In a recent business move by The Art Compliance Company, its founder, Mr. Marion Maneker is trying to change how we trade art. Citing a huge increase in art purchasing, Mr. Maneker believes that it is more important than ever to perform a vetting process to ensure that the $10 million painting that your about to purchase is really what you think it is. Mr. Maneker goes on to explain that his service aims to simplify this process for both buyers and sellers by performing the background check for them. This process will track down each specific pieces trail until the root, without the need to hire expensive lawyers or private investigators.
Mr. Maneker is not the only one with this concept. Christopher A. Marinello, operator of Art Recovery International plans on offering a similar service as well. Marinello previously worked at the Art Loss Register, where he helped clients track down missing art and check if a work has been reported stolen. I think that we will see many more services like this emerge in the coming years and months.
As noted in the article galleries around the world have been forced to shut down due to the increase in even more realistic counterfeit paintings by some of the most revered artists. One example is the travails of Knoedler & Company, a gallery that suddenly closed in November of 2011, after being sued for allegedly selling fake paintings, by several of their powerful clients.
Art has become more accessible than ever to anyone around the world with the rise of the internet. As we saw last week in Joleens post (http://eportfolios.macaulay.cuny.edu/seminar1baruch13/2013/10/04/art-collections-a-click-away/), selling art online is becoming a reality, and not just for small pieces. With the rise will come an unfortunate increase in both stolen and counterfeit works. I believe this service will become a huge motivator to smaller collectors who have previously been hesitant to purchase because of the possible risks. Combining this new service with the improved access through the internet should provide both increased security and an important global increase in the arts.
Article link:
http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/10/16/art-market-veterans-announce-new-business-ventures/?ref=design
I’ve actually been curious about this topic for a really, really long time. It’s always been a question that I’ve had, seemingly how does one know when a painting is real or not? With the quantity of paintings available around the world, who keeps track of the legitimacy of each and every single one?! For this reason, I think the goals of The Art Compliance Company are truly great, and can definitely, like you mention, garner more attention to art in general. I’m glad that people are coming up with ways to check for legitimacy, but I’m kind of curious as to how these creations have been avoided up to now. I know the process was obviously much more costly and time-consuming earlier, but I think it’s absurd to imagine how many galleries are out there just like the Knoedler&Company. How is it possible that making this process more cost-worthy and efficient has taken so long? It’s kind of crazy, but better late than never, I guess.
I agree. Though the process to run a background check on an art work will be painstaking, expensive, and time consuming, it is a worthy endeavor to ensure the authenticity of a piece. By unknowingly selling counterfeits, the name of the seller is tarnished, lawsuits will likely cost even more money, and buyer confidence across the board will be reduced. Today, in a world where things are so easily copied from handbags, to technology, etc, it is admirable that these art sellers are trying to maintain authenticity.
The gallery you mentioned, Knoedler & Company, was a victim of counterfeit art which this article explains in more detail (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/17/arts/design/art-dealer-admits-role-in-selling-fake-works.html?_r=0).
The goals of The Art Compliance Company and Art Recovery International are much needed in times such as these when information on the web can be manipulated and reproductions can be created at a near flawless imitation. Counterfeit art won’t just hurt galleries and museums, it can also hurt the clientele, and associate the name of the artist with counterfeit reproductions.
It won’t be easy tracking down individual works and determining whether or not Pollock really did paint this or whether someone else took a paintbrush and went crazy on a canvas but, like you said Michael, hopefully we will see more of these services emerge in the coming years.
It is always refreshing when people, whether it is in business, art, sports, etc, make moves to ensure that customers are getting what they pay for. The fact that new businesses are making themselves available to retrace the steps of purchased art will hopefully not only give security to those who do buy art, but encourage those who were previously hesitant, as you mentioned, to now go ahead and become clients of paintings and other art pieces. The actions taken by Marion Maneker can be compared to those by the Better Business Bureau of Northeast Indiana (article below), who are warning costumers to beware of fake tickets to this week’s primetime football game between the Colts and Broncos. It is very important that we maintain a high consumer confidence level in all areas of entertainment.
Link to the article: http://www.indianasnewscenter.com/news/local/Be-On-Guard-BBB-Warns-Of-Colts-Broncos-Ticket-Scams–228242281.html
I think it’s very important and even more necessary than ever to make these sorts of background checks. It’s possible to create very convincing copies of designer bags and shoes, so it seems plausible that the same would be true of artwork. Besides keeping art a thriving, living industry, preventing counterfeits from being sold benefits everyone involved. The client gets a genuine piece and doesn’t waste their money, the gallery maintains clean methods of operation, and the artist receives the money and recognition that they’re due. It would also bolster the reputation of the seller, since taking such measures to ensure the authenticity of a piece of art demonstrates true dedication.
This seems to be a very affective way of handling the counterfeit art problem that the art world is faced with. This added security will provide a push for art collectors to buy new paintings. Counterfeit pieces are easy to purchase by mistake, so having a service provide you with some reassurance is a big relief. If this service shows great results I am sure it will not be long before it is used to check on items such as bags, shoes, watches and other clothing. It may even turn into the next big app somehow. Here is an article of how the U.S. deals with international goods traded in regards to prevent counterfeiting. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/05/business/05theft.html
I think this service is absolutely necessary being that there are so many counterfeit pieces that look genuine. It is basically impossible for a person to be able to distinguish between real art and fake art without the help of professionals, but that is a very expensive process. This new company found a way to efficiently answer these questions and I think it will be very successful. With any successful business, people will always try to cheat and make money. Hopefully this new system will stop these people and making buying art a much safer process.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/06/arts/design/murky-laws-give-fake-artworks-a-future-as-real-ones.html
This article from about one year ago talks about how fake art is emerging and will continue to be a problem. In fact it states this will be a problem that will be hard to deal with. Hopefully, the new technology stated in Michael’s article will bring this problem to an end once and for all.
