Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Aureliel, post: 326355, member: 3623&quot;]It seems the concavity was because of the hollow in the wood behind the miniature. I got it out this morning and have posted some photos in the post before this one. It&#039;s hand-painted and seems to be on some kind of thin wafer - ivory perhaps?</p><p><br /></p><p>This takes me back to my original question. Do you know if it was at all common for copy artists to sign a miniature with the name of the artist who made the original, rather than their own? For example, would a miniature copy of the portrait of the Duchess of Devonshire by Gainsborough ever have been signed only &quot;Gainsborough&quot; without the name of the copy artist? (The ones I&#039;ve seen usually have the copy artist&#039;s name, sometimes with &quot;after Gainsborough&quot; added).</p><p><br /></p><p>Long story short - do you think there is a tiny chance this could be by Kucharsky himself, or would it likely have been someone else that made it as a copy and signed it Kucharsky instead of their own name, perhaps under the impression, as was the art world as a whole for some time, that he was the painter of the original painting? The latter seems more likely to me but then I just really don&#039;t know.</p><p><br /></p><p>Thanks for your reply, I really appreciate your thoughts on this![/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in