Jo Bonger (Van Gogh’s sister-in-law) did Vincent and her husband a huge justice in cataloguing and marketing his work. What an amazing woman to turn his work from rags to riches and make his work internationally renowned. Vincent was so fortunate to have a brother who encouraged and cared for him like he did and for me that sets a fabulous example of how we should treat others.

Big art, like big oil and big anything is full of corruption....

I'm amazed more wasn't said about it not being signed. Maybe Van Gogh said to Gauguin, "This is another copy I did of the Sunflowers to cover this hole in the wall, I didn't sign it so it is never sold under my name as it's not as good as the others because I was half pissed when I painted it".

It's not so much a question of the authenticity of the works , but rather the experts . Which is the fake ?

It''s about money. Christie's is protecting profits/reputation and the Japanese are protecting face/investment. It matters if it is real.

Some "expert" says that Sunflowers are used to produce turpentine, which is just nonsense. Turpentine is distilled from pine resin. And when that same "expert" talks about colors, it is also very subjective. Why do these people make things up?

Turpentine is not derived from sunflowers, as the American “expert” asserts. It comes from trees, mainly pines.

If one can't distinguish between an "authentic" painting, and "fake", what difference does it make?

Richard Rodriguez is believable... He spoke up in the public forum of a supposed art elite...risking both his name and his reputation... 🇿🇦

At 29:36 during Christie's high tech examination of the painting, with a flashlight, they read the painter's name out loud "Schuffenecker" and the guy pulls his head back in reaction to it. LOL. How is that clip not the smoking gun? Back at 23:20 they say Schuffenecker is their prime suspected forger of both paintings. Hello???

I cannot STAND to see others getting filthy rich off someone else's art work that never made the ACTUAL ARTIST RICH!!!!! Artists struggle most of their lives and careers making these amazing artworks, barely scraping by the whole time. It's always when they're long gone, is their art is worth something; making others millionaires. Smfh I'd rather set my paintings on fire before I go than to have someone else profit off them, especially greedy people who are already wealthy.

at one point, in this film, there's a guy who says that the yellows are painted over the brown and Vincent didn't do this, well artists experiment, and it looks like VG was trying something different. Also, counting flower petals is pointless since artists do pretty much whatever they want.

I don't know if sunflower oil is perhaps used in painting (probably is) but I know turpentine comes from the bark of pine trees, not from sunflowers.

That man scraping the paintings with that metal stick, i would fire him immediately.

It's really gross that the Van Gogh Museum would agree to keep quiet and be obstructive about the Japanese painting in return for a building. I think most collections would do the opposite and speak out loudly.

The owner should submit the painting to a modern forensic study.

Maybe, for the Japanese People, not answering the Questions authenticity, is not about the Money they spent but to protect this soothing Thought who still Heals the Firebombing of Tokyo. To see the Sunflowers of Van Gogh back, brings back the Sun. I am just a viewer, but frankly, from 'here' this painting looks strong and imposing; a force radiates which comes from It's presence .

It's so ironic that back when he was alive nobody liked his paintings but move on to present day his works are beloved, idolised and wrapped up in mystery. He would have thought we were crazy 🤪

This woman is wrong. Turpentine comes from pine trees not from safflower. And it is nota medium it is a thinner or a solvent of oil painting.

Brilliant video! Thank you.

Those two landscapes at 36:50 in the fake Van Gogh section are great, I don't care who painted them.

There's a lad down in Dorset who does excellent copies of old Vinny G. He doesn't pretend they are the OGs though but his landscapes and still lifes are FR lit

Great Artists have bad days what if this canvas is the prototype that Vinny said sucks let's try again, auctions operate on the concept let the buyer beware and how many fakes were contracted by the sister-law.........

2:58 “Since learning about the fakes, I’ve been wanting to have a Gogh at it” I see what you did there

15:48 Basic fail in logic - should have investigated all of V's other paintings to prove he never made any other such 'mistakes'. Who knows what 'inconsistencies' V's troubled mind may have executed in paint here and there. 46:39 The programme previously confirmed that they cannot know if the Japanese Sunflowers was or was not mentioned in the letters. Can't have it both ways! Deeply flawed doco which contributes virtually nothing to the debate. ETA watching this again I notice that VG is shown by Gauguin _painting sunflowers_ - is this him painting the _third_ version, since the other two were painted 'in preparation for the arrival of Gauguin to decorate the house for his visit.

