Toulouse-Lautrec Lithos

Hope these were not original because if they were I will jump from Golden Gates.
So, I saw them at an estate sale today, $75 each. Appeared to have some age but what bugged me was the hand written in pencil text under the plates. Both piece with "Toulouse-Lautrec" at lower right, Le Jockey with "original lithograph" at the lower left and The passanger of Cabin 54 with "Lithographie Originale" at lower left.
Usually when something says "Original", it is not, but I thought that maybe the notations were added by the gallery who sold the pieces. Was that a common practice? I am still suspicious because one was signed in French , the other in English.

So, anyway, I decided to get just the Jockey litho but had to run to an ATM (one of those sales with checks or cash only). For some reason I did not put it on a hold table. Noone was paying attention to those so I thought they will wait for me.But they did not, when I got back someone was leaving with them.
So, tell me please they were not original.

 

Le Jockey might possibly be the real deal. Here's a copy in the British Museum, with different coloring. It doesn't show a signature, though. If you can find samples of his signature, that might help.

http://www.britishmuseum.org/explor...t_image.aspx?image=ps099990.jpg&retpage=21531

I didn't look for the other print.

No matter what... please don't go near the Golden Gate!

 

I don't think these were hand signed but only monogrammed in the stone. The hand writings are most likely added later.
The real deal is 70-80k
http://www.christies.com/lotfinder/...ulouse-lautrec-le-jockey-5063125-details.aspx

The not real deal, just hundreds.

https://www.liveauctioneers.com/item/37349638_toulouse-lautrec-lithograph


I see that some of the originals say " printed to the edges". That means that there are no white borders, right?
Also, I think no reputable dealer or gallery whould ad a text under the plate that states "original lithograph".

 

I agree that "printed to the edges" would mean no borders.

As far as I know, handwriting beneath the image on an original should only be done by the artist, a person designated by the artist, or someone else in an official capacity if the print was struck posthumously.

 

The Christie's print looks like the one in the British Museum, while the Live Auctioneers one looks like the one that got away in terms of color and aging of the paper (which could indicate a less expensive paper was used).

The Christie's auction says that there was more than one print run, so if the prints weren't hand-tinted, I think it's possible different colors were used in the different runs. Or if the more colorful versions are reproductions, the color could have been altered then.

Were you able to look at the prints through a loupe? Did they have any dots and/or plate marks?

 

I did not bother to have a closer look because I was planning to get the one with the horses.
As far as the handwritings, something is fishy. If both were in French I would think that maybe there was a later edition and the printer/publisher put the text. But I've never seen an authentic print by Picasso, Chagall, Miro etc to say "original lithigraph" in handwriting.

 

It looks like neither print has numbers indicating the size of the print run or the number for the print? That's not typical, either.

Without an expert taking a look, it would be hard to figure out what's what, though. I think it's conceivable that a dealer might add info in the margin for an unsigned original just to say what they honestly believe a print to be. But it's equally possible for an unethical dealer to try to pass off a reproduction as an original.

I've seen prints on eBay that were "signed" and supposedly originals that looked identical to reproductions I have and I was pretty sure the signatures were bogus.

 

In case I wasn't clear... when I said it looked like maybe the print was the real deal, I meant that the image appeared to be a genuine Toulouse-Lautrec work. Whether a particular instance is a repro or not is not so easy to determine.

 

With no numbering for issue size, I'm a skeptic ....