Is This £1 Thrift Shop Painting By 20th Century Italian Master? | Fake Or Fortune | Perspective 

I DO think there is a problem with these committees who have the final word on authenticity of a given artist’s work. They don’t do the chemical and scientific research that you do, but use their “feelings” to decide. This painting in particular has so many markers giving it time and place, that they disregard because of the “placement” of the fruits, when we all know there has never been an artist who didn’t have an off day, or who didn’t attempt something different from their usual works. I think there is much power in the hands of these committees, who are unwilling to admit to an earlier mistake unless forced to by an ironclad provenance. It is a dreadful shame.🖤🇨🇦

It's a De Chirico, you know it is. Especially when you connected the letters and friendship to Vera Morris and he was sending her paintings. You all do such great work.

After all the evidence presented the experts do not seem like experts at all and possibly didn’t change their mind because they didn’t want to overturn the original assessment. They didn’t want to look like fools.

So four of them strangely changed their minds, first thinking it was right, now wrong. Makes you wonder about these decisions.

The number one thing I've learned from this series is this: the "experts" _never_ change their minds. If they didn't have an opinion, the painting and evidence gets to stand on its own. If they have, there is no way. Ego seems to be more important than authenticity, or not.

I love that artists like Ernst and De Chirico copied themselves and each other to trigger and confuse the egos of pompous and self-important collectors and experts. 😄💗 I love this program, I am always learning so much.

Loved Bob’s line: “how vast is a pomegranate?” 😆

A captivating episode.! For me.. there are always more questions about these "committees" authenticating the works.. than the works themselves.

As soon as I saw the painting I thought of Chirico. The 'experts' say it is 'in no way' by him. Looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck...

Your research results convince me it's a real De Chirico. I think the committee just didn't want to admit they'd been wrong before. Hang onto your picture, Bob. Hopefully, in the future, you'll get a confirmation that it's a genuine work.

My thought on some of these art house experts is that there is more value in declining art work that is not in the current catalog of an artist's work. It's the classic scarcity creates more value for existing acknowledged works.

How on earth could that committee possibly deny the scientific results that were overwhelmingly in favour of the painting being an original work !

These art authentication committees/foundations are ridiculous. The way they make their decisions so randomly.

This really highlights the arbitrary value assigned to works of art

I think the Italians just didn't want to admit to a mistake and just doubled down on their refusal.

This programme always is amazing, but the piece of data on the year when the picture was probably made was truly beyond fantasy. Thanks!

I am a painter, DeChirico is one of my favorites, and i have been to the museo, twice, also the caffe greco. His still lifes are amazing, the way he paints grapes they seem more real and alive than the ones being painted. Yes we are looking at the painting on a youtube video but for me it seems to have that quality. Its either legit or the person who painted it had his own gift and a very large gift it was.

While I can't afford a masterpiece I do appreciate the prints of my favorite paintings. Thank you for the enlightenment on the stories behind the painting. When I travel I always visit Oxfam, British Heart Society, Goodwill and flea markets along with antique stores. I only buy what I love or think my family will like. Sometimes I have a painting that isn't claimed by one of my children and then I am secretly pleased "It's mine!".

I think the De Chirico people in Italy got caught with their pants down and are bluffing their way out to save face. Egos vaster than pomegranates 😂😂😂😅

I must say that yr program's are better than a good murder mystery. I even find myself holding my breath for the reveal. And learning about art & the art world is a plus! Great program, 😊 thanks

Absolutely brilliant episode - what fascinating lives you all lead - please bring us more!

It is reassuring to know this show is for real, even if the piece is not authenticated, for whatever mundane reason, they take their time, and modern resources to do their forensic analysis, perhaps in the future, a new set of eyes, and more science can prove its artist.

The committee is wrong. How dare they rule in favor of their pride, rather than authenticity.

It is entirely possible that the "experts" were wrong. The art business is a very dangerous place.

If we eliminate de Chirico, then we have a painter who knew his style, who was painting in the late forties, and had sufficient familiarity with his paint recipes as to be able to duplicate one of them. This would indicate a person who had a fairly close acquaintance with de Chirico. Given this information, it should not be too difficult to determine the identity of the actual painter. I believe that the owners , given their fondness for the painting, would appreciate knowing this, even if it does not raise the market value of the painting. In any event, it would be a good basis for another very interesting episode in your series.

The carbon dating was enough to convince me. The rest of the evidence made it seem to be plausible that it was by de Chirico. 🖌🎨

Why didn’t you test the actual paint recipe via spectroscopic analysis and see how close the spectra from the painting was?

