eBay

retro_nostalgist · ‎08-24-2017

I have two paintings here that have similar issues. I'm most concerned about the stretch marks, I really don't know if there is a technical term to describe them, or if it is normal for an oil to do that (the marks sit along the path of the supports on the back). Also, how should I describe the webbed look of the paint; is there a way to tell if it is below the varnish? It looks to me like it's supposed to look that way, but I don't know. Any help would be appreciated.

retro_nostalgist · ‎08-24-2017

I wanted to show this also-the back of the frame.

melda58 · ‎08-24-2017

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Craquelure

Rita

argon38 · ‎08-24-2017

The painting is relatively modern (Al Jackson (1940-2001)). Do you know if any of his other paintings suffer from the same issues?

tekobari · ‎08-27-2017

It seems to me you're asking about the lines across the backing showing through to the front, yes? That indicates that the artist stored his paintings upright, all facing one way. Often a painter will put his works aside, leaning them against a wall. Those stacks can get pretty large, which puts a lot of weight on the poor guys right against the wall. There are ways to avoid that, and it's a separate problem from the painting's extensive crazing.

Argon's point is very good. All that crazing looks like a technical problem, and one which I'd expect to see in the artist's other works. That a painting this young is showing such heavy crazing indicates a problem with the artist's use of his/her media. Good oils won't crack unless they're extremely old or have been mixed with excessive amounts of turpentine. I think this crazing comes from his/her varnish, though, which painters use either as an artistic choice (the many layers Maxfield Parrish applied to his in order to achieve a particular look) or to protect the work. But varnishing requires a lot of experience and/or knowledge to do well, and most painters without formal education or who are relatively new (under ten years in the art) don't have that knowledge.

Crazing in and of itself isn't all that bad a thing in a painting per se, but it does indicate the work won't hold up over time. Still, this isn't a master's work, so a buyer should be happy to get a painting s/he likes at a reasonable price. I buy plenty of pieces I know won't last simply because I want to look at them and live with them now. Frankly, at my age, I don't really have to worry about outlasting any painting anymore.

maxine*j · ‎08-27-2017

It might be the artist's fault, of course, but searching on-line, I found many examples of his work and I didn't see condition issues like this, or come across reference to them.

So perhaps the damage is from the display or storage of the paintings. Maybe they were exposed for long periods to extremes of light or temperature or hunidity (or a combination of one or more of those things) or to serious fluctuations or to sudden changes in same.

I suppose the cause doesn't matter at this point, but I'd hate to see the painter convicted without any testimony for the defense.

argon38 · ‎08-27-2017

@maxine*j wrote:
It might be the artist's fault, of course, but searching on-line, I found many examples of his work and I didn't see condition issues like this, or come across reference to them.

To be honest I didn't check them out myself - I just thought the OP might want to investigate along those lines. My suspicion was that faulty technique could be to blame (for the reasons given by tekobari) - but if the rest of his paintings have fared better, there clearly must be other factors at play.

maxine*j · ‎08-27-2017

@argon38 wrote:
@maxine*j wrote:
It might be the artist's fault, of course, but searching on-line, I found many examples of his work and I didn't see condition issues like this, or come across reference to them.
To be honest I didn't check them out myself - I just thought the OP might want to investigate along those lines. My suspicion was that faulty technique could be to blame (for the reasons given by tekobari) - but if the rest of his paintings have fared better, there clearly must be other factors at play.

I even toyed with the idea that the artist did it deliberately, to give the painting(s) the aged look that some buyers / decorators like. But when I went on-line to look I found no others this; in fact, rather the contrary. So, who knows?

pillarboxred · ‎08-27-2017

The crackle might have been deliberately induced by the artist through his technical choices to enhance the very traditional style he practised. To deal with the sagging, the canvas needs to be keyed. What you observe is an almost inevitable feature of paintings on stretched canvas. Some stretchers have a profile which makes it less likely to happen

retro_nostalgist · ‎08-27-2017

Thank you all for your very helpful responses. I also suspected that it was purposefully done at first. There is a very heavy varnish applied that I do not see in the artist's other works, so I suspect that maybe these are from an earlier point in his career, and the varnish choice or technique evolved to better protect the life of the art. Thanks again.