A yellow glazed incised dragon saucer-dish; Daoguang seal mark in underglaze blue.
I would like to know if this Daoguang dish is from the period. Thank you.
Hi Anthony, this bowl looks new to me, no age signs and high gloss shine,
I forgot to mention the white, white bottom.
Hello Stan,
Thank you for your input. This lot was purchased at Christie's New York, Sale 2235, Lot 511, 17 December 2009. The yellow ground saucer dish measures at 6 3/4 inches in diameter.
May I ask what you paid.
Estimate at $1000-$1500. There were two additional items (Song Dynasty qingbai dish and a Kangxi famille verte bowl) from the same lot. I had a competing bidder. Final realized price at $3250 (including premium).
Was that for all three pieces?
Christies usually combines items that are not worth that much, in other word they would not sell for much if sold individually , so they combine them to make it enticing to bidders.
Indeed.
According to this forum's policy, we are unable to provide monetary estimate (apology for previous email). For reference of related dish, please see (Christie's New York, Sale 2580, Lot 1517, 13 September 2012).
I agree.
Pre-2009, the market with higher expectations / price paid were focused on porcelains made from early Ch'ing Dynasty (???) between Kangxi to Qianlong. Since latter part of 2011, I've noticed higher price paid for works from Jiaqing / Daoguang period. Now at major auctions around the world, we see an increase amount of porcelain wares produced from late Ch'ing Dynasty to Republic. Supply cannot meets demand.
Also, at major auction houses (such as Christie's, Sotheby's, Bonhams), they tend to lower prices to seduce bidders who are looking for bargains. All I want from the lot at that time was the Daoguang dish; but I have to buy three all together. Pre 1980 to early 1990s was expensive for early ceramics, but not anymore. Therefore Christie's added some attractive merchandise to lure buyers.
Thanks for sharing Anthony, sorry for asking you what you paid.
Not a problem; just follow forum's policy.
For the record, I thought it was relevant to ask the price that you paid at Christies, you made it sound like they were saying it was of the period, the price they valued it at tells me different. And speaking of the forum rules, I did not see any where that says you can't ask some one what they paid.
Every piece of information are available online, thanks to the advanced technology. I have copied a link for you to view:
http://www.christies.com/lotfinder/lot/two-chinese-porcelain-vessels-5276803-details.aspx?from=searchresults&intObjectID=5276803&sid=6d7054dd-0efb-41bb-8f93-0f88e3788e45
Thanks for that link, That is amazing that all three pieces, they say, are of the period and yet thats all that it sold for, I think the bidders had more knowledge than the appraisers at that time.
Even at $4000 was considered a bargain. A similar Daoguang dish is currently valued between US$6000 to $8000. Knowledge is powerful. Auction houses are mediums between sellers and buyers. They care as long as it sells. Future forecast is a risk though. It may not be popular at this moment; but might be in the future. It is worth collecting as long as it is genuine, beautiful. I saw it, I like it and I take it. Only time tells if it is worth the wait.
Stan, I would like to upload pictures to share with everyone and have difficulty, would you report it to the administrator of this site. Thank you.
Hear! Hear! I second that.
Anthony, maybe its just the small photo you posted but look at the bottom unglazed part of the foot, the porcelain is dense and there appears to be no rust spots, the porcelain from that period was not as dense, and a dish that is over 150 years old would have rust spots, wouldn't it?
There are several rust spots of different sizes on the glazed portion of the dish, but not on the unglazed area. Porcelain from pre-Kangxi were dense. Technology of making it lighter after Kangxi. It's easier to make dense / thick porcelain; while lighter and translucent porcelains are challenge. Strict guidance made for imperial use.
For reference, please visit the following link:
http://www.christies.com/lotfinder/lot/a-fine-pair-of-incised-imperial-yellow-glazed-5633515-details.aspx?from=searchresults&intObjectID=5633515&sid=a57bc738-4c07-4806-a22c-7c400a20c506
The one that I have is translucent under light where I can see my fingers moving and weighs lighter compare to porcelain of similar size & proportion produced in Ming Dynasty and early Kangxi.
I did not know that, thanks Anthony.