ART FORGERIES

Sun (Auckland), Volume IV, Issue 1010, 28 June 1930, Page 29

ART FORGERIES

FLOURISHING TRADE DETECTION BY SCIENTISTS The discovery in Paris of a factory of fake pictures makes it more than ever evident that the assistance of the scientist in deciding the authenticity of a picture is now almost essential. The most competent expert can be deceived, as has been proved time and again, hut the scientist with the X-rays, microscopic lens and chemical analysis of pigments is now in a position to come to conclusions which, as a rule, are unassailable. The two Rembrandt portraits lent to the Dutch Exhibition by the Duke of Westminster, the authenticity of which was challenged by a wellknown critic, were definitely proved, by scientific means, to be excellent examples of Rembrandt's earlier'work. It is, moreover, unnecessary for the scientist to supplant entirely the recognised expert, who, with years of experience and a long, artistic training, will always have the last word. Rather will the results of scientific investigation be a valuable and often definite means of confirmation. Chemical Analys's Professor A. P. Laurie, Professor of Chemistry to the Royal Academy, has, perhaps, done more than any man to defeat the maker of spurious pictures. Years of experiment have enabled him to tabulate the pigments used by artists of every period, and from his list it can he conclusively established whether a certain colour was in use at a certain time and when certain colours fell into disuse. The process only necessitates the taking of a few minute fragments of the pigment of a picture, and by submitting it to chemical analysis the date of a painting can be arrived at fairly accurately. Microscopic examination of the pigments is another method followed by Professor Laurie. By this means it can be definitely established whether a picture has been retouched. The discovery of certain colours which were known to be in use by a particular artist is additional evidence of a picture’s authenticity, quite apart from the ordinary expert’s judgment. By this means the authenticity of a reputed early sixteenth century Italian picture was definitely disproved by the disco'very upon it of pigment invented only in the seventeenth century. Micro-Photography Perhaps the most valuable and conclusive of Professor Laurie’s labours is his system of micro-photography. By means of enlarged photographs of sections of a painting, remarkably definite conclusions can be arrived at from the technique and brushwork of the artist, which are thus shown so clearly. These pictures can be projected on to a screen by means of a lantern, and every detail of a painting’s structure closely compared side by side with similar photos of sections of an accepted work by the same artist. Micro-photography is especially valuable when examining pictures attributed to such artists as Teniers and Watteau, whose touches are so fine as to be beyond the limits of unaided sight. All this undoubtedly marks a great step toward defeating the machinations of the picture forger. It defeats the efforts of the maquilleur, whose specialty is the painting over of an ugly or unprepossessing face in a portrait, and replacing it by one <?f a more pleasing character. Composite Pictures The trucquer, the maker of composite pictures, must also look to his laurels. Ills method, should a Titian be required, is to copy a head carefully from one well-known work, an arm from another, and so on, and thus

| build up a picture* to which he gives ■an appropriate title. Finally, before : offering it for sale, he robs it of its ! i “newness” with the aid of soot, var- ! nish, tobacco ash, and lampblack. , Such works, by their sheer clever- I ness, have at times deceived the ordi- j nary expert, but the most cursory examination would disclose the fraud to the scientist. The X-ray and ultra-violet ray, too, j have proved of inestimable value in [ proving or disproving the authenticity I of pictures. By the help of the Rontgen ray it can at once be discovered whether the pigments of a picture are \ old or modern. Much, however, has ! yet to be done before the collector is | immune from the wiles of the picture j forger. The scientist is not infallible, and his conclusions have at times been ! definitely upset by the man with a j technical knowledge of art. The ideal < expert of the future will be a man who combines the necessary scientific knowledge with a familiarity with the j technique of the art of painting. - I