Problems at Hampel

Hampel, from Germany, has an interesting Old Master sale on 26 September 2018. Plenty of good paintings and interesting research material, but even the most fleeting browsing reveals many dubious attributions and estimates, things which are too obvious or problematic to happen at a large auction house and with the prices they claim the paintings are worth.

I already tweeted about some of these, here's a recap and some other ones I have doubts about.

Lot 639 is an "attributed to Frans Francken The Younger" adoration of the shepherds, estimated at 45,000 to 50,000 Euro. For that money, I can buy better Francken's every month...

Lisaert, from the Maidstone Museum

Another Lisaert, from a Dorotheum auction, with a comparable Virgin

The painting resembles much closer the work of Pieter Lisaert, a second-rate Francken follower, especially in the way e.g. the faces are painted. Calling it a "follower of Francken" would be acceptable, but the estimate is about 10 times too high.

Lot 627 is "Attributed to Hermann tom Ring" and estimated at 100,000 to 150,000 Euro. Which is quite hefty for an interesting painting which has no resemblance at all to the works of tom Ring (Hermann or another member of the family).

Three typical works by Hermann tom Ring

A portrait and a self portrait by Ludger

The tom Rings are a very interesting family of painters who I didn't know yet. They hailed from Münster, and the two most famous are the brothers Hermann (1521-1596) and Ludger the Younger (1522-1584). They were both inspired by the Flemish masters of the 15th century, but also by people like Maarten van Heemskerck (1498-1574), bringing with them a great deal of realism and renaissance classicism. The opposite, one could say, of the anecdotical, somewhat Brueghelian (or Van Reymerswaele-style) work for sale.

And sure enough, the work was sold as a "Circle of Reymerswaele" at Dorotheum in 2017, fetching 17,500 Euro. Which seems both a fair price and a reasonably fair description, certainly better in both regards than what we have now.

Lot 630 is a "Flemish School, 16th or 17th century, or youth work from the circle of Rubens)" Saint Francis and the Angels, estimated at 18,000 to 25,000 Euro.

Well, you may forget the 16th century or any link with the youth works by Rubens, and best forget the 18,000 Euro as well, as it is a reasonably competent copy after an engraving by Lucas Vorsterman, based on a painting by Gerard Seghers from about 1620-1624 now in the Louvre. So date is 1625 or (much) later, value is 2,000 to 3,000 Euro probably.

Lot 632, "Circle of Georges De la Tour", Mary Magdalene, estimated at 50,000 to 60,000 Euro. No provenance given, and my gut feeling is "painted in the last 20 years". It just feels like a modern fake, though I don't have the means to prove it. The painting doesn't have the simplicity and purity of a De la Tour, but looks more like someone awkwardly aiming for it.

I realise that the work isn't sold as by De la Tour but as by someone close to him, but still... Compare it to the Magdalene from the Prado, and the differences are striking. The one for sale looks more like a Tamara de Lempicka in some ways!

Lot 636 is a "Gilles Coignet the Elder" Allegory of Ire, estimated at 15,000 to 20,000 Euro.

While I haven't found the original yet, I think it is another copy after an engraving. A rather good one though, so this might be the original and worth the estimate. I doubt it though, considering the below.

The RKD lists one other version of this work. It used to be attributed to Jacob de Backer, but is now downgraded to "anonymous, Netherlands, 2nd half 16th century". It is kept in the Museum of Capodimonte, in Naples. The Coignet one was sold at Kinsky in 2016 for 15,000 Euro, the same as the current estimate.

UPDATE: lot 627, the Tom Ring that isn't, was (of course) unsold and again for sale on 27 March 2019 with a lowered estimate of 70,000 to 90,000 Euro, and the same erroneous attribution.

The unpredictability of auctions

Offered in Maastricht on 13-16 June 2014, est. 2,000 to 3,000 Euro: not sold.

Offered at same auction house, 26-29 September 2014, est. 800 to 1,200 Euro: not sold.

Offered at same auction house, 11-14 March 2016, estimate 1,000 to 2,000 Euro: sold for 2,700 Euro.

Now for sale at Hargesheimer, Germany, 24 September 2016: estimate 800 Euro.

Art really isn't an exact science.

UPDATE: sold for 1,700 Euro. Weird...

First! Picture I highlighted now for sale at another auction

In this post of 21 January 2015, I discussed a painting with a very old (too hopeful) Brueghel attribution, but which was otherwise intriguing, interesting, and in my opinion undervalued at 300 to 500 Euro, at Carlo Bonte.