Pretentious professor of art history, Dr. Bogomila Welsh-Ovcharov (supposed expert on Van Gogh) proves her ignorance of paint, painting and sunflowers by declaring sunflowers the source of turpentine. What a complete doo-doo head.

Fascinating video. I feel sorry for Van Gogh. He was very fond of a young lady that served at the cafe he went to and she was friendly to him. One of the highlights of his life and very much looked forward to. One day she left with her child and his life had lost a great part of its colour. He was a poor man so there was nothing he could give her that would attract her even though his family were middle class. His relationship with Gogan was strained and that film with the two American actors (Terrible) was not a good reflection of the truth. The painting of the cafe was full of hope and love for him, somewhere to get rid of his loneliness for a time. It is so sad that his paintings fetch millions but his only painting he sold went to his sisters friend and his mother wanted them all destroyed.

Is it not possible that he sold the initial painting and as a result it wasn’t in his possession when he died for his sister in law to record it.

Someone call "Fake or Fortune!"

Art prices gone wild. Foolishness.

THE KEY TO THIS, IS TO ANALYZE THE BRUSH STROKES IN GREAT DETAIL. THE TWO KNOWN ORIG, WILL SHOW VINCENTS HAND MOTION, THE OTHER WILL BE ""DIFFERENT ""

Turpentine is not made from sunflowers 🌻

Who cares who painted it? If its a good painting, it’s a good painting. Stop helping the corrupt launder their money.

So they are so masterful and clever that they think they know the minds and trials of a rejected art genera, and then become experts on what painters were thinking/feeling and their stylizing attempts - comedic. Vincent is not rolling but laughing in his grave!

As an amateur oil painting hobbyist there a fine line between a fake and an “unsuccessful” painting. My rubbish bin is full of my un-successs. Sometimes we try, and try, and try again, and it just doesn’t click.

I recently had the opportunity to see the painting Jardin at Auvers that was up for auction at 2 minutes into the film. It is in a private collection but was recently on show at the Musee D'Orsay in the Last Months of Van Gogh exhibition. Immediately I was hit with an overwhelming suspicion that it was a fake. The pointillist style dots that make up the gravel foreground, about a quarter of the painting, are totally unlike anything in Van Gogh's oeuvre and they show an utterly indisciplined and haphazard execution that Vincent could never be accused of. They seem embarrassingly amateur. The other three-quarters of the painting look like a bad attempt at copying Vincent's style with equally indisciplined application of paint and no conscious plan of what the intention was, except to do what the artist thought Vincent was doing, without the first idea of what he was actually doing, or what his intentions might have been, or indeed the whole point of the exercise was. VVG always had an objective that was his struggle to achieve; the two-dimensional replication of some emotional response drawn from the subject in nature before him. In this painting the point seems simply nothing more than to 'do a picture of a garden'. Seeing this picture, placed next to other, clearly authentic Vincents, I felt much like the little boy who'd spotted that the emperor was wearing no clothes. Could other's not see it? It was bloody obvious.

Who authenticates the paintings? It can’t be the auction house…or if it is, that is utterly insane since the auction house stands to gain millions in commission.

It's ridiculous isn't it. 22.5 million for a painting that I wouldn't even call a good expressionism style. I went to art college. I had 2 teachers in the same class. They told us to draw a rock. I drew it exactly in shaded pencil. One teacher liked it. The other didn't and told me to draw something else. So I took out a sheet of black card, picked a few angles from the rock and drew some lines in coloured chalk. The first teacher didn't like it. The second teacher liked it.

A painter can paint the same picture many times, I bet something in it would be different

Love how they keep calling the (counterfeiting) artist 'clumsy'. How clumsy could that painter possibly be, for idiots to willingly pay millions of dollars for the work. Bunch of snobs, they all deserve each other.

the question is not the tableau price but the tableau valor ..thes ear etwo different things

At 41.22 mins Dominique Janssens explains that Vincent was "blessed", should of course say wounded but mixes French and English badly. No crime, just confusion

Its easy. Unless there’s a paper trail going back to the artist or his family, you avoid it like the plague

The Japanese company paid £22.5 million for advertising and it has repaid them A good investment real or fake.

