@saki2015 I'm glad you clarified that because you reversed the way you had described them before and so I had meant to ask you which was which but had forgotten to do so.

Here is one I have by Utagawa Toyokuni. Sadly it seems someone cropped it at some point, probably to fit it in a frame, so some of the signature and image is cut off. I am not sure if this is an original or later version, but it seems to have some color fading that could indicate a bit of exposure age. Curious to hear your thoughts.  John

@johnshoe I think it is very lovely, and I would be extremely surprised if it's a restrike. It does have some fading, but the colors are soft and beautiful and I think It's in good overall condition - pity about the margins but people do that, for some awful reason. I really like the emotional aspect of this picture. It's quite striking. It makes you wonder what is going on?

@saki2015 I'm not sure which actors and story this is of, but it seems she may have betrayed him and is begging for forgiveness. That's what the image says to me anyway. Perhaps someone else will know more specifically and can educate us.

@johnshoe That is what it says to me as well. From the expression on his face, I don't think forgiveness is coming any time soon! Please post more of your wood-blocks, if you like. I'd love to see them!

@johnshoe John, the print is by Utagawa Toyokuni (Toyokuni I).  This print was originally printed at the end of the 18th c. based upon the colors and subject matter used by the artist.  However, your print is a 20th c. reprint.. perhaps even lithographic.

The paper is not correct for 18th c. work, the colors should have bleed through deeper and tool marks should be apparent.  The paper is also too thick and does not have the appearance of laid paper.

Finally, prints were regulated by the government.  your print lacks the 'kiwame' censor seal that the print received government approval.  Either the print never had one (as is the case with later reprints), or it has been trimmed, but that usually is not the case on this type of print.

Print collecting is very specialized and many people end up acquiring later copies thinking they are from earlier original printings.  If original, this print would likely be worth in the $5,000 or so range.

I can look to see if I can find the original on the MOA of Boston's website.  I'm heading out...so I unfortunately don't have time at the moment.

Clearer photos of the back (lying flat) would be helpful to determine if there was additional washi paper glued on as a backing.

@greeno107 here are some more pictures. While I was taking these I noticed that it seems there is a clear backing attached to it because when held to the light there are a few areas where there seem to be holes in the print and you can see through them and that there is a clear film/paper on the back that gets exposed through the holes. I've included a couple pictures to show what I'm talking about. Would that be the washi paper you mentioned? At any rate I hadn't noticed that before. Could that explain why the paper seems thicker than it should and the bleeding isn't as strong as it should appear? Also, maybe these pictures are a bit better in terms of showing any potential tool marks, etc? I am not aware of what those are supposed to look like, although I can see some lines throughout so perhaps that is what those are? I have seen other examples and it is cropped on the bottom and left side so perhaps that explains the missing mark you mentioned. I'm looking forward to learning more so please keep the info coming! Thanks!  John

Could it have been eaten? I have had some old European engravings with wormholes.

Interesting thread, I am enjoying it.

@julia it certainly looks worm-like.

@johnshoe I can see that @greeno107 is far more expert than I am. But in the restrikes of Hiroshige and Hokusai I've seen and owned (till I got rid of them) the color was brighter and harsher. Still, where are the censer marks? It does look like there's some weird coating on the back?

I am loving this discussion. I have only a few woodblock prints, not very good ones, and unfortunately not in top-top condition. There is one that just might be an original Hiroshige that I bought at Phillips Son and Neale many years ago, described only as a "print by Hiroshige," which might mean anything. A bit faded, and the margins probably trimmed, but it is the right size -- I have contemplated taking it out of the frame many times but have not yet done so.

Do any of you have experience with dealers you can recommend? And could you recommend a book or two to help us judge better? I could look at these prints forever and would like to buy a few more to enjoy. Meanwhile, I am learning a lot from this thread. Thank you all!

Carol

@cashflowz Carol, the best dealer I know is Israel Goldman in London. He is very kind and patient and willing to teach you. He's super-famous (he just had a stunning exhibition of his Kyosi paintings at the Royal Academy) but he's also just a really nice and unassuming person. I also really like Stuart Jackson in Ontario. I'll bet if you sent via email either one a photo of your piece they'd be able to tell you immediately what it is. I'd love to see a picture if you have one. I collect Hiroshige and I might be able to tell you a bit about it. But those dealers are both really knowledgeable.

@saki2015 Thank you for the recommendations. I will try to get a decent photo in the next day or so, but it is under glass, so that won't be easy!

Carol

@saki2015 I think they stuck it to that washi paper or whatever it is, maybe to protect it? I'm not sure if that is a thing. Where the hell did Greeno go. We need more input, damnit!

I do know that all sorts of things are done to Japanese prints, like album backings and cutting down margins. I found a picture of one of my restrikes and it does have a censer seal, but it's still a fake. The Boston Fine Arts Museum does have images that are both of originals and of restrikes that you can compare. I was looking at a Hiroshige print I know very well and it was startling how bright the restrikes are. So that's why I wonder if yours is really a fake. Faded it certainly is, but unless we can study one that is for sure original I don't think we can be certain. I do think that Greeno knows more than I do, and I would never insist that it's not a restrike, because I don't know. 

@johnshoe I'm home again.  Sorry for the delay.  The new photos are much better, and I'm using my 'big boy' computer, so I have a large screen to view the photos.

So, I did some quick referencing... I have not located this particular print as of yet.  However, there are some things I have found interesting about the Toyokuni I prints I did look at.

First, I found that the kiwami censor seal is not on many of the prints sold by Christie's.  This is odd to me, as the enforcement of censorship was a very big deal for prints made for public consumption.  Trimming is not likely the reason for this... I will look into this further.

Based upon the new photos, and my large computer screen, I do believe the print is of the period (late 18th c.) and mounted to washi paper (as you've mentioned).  This was a common practice as the interest in these prints grew in Europe, the paper of 18th c. prints is so much thinner than 19th c. (and later) that adding the washi backing was essential to preserving the print.

As I stated earlier, I think that if the print was original it would be worth around $5,000, and now that I see it in better light, congratulations!  It is in my opinion both good in color and subject matter, and not too bad at all regarding the overall condition.  A few worm holes is no big deal.

Compare to this Christie's example...

https://www.christies.com/lot/lot-6362233