I think this would have been the best time to crack out Dating Chinese Porcelain from Facial Features and Adornments by Tommy Eklof... if I had it. I just cant bring myself to buy any more Chinese porcelain books, I have far too many, I am starting to look like a hoarder (okay I admit it, I am a Chinese porcelain/art book hoarder - it's a very expensive habit). If anyone has this book, does it look genuine period by the faces? I'm sure this is the exact book to answer this question.

Joannie's is a hit and miss for me, more a miss. On the surface it all looks like really nice collection of authentic antique Chinese items and I get excited but when I really zoom in and look - a lot could be copies/fakes and/or just bad quality and none of the pieces ever look "right". Even these 2 vases look off to me. For example, the ruby ground vase (love the color though), such detail taken but when it comes to the trees and their leaves its just a wash, why are all the other details nice but they just decided to schplot on some clear green enamel wash for the leaves? Again, just seems off. 

D.

@fuantiques If you buy only one more book, buy this one. 
I personally think the people depicted on Joanies vase look ok. The ones in the book also have these crazy upturned eyes, the same noses, ears and mouths. But then this category of faces is one of the easiest to copy and a good faker will manage that, especially if he has the book too. 
What makes me more suspicious is the fact that Joanie always has spectacular items. Everyone else, me included, has a modest Wu Shuang Pu plate - Joanie has the huge vase. 
I also think you have a point with the green leaves in the ruby colored vase. And though a fishing with cormorant topic is very nice it could be a modern invention. 

@shinigami Take a look at this comparison of two woman from similar sized vases, Joanie's and one of a pair sold by Rob Michiel's..

The drunken eyes is just the tip of the iceberg.  The entire rendering on the Joanie's vase is similar to the quality of a small bowl or plate, but in large format - that's strange.

Look at the Joanie's woman's feet....they are HUGE...I don't even think these are woman's feet and generally, feet are hidden or just the very tips are shown (I think feet were considered erotic back then).

The color of enamels in the robe are wrong.  They look more like famille verte colors, not the rich opaque famille rose used in the daoguang.

Here's the link to the Michiel's pair of vases that sold for 6,000 EUR plus premium May 2022 (note that Joanie's single vase is almost as much as the pair, but far less in quality...also strange).

https://www.liveauctioneers.com/item/127371500_a-chinese-famille-rose-wu-shuang-pu-hexagonal-vase-19th-c

Now, here is my wild theory, but I've been saying this for some time.  What I suspect is going on is that genuine old vases with either worn off designs, or common designs, are being stripped of the outer decor, then refired with more valuable design.

I'm currently in discussion with a specialist (PhD) in ceramics - the idea is well in the scope of possibility and given the technology available, undetectable.

Tim, you are right. The colors are wrong and the feet are of course hilarious. I didn't notice them before, they look like a pair of trendy red sneakers with white soles. On my Tongzhi plate the feet of the lady are only slightly visible. I didn't mean to say the Joanies vase is authentic, only that they got at least the faces right. Though not the rest.

The stripping of old paint and fresh overpainting is known from the turquoise plates with erotic scenes sometimes encountered on Ebay. Birds and butterflies were removed from cheap Daoguang Canton export plates. It is very probable they can do the same to vases.

@johnshoe What is the form of your piece, is it an underplate, a small stand or a lid, looks wide on the side? I like him.

@greeno107 Well it wouldn't be the first time that vases were scraped and repainted, famille noire, think you and Birgit are correct, the clodhoppers would not have appeared attractive to men who preferred women with bound feet, this one looks like she could win the race and get away clean, see ya.

Just to be clear, I’m not suggesting anything nefarious on the part of Joanie’s… there are a number of features that point to being genuinely 19th c.

However, we preach that there must be a perfect marriage of technical and artistic qualities for a piece to be genuine, but usually this is when we are talking about mark & period pieces.

However, the economics of unmarked pieces of desirable designs has caught up in value to some M&P pieces, so we can no longer let our guard down to the possibility of very sophisticated fakes of unmarked varieties.

What’s the solution?

Well, there is nothing empirical about the collection of art - you have to balance how the artist features appeal to your taste, then look in your wallet and decide how much you’re willing to spend.

In my case, you wouldn’t see me spend $40 million on a Jackson Pollack, whether I had it or not, but I’d be more than happy to spend $100 on an original drip painting in the manner of his work.

@greeno107 Don't worry about it, you said theory and that's what it is about, opinion.

@sharonp it's a lid to something, but not sure what.

