Thank you for your report!
We have received your report and it is currently under investigation by a forum moderator.
Any feelings to this small Acrylic? Of a Stormy Sea signed & dated 1916??
Welcome to the forum.
Here you can discuss all things art with like-minded artists, join regular painting challenges, ask questions, buy and sell art materials and much more.
Make sure you sign in or register to join the discussions.
Hang on Studio Wall
This is a Studio member-only feature!
Join our Studio membership and save your favourite Painters Online content, from gallery artwork to step-by-step guides, to your own online mood boards. Create your go-to place for inspiration and learning. Plus, members can also enjoy a range of exciting features including monthly art videos and a digital magazine library.
If you are already a Studio member, simply login to your account.
Not a Studio member? Why not try our free 30-day trial - no commitment, no credit card required
Showing page 1 of 2
- 1
- 2
Message
Posted
Found this little piece in a modern frame my son thinks its acrylic ? it says Rowney academy board to the reverse.
Has some illegible writing also on the back. The front shows an almost red dusk or early morning rough sea which
is showing a light house and fishing boat lovely moody scene i think when i look at it anyway. The bottom right shows a
small red signed part i think might say ETM 1916 ERM 1916 Hard to read. 1916 was a very hard time for the people of the first world war i wonder if it might relate possibly to a soldier or maybe somebody else?? jUST
Posted
It's an oil (acrylic wasn't around at the time, and doesn't hold brush marks as well as this, anyway). It's extremely dark - whether because some of the colour has changed over the years, or because the artist used an excess of - perhaps - Burnt Umber, isn't obvious. The basic drawing isn't bad, I've certainly seen worse; but it's very heavy-handed. The name looks like R T Adams, who I strongly doubt was a professional artist. If it's not actually bad, it's not actively good, either.
Posted
Of the handwriting, one of the last words above the name looks like "sunset", which it probably is meant to be; I suspect that the red paint, which looks like a form of vermillion, in the sky has faded. It has SOMETHING - it does cause one to keep looking at it, partly in analysis of the colours used.
Posted
Certainly by an amateur hand, but that’s not to say it doesn’t have some redeeming qualities…
Dreadful main photo which doesn’t help, the impasto oil paint seems to be catching the light and therefore making any sort of positive comment difficult!
The composition isn’t good! The land and sea are split close to 50/50, and the lighthouse/jetty are far too big, they compete with the ship, the ship should have been the focal point!
I’m hovering between good, bad and indifferent - I’m leaning towards indifferent at the moment!
Oh, and that dreadful 60’s style gold frame doesn’t help matters!
Edited
by Alan Bickley
Posted
Just my tuppence worth - I recently bought a book entitled "Hidden Talents " a dictionary of neglected artists working 1880 - 1950 . There's an entry thus - Edgar T Adams , (exh.1899 to 1901 ) Painter in oils of landscapes and marines , who lived at Halstead , Essex and exhibited five works at the Ipswich Art Club 1899 - 1901 . The titles included Luccombe , Isle of Wight , Evening Spring , River Colne ( both 1899) and The Dutchman at Anchor (1901) . Perhaps this is the man .
Stephen Weight
PS I think there is a thread to be had ( or indeed already had ) about the suitability of frames for their works and how an unsuitable frame can be the ruination of a decent painting . And perhaps some lesser paintings have been carried forward by a really nice frame . Just my thought .
Posted
I don't think this is our artist - although that initial letter could well be an 'E'. I've looked at his work, of which there seems to be not much online, and it has no resemblance to this.
Frames - it would be interesting to see a representative sample of where we think the frame isn't helping the painting, or even worse, spoiling it. I have a weakness for gold swept frames (obviously not for everything) which I know a lot of people find extremely unappealing. Choosing a frame is an artistic decision in itself - a really good framer is worth finding, cultivating, and keeping, because the best of them know what's going to work better than we do.
