In the small circle there are gaps in the outline, which is very neatly done, that don't look like paint skips. They look like print errors.

In the large circle it seems unlikely that they would go through all of the trouble to paint the detail clearly over that border line.

Also that cross hatch sort of border trim is very neatly outlined then very sloppily filled in. Seems unlikely one would be so neat while the other so messy.

Yes, I noticed some gapping and overlapping too. 

Nic

Very good eye @NicDan, I missed those and it's pretty clear they printed that panel or transfer just a tiny bit off so you can see both the gap and overlap from the misplacement especially on the second photo!

Dear yrguide,

there is nothing to learn from fakes. It is not a detail, like many seems to believe, for example the type of blue, bubbles and such things, that tells you that an item is a fake.

To be precise, here we are not even considering a fake in my opinion, that is just garbage, it is one of the more horrible things that I have seen.

It is how it has been decorated, what is usually called painting style, but frankly, in this case it is even not deserving to be called “painting style”. Look at the detail below. A child would draw it better, I think.

First at all compare how everything is drawn there with genuine Kangxi items. Compare the faces, the dresses: there you will learn. Looking is enough, there is not a detail that tells that it is a fake, it is the whole thing that is horrible.

Compare also to a late 19^th century Kangxi revival, which is already different from the original, but still at least pleasantly drawn.

Please look. Have you seen the faces? And the dress of the main figure? What is that mess? And those western stars? And that boot on the table, where are they, in the Far West? Is him a sheriff?  And the other figure on the left, what is that flying barb?

Everything is not ridiculous, it is just unwatchable, if you compare to genuine examples.

When judging a decorated piece, the painting style is everything and immediately spotted. Then the piece is in just a fraction of second classified as bad or worth to investigate further.

Look at how many genuine pieces you can, on books, Museums and reliable auction houses. That way one is learning, not looking at fakes.

Giovanni

Not easy to notice that!

I guess experience and Knowledge give the more expert that instant appraisal that would take me hours of staring at enlarged photo's to find.  I must read that book "Allen's Antique Chinese Porcelain" The Detection of Fakes  and perhaps it gives more insight into how these modern items are produced. I think that would be a great resource. 

The book is about £100, a little pricey. 

Thank you Givoanni, Our post's came in at the same time. That is a wealth of information 🙂 Much appreciated. 

Hi Giovanni thank you so much for your feedback.

I disagree, I believe there is much to be learned by observing both. I point to a few very simple tips easily seen on fakes...is the porcelain too shiny/glossy? Fake. Is the base/foot rim too full of dirt? Fake. And in this case closely looking for the transfer print also fake. Looking at enough fakes you understand what these qualities look like.

I agree there is much more to be learned from authentic items but coming into contact with so many fakes it is a good skill for the less educated to be able to quickly dismiss them by the means I just listed above.

With all due respect many early Ming items look like they could also be drawn by a child. And on this particular vase there *is* a detail that can tell you it's fake easily, that the outlines have been printed. 

I agree with you that the painting style is the most accurate way of identifying authentic porcelains but many of us don't have years of knowledge you do nor when we are out at a a shop or yard sale do we have access to quickly find examples of authentic pieces to compare the item to that we might be interested in purchasing.

Thanks again for your feedback. I do hope you'll be someone willing to educate all of us as we learn.

This is just a hunch, but is it possible that different people will develop different processes to evaluate authenticity? Very often, when listening to experts in any field discussing a piece, different experts will spot different things. There will be things they both pick up on too, but everyone has a different eye and different cognition so different thing may ‘jump out at them’ although they will both reach the same conclusion?

I think that personal taste can get in the way too? I often see pieces that I think are unattractive, poorly drawn or that I think are poorly rendered that turn out to be genuine. Conversely, I also see things that I like that others quickly spot as a fake or poor quality. I’m sure people think “how can he like that?” ?

This is one of the reasons that this forum is such an excellent environment for beginners - we have the privilege of seeing how other people’s deductive processes works whilst picking up fantastic hints, tips and good practice as we learn.

I thought this vase was terrible, but I would’ve been too afraid to say so! I would however have felt comfortable tentatively picking on a few characteristics that look ‘wrong’.

Another interesting discussion!

Nic

Someone here once talked about a good way for detecting printed design. Imagine how the item was produced. If the black lines were really hand painted that would mean a lot of careful work for an artist for days. Then comes the colleague with the brush paint and just dabs the colors on in a careless way. Do you really think this could happen?

Dear ShortDong,

I am aware of the existence of that book, but although I have never seen it, I am not interested in buying it.

I know, I am talking about something that I do not know, hence I may perfectly be wrong, but it is the approach, that “how to detect fakes” that sounds so wrong to me. It sounds as being proposing “keys”, which in my opinion is a dangerous approach.

For example, and I am also addressing to yrguide, who said that: “is the porcelain too shiny/glossy? Fake. Is the base/foot rim too full of dirt? Fake.” Both these assumptions are wrong.

