Thomas Kinkade Studio Proof appraised but........

Hi everyone,

I'm currently working on a sale and they were an avid Thomas Kinkade fan. They purchased several prints in a very short time several years before TK passed. A few of these are studio proofs they purchased for thousands of dollars and recently we found out from the TK gallery in CA that one called Hometown Morning with a low number appraised at $12,500. What is the realistic value of these and can we really ask anything near this price. (btw I'm not on my computer ATM but I can get photos later if you need them) Any guidance would be most appreciated.

Thank you everyone I appreciate your time,
Tina
aka
dssrtlady

 

I think the time has passed for Kinkade to have any value

 

Here are auction house prices from the last few years for Kinkade. I believe all prices shown are actual sale prices, but there's no indication if the prints are originals, if they're signed, or if they're framed...

http://www.findartinfo.com/english/list-prices-by-artist/1/274245/thomas-kinkade/page/1.html

Here are original Kinkade prints sold recently on eBay, which may be the best way to go...

http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_sacat=0&_nkw=thomas kinkade original print&LH_Complete=1&LH_Sold=1&rt=nc&_trksid=p2045573.m1684

 

Im astonished theres even a market for him still,but there you have it ! I know his original oils might go for $12000,but I highly doubt prints could be worth that much,but what do I know !

 

I would not take an appraisal from a TK gallery as being anywhere near accurate. The $300-500.00 that most limited edition prints are bringing on ebay seems to be a more accurate value on the secondary market. I am kind of surprised that they are even bringing that much.

 

A quick check finds a few copies of Hometown Morning that sold just below or in the above range. It does not seem to be one of the ones bringing bigger money.

 

Thanks everyone for your input and knowledge. Pat Thank you for the prices sold. Some of those on eBay I didn't even find. Brad I understand, seems the one that was appraised was something like #44/160 for the studio proof that supposedly Tk himself oversaw touched up then signed it and then penciled sketched on the back of the canvas along with his signature. It's a print or (Litho) mounted on canvas with painted areas on it. We will give the information from the TK gallery to the family and do what their wishes are.

Thank you again for the insight.
Tina

 

Some collectors consider artist's proofs, especially those that have been touched up and signed, more collectible than signed numbered prints. Do some more searching and you might find that this could be worth a few thousand. Some of the signed limited edition prints are getting a $1000 to $3000 so this might go a little higher depending on the subject.

Personally, I never understood why these became so hot but there are still collectors out there.

 

especially those that have been touched up and signed,

sometimes called Remarque's

 

Maybe because so many of his works look like illustrations for children's books so appeal to the "inner child" in people? If not, I don't understand it, either.

 

Guess I didn't know the difference between an artist's proof and a studio proof (I guess anything to make a buck!). Found a couple studio proofs that sold.

http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_odk...313&_nkw=thomas+kinkade+studio+proof&_sacat=0

 

Brad some "proofs" are the real thing where the artist makes corrections directly on the proof and signs his/her approval of the corrections and it goes back to the printer.

Other "Artist Proofs" are somewhat of a gimmick where the artist takes the first 15 or 20 prints, sometimes more, and signs those differently to make them more valuable.

From the description the OP gave, this sounds like the "real" proof that went back to printer with corrections.

 

How can there be 160 of these type of proofs? Seems like a gimmick more than anything else to me.

"These special limited edition prints had their production authorized by Mr. Kinkade. Those over there, he actually supervised their production. These special ones were signed by him. The next step up were actually looked at by him before he signed them. The extra special ones were touched while he signed them as he looked at them. The super special prints and our top of the line were actually scribbled on the back by him!"

 

The extra special ones were touched while he signed them as he looked at them.


... How did he sign the other ones without touching them?

 

His robo-assistants held them for him so as not to accidently bump them up to the next level and ruin the whole scheme. God forbid that he should actually touch them and make them more valuable.

 

rotfl @ how they determine value.

I re-read the OP's description and this is not a "real" artist proof that went back to the printer. He scribbled on it and touched it up and then signed it.

I hate to say it, but it still makes it slightly more valuable than one that is just signed. Gimmick? Yes! But people pay more for them.

 

Gimmick? Uh huh. Lucrative? You betcha.

 

I am astonished,thats all I can say.

 

funny, just this morning I was reading about collectibles that have bottomed out in price. Thomas Kincade Art was one of them. This isn't the one I read, But one by Kovels says the same thing.
http://www.kovels.com/latest-news/10-collectibles-not-worth-collecting-anymore.html

Here is another story along the same lines....

http://www.thestreet.com/story/10863800/1/5-completely-worthless-collectibles.html

 

The OP's clients would have been better off spending all that money on liquor and drugs which, coincidentally, is what Kinkade did.