Another shocking case. I think 50/50 split would have been more fair and likely to have been acceptable. 75% seems greedy considering all things. Perhaps the BBC should charge the Blakes the cost of the programme and give some of it to the young woman. Or as someone suggested, sell the film rights. If only we could rely on courts to make a fair decision but it's like rolling dice. One minute the Blakes claimed to NEED the money for house upkeep then suddenly they don't need money and want the return of the painting they never knew they had. Personally, I hope the Blakes never get the painting. They valued it so much they never knew they had it. And as for leaving their ultimatum until 10 minutes before the auction, well that stinks.

A dishonest art dealer, a rich woman foolishly deceived, a painting bought for a small fortune with disputed authorship and the investigation to unravel the mystery. A typically English story, worthy of the creator of Sherlock Holmes. Guaranteed entertainment... and good business as usual too.

we all know who the real small warrior is...

Despite its authenticity I will not hang such an ugly thing even in my toilet! It goes to show that even great painters are sometimes capable of such horrors...but that doesn't take anything away from the professionalism of this whole particularly endearing team.

I've just read on Wikipedia that Lowry holds the record for _rejecting_ the most amount of honours! I think it's important to know that, if you're at all interested in this painter, because he must have had a deep-seated reason for rejecting all those honours. Perhaps because he'd had to put up with a lot of heavy criticism and verbal abuse from those in power, until his works became recognised and then they all started to be nice to him. That's just a guess on my part, that he couldn't put up with the hypocrisy of the establishment and so didn't want to be counted amongst them.

The more I look to the work of Chagall the more I understand why Hitler described it as ' Art Dégénéré ' ..and with all my respect to your thorough knowledge and taste in Fine Art...I can hardly perceive the merit of this artist ,the harmony of his coulour' palette or the genius of his composition ...even my 7 years' old daughter could do better on a canvas...so when I see you so impressed and so in awe of so much ugliness in the presence of his work ( just because of his price rating) describing it as ex- cathedra I feel like throwing up !

IF the painting were owned by The Foundation, I'll bet it would have "value." In Liza's shoes, I'd write to The Foundation and threaten to BURN THE PAINTING "...seeing as it has NO VALUE." ...then see how they respond!!!

OMG, I love Liza!!! Damn straight! She tears up the stupid piece of paper that was issued by people who SIMPLY DO NOT WANT ANYONE ELSE TO HAVE A PIECE OF THE PIE. Their 'decision' was a "Screw you." to anyone owning such an important piece. If that tableau was in his FIRST SHOW and then (painted over) was worked on in the last year of his life, it IS an important piece. Their saying that it has "no value" because it is "damaged," is utter rubbish. It's a power grab. It is very easy to see through the machinations of those wielding decisions in The Art World. We've seen this before!

Six feet apart...lolololol

Frink looks like her sculptures.

At 55:25. Wonderful to learn that this painting was in full possession of the Blake family. Provenance it’s a real life Winslow Homer painting-check! But still no evidence of what the hell happened in 1988, when this painting was discovered near a rubbish heap. Who the hell put it there? If they put it there, did the Blakes lose title to it because a member of the family conceded that it should be chucked? Why was it chucked? Who’s the one in the Blake family responsible for this? Are they dead or is the family illegally keeping this evidence from a court proceeding, and a judge? So many questions.

The correct pronunciation of that paint is GWAASH, not GOOache, I'm surprised they got that wrong.

A very valuable lesson to be learned here-if grandmama, once a lady of leisure married to a governor of far-flung colonies, left you an ugly painting that looks to be worthless, DO NOT THROW IT OUT! And most certainly don’t leave it right outside the gates of a rubbish dump. Open your eyes, inquire about, keep the damn thing somewhere in your giant house. You can spare the room, especially when you find out, after much research, that the ugly thing is a valuable Winslow Homer. And if a struggling mother finds this treasure you cavalierly threw out, just let it go. Console yourself that you own a giant house. Lol.

Is it all about art or about money? Is there really a difference between these two things today? I fortunately have no relationship with this weird world of art, governed by carefully preserved prejudices with elaborate aesthetic discourses that hide raw greed. But I had a painter friend who unfortunately has already died. Ten or twelve years ago I commissioned and bought several watercolors from him, either because I had always admired his skill or because at the time he was in need of money and had two young children to raise. The watercolors are beautiful and authentic, but they have no monetary value. And yet they have immense sentimental value to me, because they are colorful and expressive pieces of life and creativity left by a good friend who passed away in January 2016.

If the painting of Gape was already an oval and someone wanted to cut it down so it could be framed in that shape, why would there have been any part of the arm that needed to be filled in? Why not just cut it down to the shape it already had? Their explanation didn't make sense to me.

Money, it's always about money.

The restoration of the original painting under the more recent one that covered it is very delicate, professional and interesting. But authentication by a specialist always leaves the smell of a scam to value an unsigned work of art without a specific document indicating its authorship.