Dear yrguide, you may know that generally, Ming glazes has a silky surface texture, a semi-gloss looking.

Well, with your above keys in mind, you could have the opportunity to pass some really nice Kraak dish, which can have both those “bad signs”.

The only key is knowledge. When you know Ming ware, you know that it can’t be transfer printed. Or you know that the painting style of the ware of a certain period, although looking naïve, it is not of the same style of today’s naïve.

I very often bring the example of the apple. When you knows what is an apple, you instantly spot it among peers, and conversely spot a pear among apples. If you do not know the apple, there is no description, or keys, that ensure you to spot it with certainty.

But Nic has a point here, in saying that besides our own culture, in part our way to looking at things has a certain importance. For example, I'm not a physiognomist. If requested to make an identikit, I would be in difficulty. But I can spot a friend among a crowd by how he walks, his gesture, or how he speaks. We must have an individual different approach to look at the real world.

Giovanni

Yes, because we are all a product of our experiences and so much of how we view or interpret things is subjective. We’re like children learning concepts for the first time. So if you put 3 identical objects in a line, small medium and large, and you ask a child to group them into big and small, their decision will be relative to their previous experience. Also, each object is only big or small in relation to each other.

This is where I am with interpreting Chinese porcelain. Some styles and periods I find relatively easy, others I still can’t interpret well. I am overjoyed when I’ve added something on my eBay watch list and then it appears on the Bidamount list! But other times, the very experienced people here are talking about a piece and I just cannot see/relate to what they’re saying. But this frustration will, presumably, decrease as my knowledge improves?

I think it’s made a lot harder because the field is so nuanced, one piece can flaunt all the ‘rules’ you’ve learned, so with experience, one can develop a fine gut instinct that means you can spot an excellent fake or even a piece that looks like it may be 19th century but is actually older.

Nic

I have an analytical mind, I like statistics and comparative analysis, cataloging and grouping and organising so a book about detetcing fakes would be interesting to me as means of data and pictorials  for organizing fine details.

Example

Fake Kangxi vase with rigid turns of the foot and Genuine Kangxi vase with rigid turns on the foot. To try define and find a simple distinction if one exists. 

However Giovanni, I do understand exactly what you are saying to me. That i should i study and complete some academic knowledge and education into Porcelain long before i get down to the dirty task of looking at fakes. As professional accomplishment and the true experience and knowledge is the only safe and secure way to be confident in any appraisal.   

However my interest in such a tabloid approach such as Allens book detecting fakes still appeals to the analytical side of my brain. However my mind knows better and i am studying the correct literature on Porcelain, presently i am reading 2 volumes of Chaffer Keramic Gallery if not just for the historic merit.

My only real academic qualification is History of which i was an A student. I could never get into this field professionally without several hard years of hard slog. That is a long road ahead. Books like Allens how to detect fakes are like comic books for fun along the way 🙂   

Dear ShortDong,

I stay with my opinion. I repeat that I do not know if Allen’s book is of the type of books, as the title seems suggesting, that are providing “keys” for spotting fakes.

If so, that type of books is dangerous.

You must have seen the link provided in this thread:

https://bidamount.com/the-bidamount-asian-art-forum/main-forum/ming-blue-and-white-blog/paged/3#post-17748

where an unknown supposed expert is providing sure keys (in his opinion) for spotting real Yuan – Yongle – Xuande ware. He stresses the importance of the heap and pile effect with length and documented description.

If one believes him, or those so simple keys, he is convinced that he knows he to spot the real thing.

But then look at the pictures shown by Carl here, perfectly matching those of that guy:

https://bidamount.com/the-bidamount-asian-art-forum/main-forum/sothebys-hong-kong-xuande-fish-pond-bowl#post-17783

Dangerous, isn’t it?

Giovanni

I was kind of upset how you come on here and ask for peoples opinions, but don't post a picture? 

I was extra upset when you bought the vase but then said your not posting a photo and if the auction house takes it you can go look at it yourself. like huh?

trying to buy something for a fast flip has defiantly shot you in the foot here. that vase is not even worth 10 dollars as a decorative piece. like I said before in my first reply spend more money on books.

I sometimes post things I know are old but can't put my finger on.I want to make sure if I list a item on ebay someone knows what they are getting, for that im very thankful for the forum members that share their knowdgle. Takes years to gain a eye thats something you can't put a price tag on.

ok I read this wrong, that vase you posted on ebay isn't yours and is another example that is similar to yours. You still haven't posted a picture of your vase.

I don't know what your fishing for here. ANYTHING from a dealer or shop that seems to good to be true normally is, These people are in the business to make a profit. Even if the dealer knows ZERO about chinese antiques he or she defiantly knows a guy that knows a guy that does.

because of the above im pretty sure your vase is not old, but if done nice it will still hold decorative value.