I saw a massive, gilt ormolu frame in a museum years ago, a work of art in itself, smothered with swags of grapes and intricately carved: lost in the middle of it was a painting of I suppose around 7" by 5" - I can't even remember the subject of the picture, something classical or Biblical: but that just led to the killer phrase "nice frame".... well, how "nice" it was = something else again. But it butchered the painting. And anyway, the last thing you want is a piece which commands the eye to evaluate the frame first and the painting second (if at all).
Posted
I agree with all comments and found the information on frames very interesting i can tell you a story one time long ago in a long gone auction in a small Shropshire town my late Grand dad asked me to help him with a large frame made in plaster of large proportions and age with some other garage items the bidding was furious for the frame and none of the other things, This is even though it was missing many sections it actually went for £675 and it turned out that this frame was going to be repaired by taking rubber molds of the surviving sections to renovate, The very heavy frame i believe was a couple of hundred years old or so and quite rare due to proportions we were so shocked in a nice way. I also think the above frame adds very little and is frankly a shame to the painting, I assure you i will go and get it in an oak one maybe something nearer in period i like oak ones of simple construction. I am always hoping to find myself a Naive painting of an animals or scenery i love them especially large cows and race horses painted in the 18th century although i guess i am unlikely to ever find one or ever be able to afford at an auction but the fun is looking for art i guess Thanks for helping Thanks guys :)
Posted
Daniel whist I haven’t contributed to the discussion as I don’t have the knowledge or experience to advice you , I have followed the thread and found it really interesting. Luckily both Alan and Robert have a great deal of knowledge and I know find this sort of request interesting , we learn so much from this sort of discussion especially when it turns out to have a positive result.
Posted
Hi Folks, I have found another site showing Edgar Tarry Adams' work. The second on this page seems to be the same subject.
https://www.arcadja.com/auctions/en/author-lots/uglzehoy/
(I'm not prepared to register with them to get a better copy :-) )
Seems he was more of a photographer and a brewer and, as others have said, perhaps an amateur painter.
Posted
Maybe the painting is AFTER Edgar T 's work? One of the paintings on your link is of the same subject as the painting above; but is (I won't subscribe either, so can't enlarge it to be sure) infinitely better painted. If the above IS an Edgar Tarry Adams, well, maybe brewing was the area in which he excelled. I think though that the man himself was a much better painter than the author of the painting we've been shown,
One point of interest - I remain convinced that the painting is in oil: but if it's a copy, then the 1916 date is irrelevant - so perhaps it could be acrylic, as Daniel's son suggested. The argument against that is that it doesn't look like acrylic, the paint hasn't behaved as acrylic will. Plus, the material on which it's painted - George Rowney's Academy Board - is much nearer to the 1916 date than to anything produced in the last 50 years.
Whatever its virtues or vices, it has provided us with an interesting puzzle.
Posted
PS - 'Academy Board' was first produced, according to Daler-Rowney's records, in 1852: primarily for students and amateurs, though it does seem to have lasted very well as a support. Now what we need to do is find out the date of the painting on Norette's link which is clearly of the same subject! If earlier than 1916, that'll be of interest in itself. What it would prove, if we can find out, is something else again - but I'm tending more and more to the view that the painting above is a copy of a known work. It's the trace of that known work in the painting which has prompted our attention to it, and inability to dismiss it entirely.
Edited
by Robert Jones, NAPA
Posted
Right, here we go again - the auction house to which Norette linked dates the painting of (possibly Dover Harbour) to 1904. The composition of that painting is so much better than that in the picture Daniel posted - Alan Bickley has already pointed out the problems with it. I'm as sure as I can be that the painting is based on Adams' work by an amateur or leisure painter who was perhaps challenged to make a sunset version of it.
Adams' work is, as we have discovered, rarely encountered - it would be of great interest to learn how his admirer enountered the work, and where; Adams himself seems to have been polymathic, his interests extending to photography, brewing, archaeology and architecture. Perhaps that's why he's hard to find as a painter - perhaps he didn't actually paint very much. Tantalizing questions!
Showing page 1 of 2
- 1
- 2