The complete lack of any provenance was going to be a major problem. Another excellent episode nonetheless!

Fake or Fortune always does such a thorough job of investigating, but this episode really takes the cake for comprehensiveness! I was amazed to learn about the tempura paint technique, and the way it was tested by both artists and scientists provided very convincing evidence. I also really enjoyed the care taken to examine the age and the exposed edge of the wooden panel - what attention to detail!

The way you thoroughly traverse every possible hurdle is just fascinating. I’m so happy to have found your show! Many thanks for the wonderful entertainment and knowledge, from Pittsburgh.

I am really impressed about how much they were able to learn with so little initially to go on. Having an engineering background, the technical analysis seems convincing to me and is more compelling that deciding based on subjective stylistic elements. The only thing more I think that could have done is taken a paint sample from the board edge and done a different chemical analysis to perhaps identify the other ingredients of the recipe. The more unique the recipe the less likely someone else did the painting. A question I would ask the committee is, who else in that time period was painting in tempera with oil and honey.

Even with the paint recipe and the pre 1950 wood…..I’m very surprised.

Awesome story and video!!!!!!! Thank you! With you as in my work I take a scientific approach and I agree that all you found say the painting is real to this artist! And I encounter the same issues in fighting the establishment that will never allow new ideas or being wrong and thus never take the risk to agree!

Funny how De Chirico renounced his early style and then returned to it because that seems to be the work that people appreciate and so was worth more money. It is probably the only period of his art which is considered truly significant.

Such a fascinating journey! I think the painting is real, the more I looked at it, the more it felt authentic. Those guys at the de Chirico Institute were a bunch of fuddy-duddy spoilsports, who would never admit they were wrong. the honey and the oil - who uses that?? It was a no-brainer!

This program is just fascinating EVERY TIME I watch it - all that history that surrounds just ONE little painting and all of these BRILLIANT people who are so good at their handcraft and their love for The Arts is just so awesome LOVE IT👍❤️

It's has not bee proved that the painting is NOT by De Chirico. It is simply that it is not proved that it IS by De Chirico.

The suspens beaver the reading of the letter, was almost unbearable and never would I have guessed the negative answer. A Shock! Something else, the letters to 'his Muse' suggested that De Chirico adapted the size of his paintings to the envelope he sent them in. So, the 'Cut-off Apples' might have been de Chirico's doing. What a great story this was. I am totally fascinated by your episodes!

After some point time, when the artist has achieved a stable price, there must be a very strong evidence to certify a new work. Each new painting devaluates a little the existing ones, and no one wants to loose money.

The painting looks like the fruit has been washed and ready to eat. Ditto all the De CHIRICOS look good enough and ready to eat. Bob's painting is a De CHIRICO. Delizioso!!!

Great video, thank you. By the way, is the owner related to Bendor Grosvenor, the chap featured in other series? Something very similar about him!

Did de Chirico have students or apprentices? Perhaps this is by one of them. It's a pretty picture, no matter who painted it. Because it was featured on this show, Bob would get a lot more than one quid out of it if he sold it today.

I certainly agree with the other comments that the refusal of the committee to authenticate it as a genuine De Chirico and more to do with false pride and arrogance then a genuine assessment of the evidence. For me the woman who immediately felt it was genuine because of the one element that negated an unanimous vote- the walnut impressed me the most. I think the owner's, Bob reaction to the bad news was magnanimous. I can't help but wonder what they said to each other off camera.

When the walnut researcher brought up original paintings by the artist side by side comparison you could see a difference in the paintings.

Why a professional artist today wouldn't at least sign the painting, and place a fingerprint or three along with their handwritten signature with the date and title on the back is beyond me.

Thank you so much for this posting! I've found every episode of every series of this show on RU-vid except this one. Until now. Now my viewing of the entire show is complete. Hoping for new episodes later this year.

I don’t care what the experts said. I think it’s genuine.

The clouds, the strokes on the foreground, and the intensity of color on the painting they are checking just doesn't seem to be in the same vein of de Chirico...but that's just to my untrained eye.

Just think of the costs involved in this investigation. Wow!

Unpleasant conclusion, I have watched many of your episodes and this episode, for me, rises to the head of the class, in so many different areas…I am a painter and I so appreciate your phenomenal efforts in research, detective work and art education that is so informative, enlightening and entertaining…brilliant…well done ..cheers…and I’m an American😂

A sad ending but... it’s the love and journey... of art xxxx

This is why one should only buy art from living artists. You know what you are getting and the dead ones don't need the money.

