Painting(?) from 1861 ...on metal, kind of two dimensional...

lizadkiss

Tenderfoot
Feb 5, 2008
7
0
Hi folks. Thanks for the chance to finally find something out about this lady here. I bought this in 1999 because I thought it looked like a good piece to resell. I was told by a respected auction house that it would be impossible to sell because these paintings on this type of metal are actually TOO rare and never found in one piece. (This IS in one piece, obviously)

The date on it is _ _-31-61
The month MAY be a 5 or a 6...it's hard to tell.

There is some kind of red enamel pushed into the back of the painting to give it a two dimensional look. Unfortunately bearing the passage of time, this "technique" has just made the woman look as though she's wearing one of those fake-muscle padded wrestling suits! However, it is an interesting technique and I would love to learn more about when/how/why it was used.

Here are some photos- sorry they are so large but I wanted to show as much detail as possible. The painting is about 14x16 (if indeed it IS a "painting" and not some altogether different type of medium) and if ANYONE can oblige, I would dearly love to know *anything* about "the old sourpuss", as we've come to refer to her in my family.

http://nunesadkisson.webng.com/metal_painting_001.jpg - FRONT
http://nunesadkisson.webng.com/metal_painting_003.jpg - FRONT
http://nunesadkisson.webng.com/metal_painting_004.jpg - BACK
http://nunesadkisson.webng.com/metal_painting_sig2.jpg - SIGNATURE/DATE

The painting is HEAVY to be this size. Unfortunately, I do not have the original frame. It was apparently very ornate and expensive; the man I purchased the painting from sold the frame separately and actually FOLDED this metal sheet and stored it for decades. It's amazing that it's in one piece, as the metal bends and twists every which way when you lift any part of it. My dad thinks it's lead but I have no idea as to the type of metal, myself.

Oh, one last note- I purchased this in Connecticut in 1999. It was said to have originally "lived" in Pennsylvania, although I was not told what part. It had been in Connecticut since at least 1932, I do know that much. (Well, I was TOLD that much...it could be completely inaccurate for all I know)

If anyone can help me identify anything about this piece, I would be sincerely grateful. I have grown really curious over the years having never been able to find ANYTHING about this style of artwork, so I would be grateful for ANY resource of information, no matter how insignificant.

Thank you, everyone.
-Liz
 

Thank you SO much Jim! I have been looking through a few posts and I see that you are obviously the go-to guy for expertise on just about everything. Most grateful for anything you can find out.
-L
 

Upvote 0
lizadkiss said:
Thank you SO much Jim! I have been looking through a few posts and I see that you are obviously the go-to guy for expertise on just about everything. Most grateful for anything you can find out.
-L

I most humbly thank you but must also most humbly disagree. I am merely the guy who looks through Google a lot. :P Prolly way too much. Many folks here out-ID me by miles :).

I found lots of other paintings c. 1800s - 1900s that were painted on tin. I of course have found nothing that resembles your artists work. :( I'll keep looking, and maybe some others will be able to help out.

And by the way - I was remiss in my first post... Welcome to TreasureNet! Keep on posting!
 

Upvote 0
Hello again Jim,

I have been more than intrigued looking through these archives- I am having so much fun. I actually did not get dinner on the table for the hubman until after ten pm last night because I just got "lost" reading about everyone's treasure hunting exploits. I have never even SEEN a metal detector but I do believe you all have convinced me to ask for a detector for my birthday in May! (What is a good one for a newbie who knows literally noth-ing about the sport?) I have MS and it's very hard for me to get motivated to be outdoor and in motion, even though I love being outside...so I think having something to work toward, a "goal", if you will, could help me a lot in my quest for good health. I live in "the sticks", as they say, and there is TONS of ancient, abandoned railroad sites out here plus a few places that used to house banks on their property...I bet I could find some neat things if I kept at it long enough.

Anyway, moving on-- my dad came over awhile ago and saw me reading your post...he pitched a *fit* about my saying the painting was on TIN...he insists, absolutely SWEARS that it's 100% LEAD and not tin. I personally have never seen a "flexible" sheet of lead, so I don't know. But he said that bearing in mind he used to be a jeweler (for six months, about forty years ago) I should trust his opinion.

It IS incredibly heavy...but I don't know. The people whom I spoke with regarding civil war era artwork seem to think it's Tin.

