Two persons sent emails with responses to questions I asked in the previous post regarding the prints - thanks for this! The emails below show that not all prints have the Raymond and Raymond stamp and that some prints have a signature inside the brim of the hat.
John in Tennessee wrote:
"I too own one of these white clowns and would like very much to understand its origin.
John in Tennessee wrote:
"I too own one of these white clowns and would like very much to understand its origin.
Having some family connections to the art world I have had this print before two of north America's print experts - the first said it was an authentic Picasso screen print and to be prepared to insure it for lots of money. The second said it was a fake, that Picasso did not do screen prints, that the image was not even by Picasso.
Oddly enough when pressed the second expert allowed that if I looked hard enough I might find the image in a Picasso Catalog somewhere.
Of course the work is clearly not a screen print, however the brown paper appears to be woven in a Herringbone pattern, one supposes that as this pattern shows through the gouache a cursory glance might give the idea that the work is a screen print. Examination with a loop or a touch reveals thick paint most likely gouache, obviously not a screen print. Of course the image is a Picasso image as has been documented.
As an aside the image on your blog that is stamped Raymond and Raymond does not appear to be on the same paper as my example but this could be a resolution problem with the image.
My example has no stamps front or back, nor any marks at all, other than what appears to be a signature done in black paint with a thin brush just above the hair on the hats inside brim, left side as one looks at the image.
I will send an image of my "Picasso" along with a number of images of different representatives of this work I've collected off the web. I do not recall seeing stamps on any other examples but they may be hidden if present. My image is picassoprint.jpg the others are off eBay or from folks with whom I've exchanged emails regarding this conundrum.
Careful examination of the various images shows considerable differences, suggesting they were partially or complete handmade. Some are quite rough. Also some of these images were apparently signed, one below the image, one like mine in the hat brim.
What fun thanks for the blog and your work."
An image of John's own print is next to this post. The signature on the brim of the hat can be seen, but no details can be made out. I will ask John for a close up.
Martha wrote:
"I have a white clown Picasso as well. My aunt owned an art gallery many years ago (in the 1940's or 50's I think). She is deceased now. She kept this for herself and gave it to my mom in the 1970's and told her it was very valuable. We have another, unsigned, that is made of the same material and technique and looks like a Matisse. She had been an art dealer and kept the work for herself."
So we have found that not all prints are stamped with Raymond & Raymond, but many questions remain:
- What other sources, other than Raymond & Raymond, are there for these prints? Do you have a print - does it have a stamp or a label? Does the paper have a watermark?
- Is the print documented in any gallery catalog or is there any other hard documentation, in addition to the Raymond and Raymond stamp on one particular print?
- Were they printed in conjunction to a specific exhibition at the gallery, or where they just reproduced in isolation?
- I do not know this for certain but I imagine that the copyright owner of the original (Picasso himself or the owner of the original?) would have to approve the reproduction of the original painting - was Picasso alive when the prints were made and did Picasso authorize these?
- When it comes to technique and the look and feel of the paper, are there any authorized prints by Picasso that were made on a similar paper or with a similar end result?
John here
ReplyDeleteSorry I should have sent closeups of the signature (s) to begin with. They should be in a following email.
There are two closeup images of my white clown and one from a guy named Guy. One can also see the signature in Guy's example though not as well.
The signature is of course a bit more clear when one examines the artwork itself, however one can clearly make out the final "s" and "o" of Picasso in the image provided and the short dashed line after the name.
I am of course sure that someone looking at the images will be saying that this is not a signature at all, all I can say to that is that I have used magnification, and spent considerable time looking, and have no doubt that this is a signature.
It is also of note that the signature on my piece is straight and on Guy's it is curved. Showing that if these are prints of some sort - there was at least some handwork done. Both the straight and curved examples are I believe consistent with Picasso's many differing signatures. Of all the images I've collected the ones belonging to Guy and myself are very very close in appearance, in fact we referred to them as the "Picasso Twins" in our correspondence - there are however a few differences other than the signatures on the hat brims which suggest that even these nearly identical examples are not simply reproductions.
Regarding your further question as to wether Picasso was alive at the time these works were made - I do know that the frame that my example was in when I obtained it was made by a local frame shop that changed hands in the early seventies and had been opened originally in the mid fifties and was stamped with the original frame shop owners stamp. I had the work removed from that frame and the paper conserved. For what it is worth the touch and feel of the paper suggests that the age is considerable.
Also emailed is a image 205055_1.jpg which has a signature apparently done with fine brush beneath the green and to the right. Unfortunately I do not have a higher resolution for image 205055...
Thanks again for the great blog.
Just thought you'd like to know if you don't already; there's one listed on shopgoodwill.com right now; it's item #5858719.
ReplyDeleteI also have one of these Pierrot white clowns. I remember reading some where that the white clown part is a lithograph but at an exhibition some where in Europe he (picasso) hand painted the green backing. mine has the lithograph signature (top left). A faded hat brim signature, and some questionable squiggle marks where I can make out an S and O and maybe a C.
ReplyDeleteI will email you pictures and if I find anymore information.
Ps. does anyone have any idea what these are worth?
I too have one of these picasso prints. An auction house told me that it's a picasso reproduction. On being told this, I searched the net under Picasso/reproductions and came across your page. Interestingly, there is no Raymond stamp; nor under hat endorsement. The framers label on my print uses the old local glasgow dialling code- which has been out of circulation for (i'd guess) 45-50yrs. If you'd like some photos, i'll send some along. My only worry being; regardless of provenance, should I take the print out of the original frame, as it's near enough touching the glass,and have it remounted, or keep it "as is", until further evidence comes along?
