Thank you for your kind words! Teri truly sounds like she was an incredible person, and it’s an honor to bring stories like hers back into the spotlight. She definitely left a lasting impact.
The finger print match, plus the chemical analysis of the paint and canvas consistent with Pollock's confirmed works leads me to believe it's a genuine early Pollock painting. I just looked it up, and apparently the painting is now estimated to be worth $50M. Teri Horton died in 2019, so I'd like to know the current status of this controversial artwork.
The dumbing down of America. Jackson Pollock was only one of America's most famous artists yet she had never heard of him? What the hell do you learn in school? Not a broad enough education, that's for sure.
You bring up a great point! The art world can definitely feel like a complex and sometimes exclusive system. It's frustrating when the true value of a piece isn't fully recognized until it's in the hands of a collector with significant influence.
The style of work in it self is a signature, many try to copy and many fail, even though most people try the artist training and skill comes through. A study was done of hundreds doing abstracts , both amateur and a few experts thrown in. Then they were all asked to tell which ones looked good. The professional artist were picked an overwhelming number over the rest of the paintings. Why? because the amateur painters Adults and children didn't understand line, shape, form, colour, perspective, and so on. The understanding of using these tools is what makes good art verses bad art. To me, the colours chose, the mixed method of applying the paint, this does not look like a fake. Thats hard to copy . At least on the surface. (Graham)
The fingerprint is a partial print, and was inconclusive. This painting is regarded as an early fake, many people made them at the time as his works were widely published. Interior decorators were also having them cranked out for clients walls.
Love how this video references the "vigorous" standards of art authentification, when in reality, there are thousands of fakes out there, including Pollock's. Not saying this is a fake, but that fakers have had a huge run of success for decades.
Thank you for your insightful comment! You're absolutely right-art authentication is a complex process, and there are certainly many fakes out there, even of well-known artists like Pollock.
Thanks for sharing this. The evidence of finger print should be enough, hard to copy that. The fact that his signature is missing could be for two reasons. It could have been a practice piece, therefor not worthy of his signature in Jacksons mind. Or my more believable thought, this piece was actually larger to begin with and was cut down to fit the wall of whoever's home it was in. this would explain the missing signature. It's not the first time this has happened nor will it be the last. I bought a water colour painting in an eighties frame. A shinny brass and a dusty rose mat framing the picture. when I got it home I took it out of the frame. To my discovery and delight I discovered that it was actually six inches larger on two sides. This revealed a signature and date which I couldn't see before. I was glad that who ever framed it had not cut it off. Another more famous painting of Rembrant's was cut off as well to fit a wall, "The night watch". So the more important question should be , Where is the rest of it ? Does it still exist or did it hit the cutting room floor ? At the time, the People should have asked the second hand store where they got it from. does this piece look consistent with it being compleat? Look at the edges, is there paint dripped on all four edges or does it look like on edge is cleanly cut? Experts can miss the obvious , they need to get there heads out of their own pompous assets. And Yes, the Biggest question, where is this painting now? Hopefully it's keeping some form of providence now. Or is it lost all over again? Or even forbid, burned or was taken to the dump. I have rescued well over seventy paintings from that fate, still hoping that one will turn out to be a treasure, fingers crossed. the most important thing is that I like them to begin with. (Graham)
@randyzeitman1354 It is a partial print only, and Pollack used interior, high-gloss house paints, widely available at hardware stores. Neither one prove anything.
@@wiffley The combination of the different paints chemistry should prove that. paints today don't have lead and other chemicals, that in it self is another fingerprint. it should prove this beyond a reasonable doubt either way.
@@coleenpunter2243 This painting could have been produced during Pollock`s time , using the same hardware store paint. It is accepted that fakes of his work were indeed painted during his lifetime.
@Fischjesicht It is not dishonest to buy something that is for sale and pay the price asked for it. Dishonsty is stealing it, or misleading the seller in some way.
@ukestudio3002 was the woman planning to give the $15M to the thrift shop owner she bought it from? If, not, then I guess she is a criminal and should be charged with theft.
@@Fischjesicht Maybe honesty, but it's not so simple for me. Would she give a cut to the thrift store and to all previous owners too? Of course one could argue that she bought the painting without a clue, but, once she was convinced it was a Pollock, then what?
I was a fine art major back int he late 1970’s. I always thought that Pollock was crap. Low skill. Like Rauschenberg. Decoupage. Sure, I’d take a few million if i paid $5. I had paint smocks that looked like this. Stop with the lavish explanation of dripped paint.
I thought I found one a few years back. Then I realized it was my old drop cloth
Thanks for bringing this fascinating story back into public attention. RIP Teri she was a firecracker and a memorable lady.
Thank you for your kind words! Teri truly sounds like she was an incredible person, and it’s an honor to bring stories like hers back into the spotlight. She definitely left a lasting impact.
@@Art.in.5 It's interesting to speculate about a meeting with Teri and Jackson, as they were both rascals, and had some daily habits in common. Cheers
A real masterpiece
The finger print match, plus the chemical analysis of the paint and canvas consistent with Pollock's confirmed works leads me to believe it's a genuine early Pollock painting. I just looked it up, and apparently the painting is now estimated to be worth $50M. Teri Horton died in 2019, so I'd like to know the current status of this controversial artwork.
Apparently if you look long enough at a Pollock you will see a million dollars
The dumbing down of America. Jackson Pollock was only one of America's most famous artists yet she had never heard of him? What the hell do you learn in school? Not a broad enough education, that's for sure.
Famous for being shockingly overpriced and impossible to sugarcoat, and in that art world that's something...
The art teacher should have kept his mouth shut, bought the painting, and made millions.
Like most Art World situations, the value of the painting will not be faithfully realized until a wealthy art collector owns it. It's a total racket.
