Fake teapots
@LeoFox interesting idea, and I agree that it is useful to have a resource where people can learn how to avoid obvious fakes, though I wonder if this thread will have to be limited to people's own pots (and if not, the extent to which posting about other people's pots would be allowed, such as 'egregious fakes', or pots that people have posted photos of for the purpose of asking whether they are fake). Perhaps something to consider.
In the meantime, I'm volunteering my fake that I posted about a while ago as an example, in case it helps anyone else out there.
As Bok said back then, the shape is all wrong from the alleged ROC period, among other problems, but as I have learnt subsequently from other pots I've acquired since this fake one:
- the joint line at the back just feels like a bit of clay tacked on to make it look old, rather than part of the manufacturing process;
- the inside of the lid does not feel handmade, without any transition between the skirt and the top (instead, it feels like a mould made lid); and
- the clay looks and feels nothing like old zhuni.
I would be happy for others much more experienced that I am to share their thoughts on any other giveaways on this point; we can use it as an example to learn from.
Andrew
In the meantime, I'm volunteering my fake that I posted about a while ago as an example, in case it helps anyone else out there.
As Bok said back then, the shape is all wrong from the alleged ROC period, among other problems, but as I have learnt subsequently from other pots I've acquired since this fake one:
- the joint line at the back just feels like a bit of clay tacked on to make it look old, rather than part of the manufacturing process;
- the inside of the lid does not feel handmade, without any transition between the skirt and the top (instead, it feels like a mould made lid); and
- the clay looks and feels nothing like old zhuni.
I would be happy for others much more experienced that I am to share their thoughts on any other giveaways on this point; we can use it as an example to learn from.
Andrew
- Attachments
-
- _MG_7119.jpg (181.2 KiB) Viewed 6610 times
-
- _MG_7120.jpg (261.09 KiB) Viewed 6610 times
-
- _MG_7122.jpg (279.07 KiB) Viewed 6610 times
Level headed recommendation @Andrew S. As with other teapot posts, members should be sharing their own teaware and really only use stock photos as backup examples to points being made, otherwise this thread will be truly very difficult to stomach full of junk.Andrew S wrote: ↑Wed Dec 22, 2021 5:28 pmLeoFox interesting idea, and I agree that it is useful to have a resource where people can learn how to avoid obvious fakes, though I wonder if this thread will have to be limited to people's own pots (and if not, the extent to which posting about other people's pots would be allowed, such as 'egregious fakes', or pots that people have posted photos of for the purpose of asking whether they are fake). Perhaps something to consider.
@Baisao: I've read people raise that very same concern at other times and on other forums. I'm not personally aware of how great the risk is.
The answer that people experienced in Yixing pots usually seem to give is that these indicators are well-known to pot collectors, and that an English-language forum won't add anything meaningful to what the Chinese-speaking community already knows.
I think that the kinds of people who discuss things like early-Qing or mid-Qing pots, or master-level pots, are the kinds of people who will need to keep certain things a secret from fraudsters, but I think that we're very far away from discussing that level of knowledge.
But obviously, if others have a different view, then perhaps there can be limits to what is discussed.
Andrew
The answer that people experienced in Yixing pots usually seem to give is that these indicators are well-known to pot collectors, and that an English-language forum won't add anything meaningful to what the Chinese-speaking community already knows.
I think that the kinds of people who discuss things like early-Qing or mid-Qing pots, or master-level pots, are the kinds of people who will need to keep certain things a secret from fraudsters, but I think that we're very far away from discussing that level of knowledge.
But obviously, if others have a different view, then perhaps there can be limits to what is discussed.
Andrew
Agreed on use of imagery. Best to stick to what we own and at the limit refer via link to obvious fakes elsewhere.
How about renaming or nuancing this thread by calling it “tuition pots” ?
I do think Baisao’s concern is a valid one, but as Andrew mentioned, the basics are known to fakers since the 90s at least. I for one will reserve to withhold some information in public.
How about renaming or nuancing this thread by calling it “tuition pots” ?
I do think Baisao’s concern is a valid one, but as Andrew mentioned, the basics are known to fakers since the 90s at least. I for one will reserve to withhold some information in public.
My only thought would be that some discussion of "how" rather than just "what" would be useful -- otherwise people have no way to understand anything surprising other than to reject it.
I know during my time on Reddit I was called a troll repeatedly for talking about tea in a way that was different than the wiki, because a lot of Redditors were treating tea like units in a database, if it has this, it must be real, if it has that, it must be a fake, without ever really looking at, "where did this wiki come from?" or the nuts-and-bolts of why certain teas and tea-things are the way they are today, and how traditions, marketing, and the tastes of the drinker are separate from the underlying structures of tea and tea-things.
I think that would also help with some historical puzzlers, like counterfeit pots made by potters who were later recognized as masters. They're fake pots when viewed through one lens, and real pots when viewed through another. Gu Jingzhou made counterfeit pots in the 1930s, for instance, so a genuine Gu Jingzhou counterfeit would be an example of a fake teapot.
I know during my time on Reddit I was called a troll repeatedly for talking about tea in a way that was different than the wiki, because a lot of Redditors were treating tea like units in a database, if it has this, it must be real, if it has that, it must be a fake, without ever really looking at, "where did this wiki come from?" or the nuts-and-bolts of why certain teas and tea-things are the way they are today, and how traditions, marketing, and the tastes of the drinker are separate from the underlying structures of tea and tea-things.