@fuantiques  For example, the ruby ground vase (love the color though), such detail taken but when it comes to the trees and their leaves its just a wash, why are all the other details nice but they just decided to schplot on some clear green enamel wash for the leaves? Again, just seems off. 

So, just for kicks, here is a comparison of a Daoguang M & P landscape vase that Christie's sold for $225,000 in 2021, next to a scene of the Joanie's ruby vase...

It is clearly of different quality enamel, the Joanie's being much darker, but the design and overall detail of the rendering is comparable. 

Is this fakery, or something else?

Well, I think there might be some issues with the photos being tweeked using Photoshop or something.  It also looks like the Joanie's vase needs a deep cleaning.

There were a few shots on the Ebay listing that showed the oily reflection on the green enamels that is fairly standard on 19th c. pieces, too.  But, nothing artistically stood out to me as a 'red flag' of inferior or erronious for this to be genuine.

Did you see something specific that just shouldn't be there?

Here's the link to the Christie's vase..

https://www.christies.com/en/lot/lot-6306266

This one might be a bit closer....this is the scene from a pair of massive Jiaqing / Daoguang landscape vases sold by Christie's for 73,000 GBP in 2012.

There's the pink & yellow lolipop tree!

https://www.christies.com/en/lot/lot-5611879

Even low quality Wu Shuang Pu are fetching premium I’m always willing to turn a $50 dollar bowl into a profit.

@lotusblack Nice profit!  You can't see the fine details on the photo you posted, but genuine period pieces like that always do well.

To be honest, I'm not entirely sure why they do so well -  probably a mix of experienced bidders who know exactly the quality and value, and those who are (perhaps) less knowledgable about the variation of quality, but have read about the potential value of Wu Shuang Pu wares, and are willing to pay more than experienced buyers at the possibility of turning a profit in the future.

Does it matter what type of collector bought it?  NOPE! 

Sha - shing!  

@shinigami I think I will be murdered by my significant other if I buy another book, I think I may have to sneak it in under the cover of "its just a catalogue" excuse. 🤫 🤥 To be honest, a lot of pieces out there are pretty simple (and cheap) to replicate and copy almost identically, and people are often fooled by the fact that "well its not a high enough priced item to be worth faking" (those are saved for Christie's which also has a serious problem with that) when in reality if a copy of a basic vase sells for $2000USD+ it's actually 13,400CNY - which is a massive profit for the cost involved in making that copy. It is taking more and more connoisseurship skills in order to identify fraud and the books out there to help people are getting more and more expensive.

@greeno107 I see a significant difference between the Joannie's and Christie's vases and you actually showed an excellent comparison. For example, look at the detail & coloring pine on both Christie's vases, beautifully rendered and colored with detailing that stands out.  This is something that is usually a good indicator, the detailing of all the pine needles & tree leaves and the green enamel isn't just blotched on roughly as on the Joannie's vase, so dark it covers all the detailing. Secondly, look at the mountain scenes, the mountains are so rough and the color so dark not natural, almost cartoonish in the Joannie's vase. On the Joannie's vase they did cross hatching to the extreme to depict shadow and texture to the rock/mountains. Now look at the Christies' vases, the shadows are thin and very natural, easy on the eyes and don't stand out intensely from the scene - its identical to Chinese landscape paintings on silk. Finally, look at the "lollipop" tree, on the Christie's vase they just hang and dangle there you could almost pick them and eat them. On the Joannie's vase they are, again cartoonish - immature. Even the two Christie's examples you can see a much different caliber of enamel work between them, one is much more fine than the other BUT they both follow under the same painting rules as each other when it comes to detailing & enamelwork which you can see. This is also very apparent on probably the MOST copied '100 Deer' Hu vases, if your interested in going down this rabbit hole.

So to my entire point is this - it may be an older vase, it may be Republic/pre-PROC period (the green lead oxide rainbow effect speaks to at least 100 years as you suggested) but I just wanted to point out, when you see things on Joannie's and think "Wow! That's an amazing piece, I'm going to drop $$$" and all these people bidding crazy on them without actually looking at the details you can see this vase is no where close to the value of the examples you've shown on Christie's. I know this post was over the Wu Shuang Pu vase 'buyer beware' but since you posted this ruby ground piece Joannie's was also selling, I wanted to add my 2 cents for what I look out for before I put down any money.

PS : One last thing I do when I am looking at an item on Joannie's (and other sellers, not picking on Joannie's only), I search their "sold" listings first - you'll see a lot of these pieces were either returned or never paid for. 

All the best,

D.