Love this show and the channel!

I’m amazed he died in 1978. I got a degree in Art History the next year and always associated de Chirico with the Scuola Metafisica in the 1920’s and never thought about when he died.

What an interesting subject matter. Thanks for a thorough adventure full of art world "secrets" and educational eyes. USA

Thank you for uploading I’ve been waiting for a new one to watch!

Thanks for a great show on art. Blessings from South Africa

Would like to see the 2 rejection letters side by side . If I recall , the first rejection was just from one guy , based on the ' incongruous ' walnut . Hardly an unaminous decision ? Then we see walnuts all over the place , focal points . Who were the judges this time ? You have a swathe of credible info , against the views of a few . While not in the same field , I question judges in the orchid world . One our formost orchid judges , grower and breeder told us that the new ' line bred species ' were considered 'superior ' by judges . I put up my hand and said " I like the old ones more " He replied " Oh Scott , you are entiltled to your opinion . These are their decisions and am sure no one else here would agree with you " A challange is just that . I asked for a quick poll . Ooops , he lost , nearly 90 % agreed with me . Smug whatsit that I am . As with others , am the view that they could not change their first opinion . Damage their credibilty ? Why was insured for so much by a large auction house ? As the owner says , regardless , he really got his 'quids' worth :-) All that travel and coffee :-) Must take pride of place at home . Am no art fundi , was suprised to see the painting on what seems to be ' ply wood ' , am using some at the moment . The tree was growing ' pre nuclear ' , ply is basically left over chips all glued together . Could they not analyse the glue used ? Stiil, very interesting , thanks .

The de Chirico Foundation was unaware of several paintings that featured a walnut? That rather undermines confidence in their so-called expertise.

The cluster of 'proximity provenance' the team managed to discover, especially the unique chemical analysis of the paint, convinced me! Such a distinctive signature... Bob Kay's grace in receiving the 'verdict' was impressive, exemplary. { I'd have been sobbing on the floor, or raging, or maybe BOTH! } If only we had a TARDIS and could go back in time and ask Giorgio directly! MEANWHILE... Am I the only one still reeling from the information about the massively increased radiation levels 'in every living thing' on the planet from the nuclear tests?! Why isn't this more widely known? Is there/ what is the correlation between this and the exponentially increased cancer rates and / or other health impacts globally?

😊 it amazes me how much I've learned just by watching the station about some of my favorite artist and heroes it's amazing what you do to prove works of forgotten art real lost or found

It's a pity they didn't explain who Vjera and Vesna are. On the Vjera's photo it says, in Croatian: evening of folk songs and chansons, accompanied by the guitar. On the top it says Dubrovnik City Orchestra

Interesting how I also thought of that wallnut as being not something that De Chirico would paint. And yet he did.

What a wonderful episode.

THANK YOU! Finally it is uploaded. I love this series and have only been able to view this episode twice. Why?

I’m a bit bewildered by how they describe egg oil tempera as an unusual recipe? I’ve always learned that painters have been using oil with eggs in tempera more often than not. I’ve even seen artist mixing pigments with mayonnaise for an instant egg oil tempra mix, lol

Congratulations 🎉, that was another mammoth effort and it is so lovely to see the old stone breathe again. Cheers from Australia

so very interesting of a story, a mystery, a delicious curiosity....as well as human curiosity

I think the only thing else you could've done to prove the authenticity of this painting would have been to subject a similar authentic painting from the same era to the same FTIR scan. If the scan correlates to the scan you got from the subject painting, that would pretty much be definitive proof of its authenticity. In hindsight and after reflection, I think you were naïve to expect objective analysis and anything but a negative verdict from the institution. Think about it: There is no possible benefit for them to rule to the positive, even if they are convinced it's authentic and even if they were trying to be objective in their analysis, the downsides of coming out with a positive ruling are enough to bias their judgements towards coming out with a negative verdict. What are the downsides of reversing their earlier decision? Reversing their earlier decision would call into question every single other decision they've ever made and they would have any number of people with rejected paintings asking them to revisit their earlier decisions. It would also cause a loss of confidence in any positive decisions they have made. And who would/could question or challenge them if they did rule to the negative even if they knew it was authentic? No one so there was absolutely no disincentive for them to either give a false ruling or to allow the negative consequences of ruling to the positive bias their thinking and judgement to the negative and towards a foregone conclusion. In short, there was absolutely no upside for them in reversing their earlier ruling and plenty of significant downsides if they did. Given that, it is not at all surprising that they reached a negative verdict even in the face of so much convincing corroborating evidence to the contrary and no matter how implausible and utterly subjective the reasons they gave for rejecting the painting's authenticity. I don't believe their verdict for an instant and you shouldn't either.

