Dear Xin,

As you know my piece it has an ICP MS study. The reference information for doing this study was the following:

Porcelain analysis by PIXE PACS: 32.30 Rj ; 82.80 Ej ; 91.65.ND Cheng, Zhang, Xia, Jiang and Yang - Univ. of Shanghai, China

What do you think of Cheng, Zhang, Xia, Jiang and Yang - Univ. of Shanghai, China? They have not idea?

Dear Alejandro,

I believe that you are in bona-fide, but yes you are right, the story is becoming long and there are no conclusions expected since everyone remains in his own opinion and refuse to consider other opinions too, even when they are obvious.

I want just to resume some points.

• No, I have never directly handled a genuine copper red Yongle vase like this one. Be sure that only a few people did. I have only seen through vitrines. I agree that handling is important, but not in this case in my opinion because the painting style tells everything. I know that you are not giving importance to that, but IMO opinion you are wrong, that is the first thing to consider.
• Among the important pieces that you see at museums, only a few have a TL test. Similarly, the top experts rarely request a TL test. When they submit a piece to the TL test it is not, as it seems that you are believing, that they don’t know what it is and then are asking the science to tell them what it is. It’s not that. They submit to TL test a piece that they think is genuine, and the scientific test is only seen as a further confirmation, especially for commercial purpose. If they have your vase in hands, be sure that they will not think “Hmmm, may be, don’t know, let see what the science will say”. Absolutely not.
• If you will show your vase to them, they will say just by pictures, without handling it, that it is a copy. Then if you will tell them that it has a TL test, they will tell you that it is not important. They don’t know why the TL test is not reliable in that case, but they know that with all evidence it must be not. Science doesn’t know everything, science changes in time. The fact that we do not know why that TL test report is not reliable, being it the nature of the elements, or the ability of the faker, or whatsoever, doesn’t mean that it must be absolutely reliable.
• You continue bringing up the ICPMS study etc. Why you do you insist in considering a simple recipe as a dating test, which is not? It is basically a list of ingredients, which correspond with the same list of centuries ago. And then? What is it proving? It seems that both you and Mr. Kotalla give great importance to details, like the ingredients and, even less important, the potting, which has no importance. The potting technique is the same also today! A scientist should know a little about techniques too and not only about laboratory.
• I am not interested in knowing who sold you the vase etc etc, but it is not understandable your attitude after having seen the same vase (I repeat, the same vase) at that Chinese auction. Anybody would not be satisfied by the answer of the seller, that it belongs from an old collection. Anybody would PRETEND from him to explain why the vase was there. Or how they had the pictures from, if the demonstrated that the vase was not there. It is more than logic, I think. When have you bought it, before or after the Chinese auction? If after, sorry, 2+2=4 (that, yes, is science?).
• I have shown you another similar vase, in blue and white, sold at a secondary auction, which to be honest is even a bit better painted than your one. How that is not raising a bit of doubt to you?

Saying that, I really have no more to say, it is useless to try to go forward while continue ignoring such things.

Giovanni

Dear Alejanac,

I noticed the reference in the report. I didn’t find the original paper, so I couldn’t read the content. What I found out that they published a couple of papers on similar topic. I guess they are experts of PIXE analysis. Well, coincidentally I hold a Master degree of Mechanical Engineering and Physics and I understand PIXE well. PIXE is used primarily for determination of concentration and distribution of elements in this case. That’s all. The example which is analyzed in the research at University of Shanghai is and should be authentic. No doubt. I believe them and their work, even if I didn’t read them. I also found other papers of them and similar topics. They are all about analysis using PIXE. What I want to say is, they are all technical papers about which elements are contained in the clay of ancient ceramics and how much of them, not about authentication of porcelain. I have been researcher at university too and I read a lot of papers like this. I’m very familiar with them.

Which is important here. The clay which is used at Ming dynasty can still be found and used around Jingdezhen, Zhejiang province. The glaze can also be done with old recipe. Everything can be copied according to material and technique. About the bubbles it’s not hard. Instead of using electrical oven you can use old traditional oven. Porcelains like yours can be found in the streets of Jingdezhen. You can fly to China and have a look. If I were wrong I would pay your ticket after your trip.

We don’t want to convince you to believe us. We just want you to calm down and be aware about what you do. Please don’t be mad about us. We don’t have ill intention. You asked for our opinion and we give you our opinion. That’s all.

Xin

Dear Giovanni,

2+2=4 is not science. It's a rule.  ? 

Xin

Was soll das denn ??

Es behauptet keiner das Material-Analysen Datierungen sind.

Zu behaupten das heute noch diesselben Materialien verwendet wie in den alten Kultur-Epochen

ist absoluter  Nonsens .

Was macht macht mir diesen angeblichen alten Materlien ? Eine neue -Fake - alte Vase nach der TL ?

 Was macht mann denn mit diesen angeblichen alten Materalien  incl. Glasur .  Neue Fake Objekte mit einem TL-Alter Test  ?

 Was macht mann denn mit diesen angeblichen alten Materalien  incl. Glasur .  Neue Fake Objekte mit einem TL-Alter Test  ?

Dear Ralf,

I have google translated your last posts. I am impressed by the following sentence:

“To claim that today still uses the same materials as in the ancient cultural epochs is absolute nonsense.”

I am literally shocked.

I was already perplexed by your previous sentence that today it is not possible to pot a vase with the same technique of a few centuries ago, but I thought that perhaps I have not understood correctly.

But now… really shocked.

Giovanni

Dear Goivanni,

in my knowledge until today in contact with several geological institution they do not old material from each period today .

The old sites for Ming  minerals ++  are closed and empty, they have used new sites in the same districed if possible to find

mineral sites there .

Ok, may be it is possible to make with modern technics the same mixtures :

Chemical analysis of core material (bottom sample) by ICP-MS, ICP-OES, AAS standard addition method

Evaluation: Complies with Ming dynasty Yongle period (AD 1403 – 1425)

References:

Porcelain analysis by PIXE PACS: 32.30 Rj ; 82.80 Ej ; 91.65.ND Cheng, Zhang, Xia, Jiang and Yang - Univ. of Shanghai, China

Ok , there is the idea and only meanings around to make each mixture and glazes similar today ,

what they are doing with this old looking compostion material and    how they make make a moon -flask from this

material ??

Please tell me this , I will answer soon .

Ralf

Dear Ralf,

I really do not understand why you see problems in potting a vase exactly like that one, and with the same techniques, today. Where is the problem in your opinion?

How do you think that a studio potter, not working on industrial scales, is working today?

Giovanni

Dear Giovanni,

byside evrybody only telling around it easy to make or possible +++

I ask you and others how they make the vase like the moon-flask ,. They used the so called old mixure material like attached above and make

a form of a vase and painted with so called old glaze and what happen after it ? The use not an electro oven for firing !they used as good fakers

an old one in tradition techn ic !  Right ?

regards

ralf

Ralf

Fake is fake. There is nothing to say. ?  ?  ?  LoL

Viel Spaß ?  ?  ? 

I found more fakes

Sorry , why you do not answer simple to my question.

You know it why , because you construction break total down if you anser .

Tl-test is 100 % true and real about the result last firing  or recently fired. ( age with tolerances 15.20-30 % )

We have made in 40 years more then 120 oop sample with ca 2 000 000  single datas.

More the 200 tests confirm experts meanings feeling or destroxed it totally.

I ask you and others how they make the vase like the moon-flask ,. They used the so called old mixure material like attached above and make

a form of a vase and painted with so called old glaze and what happen after it ? They use not an electro oven for firing !they used as good fakers an old one in tradition technic ! Right ?