Posted by Purple on October 17, 2002 at 23:43:07:
In Reply to: John Fiorillo's VIEWING JAPANESE PRINTS; COLOUR posted by James King on October 15, 2002 at 22:24:09:
James, in an ideal world there would be a single standard for rating prints that everyone would follow. Unfortunately, in the world as we have it, about the best one can hope for is to know how a particular person or dealer rates prints, and how much his/her standards can be trusted. Sadly, the only way to do this at present is to see the print in person, as scans can be tricky. It does help to establish a knowledge of the subject for oneself though, and that's where J.F.'s site is of aid to the collector. I'm not sure it's realistic (or appreciative) to demand more of someone who's volunteered his time/energy for the joy of doing so. But perhaps if you had ideas on developing a rating system you could introduce them here and they could be modified and picked up by Fiorillo and others.
Fiorillo's article appears in Andon, which is the publication of a Society for the Japanese Arts. You need an introduction to become a member. Perhaps you might ask J.F. to introduce you if you have an interest.
: As someone who has only begun to collect recently, I would like to say how much useful information is contained on this outstanding website. However, I think MORE could be added on what constitutes poor, fair, good, very good, excellent and fine colour in the older prints. There seems to be a lot of confusion among dealers and auction houses on this point. For example, I have noticed that prints in which the yellows, blues and purples are decidedly down are often listed as having very good or excellent colour. I think that an article on this point could be added even though there are already three entries under FADING.
: I cannot find a proper reference on the web for the periodical in which Fiorillo's recent article on Eizan is published. Could John F. or someone else give me this reference. Thanks.
Post a Followup