Vincent can't catch a break, even in death. It's shameful. RIP Vincent Can Gogh, the best artist of that time period.

At the end of the day it’s all about the MONEY. If this one painting can be proven fake, all others will be suspected and interest and value will diminish. I love Vincent Van Goh for what he was and his tragedy of never knowing the world would elevate him to one of greatest artists of all time.. he never knew this and kept painting. It was not for the money… and if even the Museum which carries his name can not honor that, I’m glad he is not here to see this.

The lady at the very end said it for me

As an artist, I hope that one day, perhaps after I am gone, that my art is copied. One can only hope. At least people get pleasure viewing the art. The value is created and doesn't mean anything.

...document & truth detectives must've missed reality of the ear incident that's pretty clearly spelled out in letters?? Perhaps even more intriguing investigation than these maybe fakes. Hour packed with many "experts" yet there's as many conflicting evaluations & conclusions as there are people. Vermeer's works were nearly ALL attributed to other artists at different points of time. For their own careers & reputations: each expert has a personal agenda & motive (or 5) to propel their own opinion as "fact". It's all about as clear as mud!

From the comments I understand that this is basically about sunflower oil not being made from turpentine.

An investigation has turned up that Vincent has cut off most of his ear leaving the lobe. According to a sketch made by the doctor that treated him.

It's still a 'real' painting and as for being 'good', surely that is subjective.

There’s an excellent documentary about a family in China who has painting van Goghs for twenty years and selling to an “art” dealer in Amsterdam. I’m a huge fan of Robert Crumb. 😂😂😎

the japanese could find photos of the fake being painted with some irrefutable clues connecting it to the one in japan, and they would just ignore it.... they wanted a van gogh and they were given one.... they never cared, it's just an investment, and as long as everyone plays like its real, it is real, at least for investment purposes, and for making some good anonymous painter some money. but it is irritating looking at it from the sidelines. it's like landing in a country where everyone insists the sky is green and they just ask you to play along, while you dont understand why they drag this on, after all, the embarrasment will at best just be postponed

Like anything. People only pay what they think something is worth. If they paid the money for it and enjoy it like a real Van Gogh ... More fool them. I personally think the 'copy' of the Doctor picture looked like it had a better facial structure and shape to it than the genuine Van Gogh. But the pain application strokes and the colours were as if almost done as quick as possible. But that Red centre on the Japanese one ... Just looks wrong.

All of WWII was a tragedy.

For all the evident differences you have shown to the public, between the sunflowers from The National Gallery. and The Van Gogh’s Museum, that one sold in Japan differs so much. It looks ss a fake one. Color in the background is a lot clear, almost beige instead of yellow.

Art collectors are so disgusting. Spending that kind of money on paintings when so many ppl in the world are underpaid and underfed etc. It’s morally wrong. These rich ppl should pay their employees fair salaries and then they wouldn’t have this money to blow on stupid things.

BRITAIN'S No1 ART FORGER - MAX BRANDRETT, THE LIFE OF A CHEEKY FAKER biography is out now!

As an artist , there are many ways to spot a fake especially an old one.canvas& linen were different as we're paint pigments & mediums.

I many ways it doesn't matter whether the Japanese sunflowers are real or not. It's one of three and the owners attach great value to it. What is there to be gained here? Suppose the film maker does prove that it's a fake. Then what? It's not in the interest of the larger public and the current owner rightly sounds a bit irritated at the mosquitos buzzing around their house.

9:00 in i wonder if someone wanted to by his tie for 25 million , i wonder if he would say it was an original van Gogh.

A lot of speculations. Who knows? What about chemistry and scanners?

You can hear how outdated this documentary is when she said that Vincent "cut off part of the lobe of one ear". Like it was bascially a minor event. Barely a scratch.... How terribly wrong this statement turned out te be :0 It is now decades later a 100% proven fact that Vincent did indeed cut off his entire left ear like everyone was already knew even back then. Except this poor lady who had no clue. God rest her sweet soul.

