Hi was left this bowl by my uncle.
Any thoughts?
Height
6cm
Diameter
11cm
Many thanks Alan
The bowl is depicting phoenixes that appear to be transfer printed.
There is an apocryphal Qianlong mark.
20th century in my opionion.
Thank you for your response.
There a five roundels on bowl each phoenix is hand painted and noticeably different
Thoughts?
Hi, the majority of this type of items have four roundels, but there may be exceptions.
If you want a closer examination, please provide the following:
- closeup pictures of the phoenix
- a closeup of the foot rim
- a close view of the base
- the mark only (for checking how it was made)
All should be real close, showing any blemishes in the glaze, etc. They can be partial.
If you can photograph the bubbles in the glaze where the red color is, that might help.
Todays digital cameras allow very high resolution, showing minute details. All of above pictures can be partial, but should be taken in good lighting. (E.g., taken near a window in daylight)
Far-away or small pictures do normally not allow for sufficient detail.
(Please always provide closeups of the base, including the foot rim, when posting items. These are most important for age evaluation.)
Here are a few links (Google image search (in Chinese)):
Example 1: Shows on-glaze decoration with brush strokes visible:
auction.artron.net/paimai-art5040670329/
another on-glaze decoration: http://auction.artron.net/paimai-art36940251/
https://www.google.com/search?q=%E5%9B%A2%E5%87%A4+%E7%A2%97&lr=lang_en&tbs=lr:lang_1en&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=yQHOUpfiE4emkAWTtYHYCw&ved=0CAkQ_AUoAQ&biw=1311&bih=649
http://auction.artron.net/paimai-art36940251/
HI hope these pictures help.
Thank you
Here are more.
Thank you.
Hi, thanks for the additional pictures. They are much better.
I still cannot come to a conclusion. Here is what I see and/or have doubts about:
1. The mark seems to be all right, hand written, but does not have the characteristics of an imperial mark.
2. The foot rim would be all right for Qing dynasty.
3. The red color seems to be underglaze, but the color is a bit weak.
4. There is a Qianlong mark, but the bottom shows no burst bubbles as 18th century items from a private kiln would have.
The glaze itself does not show any blemishes or clear age signs. That is fine, what concerns me most is the red decoration. With the mark it is clearly visible where the strokes started and ended, because that is where the color accumulated and is darker. With the red decoration this is not clear at all. I would think it is either late Qing dynasty or 20th century.
If you have an opportunity to have someone experienced do a hands-on inspection, that might be best. Some items are difficult to evaluate based on pictures only. This is one of those. The feel of the paste and its weight, etc. my contribute additional factors.
Hi.
Thank you for your time and replies.
I took the bowl to an auction house this morning.
In their opinion it is Qianlong and of the period.
Thank you so much for your input.
Hello again found this link to a bowl very similar to my uncles.
http://www.christies.com/lotfinder/lot/an-underglaze-copper-red-phoenix-roundel-bowl-daoguang-six-character-5492355-details.aspx?from=searchresults&intObjectID=5492355&sid=787ae7bf-838d-4854-b5f3-efaca75c0708
I know this sounds greedy but I was given no way near the valuation on my uncles bowl.
Thoughts
Many thanks Alan
Hi again thought I would share this link.
Bowl very similar to the one I have.
Cant see mark on website.
http://www.lyonandturnbull.com/asp/fullCatalogue.asp?salelot=410++++++356+&refno=++179716
One thing is that there are variations depending on the market (the demand and supply situation), but of course, with an imperial mark you could normally expect to get a better value. Even if your bowl is genuine, its mark is not imperial.
Thank you Peter.