Flambe Bowl - Chinese Or Japanese?

[kardinalisimo]

I know that those are difficult to figure but any suggestions will be welcomed.

[peterp]

Not so sure about this. There are a lot of fakes of this type of washer out there, unfortunately.
What is making me suspicious is the gray ring area. That would have been the support riing on which the brush washer was standing in the kiln. But these usually left a brown color, not a gray one. And, if fired with ancient menthods, such a wide support ring would almost certainly have stuck to the bottom, leaving traces as it would have to be knocked off.

Further, the brown, covered center area is also a big question mark for me. We occasionally see sand bottoms (unglazed bottoms) with such a brown or black cover on a certain type of 18th century plates, but why should they have wanted to cover the interior of this base?
In ancient times they would only do the minimum required to get the job done...

[kardinalisimo]

Peter, was the body double glazed? The lips are white crackled glaze and you can see the same color on few areas where the red did not cover them. I wonder why there are so many cracks on the foot edges. Maybe the support ring did stuck? Also, the shape is not perfectly round, it goes a bit ovalish.
About the browned center, don't know. Why it has to be painted in general? I mean, the whole bottom is left bear. By the way is this type of base typical Chinese?
If the bowl is not 18th C. does it mean it is recent or it could be late Qing?

[peterp]

Some type of red glazes will show the white glaze at the top rim; the cause is probably that the firing temperature at the top was too high.  Not sure what you mean with cracks at the bottom, but some monochrome glazes flow down to the foot and stick to the surface of the firing support, etc. This is knocked off resulting in an ugly base.
This is a traditional Chinese base.

Normally I would think it is late Qing, but due to the reasons mentioned I suspect these could be age faking.

[kardinalisimo]

So, it was onced glazed in white and fired and then glazed again in red? I mean the base has deep chipped pieces along the rim. Could have been caused by dropping or banging but maybe from knocking off the ring as well? By the way, those broken pieces expose the clay paste. I guess an expert can tell age by looking at it.
Do you think it is a good idea to wipe off the brown center with acetone? Curious what they are hiding there.

[peterp]

Your assumption may be all wrong. There was only one glaze and it turned white at the top due to the reason mentioned.
Do you think the fakers are fools?  Items indeded for those who understand nothing of this do not require good fakes. Quality fakes made to deceive experts will show everything the way real antiques look. Sometimes it is tiny details that you may not even notice, that will make the difference. I am sure many collectors or dealers will think it is genuine, but we here are a bit stricter than usual, perhaps.
Anyway, acetone, soak it or wash it with detergent, scrub it, anything... high fired glazes and clay are not that easily damaged.

[Stan]

Hi Peter, and Kardinalisimo, I had a couple flamb? vase appraised at Bonhams, they did hands on inspection, on both the items I had the glaze at the bottom was like the one shown here, areas thicker in areas and uneven at the bottoms the appraiser said the earlier pieces were never that way, sloppy, he said the glaze would have been even all around, especially where it meets the foot they had it down to a science, the newer items are like this because it really took skill to apply the glaze evenly that was on thing he said, the other was there was no pitting in the glaze, the antiques always had pitting through out the glaze, also the the ones that would have had a copper red glaze after long time starts developing green spots and white areas would have a slight greenish tone to it.  Im afraid that using there logic, this could only be mid 20th century at the most.

[kardinalisimo]

Stan, what is pitting on glaze? Tiny small dots? If so, they are all over. Also, I do have greenish spots. The white areas have some hue but not sure if I can call it green.
I have no knowledge in firing and glazing techniques so I have few questions.
What did Bonhams mean by early pieces? How early, and when did the sloppy bases first appear? Also, was it that specific kind of glaze that was difficult to apply evenly or any? Did any post "early" period piece had sloppy glaze? I mean did not the Chinese masters know how to make even glaze during 17/18/19th century? Also, is it possible that Imperial flambe pieces were made with better care and the every day use ones was not make to perfection? Just like any other Chinese ceramic piece?

Peter, 100% acetone do nothing on the brown center. Seems it won't be possible to wipe it off. I am still curious why did they cover that area. Maybe some kind of marks?
About the black traces. I know they used to use ceramic support rings so it  make sense the marks to be brown. But do you know if they used supports made of something different but clay at some later point?

[Stan]

Good photos, these look older than what I have, the pitting is absent from mine but the uneven glaze at the foot, "so the Bonhams expert said" would be later, to me with the pitting, late Qing.

[kardinalisimo]

Stan, again what that Bohams appraiser meat by early pieces? Original Jun ware or Jingdezhen? I don't think that Jun had exactly that type of glaze anyway.
I am not sure that the uneven glaze on the bottom of the body wood indicate a very late piece. At least from the Jun examples that I saw, they did have uneven glaze. The Jin Jun was glazed all the way to the foot rim.
The lower portion of the outer wall of the bowls/dishes of the Yuan Jun were left unglazed.  This was necessary as the Yuan Jun glaze had a lower viscosity and tends to flow more freely during firing.  Hence, if it is glazed up  to the foot, the vessels may end up adhering to the saggar due to the overflow of the glaze.

I don't think that the glaze was perfect during the Qing flambe either.
That is from gotheborg:
"From the mid-18th century and onwards the red one of those glazes became the standardized Jingdezhen Jun red. A typical feature of these later glazes is they being very fluid in high temperatures so that their bases most often needs grinding after firing, to remove excess glaze"

Peter, I read that on some Jin/Juan pieces a thin black dressing was applied to parts of the unglazed foot and base to cover potters marks.

[Stan]

The appraiser did not mention age he told me why they were not old, he did say for certain that the bottoms would not be sloppy was the word he used, bottoms on mine are similar to yours.

[Stan]

Maybe the Bonhams appraiser din't know what he was talking about, and maybe mine are authentic to.

[kardinalisimo]

You know that I know almost nothing about Chinese ceramics but just present  the information I found. He was probably right in some parts but i find it not very professional to talk about 'early' pieces in general. Every period had its own characteristics. I read something about pitting but it was about Jun piece. I guess an early/mid Qing piece may have such but not be seen on late Qing. You know they were experimenting with those kind of glazes.

I will keep digging. Now I have to explain the gray marks. They are very hard, stone like in nature. Definately something was stuck on the bottom.

[Stan]

Hi Kardinalisimo, most experts do not indulge in information, they keep it to their selves, the expert at bonhams did not offer why it is not old until I questioned him on it  and then he still was very reserve to answer, but the part that really stuck was the sloppy craftsmanship.

[kardinalisimo]

Maybe he has seen only pieces with fine bases. As mentioned the overflowed glaze is supposed to be polished. I've noticed that on few other flambe ware, chipped pieces on the foot rim.  I wonder if they were done from improper handling or production failure like stuck foot that was knocked off.. If the last was the case, maybe there was no point of refining the bases as they were already in not the best condition. Who knows, maybe they were rejected or so.
I am really curious how did they fired those pieces. Did they use saggars, what kind of support etc.