Great story, and if true quite funny, Vincent would've never cared for these amounts of money given for his canvasses.

8:40 - how old is this documentary?

My fake Van Gogh is better than any of those fake Van Goghs.

I think a painting done by Schuffeneker should have a good value but not as high as Vincents.

we, artists, have the write to paint of similar original oned but on the condition that we write on the canvas that this is "COPY". we do not cheat but show our capability

Don't eat sunflower oil.

The auctioneers just care about the money. They don't care if it's fake.

Laughable opening statement that Van Gogh is "Japan's favorite artist." Such a Eurocentric comment. Just because a few rich Japanese guys bid high amounts for Van Gogh doesn't make him Japan's favorite.

Pictures really, it hurts my ears!! Have these people seen a single PAINTING in their lives 😂

Art is originality creativity and if very good a genius. Now to copy is just short of any of the above.

This is the world of high-end art. Leonardo da Vinci's Salvator Mundi is another one that is hotly debated as being not by Leonardo.

Don't you love when self appointed sorry excuse for professionals, degrade those who painted fakes, while failing 100% at their own knowledge? Mainly those amateurs running world famous museums and being severely overpaid paid for their very simple job?

I wonder what kind of award this kind of documentary has won ?

What does Dr. Barndoor or Philip Mould think?

This is a good documentary. I personally think that all 3 are in fact Van Gough's paintings but was not painted all at the same time. I personally believe that they were painted in sequential order. Almost like one week he made the first then the next week the 2nd followed by the 3rd. But that is my personal opinion.

it is incredible that the whole world has been convinced that these are great paintings. They are not - they are ugly and represent a disturbed mind. Great art requires detachment, reason, harmony, balance. These have none of that. I would not put one in my toilet. P.S I spent 5 years as the student of Chris Yetton a famous art critic.

They bought a fake,

Turps is also mineral , not only wood.

Evident that one Dr Gachet portrait it is no legitimate.. There is no melancholy at all. It must be painted by the doctor or perhaps his son Paul.

If fools have too much money, they believe anything that makes them happy.

i did pictures of flowers like that back in high school . what are these ponces paying milions for that for?

Why would anyone buy anything from these are house? Makes them look greedy and stupid

Sadly the high number of ad breaks in this programme make it unwatchable.

Faith - Fraud? Hell, that IS the experience. As long as there are people and difference among people this is gonna go on forever.

“Among the tragedies of American bombing of Japan “. Ok Jan

The 'Greatest painter in the world', I don't think so.

If all are original, they should all be different since they would have been painted at different times either over days or weeks. The difference between the paintings could be because of the changes of the flowers through wilting.

Get fake or fortune on it. They'll dig out the truth

EVERITHYN MUSEUM AROUND WORLD., HAVE COPY VAN GOGH.THE BEST AUCTION HOUSES SSLE COPY , EXAMPLE SOTHEBYS, CHRISTIE, BOHNAMS, PHILLIPS, WILLIAM DOYLE AND HERITAGE AUCTION AND OTHERS .?

these paintings don't even value a dollar!....there's nothing a toddler wouldn't accomplish!....but people tend to price them high so that billionaires will have something to brag about that others with the same value or higher don't have! We are like sheep...one seemingly important values it a a high price and the rest will follow suit. Not the first time the public was tested with a load of sh.....in an art gallery, and viewers thought it was something important!...but even faking a Da Vinci is highly difficult....but that's another story!

How can you base an opinion on comparison of three REPLICAS? I'm not an art expert but I would rather see prints than replicas in oil. Am I missing something?

KZfaq, how many useless fricking ads can you cram into one doc?

@16:35, "...it [the sunflower] also produces turpentine for painting." She sounds ridiculous.

How many of these detectives are artists? Artists constantly draw wildly different versions and mostly do not sign early versions not for public consumption.

The oriental people appearing at around 44:40 are probably not Japanese, but Koreans, as they are speaking in Korean.

"For me it's a copy done by a clumsy artist". Wait, to be honest that exactly like the original looks. It's everyrhing but a Caravaggio.