I trust the scientific proof, but much of the “expert” opinion is solely based on ego and personal opinion.

👍👌👏 Simply fantastic and truly fascinating. I really like this beautiful picture. And I like the owner even more. He is a man of not many but always significant words. What convinced me was the fact, that some of the fruits have been overpainted because the artists opinion/taste changed while painting. Thanks a lot for making teaching explaining recording editing uploading and sharing. Best regards luck and especially health to all involved people.

Under the circumstances, I would be tempted to say “Not authentic? Fine then. I’ll destroy it.” and watch how they react when I took out a lighter.

Brilliant work!!

Does someone know or can guess why Mr. De Chirico sent, and stated he intended to send at least one other unsigned work to Vera? He said he hoped that she wouldn't be cross about it, and I'm supposing he would've given a reason. If there was an explanation given I didn't catch it. I'm just curious about what the reason might've been, since he specified it, and it wasn't simply an oversight. Thanks!

Please bring this show back….

Interesting, I knew an Semi amateur Art collector who was sure she had a de Chirico, (about 30 years ago) that i immediately thought was a fake. This one I feel is the real deal, and it was the walnut that struck me like a thunderbolt, as closing the deal, and it was the shading, coloring and expression of the Walnut form that screamed de Chirico at me, as well as the dreamlike contrast of huge fruit grading into an outdoor landscape.

You did a through job proving this painting was by De Chirico. Year, paint ingredients,composition, walnut,and who it was sent to in England. Case closed imo.

I wish they had explored the idea of a student painting. Did he teach?

It's a beautifull, skillful painting. Very strange that they didn't go ahead and try to find out who the painter was then, if not De Chirico.

It's still a lovely painting. Thank you for another great episode.

Wow. Thank you for taking the time and trouble (using all that new technology) to add more evidence that this "supreme court of authenticity" is imperfect at best, and outright crooked at worst. Keep up the good work!

I really enjoyed that. And well done even though the painting isn't one we would give wall space to. Surely the judgement should be "We can't be sure." then archive the investigation and if it ever wants sold, then any buyer can decide for themselves.

The number one thing I've learned from this series is this: Go straight to the final 3 minutes, because if it's fake I can NOT waste 55 minutes being led along.

How ridiculous that a decision on who painted it can make a worthless painting valuable or a valuable painting worthless.

I really, really enjoyed this episode.

Very good show. I'm a fan. Aloha from Hawaii.

That painting holds a very unique clue from whoever the artist was. I wish I could study the painting up close. There appears to be a 'tear' at the corner of one grape unlike any other in the composition. It resembles a weeping eye. Just my observation. In fact it looks like a set of eyes gazing from beneath the cluster. There is an intimacy in the painting. Perhaps the artist was conveying his own sorrow at not being the Master Artist? Just a thought. If you check out the self portrait of DE Curico 1948, you will find a clue in his left eye. The sky, background is fascinating. For some reason, I saw his eyes in this painting. His self portraits use tiny clues always in the left eye.

If there's one group I simply cannot trust it is a roomful of pointy-headed self-appointed art experts.

This "client" is the most articulate and interesting I've seen on the show.

😊Oh how many art experts! maybe De Chirico himself didn't remember if it was his work 😊

You can check this with painters, but to my experience tempera dries fast, a lot faster than oil. But he knew it as he painted with tempera before. And there is only one. So it might be an unsigned experiment.

As an art dealer, I’d put my hand up to buy it!

So, an English man, an English investigation team, visits the Chirico studio in Rome to have its board members authenticate painting a second time. True intense forensics indicates it is a remarkable reminder of De Chirico styles and paint formulas. To the Godfather theme, it is rejected. CASE CLOSED.

As much as a love this show, I just cannot bare to watch it any longer. I get so angry that just a few “experts” have all the power to state whether a piece is authentic.

i found this program wonderful.

if i painted this exact painting stroke by stroke. people would have nothing to say of it.

love this series !!!!!

As you opened the envelope my heartbeat increased. I was terribly disappointed.

love this show!

So despite all the evidence and the majority of the original committee saying it is, they still hold onto the word of one person. Unbelievable