Image of Vincent Van Gogh’s self-portrait. (Image Credits: Wikimedia Commons)
A painting bought for $50 at a Minnesota garage sale became the subject of an interesting debate over its authorship. The firm published its argument that the painting was made by Vincent Van Gogh in 1889 and posited its value at $15 million, according to Smithsonian Magazine. The test had also identified a pigment known as the PR-50 in the sky. There was, however, a caveat: the pigment was thought to be used during 1905 or 1906, long after Van Gogh’s death in 1890. This date problem prompted the firm to consult patent lawyer Ben Appleton, who uncovered an 1883 French patent for the pigment. The Van Gogh Museum had actually encountered the painting before LMI did when the collector submitted it for consideration in 2018, according to a January report from ArtNet News. The museum rejected the claim in 2019 on the grounds that its stylistic features didn’t carry the hallmark of Van Gogh’s oeuvre. In response, LMI contested the assessment; their rebuttal, in a January 31 statement, was that the museum had spent less than one working day rejecting their 456-page report.
This exact scenario became palpable when a garage sale find was identified as a possible lost work by Vincent Van Gogh. A spokesperson said, as Artnet News reported, “We maintain our view that this is not an authentic painting by Vincent van Gogh.
The painting uses a thick application of paint or impasto, which MoMA notes is an Italian word for mixture, according to Smithsonian Magazine. A masterpiece can lie unnoticed for decades, its true value hidden in the brushstrokes and an inscription in one corner. The work, a portrait of a fisherman titled Elimar, was later acquired by a New York art firm, the LMI Group International, which researched whether the artwork belonged to the post-impressionist painter Vincent Van Gogh. The name Elimar is inscribed in the lower-right corner. he elevated it to a primary visual language Although Van Gogh didn’t invent the technique. Jennifer Mass, president of the Scientific Analysis of Fine Art, found the canvas’ thread to match the fabric used during Van Gogh’s lifetime. It had been registered by a chemical company in Saint-Denis, near Paris; this finding meant perhaps it was available during Van Gogh’s time, though a patent alone doesn’t prove it was sold. The same year, the collector sold it to LMI.
After reviewing LMI’s report, the museum didn’t budge an inch and stood by its earlier stance.
