Asianart.com | Associations | Articles | Exhibitions | Galleries


Visitors' Forum

Asian Art  Forums - Detail List
Asian Art Forums

Message Listing by Date:
Message Index | Back | Post a New Message | Search | Private Mail | FAQ
Subject:Kunisada Print Additional Pictures
Posted By: Michael Sat, Aug 22, 2015 IP: 108.68.170.89

Here are supplemental pictures for the previous post below.







Subject:Re: Kunisada Print Additional Pictures
Posted By: Michael Sun, Aug 23, 2015

Pictures did not upload for some reason, second attempt.







Subject:Re: Kunisada Print Additional Pictures
Posted By: Michael Mon, Aug 24, 2015

This posting is intended to illustrate the difference found in the pattern detail of the obi sash of Kunisada print #17 Yui.

According to Kunisada.de "The first edition of this series seems to have been published by Sanoya Kihei and Moriya Jihei together, the prints bear the seal of both publishers and also a red kiwame seal. Later editions have only one publisher seal, either Sanoya Kihei or Moriya Jihei."

The first picture seen below is a close-up detail from an example found on the MFA Boston website. This example has only the Moriya Jihei publisher mark.

The second picture seen below is a close-up detail from an example found on the MAK Vienna website. This example has only the Sanoya Kihei publisher mark.

The third picture is a close-up from my print in question.

In the current related other post titled >>Kunisada Print Mystery Help Please>> a reply was posted by Stan in which he suggests the difference can be explained by a repair of the woodblock print.

Also, Stan explains that both publishers would have used the same set of woodblocks and there would not be two different sets of woodblocks.

So, the question becomes, if Kunisada.de is correct about the sequence of the print publisher (combined, then one or the other), and Stan is correct about a repair causing the difference in the pattern in the obi, then the question becomes which variation was the original?

Again, assuming Kunisada.de is correct, it stands to reason which ever pattern matches the edition with both publisher's seals would be the one before the repair/change. However, I can not find an example online of this print with both publisher's seals, only one or the other.

Finally, in addition to the differences seen in the pattern of the sash, notice the differences in other block lines (the curves at the hem of the robe)how fine the printing is between the Moriya Jihei publisher (MFA at top) and the two Sanoya Kihei examples below (MAK Wien, then mine at bottom).

Any leads or references to other examples of the Sanoya Kihei version or examples of both publisher's seals is greatly appreciated.

Thank you for your kind assistance.







Subject:Re: Kunisada Print Additional Pictures
Posted By: Stan Tue, Sep 01, 2015

As can be readily seen by comparing the excerpts you supplied, all three prints were printed from different blocks. Thus, you are correct that the different publishers used a different set of blocks. Also, your print was not printed from the same blocks as either of the known publishers presented above.

The fact that all three are printed from different block sets, explains the differences you observe.

Cheers,
Stan

Subject:Looking to contact a Michael here having Wei Sui stone statue with inscriptio about 243 AD
Posted By: Bill Jensen Mon, Aug 24, 2015

Hi Michael, I am looking for a Michael here on this forum that posted years ago about an ancient Chinese stone statue he had standing on an inscribed stone block that was translated then by another member to around 243 AD. Is that you?

I have been trying very long to find you. I have one here in Kirkland, washingtom that is almost identical, and Chinese antiquities appraisers and experts can find no evidence of forgery in style, tool marks, materials, etc. But ours have many artistic anomalies that are very characteristic and significant. Mine is completely coated with a natural ancient stained coating of limestone concretion patina indicative it was sealed in a limestone tomb for over 1000 years.

I am gather the $500 to send it to a special nuclear testing lab in Australia that dates limestone concretions using the uranium thorium isotope ratio method, pretty accurately, mainly for geologist who date stalagtites and stalagmites in caves.

Bill Jensen
408 209 0627 [email protected]



Subject:Re: Looking to contact a Michael here having Wei Sui stone statue with inscriptio about 243 AD
Posted By: Michael Tue, Aug 25, 2015

No Bill, not me, I never posted about a statue, sorry, wrong Michael.


Asianart.com | Associations | Articles | Exhibitions | Galleries |