@superox This has been a very thoughtful discussion...I read it late in the conversation, so I've stayed out, but you had asked some questions earlier that I think have been answered in part, but I would like to put my two cents in on....

You asked:

1.) (why) create a plate only 16.4 cm in diameter when almost with the same effort, he could do a 20.0 cm and sell it at a higher price.  Answer: The artist of your plate could have realized that he could not duplicate the genuine 20.0 cm plate exactly, so a variation in size could provide a valid explination in the variation in the artistry, and therefor went with a different size.  Variations in plate size at this degree is not uncommon, so nothing can be concluded from the size.

2.) a smaller piece could also mean, a more difficult space to paint.  could that be the reason why they cannot get the level of accuracy. the style of painting specially on the edge (roughy compare to the accuracy of Yongzheng of hyper detail).  Answer: I would not consider the size of your plate as 'small'.... small would be the size of a snuff bottle. So, no, the size of your plate should not impair accuracy of painting, but would provide an explination that some might accept to help legitimize your plate.

3.) as pointed out in this healthy post, could there have been imperial kiln imitator during those time.  I remember watching those Qing Dynasty movie (Ruyi, royal place) and what the common people do is to follow what is in fashion in the royal court.  Could this be one of those "wanna be ceramics" ?  Let us say a Minyao version ?  Answer: Even the best minyao versions of the 18th c could not produce such a close 'look a like'. The materials used for the enamels and this quality of porcelain were not available to the general public, so while the design could be copied, there would most certainly be flaws to show inferior materials.

4.) Looking at the back, there seems to be a few firing crack but it looks too clean to me.  Would it be good to know if the plate "only" itself if its modern or not ?  as Brian pointed out, it doese resemble the highish footrim of a 20th century plate with ladies (which is made much much more elaborately than mine...also bigger in size).  The earlier 20th century paste seems dirtier and I think the remnant of Jingdazhen ceramics are based on Jiangxi company and will often be marked with the company name... Answer:  I think this question suggests you are feeling the plate is more modern than Republic...and I agree.  Keeping in mind that I am not holding the plate, some of the fine Republic porcelains did a superb job of copying the design of earier Qing wares, but the porcelain body itself always feels very much as most good quality Republic porcelain does...grey white color (not milk white as in the 18th c.), generally thinly potted with semi-translucent paste, and a clean foot rim, but one that has a roughness due to the nature of Republic porcelain paste.

5.) lastly, let me imagine I am the faker, can I just get a finished red plate (on a porcelain status) with white inner surface and over enamel it and paint the ladies and rebake it ? Answer: Yes and No.  William pointed this out already, but the famille rose enamels are a group of metalic minerals that when fired essentially melts, then turns into color glass.  Each color has its own specific temperature in which it will melts, so it must be fired in order of highest temperature to lowest, so that the prior colors stay intact (don't melt/drip).  In the 18th c., the process was very difficult to achieve requiring multiple firings, which is why the best examples of Yongzheng wares are so valuable.  Now days, most of the color enamels can be created to have similar firing temperatures, so one firing can produce a complete piece. 

I do not know what the firing temperature for the ruby ground is as compared to the other enamels, but an original ruby ground and a later 'clobbering' of a famille rose scene on the inner plate is possible in theory, but I think highly unlikely without some sort of imperfections created in the ruby glaze.

My final thought is to say that I am really pleased to see how everyone has paid so much attention to the artistry of the piece as the determinant of authenticity. I really think this is the method that Peter recommends, and as you all know, I do, too.

So, it is with great irony that I want to say that the photos that have been posted so far are not good enough to determine authenticty  - NOT because you can't compare the overall decor, but in this case, we can not see the nature of the enamels (texture, color, imperfections).

The design overall has flaws that suggest that it is not truely Yongzheng, but it is still pretty good...so maybe just a bad day at the kiln, right? (probably not).

But, if Al could post a real close up of the pink/red enamels (let's say of the robe and border) where we can see the little bubbles and texture, we can resolve the matter of authenticty fairly quickly (I think).

Famille rose colors were newly invented, and despite the artistic talents of the Yongzheng artists, they still were mastering mixing the chemicals to create these 'new' colors. So, the enamels didn't really fire all that well, creating bumpy & bubbley textures with colors that were not usually uniform when you look at them up close.

Later examples are much smoother in texture and uniform in color.

Without the close up photos, and based upon just the artistry, I agree with Brian, this appears to be a modern plate.  However, that's a big risk to assume this conclusion as fact without a closer look at the enamels.