Google be darned, Jim...it's not having the information that makes you such a star 'round these parts...it's the absolute willingness to always help find and SHARE the information that does so! Way to be humble, though ; ^)

-L
 

Upvote 0
Okay. :D

I know MY dad is always correct... well, so far anyway. Lets assume that it's lead because of his knowledge and training. It would weigh a few pounds... and you did say it was heavy. Lead is also soft... can you gouge it easily? Or scratch it? On the other hand - lead can be folded and unfolded, so who knows... :-\

It's just that tin was commenly used for paintings, along with other metals I'm sure. No matter the outcome - you have a very nice piece... a local antique authenticator may be able to help.

There is also an area here in TreasureNet where they just talk about paintings... maybe someone there can help? http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/board,98.0.html (It's not an oft used area).

There are several very light and smallish metal detectors available, easy to use for beginners, and with practice will produce great results. I don't know HOW limited you are physically, but the hobby includes swinging the metal detector back and forth in a steady sweeping motion, bending over and getting on your knees to dig small holes... and getting back up. Tools can include small shovels and other smallish hand tools for digging.

TreasureNet has a You Tube video section where you can watch what folks do, and what it's about... and a great area for people to talk about their detectors, which is best, and what they cost... it's all opinions and a few arguments!

Videos: http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/board,379.0.html

Metal Detector Reviews: http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/board,208.0.html

Posting this question with your medical circumstances in the General Discussion area,
http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/board,330.0.html , should get you some replies from other folks who may also have limitations and great advice. :)

Either way - get outside! And don't get too addicted to TreasureNet... it's already claimed too many victoms.
 

Upvote 0
I am far from being any kind of an expert on anything and have often been accused of seeing things that aren't there.
But many artists signed their work in a hidden manner.
To me the buttons on her shirt look like letters--cobbees- cobrees.
look at the painting for a hidden signature or some initials.

just my thoughts
Joe
 

Upvote 0
I have seen one of these before.
I do believe it is a painted tintype.

http://images.google.com/images?q=p...US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&sa=N&tab=wi

THE TINTYPE (1856 to W.W.II)
"The penny picture that elected a president".
Price- sold for a penny or less, making photography universally available. The cost of an image at the time the process became obsolete was about 25 cents.
Advantages: 1. Lighter and less costly to manufacture. 2. Camera was lighter and easier to handle. 3. Wouldn't shatter as a glass image photo would. 4. Could be colored or tinted.

As the public sought lower prices, the cases (which cost more than the finished photographs) were eliminated. In their place, paper folders of the size of the then popular card photographs were used for protection. Instead of a glass cover, the photographer covered the tintype with a quick varnish to protect any tints or colors added to cheeks, lips, jewelry or buttons.

Popularity: The tintype was very popular during the Civil War because every soldier wanted to send a picture of himself with his rifle and sword home. They could be mailed home safely without fear of shattering.

The tintype actually does not contain any tin, but is made of thin black iron. It is sometimes confused with ambrotypes and daguerreotypes, but is easily distinguishable from them by the fact that a tintype attracts a small magnet.

DATING THE TINTYPES
Introduction 1856 - 1860. The earliest tintypes were on heavy metal (0.017 inches thick) that was never again used. They are stamped "Neff's Melainotype Pat 19 Feb 56" along one edge. Many are found in gilt frames or in the leather or plastic (thermomolded) cases of the earliest ambrotypes. Size range from one-sixth plate to full plate.
 

Upvote 0
thanks angelo,
I happen to be a big fan of old photographs.
There are 2 very interesting things about this tintype.

a normal full plate tin type only measured 6 1/2 by 8 1/2 inch.
Though in unusual cases they are as large as 10 inch by 13 inch.
(which this would be the case)

the forming out into the 3D is a type of repousse work
I have NEVER seen in a tintype.

very very cool.
 

Upvote 0
You say you live in the sticks. Are you far from a major city?
If the Antique Roadshow showed up in your area they would love to have a look at that.
Nice find and purchase, by the way!
 

Upvote 0
Wow, thank you all so much for your wonderful and informative replies. I am going to look through the links you gave me and will re-post later with answers to everyone's questions, etc

Again, thank you all *so* very much!

-L
 

Upvote 0
I don't think that's a date, unless I am seeing something incorrectly. It looks like 8161, not 1861...which may a number in a series. Am I seeing things?
 

Upvote 0
Kiros32 said:
I don't think that's a date, unless I am seeing something incorrectly. It looks like 8161, not 1861...which may a number in a series. Am I seeing things?

