Fake or Fortune? BBC1

Author
Discussion

Laurel Green

30,776 posts

232 months

Sunday 26th June 2011
quotequote all
Must say I felt sorry for the family (the finders) as they came across as a decent lot. Am sure that the other lot had never seen the painting before. Just chucked it out with a lot of other 'rubbish' when having a clear-out. The Sotheby's chap stated that he had a conversation with the sister (I think it was) and that she confirmed that her mother had seen the catalogue so, very strange that they now refute this.

Oakey

27,557 posts

216 months

Sunday 26th June 2011
quotequote all
They claim they never received the catalogue, the first they knew about it was when it appeared in the Telegraph. Have you seen the house? I can believe that things could go 'missing' from such properties and not be noticed until they're brought to the owners attention. Just because they weren't aware it was missing doesn't mean they should forefit ownership of it. What makes you think they threw it out when they clearly still had family belongings (the letters or diary, the urn that was in the painting) that prove the paintings provenance?

Besides, even if they did throw it out, isn't it still 'theft by finding' (besides which, why was a fisherman rummaging through a rubbish dump?)

Laurel Green

30,776 posts

232 months

Sunday 26th June 2011
quotequote all
Oakey said:
They claim they never received the catalogue, the first they knew about it was when it appeared in the Telegraph. Have you seen the house? I can believe that things could go 'missing' from such properties and not be noticed until they're brought to the owners attention. Just because they weren't aware it was missing doesn't mean they should forefit ownership of it. What makes you think they threw it out when they clearly still had family belongings (the letters or diary, the urn that was in the painting) that prove the paintings provenance?

Besides, even if they did throw it out, isn't it still 'theft by finding' (besides which, why was a fisherman rummaging through a rubbish dump?)
As already said; the Sotheby's chap confirmed that they had seen the catalogue. If this is so, then why did the mother not recognise it for what it was (well perhaps not for what it was but, should have remembered it being there).

As for the diary; this would hold memories/historical reference, something that one would keep but, a poorly (well I thought so) painted watercolour? Not sure about the theft by finding as it seems to be a grey area but, believe it was mentioned, if the finder believes the find not to be of significant value, then it is not theft.

I cannot believe the father stole the painting, then kept in in the loft for all those years. Also, if someone else stole the painting, why would they then dump it.

Mr E Driver

Original Poster:

8,542 posts

184 months

Sunday 3rd July 2011
quotequote all
Radio Times said:
Sunday 03 July
7:00pm - 8:00pm
BBC1
Making a Fake

3/4, series 1

Fiona Bruce's splendid fine art series gets down and dirty, looking at the nitty gritty of forgeries and the detective work that goes into spotting them.
Her mission - aided by wonderful, pinstriped expert Philip Mould - is to find out if a painting that hangs in London's Courtauld Institute is a 17th-century original or a 1940s forgery from the prolific brush of Dutch superfaker Han van Meegeren.
Along the way we see a ruinously unconvincing Vermeer and Scotland Yard's storeroom full of fakes, while John Myatt from Brush with Fame has a go at van Meegeren's techniques, using a toxic mix of oil paint and bakelite resin.
On now, another in this fascinating series.....

Laurel Green

30,776 posts

232 months

Sunday 3rd July 2011
quotequote all
Cheers for the heads-up. I'm watching the cricket and had forgotten about it - record now on. smile

Laurel Green

30,776 posts

232 months

Sunday 19th January 2014
quotequote all
'Twas back on this evening - did anyone else watch it? Won't say too much in case others have yet to see it.

w00tman

603 posts

145 months

Sunday 19th January 2014
quotequote all
Laurel Green said:
'Twas back on this evening - did anyone else watch it? Won't say too much in case others have yet to see it.
Brilliant - fantastic program and oddly satisfying.

jet_noise

5,644 posts

182 months

Monday 20th January 2014
quotequote all
Dear LG,

Laurel Green said:
'Twas back on this evening - did anyone else watch it? Won't say too much in case others have yet to see it.
I see you weren't watching the cricket this time frownsmile

Fascinating audit trail and unusual paint making. One of the few programs not dumbed down. I am not in any way a culture vulture but I enjoyed this,

regards,
Jet

Laurel Green

30,776 posts

232 months

Monday 20th January 2014
quotequote all
jet_noise said:
I see you weren't watching the cricket this time frownsmile

Fascinating audit trail and unusual paint making. One of the few programs not dumbed down. I am not in any way a culture vulture but I enjoyed this,

regards,
Jet
Yup! Sums it up perfectly for me too - fascinating.

As for the cricket; watched the highlights on Pick TV at 10-pm. frown

Laurel Green

30,776 posts

232 months

Sunday 26th January 2014
quotequote all
Heads up.

Laurel Green

30,776 posts

232 months

Sunday 2nd February 2014
quotequote all
Am talking to myself here but, had to say yikes on tonight's episode!

Ilovetwiglets

695 posts

168 months

Sunday 2nd February 2014
quotequote all
Laurel Green said:
Am talking to myself here but, had to say yikes on tonight's episode!
Agreed, he seemed quite calm about it all though.

Laurel Green

30,776 posts

232 months

Sunday 2nd February 2014
quotequote all
He took an awfully big risk and, unfortunately paid the price.

I thought right from the off that it all sounded a tad dodgy, what with the 'dealer knowing someone that knew someone.'

condor

8,837 posts

248 months

Sunday 2nd February 2014
quotequote all
I don't think he expected it might be confiscated and destroyed. After paying £100K for it, he probably expected it to be returned and branded a fake or hailed as an original Chagall.

Laurel Green

30,776 posts

232 months

Sunday 5th July 2015
quotequote all
Heads up to a new series starting this evening at 8 o'clock.

SydneyBridge

8,565 posts

158 months

Sunday 5th July 2015
quotequote all
Never seen this before but was fascinating

Laurel Green

30,776 posts

232 months

Sunday 5th July 2015
quotequote all
SydneyBridge said:
Never seen this before but was fascinating
Yep, one of the best programmes on TV, IMO.

Laurel Green

30,776 posts

232 months

Monday 13th July 2015
quotequote all
Another fascinating episode; hard to imagine how the Wildenstein Institute came to their decision considering the amount of 'proof' they were provided with.

Riley Blue

20,949 posts

226 months

Tuesday 14th July 2015
quotequote all
Pride I think. To accept it as genuine now would be admitting they made a mistake in the past.

Laurel Green

30,776 posts

232 months

Sunday 17th July 2016
quotequote all
A new four part series starts this evening at 8 o'clock:

Episode 1 of 4

Fake or Fortune returns for a fifth series, beginning with one of the most challenging cases the team has ever encountered. Can art detectives Philip Mould and Fiona Bruce prove that a painting of a man in a black cravat is one of the first pictures ever painted by celebrated and controversial British artist Lucian Freud, even though Freud himself denied painting it?