Excerpt from the Journal of Advanced Appraisal Studies

As I mentioned in a post a week or two ago, the 2009 edition of the annual Journal of Advanced Appraisal Studies is nearing publication. Click HERE to read that post which also has a list of the articles and contributors. I indicated I would soon start to post some excerpts from the Journal on the AW Blog. The Journal of Advanced Appraisal Studies will be available in early March for online ordering at www.appraisaljournal.org. The 2009 edition of the Journal contains article contribution from many ASA, ISA, AAA and NAA appraisers as well as independent appraisers and conservators, educators, and auction house specialists. Proceeds of the Journal support the non profit educational initiatives and appraisal scholarship programs from the Foundation for Appraisal Education.

The following is an excerpt from the article contributed by Graham Ospreay, a qualified forensic document examiner and forgery analyst. The article is entitled Issues in Identification and the Authentication of Artist's Signatures.

First, consideration is given to the type of forgery being presented. Is it the complete fabrication and construction of an object in all its parts and wears or is it a matter of alteration by means of additions or deletions?

Second, the complexity and the cost of the material to be worked must be considered. If the forger is to completely replicate or create anew, an object must by its components or function be unique as in one or have something in common with many, while adhering to a particular genre, movement or moment in time. Then the imitator must possess a much deeper understanding of craftsmanship, artistic technique and material technical knowledge.

Third, is the objective of the forger in making the counterfeit in the first place. There has to be an ends to the means. Will it be a smaller profit gained through the fabrication of an unimportant object, entered into a poorly scrutinized and mostly uncontrolled marketplace? Or will it be for maximum profit through the fabrication of a more important object, employing the highest level of skill and entered into a higher, more critically scrutinized and controlled environment?

The second and third factors are the core derivatives spawned from the forger’s decision made in the first. And with either, the art, artifact and collectibles world, despite striking advances in the detection of deception and learned research, still finds itself hard pressed to reduce the proliferation of rudimentary forgeries into the marketplace. This is not to be critical, but to be served as notice that there are limitations when standard historical or stylistic approaches are solely taken without the benefit of sound scientific detective work. Attempts to answer authenticity questions by applying any one without the other two, will more often than not, prove to be inconclusive or at its worse remain as deceptive.

In their assessment of the above, the forger will give foremost consideration towards the level of inspection that the object will receive once it leaves their care and control. At the less rigorous end or first line of inspection, we encounter the basic skills of the researcher or examiner. This will entail the employment of the fundamental human senses, coupled with the knowledge and experience of the individual assigned to give review. They are only limited by their immediate capabilities and skills in their objective of providing first impressions.

At the mid-level or second line of inspection, we begin to see the implementation of basic industry related equipment that will assist in a closer survey of the object at hand. This may include the use of such tools as: handheld magnifiers, direct or indirect illumination, ultraviolet examination, measuring instruments and photographic or digital capture devices, etc. Second level of inspection is limited by the degree of the examiner’s knowledge, permitted time restraints, availability and functionality of in-house or field equipment and by the restricted reach of such apparatus within the boundaries of primary surface characteristics.

The most severe level of inspection a forger’s handiwork could be subjected to is that of third line inspection. At this level the full capabilities of trained examiners and researchers are brought together in a formal laboratory setting and the object in question is exposed to the rigors of controlled testing involving strict methods of scientific analysis and protocols. Such forensic examination may involve analysis such as detailed microscopic and or scanning electron microscopy examinations, spectral analysis, infrared filtration, chemical analysis, material and property analysis, (organic and inorganic), etc., or other tests such as those which are available through the nuclear sciences, including: neutron activation analysis, proton-induced x-ray emission, accelerator mass spectrometry, x-ray fluorescence and the like.