Kiros...I thought that at first, also. Actually, that middle number DOES look like "81", but if you look closely, it actually says "31". Multiple antique/art dealers have affirmed that it is a date and that it is 0_/31/61, but there has been a lot of debate over what month it is. I personally think it's a five, which would make the date May 31st, 1861.

Oh, and Taropatch, who asked if I live too "in the sticks" for Antiques Roadshow...I actually live quite closed to Austin, and when they came here a couple of years ago, I got tickets and was SO excited to have them look at it...but I ended up being rushed to the hospital to have a blood clot removed the day of the event, and was kept in the hospital for two day after. I was so, so sad about it. There was supposed to be an "expert" on hand who knew something about items this rare, and I was SO looking forward to talking with him/her. I have tried to find out the name of the person to contact them independently, but ARS is apparently pretty stingy w/ the contact info. (Which is understandable; I understand a large part of their profit comes from people paying to have their items appraised)

Now I'm trying to be more aggressive about selling it as I've heard that a "similar" painting in much worse condition sold for 60k at auction...I have MS and my husband (only 46 years old) recently had two heart attacks, which caused him to lose his job...which caused US to lose our insurance. So obviously a financial boost like that would be invaluable at this time, as we've worked through pretty much all our savings paying for medical treatments, prescriptions, etc. Just ONE of my husband's heart medications is almost eight hundred dollars per month, so when I think about the possibility of making the "big sale"...well, obviously that would just be a blessing too big to comprehend at this juncture in our lives.

Mtntrekr2, you are not the first to mention such a possibility! As I mentioned before, on the drive back from Connecticut (where I purchased the painting) to Texas (where I live) we stopped at numerous auctions, antique dealers, and art dealers to see if we could find out more about it. I remember at least two different people in Pennsylvania asked to examine it more closely to see if there was some type of hidden signature. One gentleman mentioned that it was common for paintings of that era to be dated formally, but to have a "hidden" signature. We were short on time so nobody got to take a really good look at it, unfortunately. I have tried to focus on it at various times over the years, but being legally blind myself the signature could very well be staring me in the face and I've just been missing it all these years.

Justine... I have looked over these images and unfortunately not as yet found anything too similar. :( It seems like a lot of these tintypes look more like photographs than obvious paintings. However, it IS an avenue to start searching upon, and for that I thank you sincerely.

Jim...the info man! Again, thank you SO much for all the time you've taken. I have not had a chance to check out these forums in depth yet, but I am going to try and do that tonight.

Thanks, everyone...I look forward to reading what anyone else might have found or knows about this painting! I hope everyone is having a great weekend...thanks again for all of you sharing your time and talents; it is truly humbling and has also made me feel very welcome on my first venture here at Treasure Net. :D
 

Upvote 0
Also, just a note...one of the art dealers in PA who viewed the painting said that in this era (mid 1800s) it was not uncommon for spouses to each have a separate portrait done and that he would not be at all surprised if there was a "matching" painting out there somewhere. Just FYI..and if you know of something that looks *similar* to this painting...it might be a good lead!
 

Upvote 0
Here's my $.02 (which it's probably not worth that ;D ) I got to playing with the pictures on photoshop since I'm at work and have nothing better to do. Anyway, I pulled some color out, did a photocopy, etc, etc etc. and on the buttons the only thing I can make out is at the bottom, and I'm not sure that anything is there. I was judging by the brushstrokes that they look about the same as the top, but the "e" is accidentally spaced and the "c or u" is a mis-stroke. There's what appears to be an "s" on the right side of the buttonseam, but if you look at it in one of the RGB settings, I think it happened because of what's on the back of the painting. I never could figure out how to save it in the colors that I wanted to, I still have to learn how to use it better anyway.

I think there is/was a signature on the bottom right where the date is. Looks like there is an "R" above the date line, but it's smudged out. On the assumption that it is smudged, I wonder if what we are seeing is 03 16 1_(__) either a 2 or 4 year date, it's just smudged out too? Like I said, just my guess while doing some playing.....
 

Attachments

  • signature.jpg
    signature.jpg
    11.4 KB · Views: 122
  • siginbw.jpg
    siginbw.jpg
    43.9 KB · Views: 149
  • buttons.jpg
    buttons.jpg
    59.4 KB · Views: 151
Upvote 0

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top