Someone obviously agreed (no idea if this blog alerted them to it though), bought it, apparently had it cleaned (or the picture just gives that impression), and now offers it at Mercier on 22 March 2015 as "Flemish School, ca. 1620" (seems late to me if it is original, I would guess second half of the 16th century). They also changed the subject from "allegorical scene" to "Parable de 'l'ivraie", matching my identification of it as the "Parable of the Tares" (ignoring my typo of Pares for Tares in my original post).

It is now estimated at 3,000 to 4,000 Euro, which is at least more realistic of the value of such an exceptional work (in its own crude way) than the earlier estimation at Bonte. I don't know what it sold for at Bonte, presumably a lot less than the current estimation.

Christie's Old Master sales: predictions

Just like with the Sotheby's sales, I have tried to list some pictures from the Christie's sales of end January which I feel are over- or underestimated. This time, 5 overestimated and only 3 underestimated ones. To make up for it, I'll probably add a post on monday about the lots 146 and 226, which would make a nice comparison which seems to have been overlooked by Christie's. And perhaps on Tuesday a few things about the items for sale at Bonham's, to end with these Janaury sales.

Overestimated

Lot 12, Georg Flegel and Martin van Valckenborgh, "Tulips etc.", estimated at $500,000 to $700,000. An awkward, relatively clumsy still life with background figures which aren't much better. An A for effort, but you get the feeling that these were painters who moved out of the art centers because they couldn't compete with the masters of the time. So why should we now pay the same money for them as for these masters? It's charming, but not overwhelming, which it should be at that price. NOT SOLD

Lot 28; Roelandt Savery, "Irises, Lilies, ...", estimated at $300,000 to $500,000. I just don't get the fascination with Savery, and the prices he fetches. His still lifes are flat, lifeless, bland; when he paints fruit it looks fake, when he paints flowers like here they lack all beauty. They may have "miniaturist precision", as the lot description says, but they aren't miniatures, they are paintings, meant to hang on a wall. Not on mine though. NOT SOLD

Lot 121, Lo Spagna, "Three pilasters", estimate $300,000 to $500,000. All right, you get three paintings, but at what price? Not especially well painted (the head of the right one is especially poor), not a really popular or seducing subject, just all rather boring stuff. NOT SOLD

Lot 145, Circle of Gerard David, "Lamentatio", estimated at $100,000 to $150,000. I normally quite like David, but this is not that good, and should only be worth half as much in my opinion. Still, the Christie's sale have a lot better selection of Early Netherlandish paintings than the Sotheby's ones. Sold for $125,000.

Lot 240, Ambrosius Benson, "Virgin and Child", estimated $60,000 to $80,000. I have to admit that I don't like Benson at the best of times, but even for him this is a very "dead" picture, and worked out rather schematically. A relatively poor picture by an already overrated artist, so I hope that this will fail to sell. In vain, probably... Sold for $75,000

Underestimated

Lot 27, Melchior d'Hondecoeter, "Ducks and Ducklings", estimated at $300,000 to $500,000. A beautiful, beautiful painting, charming subject, perfectly executed. I can't see this going for less money than the Flegel Lot 12 (discussed above), but the auctioneers (and thus probably the market) disagrees. NOT SOLD

Lot 206, Dordrecht School, 1634, "Portrait of a girl", estimated $10,000 to $15,000. What a charming portrait. Beautifully painted, it obviously isn't up to par with the masters like Frans Hals, but the quality and talent, and the alluring subject, way surpass the very low estimate. I wouldn't be surprised if this fetched $30,000 or more. Sold for $41,250!

Lot 237, Workshop of Dirk Bouts, "Mater Dolorosa". Estimated at $40,000 to $60,000. Probably the most interesting of the Early Netherlandish paintings on offer on a price vs. quality basis. Not a pure Bouts, the details aren't good enough (the eyes especially), but still a relatively affordable way (for some!) to have a painting close to Bouts without paying the price for a real Bouts, should one be available. Sold for $75,000.

Sotheby's Old Master sales: predictions

Sotheby's and Christie's line up their end-of-January Old Master sales. No real "hidden" treasures, obviously, but lots of nice things. For fun, I'll list some I think are overestimated (and hence will or should fail to sell), and some which are seriously undervalued and should go for a lot more than the estimate, if there is any justice in the art world ;-) Today, from the Sotheby's sales, 5 works I think will fail to sell, and 5 which should exceed their highest estimate (but probably won't, of course).