Tim

@superox - 

Hi Al - 

Not really my area, but you may find the attached images and article interesting comparisons :- 

1/2:- No 209, exhibited ‘China without Dragon’s’, Oriental Ceramics Society, London 2016 …

3-7:- Paper by Rose Kerr, Orientations, Voll 31, May 2000 …

Stuart 

@greeno107 

Hi Tim.

Thank you for your reply.  I appreciate the effort.

1.) do you have a photo or a sample of how a "bumpy and textured" colour look like ?  

2.) If the answer to the question 1 is a yes, then it is a Yongzheng piece (minyao)

3.)  would this type "bumpy and textured" of enamel behavior still exist during the Late Qing/Republic or have they smooth them out by that time.

4.) if the answer in 3 is a yes, (Later post Yongzheng), then the paste itself will not be of the period as most LateQing paste are greyish white paste while this is a clear white paste.

5.) Peter mentioned that there is a legitimate wear on the piece, could it then be possible it could be something that was made when the Jiangxi kiln was revived where the white colour paste came back ?  Would you say this would be at most a 1950-1960 copy  (pre-cultural revolution) ?

Thanks and looking forward to your reply.

@ming1449 

Thanks ming... just saw this now...

Al

@superox 

Hey,

I agree with Tim, some close ups of the enamels would be useful.  Something I have noticed on export wares especially Yongzheng periods, is the separation of certain enamels as they fired, maybe impurities burning out, and miss mixed components not leveling quite right.  A good example of this is the Yongzheng horses plate , which Brian bought from me a while back, there was quite a debate if the quality was up to Yongzheng standards.  It is often times difficult to assess this as most museums and books, and high end dealers, only select the best, so you are essentially viewing the period with blinders on.  I showed that plate to a few very prominent dealers, who had sold better quality examples in the past, and they all assured me that it was just not the same tier( theirs were around $10k, mine certainly not), but was nevertheless of the period.  There were a few of the enamels that were slightly miss-fired, if I recall there was a green that showed this flakey/bubbly separation... I do not have pics on my computer anymore, at least not closeups, perhaps if Brian still has it, he could show some closeups.

As for your plate, the purple/mauve (whose to say someone didn't bleed brown into a purple, or mess up some other way)  doesn't convince me that it is not Yongzheng, there are too many variations of this design, and of the quality of these, and I see more going for it than not.  That said, a bunch of closeups in bright sun, of enamels and foot, and the texture of the ruby back would help certainly.

but with out some one handling it, who has handled a bunch of these export plates(I am not saying I would be a good example of that, though I have handled quite a few... there are so many things I have never seen), find someone locally hopefully there is a top dealer near you and show it to them and get an opinion.  These early famille rose enamels are often tricky, as many are set in their ways that they have to be one exact way(something I think modern fakers use to their advantage), but in reality there was no "one way" that these were made or fired, and as I have further delved into this era of export ceramics, the differences are quite noticeable, and should be kept in mind while viewing a multitude of these. 

Also to note the positive, the majority of the enamels are very much in line with what I expect, the border decoration again totally fine for this period, the sloppiness in the layout could be just a rushed decorator, the gilding looks okay, and the foot too( with out very good closeups that is), and honestly the overall composition of the design, looks perfectly fine to me.

That said, more pictures are needed to make an educated guess, and handling is need to confirm.

Below are a bunch of examples and some purples that I just found off hand at the BM... If you dig(V&A, Peabody Essex, Europeanna.com) you are likely to find a million(I am exaggerating obviously) different versions of this decorated in a variety of qualities, and very few are going to be in this top top quality range that I suspect the majority of people assume is the golden standard.

Jeremy

I apologize if I included something others have already sited...

Similar patterns:

https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/A_1936-0413-35

https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/A_Franks-904

https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/A_Franks-699-

https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/A_Franks-438

Some purples:

https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/A_1953-1015-6

https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/A_Franks-872

https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/A_Franks-418

@jbeer2121 

Hi Jeremy,

Thank you so much for this...  once I receive it I will take a photo and send to the forum group.

these photos (museum quality) are like something of an 8K high resolution art piece compare to my which is 720p (video resolution) the most (576 i would be super sloppy 😆 )

It will take take for me to absorb all these information as I am coming from collecting Song ceramcis (Qingbai) to these myriad of colours.  It is another level of appreciating as you can see the human flaws in imperfection in it.

Are there good books on enamel ?  I heard there is a Nigel Wood book that talked about Glaze... could that be good in my journey of enamel world ? 

