Lot of 3 watercolor still lifes late 1800's possibly Emil Carlsen (1848-1932)?

Discussion in 'Art' started by cartoongirl, Jan 31, 2015.

  1. cartoongirl

    cartoongirl "Don't Blink!"

    Hi! 3 watercolors on paper...all 20" by 14". One has no date...the others are dated Jan. 1894, and Jan. 1888.

    So no signatures...at first I thought the 'Jan' was a siggie, but now I'm pretty sure it's the date.

    Emil Carlsen was from Falls River, NY, which is pretty close to me. It looks like his technique...any thoughts welcome. Here is a soon to end auction on ebay...

    http://www.ebay.com/itm/301503070319?_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK:MEBIDX:IT

    IMG_0879.JPG IMG_0881.JPG IMG_0886.JPG IMG_0884.JPG IMG_0893.JPG IMG_0891.JPG
     
  2. verybrad

    verybrad Well-Known Member

    Looks like they could be but maybe not quite as proficient as the one in the link. the handwriting on the dates vs. his signature looks different. Did he ever teach students? If so, this could be by a student of his. This could explain similarity of style and subject matter.
     
  3. verybrad

    verybrad Well-Known Member

    Also, the JAN looks like it could be initials with it being all caps. I also find it a bit odd that you would have two paintings 4 years apart and they were both done in January.
     
  4. moreotherstuff

    moreotherstuff Izorizent

    I think the first is more proficient than the other two. There may be 3 different artists here.
     
  5. cartoongirl

    cartoongirl "Don't Blink!"

    The thing about the 'Jan' is that it has a period after it...that's what's making me lean towards a date even if they are 6 years apart.

    I have looked for an artist 'Jan', but no luck.

    He very well could have taught classes...I'll check that out.

    They could be by different artists, but because they came together, I think they are probably by the same person. they may look different just because they were done in different years.

    Now, I'm not positive...these are just my musings based on the research I did and having the paintings in hand. Without a signature (and their condition) i don't think I can sell them for much anyhow.

    thanks!
     
  6. verybrad

    verybrad Well-Known Member

    Right .... 6 years apart. Not sure how I got 4. I also see that the N in JAN is not necessarily a cap. I don't really know what to think. It really is too bad that these are not signed.
     
  7. Alec Sutton

    Alec Sutton Active Member

    No definite opinion because I'm not a specialist in Carlsen...which is what is required here.

    Just to say, I would not use a work of art sold on eBay at a knockdown price as a model for an authentic work by an artist.

    Try a detailed comparison to known authentic Carlson watercolors.

    In doing so what I see are very competent period academic watercolors but, based on several criteria, probably not the work of Emil Carlsen.

    It would be interesting to hear expert opinion
     
    cartoongirl likes this.
  8. cartoongirl

    cartoongirl "Don't Blink!"

    Good morning! As I said my thoughts last night were musings...I thought about them all night, and now I'm leaning towards 'Jan' as a signature (ha!), and a student's works as brad had earlier suggested. That would also explain the lot of them, probably coming from a family collection.

    Thanks, Alec, for your thoughts. It would be interesting to hear from an expert.

    A little off topic...but the pottery with the basket weave on it...wasn't that a recent topic on the pottery and glass thread?

    I will probably sell these as a lot because of the condition. Although I can't put 'in the style of' Emil Carlsen in the title, I can put that in item specifics and that could help me in ebay search.
     
  9. Bev aka thelmasstuff

    Bev aka thelmasstuff Colored pencil artist extraordinaire ;)

    I'm bothered by the Jan. with various dates. Have you verified that the paper is that old? I just can't go along with verification without really testing the media to see if it's consistent with the dates. Why would they only paint in January? Did bottles with that shape and those labels actually be from the 1880s? They really don't look it to me, but I'm not seeing them in person.
     
  10. 42Skeezix

    42Skeezix Moderator Moderator

    The bottles are fine for the period. The one in the second pic is a case gin type, used from at least the 18th. century up to modern times. As a matter of fact the one in the pic would probably date to the early 19th. century...and is actually a very good rendition. That caught my eye right away being a bottle guy and all.
     
    cartoongirl and Figtree3 like this.
  11. cartoongirl

    cartoongirl "Don't Blink!"

    Thanks, skeezix! I was hoping a 'bottle guy' would take a look see!
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page