Overestimated

Lot 6,  Quinten Massys, "The Madonna of the Cherries". For some reason, it doesn't work for me. The Madonna and the child just aren't up to par for what should be a masterpiece (well, at $1,500,000 to $2,000,000, one shouldn't expect an average Massys), even though it is a wonderful composition. It sold in 2006 for nearly $750,000, and that's closer to what I would expect it to be worth now. NOT SOLD

Lot 165, a double-sided drawing by Géricault, estimated at a hefty $200,000 to $300,000. Interesting, obviously, but why would anyone spend more than $30,000 on this? When you can buy something like lot 173, also by Géricault, for $40,000, or many other interesting and good drawings for similar figures in the same auction? SOLD FOR $185,000.

Lot 201, a "Saint Anthony" from the Florentine School, fourth quarter of the 15th century. That's the period and place that gave us Botticelli, Donatello, Ghirlandaio, ... This is basically a second- or third-rate painting, in a poor condition, and with not the most attractive subject. So I have no idea why it is estimated at a hefty $40,000 to $60,000 Euro. Obviously you can't buy anything from these masters for that price, but even in these auctions, there is a lot more value for money to be found if you have 50 thousand dollars to spare. Sold for $31,250.

Lot 231, Flemish School, ca. 1500. While that seems correct, what an utterly boring picture. "Head of a saint", estimated at $18,000 to $25,000. Compared to the only slightly later Nativity I discussed in this post, estimated at only $3,000, or plenty of other Early Netherlandish pictures, I see no redeeming features in this one and no reason for such an inflated estimate. Probably, like with most of these I consider overrated, I'm just missing something... NOT SOLD

Lot 407, Circle of Hugo Van der Goes, "Virgin and Child", estimated at $15,000 to $20,000. Normally, anything resembling a Van der Goes for this money would go in the "underrated" category, even though he is one of the least attractive major Early Netherlandish painters. But I don't see anything that would put this in the "circle of", more in the "very weak imitation of" region. The face of the Virgin has some charm, but not enough to make this worth the estimate. NOT SOLD

Underrated

 Lot 77 , Gerard Seghers, ''Annunciation''. A wonderful picture, oil on copper (large for an on-copper painting, though smaller than the usual majestic panel paintings),  this is valued at only $80,000 to $120,000. One of the best pictures in the auction, but not by one of the canonic names, it should exceed its upper estimate. But considering the prices Seghers usually fetches, the estimate may be well considered and my opinion merely wishful thinking...NOT SOLD

 

Lot 191, Circle of Rubens,"Head of a young woman", estimated at only $5,000 to $7,000. A very attractive drawing, with a not so nice scratch or mark diagonally across the face but otherwise in good condition and very nicely executed. No idea who made it, but it obviously was a very talented draughtsman. Compared to many other drawings in this auction, this is one of the few I'ld really like to own. Sold for $13,750 or nearly twice the highest estimate!

Lot 237, "Virgin and Child enthroned with musical angels", Bruges School, ca. 1500. Estimated at $50,000 to $70,000, this is a lot for an anonymous (not even a notname) work, but you get about the best Early Netherlandish painting you can buy for this money. The only (major) worrying thing is that this was for sale two years ago at the same auction at Sotheby's, then estimated at $80,000 to $120,000, which is what I would consider it worth as well, but the market clearly doesn't agreed then... Sold for $62,500.

Lot 426, Circle of Rubens, "A monk", Estimated as $8,000 to $12,000. Not a sleeper Rubens, but a very nice picture nevertheless, with real character in the portrait. The background is depressing, but the smile of the man makes more than up for this. Compared to the "circle" of Van der Goes above, this one really is worth the label, and is clearly made by a skilled painter. Sold for $11,250.

Lot 455, Workshop of Velazquez, "The buffoon Diego de Acedo, El Prime", estimated at $6,000 to $8,000. If the above Circle of Rubens is underestimated, then what about this Workshop picture? A powerful portrait, with style and vigour, for $6,000? It's a steal, usually for that price you get either rather mediocre paintings, or 19th century or later works, but  rarely such a good work. Yes, it is a partial copy of a famous Velazquez original, but it works as a stand-alone portrait and is painted beautifully. The market clearly agreed, as it sold for $25,000!