Was Philip Wrong About This Gainsborough Painting 20 Years Ago? | Fake Or Fortune? | Perspective



The team investigates an 18th century landscape that could be a lost work by of one of the biggest names in British art, Thomas Gainsborough. The painting has been in the family of owner Mark Cropper for generations and until the 1970s it was considered to indeed be by Gainsborough.

Subscribe and click the bell icon to get more arts content every week:
youtube.com/c/PerspectiveArts

Perspective is YouTube’s home for the arts. Come here to get your fill of great music, theatre, art and much, much more!

📺 It’s like Netflix for history… Sign up to History Hit, the world’s best history documentary service and get 50% off using the code ‘PERSPECTIVE’ https://bit.ly/3zj7Soo

Any queries, please contact us at:
[email protected]

#Painting #Art #History

source

26 thoughts on “Was Philip Wrong About This Gainsborough Painting 20 Years Ago? | Fake Or Fortune? | Perspective”

  1. I wonder if this decision wasn’t simply made to save face re the earlier attribution of the other landscape to Gainsborough. Seems like there was so much more evidence pointing to Gainsborough than to Barker of Bath, not only the provenance related to major galleries, but the fact that Gainsborough was painting over another artist’s portraits in the same year that he painted The Gypsies. The only reason given for deciding this painting was by Barker of Bath is this expert’s finding that it looked like his style? Well, his style was very similar to Gainsborough’s, if there has been confusion (by the best art dealers and galleries between the two for two centuries or more.

    Reply
  2. So, the old "expert" guy just comes in at the end, he says "it's not by Gainsborough", and THAT'S IT?! just a flimsy explanation (at best) as to how he concluded it wasn't?! pfff!

    Reply
  3. after Philip is dead and gone will the real Gainsborough please stand up? humiliation in the art world is a tender subject. Had Philip had this painting it wouldve proved the real one over the one that has supposedly disappeared. Plebians like me dont really care though. They look exactly the same. its all in the name and the name is the game. all of those poor starving artists who couldnt buy a piece of canvas or feed themselves would definitely spit on all the people now fussing over their acclaimed masterpieces. its a real joke amongst themselves. real artist put in the work and usually get no acclaim. look at the palace at versais its attributed to the king who never lifted a finger while spending the country into poverty. its all a sham people wake up! The most beautiful art in the world has already been created. everything else is subjective and a copy of whats already in the world

    Reply
  4. This is stupid, to me it truly looks like more of a Gainsborough than the other one. Also the provenance trail! It's so compelling! The judgement was made on a technical skill, well Barker of Bath copied Gainsborough's style and the two styles have confused galleries for over a century so that seems rather redundant to judge purely based on style and ignore the compelling provenance trail by this so called expert. This feels rather staged to save face on the other previous one that Philip discovered. When Philip mould and the other expert dies I hope this painting is re-evaluated by an expert that takes everything into consideration not just on artistic style.

    Reply
  5. My comment was lost. I am 80. I have loved long as I can remember in a pram loving colours in a flower shop from my pram. I love what I have and love this series thank you ❤

    Reply
  6. My wife an I thought this would be amazing and purchased two 128 GB The Photo Stick OMNI and it does not work on my laptop now our android cell phones. A total waste of money. We feel ripped off !

    Reply
  7. Oh how convenient that the 1999 lost Gainsborough “had a new lining”. So zero evidence at all !!!

    Nothing therefore to collaborate the provenance they miraculously matched it with….

    I have to add that the clouds, tree-line and the far perspective element of the 1999 painting looks totally wrong !

    That’s pretty shabby work Philip !!!

    Reply
  8. So much evidence that it was a Gainsborough! I feel in my gut it is! What about the other recycled picture that’s been proven to be one. Something fishy going on. To strong of a trail to be wrong

    Reply

Leave a Comment