@mightwenotbehappy ☹ awww, dang.
@lanelakey3581
@lanelakey3581 3 года назад
@@mightwenotbehappy Is season 8 available anywhere?
@mightwenotbehappy
@mightwenotbehappy 3 года назад
@@lanelakey3581 I have season 8 ep 4 on my dailymotion account certain most of season 8 used copyright music so wasn't able to upload them
@mightwenotbehappy
@mightwenotbehappy 3 года назад
@@lanelakey3581 www.dailymotion.com/video/x7g083q s8 ep 1 Thomas Gainsborough
@nathanbabble1976
@nathanbabble1976 Год назад
I’d pay her 10k right now just because of how good the painting is
@williamellis1370
@williamellis1370 3 года назад
All the reasons to be believe that this is indeed a Landseer are given by many people who commented below. I won't repeat these, but simply add my vote to the idea that the expert got it wrong, and that this is a genuine original. As an aside, I teach art history.
@theartfullgolfer3279
@theartfullgolfer3279 Год назад
In my opinion there is a lot of ego going on with some of the so called "experts" not wanting to be proven wrong.
@aucourant9998
@aucourant9998 3 года назад
I think in years to come, the 'expert' will be proved wrong.
@olafkundrus1570
@olafkundrus1570 3 года назад
I'm sure that this is the original painting. The problem is if it is the original, and I'm sure it is, it was owned by the Museum how does it end up at a auction? I think they want to cower up something, better to say it is not the original, than to open an investigation. It is my opinion.
@kevinchambers1101
@kevinchambers1101 2 года назад
Museums deacession art so it was possible the Tate sent it off to auction.
@flyingrobins6468
@flyingrobins6468 3 года назад
With this one I firmly believe it is a genuine work by the artist in question. But I also think that it was probably poorly restored. By comparision with the picture all the main figures and objects outlines are perfectly align. Its just not as detailed and lacks the fine brushwork which could be due to overpainting it. Also the smoke above the soldier in the center of the painting is differently shaped. I think someone really had the heart and compassion to make it whole again just not quite the skill.
@borderlands6606
@borderlands6606 3 года назад
I agree. The Tate's flood appraisal was damning, so they clearly thought its condition beyond repair. However, someone charged with the painting's disposal could have had it restored, with no intention of representing it as a Landseer. It appeared in a local auction without provenance, and a price to match. When the extent of restoration no longer renders it as "by the artist", added to a convoluted ownership and insurance trail, the expert probably did everyone a favour by declaring it a copy. To the audiences satisfaction, it was what it purported to be - a Landseer. It would be interesting to know what the verdict would be for a painting worth tens of millions, rather than a couple of hundred thousand..
@mikegrey7549
@mikegrey7549 2 года назад
I think it should be subjected to a optical profile projection from the original photograph. I guess it highly unlikely a copier would be able to manage perfect outline placement and dimensionality .
@terryt.1643
@terryt.1643 7 месяцев назад
That painting made me cry. I just wept for it all. How can that be just destroyed? Even if damaged, isn’t it an extension of Time of War? Do we destroy the artist’s message?
@terryt.1643
@terryt.1643 7 месяцев назад
The reasons the “expert” gave weren’t strong. I trust he will be overturned with future technology. Others in previous programs also will be revised.
@annwagner5779
@annwagner5779 2 года назад
I met Richard Ormond at a Sargent conference at the National Gallery in Washington some years ago. Now I want to argue with him about this! It’s too flat AND not enough damage? He seems to be faulting the conservation as both too much and too little. The conservator was surely constrained by the need not to cover any evidence, but to bring out detail. That canvas kink certainly seems diagnostic. It does really make me wonder. This show tells a great story that brings out interesting aspects of the history of art conservation and the history of attitudes toward past art.
@pangaeuspress
@pangaeuspress Год назад
In 1928 somebody nicked it and sold it. And maybe somebody got the insurance to pay off. That's a Landseer sure as I'm sitting here.
@bethbartlett5692
@bethbartlett5692 10 месяцев назад
I'm surprised that they call Paintings "pictures". I recall being taught "Puctures are Photographers". This always calls ti mind the ecample of the digference between Ships and Boats. I don't judge it, merely it surprises me. I suppose it's another example of "the Mandela Effect". Hiwever, Landseer"s Paintings are a delicious experience of his amazing talent. Beth Bartlett Sociologist/Behavioralist and Historian Tennessee, USA
@P.Galore
@P.Galore Год назад
If this painting was the property of the museum when rhought lost in the flood, would it still not belong to them if this is the original?
@greenspiritarts
@greenspiritarts 6 месяцев назад
This is quite a challenge. As we have seen in other episodes, an “official” denial of authenticity can, in time, be corrected. The biggest problem with this painting is that there were so many documented details of the original that could have allowed excellent copies to be made. That said a water-damaged original COULD have been spirited away by an individual who was supposed to destroy it and could not bear to do so because of the emotional nature of the painting. The original had been ordered to be destroyed in a time when so much art was lost due to the flood. The tragic story in the image itself could have inspired someone to rescue it not for reselling, but just as an act of needing to attempt to save it. The same emotion that prompted the present owner to buy it at auction. The differences in the painting and the photograph could be attributed to changes done by a restorer with less skill than the ones who worked on the Lady Jane Grey restoration. The edge of the frame seems most difficult to replicate in a copy. If it were mine I would wait and have another test done using the photograph as source and looking to see how it compares to this painting when superimposed, keeping in mind that some changes could be present thru an attempted restoration. this warrants more analysis and waiting for that “authority” to be replaced by the next generation who does not have a reputation to protect.
@greensage395
@greensage395 11 месяцев назад
Disturbing...no one would go to such an extent as to recreate the edge of the canvas, as shown in an Actual Photograph of the Work. ...So Sad...someone doesn't want it to be True, but it is!
@purplefriends859
@purplefriends859 3 года назад
I was gutted this wasn’t the real painting!! ( so sad that it got destroyed in the Thames flood!!)
@Time2Fly
@Time2Fly 3 года назад
awwwww bloody spoilers!
@thedarkhugheshughes2640
@thedarkhugheshughes2640 3 года назад
Thanks for uploading keep them coming please
Далее
Brilliant Budget-Friendly Tips for Car Painting!
00:28
Свожу все свои тату (abricoss_a_tyt)
00:35
Watermelon magic box! #shorts by Leisi Crazy
00:20
Просмотров 2,7 млн
Fake or Fortune?
1:01:36
Просмотров 386 тыс.
Restoring Rothko | Tate
17:26
Просмотров 572 тыс.
Exploring RAPA NUI / Easter Island
19:23
Просмотров 43 тыс.
Fabergé's rare gem: Alma Pihl | V&A
12:51
Просмотров 379 тыс.
Brilliant Budget-Friendly Tips for Car Painting!
00:28