Featured QUESTION ABOUT ALEXANDER CALDER LITHO?

It's facing wrong way + has a sun or moon that's different from original just for a start?

 

The "fake" image on the Calder Foundation website is a mirror image of yours, which is good news. It does not appear to be identical to yours in several other features: the teeth in your impression are white, not yellow as in the identified fake and the horse's mane doesn't correspond, if you compare them. My next comments are all speculative, so by all means disregard them;

I love Calder's lithographs and have three, whose provenance is as solid as one could hope, so perhaps you'll find my musings helpful.

Firstly, blue is the most unstable lithographic ink, so you needn't worry too much if shades are discrepant from one impression to the next. I believe Picasso was so aware of this colour instability, that he calculated it into the composition of his own lithographs as an aesthetic phenomenon when using blues.

H.C. impressions provide the forger with a carte blanche to generate as many spurious reproductions as s/he pleases; Miro and Chagall (to name but two artists) were fastidious in having had their multiples carefully numbered so, in order to pass off a fake, one could only swing the trick by numerating it as an H.C. Chagall, I believe, went as far as insisting that the margins were trimmed from all but impressions from the authorised edition. This makes it easy to dismiss any Chagall lithographs "signed in the image" as bearing spurious signatures. That does not, ipso facto, mean the impression itself is a reproduction, only that the signature is bogus. From what I have observed, Calder's bona fide not for sale impressions tend to be labelled E.A., not H.C. This might be a warning sign that something might be awry.

Rather unhelpfully, several bona fide prints by Calder are catalogued under several titles for the same image; one of mine is occasionally listed as "Music Maestro Please" and alternatively "Phonograph." Another has 4 different listings: "Flowers by the Fence," "Flowers at Fence," "Flowers" and perhaps most unhelpfully "Untitled." The only one with a consistent title is "Grande A Avec Moustache." This level of inconsistency makes researching Calder's graphic works tricky.

I have tried uploading the images of the works I own, in case you're interested. Notice how very different the cobalt blue is from one image to the next. I have owned "Flowers" and "Grande A" for several years and the colours are significantly different again from these photographs, which are taken from the sales catalogues.

I hope I haven't gone on too long; I'm even boring myself!

 

Another caveat with either a/p or h/c vis a vis forgeries is that while there can only be one print numbered 1/100 (for example) there can be literally thousands of spurious hors commerces or epreuves d'artiste. Having dealt in European graphics for decades I can attest to the fact that there are numerous a/p or h/c prints which are 100% kosher, the sad thing is that they are also the easiest to fake.

 

Mark London's contribution is, of course, invaluable. I should like to add an emoliative. Never feel foolish for buying something you love, which turns out to be a "fake." Some of the most reputable auction houses in the world have some decidedly dodgy offerings amongst their Prints and Multiples catalogues. As soon as you smell a rat concerning a purchase's authenticity, flag your concern to the auction house or dealer from whom you bought it. I have been collecting for about 20 years and have bought around 100 works, four of which turned out to be fakes. In each of those 4 cases I was reimbursed, without a fuss in three instances. Of course I had to return the works in question. It is easy to feel foolish and decide to put the matter down to experience, but there is no need; most galleries and salerooms, in my experience, are reputable institutions, not shysters, who pride themselves on providing a good and honourable service. As long as you can provide convincing evidence for your misgivings, you should have no difficulty in obtaining a refund. Be aware that many auction houses give you a time limit to raise such concerns; usually 30 days from the date of purchase, so make sure you're timely with your homework! That said, expert appraisals can take several weeks to obtain. As long as you inform the auction house in question within the time-limited period, that you will be pursuing such an avenue, you should find them to be flexible and amenable. They should suspend payment to the work's consignor until your investigations are completed.

 

Another caveat, learn to spot “eBayspeak”. “Signed Picasso” and “signed by Picasso” are not the same thing. The former, while misleading, is not necessarily a misrepresentation.

 

I feel like I've missed an entire conversation.

I understand the general reservations about HC, but is there any evidence that journey's piece is a fake?

 

I just accepted a $700 offer for it on eBay!

 

It was informative & appreciated (lord knows I've bought more 'factory' paintings I thought were something special than fakes) - unfortunately when I see something I like I usually 'Buy now, check later' - but I'm trying to slow down.

 

Congratulations, Journeymagazine.

 

In response to Jivvy; for my part, I know of nothing concrete to suggest Journeymagazine's Calder is a fake. That said, I have not researched that particular work one way or the other. You must admit, though, that his/her posting has generated some lively responses.

 

If I was you I would mention to the buyer that bought it that your not 100 percent sure it's real so you won't get any negative feedback.

 

Since you havent shipped it out yet

 

I have almost 1800 sales with 100% positive feedback. I believe it is real - if there is a problem I will accept return & refund their money

 

I've done a bit of additional snooping. I believe the full title of Journeymagazine's lithograph is "Seahorse." You might like to try googling "Calder lithograph seahorse;" then click on "images." The results are quite interesting. There is no decisive reason, certainly on the basis of this discussion thread, to decide categorically that Journeymagazine's lithograph is a fake (at least not in my opinion), but it could be more than one thing (including a trimmed exhibition poster). I would suggest that dimensions are crucially important here.

 

We were gifted a lithograph, Calder ‘71 untitled - I have searched the internet and only found some examples of it and nothing on the Calder foundation website or misattributed works.
Can anyone help me any further?
Tim

 

This appears to be a work from 1971 - I've seen it entitled both "Balloons" and "Venusiennes" though I suspect the former title might be apocryphal. There are several similar (but not identical) works by Calder - often signed by hand, not in the matrix (like your impression). Calder became hugely popular during his lifetime, during which the very high-end art journal - XXe Siècle - published several open editions of fine-art-quality prints from his oeuvre as well as a deluxe publication entitled "Homage to Calder." Your piece may be from one of these (possibly uncatalogued) editions. Enjoy your print; I've seen it described as being either an offset lithograph or a serigraph - either way it's terrific.