|
|
Post by alittle on Jul 1, 2015 0:00:37 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by notmattl on Jul 1, 2015 10:04:19 GMT
Am drooling over that Turf War AP |
|
|
|
Post by blade on Jul 1, 2015 17:56:04 GMT
Very low estimates £8-12k for the LIITA signed print. I think it will go for double.
|
|
|
|
Post by blackappleart on Jul 1, 2015 18:22:43 GMT
Very low estimates £8-12k for the LIITA signed print. I think it will go for double. They usually list estimates very low. Great cross section of prints so will definitely be interesting. |
|
|
|
Post by sleepy on Jul 4, 2015 4:53:24 GMT
Definitely a nice mix up, will be good to see where the bulk goes, Nola and LIITA stand out, but turf war....yummy
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2015 10:29:56 GMT
Bit weird a few of these in that they are aside from the edition but called AP's which kind of just imply's they were extras to me and called an AP later......is that correct?
As mentioned the estimates are well low esp as it was 11k at the bloomsbury sale for an unsigned.
|
|
|
|
Post by alittle on Jul 14, 2015 6:02:25 GMT
The following lots appear to have been withdrawn: |
|
|
|
Post by cnh on Jul 14, 2015 9:00:00 GMT
The following lots appear to have been withdrawn: Shame, I hope the seller has kept them. I was looking forward to seeing what these went for. |
|
|
|
Post by manu on Jul 14, 2015 10:45:57 GMT
Few withdrew
|
|
|
|
Post by odog on Jul 14, 2015 11:24:37 GMT
That's odd. I've never seen lots withdrawn at such a late stage. I wonder what the complications were?
|
|
|
|
Post by manicpixiedreamgirl on Jul 14, 2015 12:29:07 GMT
Very odd. Will certainly be interested to see the other pieces. It would be shock of the century if they actually come in at the estimate range!
|
|
|
|
Post by alittle on Jul 14, 2015 14:45:32 GMT
Results below incl. premium |
|
|
|
Post by cnh on Jul 14, 2015 15:19:29 GMT
The Nola seems cheap?
|
|
|
|
Post by posterbob on Jul 14, 2015 15:24:01 GMT
With all of the economic uncertainty in the Eurozone and China I would have also withdrawn those prints. Having taken a look at the results from today they made a great decision; there are a large number of unsold lots and the overall prices are underwhelming.
|
|
|
|
Post by alittle on Jul 14, 2015 15:28:44 GMT
Maybe the NOLA was damaged?
I only got the condition report on the Donuts, which was taped to mount and had "handling creases"
|
|
|
|
Post by manicpixiedreamgirl on Jul 14, 2015 15:34:50 GMT
Is it possible to get condition results after the auction? Would be very interesting to know.
|
|
|
|
Post by alittle on Jul 14, 2015 15:55:04 GMT
In my experience, they don't respond after the auction has closed.
|
|
|
|
Post by blackappleart on Jul 14, 2015 17:03:53 GMT
Was damaged. Quite a few issues with it. |
|
|
|
Post by cnh on Jul 14, 2015 18:06:38 GMT
Was damaged. Quite a few issues with it. Thanks |
|
|
|
Post by odog on Jul 15, 2015 10:56:39 GMT
Are the summer holidays a good time to sell at auction?
|
|
|
|
Post by lee3 on Jul 15, 2015 15:11:45 GMT
Are the summer holidays a good time to sell at auction? Traditionally, the answer would be no. From a seller's perspective, you would do everything you could to consign during the premier NY auctions (May and November) or London (July or October). There were offseason sales in London in Feb and NY in September that sellers used to avoid but that seems to be less of a concern these days as the houses have done all they can to stretch the season to as many months as possible with warm up sales and whatnot. Still, August and January are very sleepy months even with the attempt to stretch the year. The calendar certainly matters less with the editioned/print market but I don't expect to ever see someone selling their Picasso or Giacometti during a traditional holiday break. When I see a host of withdrawn lots at the 11th hour like that, I speculate that the consignor was someone who didn't like the feedback they were hearing on presale interest and had little or no withdrawal fees and figured better to roll the dice another day. But that is pure speculation on my part. |
|
|
|
Post by Black Peter on Jul 16, 2015 23:42:20 GMT
Was damaged. Quite a few issues with it. You obviously didn't see it in person. I did. I used to be involved with a rather prolific print house, we had a name for customers who would return brand new hand pulled screen prints because there was a fingerprint or smudge of ink on the reverse. We called them 'Americans'. |
|
|
|
Post by blackappleart on Jul 17, 2015 0:09:26 GMT
Was damaged. Quite a few issues with it. You obviously didn't see it in person. I did. I used to be involved with a rather prolific print house, we had a name for customers who would return brand new hand pulled screen prints because there was a fingerprint or smudge of ink on the reverse. We called them 'Americans'. 1) Tapes to front mount at 3 places along upper sheet verso, 2) A very soft surface abrasion in the grey background in the upper left image only visible at raking light, 3) Slight skinning at places along upper sheet edge verso, 4) A few soft handling creases in the margins, otherwise in excellent condition, the colours bright and fresh. These are the exact condition notes from Bonham's above and pretty easy to see this piece is questionable at best. Your visual "inspection" is obviously off and in general it is impossible to assess condition without seeing the piece de-framed, front and back and under proper lighting conditions. I myself have dealt with one or two prints myself and we have a name for grading works by looking at them on the wall....we call that "Negligence"  |
|
|
|
Post by Black Peter on Jul 17, 2015 0:25:38 GMT
You obviously didn't see it in person. I did. I used to be involved with a rather prolific print house, we had a name for customers who would return brand new hand pulled screen prints because there was a fingerprint or smudge of ink on the reverse. We called them 'Americans'. 1) Tapes to front mount at 3 places along upper sheet verso, 2) A very soft surface abrasion in the grey background in the upper left image only visible at raking light, 3) Slight skinning at places along upper sheet edge verso, 4) A few soft handling creases in the margins, otherwise in excellent condition, the colours bright and fresh. These are the exact condition notes from Bonham's above and pretty easy to see this piece is questionable at best. Your visual "inspection" is obviously off and in general it is impossible to assess condition without seeing the piece de-framed, front and back and under proper lighting conditions. I myself have dealt with one or two prints myself and we have a name for grading works by looking at them on the wall....we call that "Negligence" This may come as a surprise to you, but some people buy prints to look at them on the wall. |
|
|
|
Post by blade on Jul 17, 2015 3:30:19 GMT
1) Tapes to front mount at 3 places along upper sheet verso, 2) A very soft surface abrasion in the grey background in the upper left image only visible at raking light, 3) Slight skinning at places along upper sheet edge verso, 4) A few soft handling creases in the margins, otherwise in excellent condition, the colours bright and fresh. These are the exact condition notes from Bonham's above and pretty easy to see this piece is questionable at best. Your visual "inspection" is obviously off and in general it is impossible to assess condition without seeing the piece de-framed, front and back and under proper lighting conditions. I myself have dealt with one or two prints myself and we have a name for grading works by looking at them on the wall....we call that "Negligence" This may come as a surprise to you, but some people buy prints to look at them on the wall. [ I don't understand your point. So people shouldn't care about condition when spending large amounts on art? |
|