You bring up a great point! The art world can definitely feel like a complex and sometimes exclusive system. It's frustrating when the true value of a piece isn't fully recognized until it's in the hands of a collector with significant influence.
Jack the Dripper.
The style of work in it self is a signature, many try to copy and many fail, even though most people try the artist training and skill comes through. A study was done of hundreds doing abstracts , both amateur and a few experts thrown in. Then they were all asked to tell which ones looked good. The professional artist were picked an overwhelming number over the rest of the paintings. Why? because the amateur painters Adults and children didn't understand line, shape, form, colour, perspective, and so on. The understanding of using these tools is what makes good art verses bad art. To me, the colours chose, the mixed method of applying the paint, this does not look like a fake. Thats hard to copy . At least on the surface. (Graham)
The fingerprint is a partial print, and was inconclusive. This painting is regarded as an early fake, many people made them at the time as his works were widely published. Interior decorators were also having them cranked out for clients walls.
Love how this video references the "vigorous" standards of art authentification, when in reality, there are thousands of fakes out there, including Pollock's. Not saying this is a fake, but that fakers have had a huge run of success for decades.
Thank you for your insightful comment! You're absolutely right-art authentication is a complex process, and there are certainly many fakes out there, even of well-known artists like Pollock.
Looks to me like it could be. The black slashes are interesting to me.
Moral of the story - shit work gets shit load of money.
Thanks for sharing this. The evidence of finger print should be enough, hard to copy that. The fact that his signature is missing could be for two reasons. It could have been a practice piece, therefor not worthy of his signature in Jacksons mind. Or my more believable thought, this piece was actually larger to begin with and was cut down to fit the wall of whoever's home it was in. this would explain the missing signature. It's not the first time this has happened nor will it be the last. I bought a water colour painting in an eighties frame. A shinny brass and a dusty rose mat framing the picture. when I got it home I took it out of the frame. To my discovery and delight I discovered that it was actually six inches larger on two sides. This revealed a signature and date which I couldn't see before. I was glad that who ever framed it had not cut it off. Another more famous painting of Rembrant's was cut off as well to fit a wall, "The night watch". So the more important question should be , Where is the rest of it ? Does it still exist or did it hit the cutting room floor ? At the time, the People should have asked the second hand store where they got it from. does this piece look consistent with it being compleat? Look at the edges, is there paint dripped on all four edges or does it look like on edge is cleanly cut? Experts can miss the obvious , they need to get there heads out of their own pompous assets. And Yes, the Biggest question, where is this painting now? Hopefully it's keeping some form of providence now. Or is it lost all over again? Or even forbid, burned or was taken to the dump. I have rescued well over seventy paintings from that fate, still hoping that one will turn out to be a treasure, fingers crossed. the most important thing is that I like them to begin with. (Graham)
Why aren’t the fingerprint and paint chemistry enough enough to verify it?
@randyzeitman1354 It is a partial print only, and Pollack used interior, high-gloss house paints, widely available at hardware stores. Neither one prove anything.
Because it's a well known fact he used to shit on it as his signature 😂😂😂😂
@@wiffley The combination of the different paints chemistry should prove that. paints today don't have lead and other chemicals, that in it self is another fingerprint. it should prove this beyond a reasonable doubt either way.
@@coleenpunter2243 This painting could have been produced during Pollock`s time , using the same hardware store paint.
It is accepted that fakes of his work were indeed painted during his lifetime.
It's so weird that the art teacher who knew it looked like a Pollack, didn't buy it at the yard sale. Talk about a lost opportunity.
It's called honesty.
@Fischjesicht It is not dishonest to buy something that is for sale and pay the price asked for it. Dishonsty is stealing it, or misleading the seller in some way.
@@wiffleyodd moral compass.. 🤷🏽
@ukestudio3002 was the woman planning to give the $15M to the thrift shop owner she bought it from? If, not, then I guess she is a criminal and should be charged with theft.
@@Fischjesicht Maybe honesty, but it's not so simple for me. Would she give a cut to the thrift store and to all previous owners too? Of course one could argue that she bought the painting without a clue, but, once she was convinced it was a Pollock, then what?
What absurd story
Uhm … the same forensic art expert / fingerprint investigator was allegedly caught FAKING fingerprints on other artwork.
You didnt say whether she sold the painting or not. Thats what i wanted to hear, the rest of the story!
The painting has not been sold to date. Its journey remains a fascinating story, but no transaction has finalized its ownership.
@@Art.in.5 So the lady died? Who has it now?
Ridiculous, nobody is going to pay that...
I liken modern art to hand painted promissory notes used to shuffle and park funds by corporations and the super wealthy.
Find the photo...
I don't like it but I like expensive stuff.
That's still belongs at the thrift store or in a Goodwill bin. Jackson Pollock fifth grade art.
When I was in high school, Thursday was "stupid artist day", and we'd paint crap like this. It's insane that people would pay anything for this.
I would like to buy it... for 10 bucks. It's a fake no doubt. There are hundreds of Pollock's fakes. 😅
Absolute bullshit
A schooner is a sailboat, dummy head. 🤣😂
Hot Take - Lee Krasner was a better painter than her husband Jackson Pollack
I was a fine art major back int he late 1970’s. I always thought that Pollock was crap. Low skill. Like Rauschenberg. Decoupage. Sure, I’d take a few million if i paid $5. I had paint smocks that looked like this. Stop with the lavish explanation of dripped paint.
To much black...
sloppy structure, overbusy and untidy execution, rather poor work, not by an major artist
This is a particularly ugly painting and Jackson Pollack probably thought so too, explaining why he didn't sign it.
Well all said and done.... It's still shite whatever or whoever splashed some house paint over a good piece of canvas