All comments from everyone is truly appreciated...  Now i need to get some sleep its almost 2 am here in sydney...

Al 

Some fantastic feedback from our noble members. 

I only have one yongzheng piece atm that I was lucky enough to buy last year. 

Please note the enamels and the foot. 

Mark 

@imperialfinegems 

Beautiful Mark!

the colours are vibrant!  something you can sit down put it on a slow turn table and really enjoy it..

also a nice almost pearly white glaze...

What mark is it (no pun intended! 😀 ) 

@superox,

The mark is a rare one. 

Tan zhai Zhen cang'

Translation is 'precious collection of the calm studio'.

We reside in the same country. I am in Melbourne.

Mark 

@jbeer2121 I find it hard to believe that the border design would have been treated this casually in comparison to the more detailed examples given the way the other aspects were done to emulate the best period examples. If anyone has located a period example with this loosely done border I would like to take a look at it to compare. At any rate, I agree that we need to see good pictures in natural light that can be enlarged, etc., before we can have a better sense of what this plate is. 

it's amazing when the real thing reveals itself when it's compared to a less quality copy....

no doubt

@johnshoe I repeat, excellent point.

@johnshoe Hey John,

I was more commenting on the enamels and interpretations of the design, and the wide variety in those, and I suppose I am wrong about this particular plate, I agree the border should not be sloppy... I also doubt that this would be republic period, I feel that this is often used as a catchall for 20th century "copies", to be honest for me this plate is either the period or fake.

I looked further into ruby backs after mentioning this dish to the forum's other John, and it seems that these ruby backs are always decorated to the highest standards. I have only ever handled four in person, with solid provenance in a major collection, and I will admit that they were perfect in every way.

I still stand by the possibility of odd colors and design features in this period, I think that by Qianlong though if you see funky colors and errors it would be a bad sign.

I would like very much to see the closeups though...

Jeremy

Just my input I own a lot of Chinese and Japanese porcelain almost everything from the Kangxi to the Qainlong period the boarders are drawn very clearly and persistent. I also went through all of my books. We are not talking about a crooked boarded we are talking about missing lines uneven rows S lines missing sections. This happens when a artist is unfamiliar with the mapping of a design. An artist that is clearly copying a pattern but doesn’t have the experience to transition the pattern correctly. To me this is a smoking gun this is not a quality issue this is an experience issue. 

@superox ,

Looks like Stuart posted a great article that covers the subject of your plate very completely, and others have provided some great references, too.  But, I'll do my best to answer your questions:

1.) do you have a photo or a sample of how a "bumpy and textured" colour look like ?  Yes.  The reference book below is of Imperial wares of the Yongzheng.  They have some great close up photos of the red enamel, but my photos of the book images might not be very clear.  Take a look....

You should be able to see under high magnification a collage of clear and opaque coloration, along with imperfections since the metal compound was not as homogeneous as more modern enamels.

2.) If the answer to the question 1 is a yes, then it is a Yongzheng piece (minyao)  I am not sure I understand the question. Are you saying your plate has this manner of red glaze?  That's excellent!  Congrats!

3.)  would this type "bumpy and textured" of enamel behavior still exist during the Late Qing/Republic or have they smooth them out by that time.  No, not that I am aware of.  Here is an example of a vase I own from the late Qing in the Yongzheng style  - I bought it because it is a very good study piece.

  Here's the vase with the CHINA mark...pretty typical late Qing style.

If you open the close up in a seperate browser, you should be able to zoom in.  Very few bubles and imperfections...very uniform color and perfectly smooth texture....not at all like the Yongzheng period red.

4.) if the answer in 3 is a yes, (Later post Yongzheng), then the paste itself will not be of the period as most LateQing paste are greyish white paste while this is a clear white paste.  I am not sure if this is a question or a statement. When you get your plate, place it on a bright white sheet of paper.  A post 18th c. plate will still be white, but you should see a slight gray tint... it's very faint.  Genuine Yongzheng porcelain is like milk white, especially in bright light where it almost glows white...it is very distinct.

5.) Peter mentioned that there is a legitimate wear on the piece, could it then be possible it could be something that was made when the Jiangxi kiln was revived where the white colour paste came back ?  Would you say this would be at most a 1950-1960 copy  (pre-cultural revolution) ?  What do you mean, 'legitimate wear'?  I would need to see photos, but the 'wear' of a piece is perhaps the last assessment I would use to authenticate...too easy to fake, and many pieces held in collection for long periods of time are completely without wear.  

I look forward to seeing more photos when the plate arrives, and I am really hoping the plate is genuine!