ReplyDeleteCheers,
el quinn
August 14, 2010 I have one of these prints, my mother bought in 1972 at an estate sale. She was living in Falls Church, Va. at the time. I can't ask her as she has passed away, but none of us thought it was an origianl. It did not have an expensive frame and we all thought it was just a poster. It is not signed, just the upper left hand corner and it is slightly different than the prints posted here. Carrie
ReplyDeleteI recently purchased Norman Rockwell prints at an auction with the "Raymond & Raymond" stamp on the left hand bottom corner. Curtis Printing. Also on the right hand bottom corner is the name "Max Jaffe Vienna." Have I found a treasure?
ReplyDeletemy husband bought one of these today at an estate sale. It's professionally framed with a stamp of Turner Galleries Picture Framing, Dallas TX. By the phone number, it looks like it's from the fifties. I am afraid to take it out of the frame. Any suggestions on how I should proceed to learn about value?
ReplyDeleteI have one of these. I keep telling my husband to get rid of it, because it's a reproduction or a fake, but he insist on keeping it. I bought a Jesus poster that was originally in this wooden frame and the poster was taken out during our clean up, and I notice this piece of art in the back of the poster. Don't know it it's worth anything but I think it's a nice piece of art to decorate and display on my wall.
ReplyDeleteI have a white clown which appears to be a watercolor however it could be a lithograph it has a Picasso signature in the upper left and
ReplyDeleteon the back it again has a Picasso signature with accompanying numbers not sure what this all means. It certianly is not a print because it is on board. I don't know who did this work but it is very old 20'/30's
Dale
I have one from an estate sale....it was framed in Belgium pre 1950 and it is a Linocut? on canvas-paper or something like that. I am worried to take it out of the frame...Belgium is less than 2 hours from Paris where Picasso lived at the time.
ReplyDeleteMy parents have one Small Pierrot that they found in Spain. Several art experts have seen it and were not able to confirm us if it was a real or a fake, but most of them told us that the lithograph was quite disturbing because of the signature and the "paper" as they dated it from the beginning of the 20's century. My parents would like to reunite the owners of the Small Pierrot in France (we live in Provence) for an exhibit. If you are interested please contact us by email: lebene7@hotmail.com
ReplyDeleteI just found an old White Clown at a thrift store. The piece fits the exact description detailed in this blog. The signature and green background are slightly different than pictures of other copies, just as others report. This piece was treated as a cheap print of little value to the original owner. The brown paper and the frame show much age but the paper was cut and the clowns legs folded behind the frame backing just so it fit in the smaller frame. The thrift store borders a very rich area, good finds can be made there, I purchased it for $5 just to research it, knowing the odds were not in my favor that it was of enormous value. I'm still confused how no one has been able to prove the signature could have in fact been by Picasso and not done by a silk screening process. Since mine is in poor shape the value would be in the signature. So there have been versions of this that have sold with authenticated Picasso signatures?
ReplyDeleteI have an old print I found in my grandmothers attic. It has a stamp VP520 picasso white clown 18x24. Looking for more information. Was found in a very old frame.
ReplyDeleteI have this same one stamped "VP520 18x24" on back of brown board.
DeleteMVPAT
I found that the ones that were made on paper and have a marking "VP520" were sold at yonkers in 1966...
ReplyDeletehttp://fultonhistory.com/newspaper%2010/Yonkers%20NY%20Herald%20Statesman/Yonkers%20NY%20Herald%20Statesman%201963%20%20Grayscale/Yonkers%20NY%20Herald%20Statesman%201963%20%20Grayscale%20-%200169.pdf
It would be interesting to see if there are multiple prints out there of the other works of art listed in the Yonkers ad.
DeleteI have one that is printed (lithograph) onto canvas. It is framed in Belgium. printed sometime before 1945
ReplyDeleteMine is on board
ReplyDeleteHi I have 3 of these everyone different. They are all done on a limestone and are all lithographs. I am contacting the Picasso family and getting them looked at.
ReplyDeleteSo fake picasso clowns fase 1903-1907 I dont see oxidicion of colours he signed like that but he doenst have in that time signutures in left up side that green colour is very modern for me is good fake ...but fake.
ReplyDeleteYour mom boobs are fake. You pos.
Deleteplease look at the book the Norman Rockwell album 1961 on the dust jacket you can see one of these Picasso prints on the wall of his studio, these were prints authorized by Picasso, mass produced but not fakes, maybe someone else made them too, later? but the ones made in the 1950's while Picasso was still alive are a good buy if you can find them for under $500, if in the original frame, if it's not been out of the old frame you can be sure it's one of the 1950 versions, the paper it's printed on and the not perfectly cut margins are also a clue, they were float mounted originally, not matted.
ReplyDeleteI too have one that was passed down from a great aunt. Mine does not have the stamp on it anywhere. It does seem to have a signature in the brim of the hat but it is not too clear what it says. We have been trying to find out what the value is.
ReplyDeleteNatalie
If anyone is interested I have one on canvas with no stamp and a signature at the hat thats legible and it appears very old. The canvas where its taken off the original wood frame is thin and has the expected 2 holes on each side where the canvas is streched.
ReplyDelete