>>>>>> PIGMENT ON COTTON RAGS,,,,,,,,THEY CALL IT "" ART ""

I think Selena made mistakes. She could get that 25% that they first offered, It was better than nothing. After years the painting is still kept away from her and she earned no money. 😑🙁

It was nice of the owner of the verified painting to allow access and samples

Soon, the history of fake art will be more interesting than the history of art. In fact, it will be difficult to make a distinction between the two, because in the eyes of an AI, everything is information. And we already are and will be increasingly trained by AIs to think the same way. At some point in the future, anyone who insists on saying "there is incontrovertible proof that this work of art is truly authentic" will be laughed at, made nasty comments (Poor guy, he's gone crazy) or branded as dangerous, criminal or, worse, revolutinformationary.

I'm so happy for them! Being working artists themselves, being so familiar with the work of your artistic inspiration that you can recognize it even labelled as something else, and being right? What a wonderful story. Of all the people I've seen so far who've gotten the big "congratulations" on this show, they seem the most deserving. Hope they're enjoying the money.

Beautiful film work, well done crew ✨✨✨🎥

It sold for £33000 pounds in 2019

Im tired of seeing the young man twitching his face at the beginning of every video

The very rich don’t care for realism in their art, especially religious realism of the first half of the 19th century. The only exception would be Renaissance and Baroque old masters that are extremely rare. The very rich want art that is trendy and fashionable, that can be hung in a minimalist interior or a New York-style loft. Alas, Delaroche does not tick any of these boxes, even with the royal provenance. Hence almost no demand and a very low valuation for an old work in exquisite shape. Only second-rate museums with small budgets and very niche collectors will be after this painting.

Clearly this man was LOADED in the early 1990s, likely with money he inherited and didn’t earn. A random painting purporting to be a Chagall coming out of the chaos of an unraveling USSR? Why, yes! I will squander a small fortune on a hunch and a prayer. Though an heir being bad with money is a tale as old as time in ye merrie olde England.

To see something be as it is and always will be is amazing. Being a fan of Gerome, and owning a small sketch of his, this is special to know it is a real painting from an early period. Perfect!

when are they doing a Bob Ross "fake or fortune" episode????

This show is a good example of what I like best about this series. The search. Many times with genealogy and with old or antique items it goes just like this. You start with an item and little to no leads. You take just one seemingly minor lead, "run it to ground" and go as far as you can. Step back, and do it again. There is something indescribable about research. Patience, familiarity with the specific subject and dogged determination are your strongest allies.

Maybe the real one was destroyed during the flood and the copy was made. Maybe the "copy" IS the original piece and it was heavily restored to the point where it no longer resembles the characteristics of Landseer's other work. It's entirely possible that the original was stolen after the flood, passed around for nearly 70 years and then wound up at auction. I do love all of the detective work that goes into this show!

The people with the ceramic jug painting on the wall in their stately home... 😮😮

Greed by the Blake family's sniveling lawyer...

compared to the masters the new generation of painters were asswipes , Impressionism is pure CRAP

Love all the intrigue about the art but…… anyone else just loving watching Phil and Fiona become really good mates over the years?

This is my favorite TV show. I grew up going to free art museums in Washington, DC with my mother, who is an avid art fan. There is something very endearing about seeing forgotten artworks being rediscovered and scientifically analyzed decades (or centuries) after they were first made. It's like the artist never died as long as their work is still being celebrated. I collect vintage, original artwork from much smaller American artists, though nothing of this caliber!

1926 exhibitions in Amsterdam AND in The Hague, only the Amsterdam exhibition catalog was found. Likely a copy of The Hague’s exhibition catalog is around somewhere, that catalog may have contained the dimensions.

Banana

Finally! Someone stands up to the fickle 'foundations'! Good for her!

Wow! It was so satisfying to see that the Wildensteins finally accepted it as authentic. I think that when they presented the painting "Bonds de la Seine à Argenteuil" by Monet, they did a bit less reserch compared to this case. 👍

Dont look at the comments if you want a surprise ending.

Watching this great programme Ive heard Wildenstein decline 2 and accept 1 only. Will be interesting to see how many more they decline.

I love his image of Diogenes

Van Megreen was painting ‘in style off’ since no one knew how Vemeer’s earliest lesser known paintings looked like, just vague description and size of canvas was given… Everyone believed this was how Veemer painted, these forgeries, before perfecting his style….Van Megreen was a genius…

My Father was an artist . His one rule I recall him teaching me when young , was never work on anyone elses work .

If they want the picture back, then just give her the money for it. If they are that wealthy, a few 100,000 pounds would surely be nothing to them. It looks more like they threw it away than someone stole it and they are upset that it turned out to have value.

Hip hip hooray

These snobby committees/foundations make cloak and dagger decisions based on personal agendas. Had the white paint been successfully removed in the 1960s, they'd have accepted the work as Gorky's with barely a thought. As for the granddaughter, she comes across as a piece of work - just barely civil. Bet her attitude would have been different had she been the painting's owner. Anyway, It's common sense to want to see what's underneath.

Anyone else go to sleep to this?

The DO THE DEW Fn commercial ruins the pucture !