I think that would also help with some historical puzzlers, like counterfeit pots made by potters who were later recognized as masters. They're fake pots when viewed through one lens, and real pots when viewed through another. Gu Jingzhou made counterfeit pots in the 1930s, for instance, so a genuine Gu Jingzhou counterfeit would be an example of a fake teapot.
Good idea @LeoFox
Even before delving into the details of workmanship and artistic style, this is how I see this:
I stand by my point that if we feel it's too good too be true, then it's too good to be true. Simple logic will tell us... a senior master pots at the mastery level of the likes of GZJ is highly appreciated and collected in the collector's sphere. No one vendor or representative of such calibre would spend time in online forums trying to educate and argue with the online citizens about the authenticity of their pots. We are not talking about 5 figure pots.... these are all 6 figure pots with certification. Pots of such level are very quickly snapped up in the high end collector's sphere. No way in our lifetime that it will trickle down to our level. We have to make our way up to that level.
We also can't discount that it's a pot made by the masters themselves as they were also once students. Learning the art and crafting their very own unique techniques along the way. But then again... how many would have slipped out from the hawk eyes and eagle talons of the high end collector's sphere??
Many student artists would copy their master's techniques to learn and from there on, craft their own unique style. There was a time when students copied their masters and later in life became a master themselves. At that point of time, their students would have copied their styles. Many common factory shape pots are made by apprentices and stamped with the mark of the master as a seal of his approval. You won't be able to tell the difference unless someone leaked insider news. Only the masters know what to look for in their own masterpieces.
Then again, if it sounds too good to be true.... that's just it... hahaha....
Cheers!!
Even before delving into the details of workmanship and artistic style, this is how I see this:
I stand by my point that if we feel it's too good too be true, then it's too good to be true. Simple logic will tell us... a senior master pots at the mastery level of the likes of GZJ is highly appreciated and collected in the collector's sphere. No one vendor or representative of such calibre would spend time in online forums trying to educate and argue with the online citizens about the authenticity of their pots. We are not talking about 5 figure pots.... these are all 6 figure pots with certification. Pots of such level are very quickly snapped up in the high end collector's sphere. No way in our lifetime that it will trickle down to our level. We have to make our way up to that level.
We also can't discount that it's a pot made by the masters themselves as they were also once students. Learning the art and crafting their very own unique techniques along the way. But then again... how many would have slipped out from the hawk eyes and eagle talons of the high end collector's sphere??
Many student artists would copy their master's techniques to learn and from there on, craft their own unique style. There was a time when students copied their masters and later in life became a master themselves. At that point of time, their students would have copied their styles. Many common factory shape pots are made by apprentices and stamped with the mark of the master as a seal of his approval. You won't be able to tell the difference unless someone leaked insider news. Only the masters know what to look for in their own masterpieces.
Then again, if it sounds too good to be true.... that's just it... hahaha....
Cheers!!
- 02_red.png (515.45 KiB) Viewed 6541 times
- 01_powder.png (445.81 KiB) Viewed 6541 times
- 10_rozbor-detail.png (310.57 KiB) Viewed 6541 times
- 09_menu-detail.png (214.91 KiB) Viewed 6541 times
- 08_menu.png (438.3 KiB) Viewed 6541 times
- 07_redbrick.png (359.5 KiB) Viewed 6541 times
- 04_redliquid.png (366.37 KiB) Viewed 6541 times
- 11_cert.png (401.04 KiB) Viewed 6541 times
- 12_stamp.png (451.03 KiB) Viewed 6541 times
You go to the factory, they give you almost like Windows with 256 colors resolution catalog to chose from
The problem is that those coloring substances are not entirely "food friendly".
Other issue they point out is the certificates ( which are easy to make for anything ) and the master stamps which they just make as they pleased ( I mean copies ).
Could you add a link to the video too?aet wrote: ↑Wed Dec 22, 2021 9:10 pmsome screenshots from documentary made years ago about Yixing production. Various powder mixtures are applied to the clay for coloring and clay behavior ( shaping, firing ) purposes.
You go to the factory, they give you almost like Windows with 256 colors resolution catalog to chose from
The problem is that those coloring substances are not entirely "food friendly".
Other issue they point out is the certificates ( which are easy to make for anything ) and the master stamps which they just make as they pleased ( I mean copies ).
Here’s a tuition pot of my own. Sold as green label, obviously not.
If anyone has comments on what it actually might be, I’d be interested.
If anyone has comments on what it actually might be, I’d be interested.
- Attachments
-
- D3EFF87B-6DBC-4D9F-8FDD-BD1B4ADECDC2.jpeg (173.32 KiB) Viewed 6470 times
-
- 453EBC37-2C68-454A-A2DE-8F9520E834F9.jpeg (184.3 KiB) Viewed 6470 times
-
- EEB89EBA-C3AF-4688-ABD2-669A620288CE.jpeg (259.44 KiB) Viewed 6470 times
-
- 31EFF9C0-9450-408B-BD23-C3209130A7CF.jpeg (191.25 KiB) Viewed 6470 times
-
- 557F4DB5-E194-4404-9292-5691E48214CE.jpeg (326.36 KiB) Viewed 6470 times
-
- 8621CD4D-E063-48C7-9FBE-304EA4BF139F.jpeg (277.09 KiB) Viewed 6470 times