I think this is a great idea. Like Mariana said, I’ve always wondered: how do you know what you’re actually buying? I think this is really a necessary step into knowing the authenticity of art. It wouldn’t make sense to spend millions on something you aren’t even sure is real.
While it’s not completely relevant, this reminds me of an article I read recently. World-renowned artist Banksy sold some of his authentic pieces for 60 bucks in Central Park. He had an elderly man sit at a booth with a sign that stated “Spray Art $60.” People had absolutely no idea they were real Banksy pieces, which could go for up to hundreds of thousands of dollars! http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-207_162-57607356/banksy-sells-art-works-for-$60-in-new-yorks-central-park/
While this is is the complete opposite of what your article’s about, they do fall under the same topic of authenticity!
Although this is an interesting topic we seldom think about, art theft and counterfeits, this article did a poor job of describing exactly how The Art Compliance Company was planning on preventing the spread of stolen and/or fake pieces. The article does a good job of describing the problem, and describes that this company has created a new business to protect consumers and dealers from art theft and fraud, boasting that the days of expensive lawyers or private investigators are over. From a business perspective, I don’t see how they are differ in deciding whether a piece is real or not from any other so called expert. What qualifies them really? Furthermore, time and time again experts themselves have been fooled by counterfeit pieces (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/17/arts/design/art-dealer-admits-role-in-selling-fake-works.html) so if I owned art I would rather pay more for lawyers and ‘expensive’ investigators than to skimp out on these important services. Not exactly sure what their pitch is.
Although I do not deny art counterfeiting is a pressing and growing issue, I concur with Nabil Ahmed Khatri’s reply in that this article does a poor job, if any job, in addressing HOW The Art Compliance Company will conquer this problem or what makes them better than the already incompetent experts. Thousands of paintings have been examined, tested, and investigated yet still have still managed to dupe the most learned experts. Because of this, buyer interest and trust has decreased; more people are less willingly to drop thousands to millions of dollars on a piece of art that may be fake. Marion Manekar and his Company can not simply say they are going to fix this enormous issue with a simple flick of their wrist. I mean, I hope this company as well as similar companies can band together, pool their resources, and attack the problem together. However, this is wishful thinking.
I do not know how to fix the problem, but from what I read in this article and your review of the article, I do not think Marion Manekar has the skills nor size to conquer this growing issue.
This service seems like it could change the way art us bought or sold, but it all depends on the price of such a service. If it can act as a cheaper and more accurate alternative to private investigators and lawyers, then it may become mainstream. I don’t know much about the buying and selling world of art, but to me it appears that a service like this could be a game changer if done the right way. With the expansiveness of the internet, many industries have undergone change – it seems that perhaps the exchange of artwork will see a sharp increase if smaller buyers can trust that they are buying the real thing. I’m looking forward to hearing more about the results of this.
Since art purchasing is becoming a very common thing, tracking down a painting’s value and worth is something everyone should start thinking about. I was surprised to find out that some galleries around the world are shutting down due to counterfeit paintings. One of the reasons paintings are becoming easier and easier to replicate is because they can be found in so many different forms. Paintings can be views online, at museums, in magazines, etc.
Based on another article, a painter in Queens sold fake paintings for thousands of dollars working with his girlfriend and an art dealer. No one truly knows how they fooled so many people into believing their paintings were originally done by the most famous Abstract Expressionists of all times. The case was followed for months and included eight lawsuits.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/16/nyregion/one-queens-painter-created-forgeries-that-sold-for-millions-us-says.html
I think this is such a great concept. I have been curious about how art sellers know they have the original and not a forgery in their hands. Especially with those paintings that have been a few centuries old. Artifacts and evidence are lost all the time. As this article mentions, fake art has been sold many times so I always wondered if people were getting some sort of certificate, like “hey, yes this is real, go ahead and pay 20 million dollars (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/06/arts/design/murky-laws-give-fake-artworks-a-future-as-real-ones.html?_r=0&gwh=75BDF519AC07C2FC8F19BA6037972C4D). it’s interesting that this would come at a time of the internet and technology age, although I am not sure if the internet makes this easier or harder.
I think it is vastly important that we figure out what art we are buying and what is real or fake because many times art costs a lot of money and loosing millions to fakes really just sucks. If Mr. Marion Maneker is really capable of dwindling down the process to just himself in order to find the history and authenticity of art than it is awesome. I think this would be extremely helpful in returning art that had been stolen in World War 2. In an article stating France’s lack of returning stolen art work to the their rightful owners, mostly Jews, I feel the biggest problem is finding authenticity and seeing who or which paintings rightfully belong to. With Maneker’s help the thousands and millions of art pieces that were stolen could quickly and efficiently be returned without too much of a hassle.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/29/arts/design/despite-pledge-france-lags-in-hunt-for-looted-art.html