Japanese wood block print authenticity?

muff528

unread,

Jun 27, 2004, 9:12:27 AM6/27/04

to

Hello,

I'm looking for someone in Central Florida who can
authenticate Japanese wood block prints by Hiroshige.
I'm not necessarily looking for an appraisal as much as
I'm trying to determine whether a print is an
original woodcut print. I have 3, two of which I know to
be re-prints, but possibly reprinted by the original
publisher in the early 20th C. The third is possibly
an original by Hiroshige.

John Yamamoto-Wilson

unread,

Jun 27, 2004, 4:41:11 PM6/27/04

to

I can't anwer your question, but I can suggest ways you might get at the
information under your own steam.

There were three Hiroshiges, and Ukiyo-e artists frequently had several
different signatures. The first step is to check the signature, which you
can do at http://www.artelino.com/forum/signatures.asp or
http://www.bahnhof.se/~secutor/ukiyo-e/signatur.html and/or by googling for
further sites; you may even turn up one which has the same print as yours.

The second step is to determine whether there is a censor seal present (see
http://users.exis.net/~jnc/nontech/prints/nanushi.html). Censor seals were
mandatory from 1790 to 1876.

Then you'll want to work out the date (see
http://users.exis.net/~jnc/nontech/prints/zodiac.html for some guidance on
this).

Alternatively, your library may have a decent reference work on the subject
(such as Self and Hirose's Japanese Art Signatures).

Hope this helps.

--
John

muff528

unread,

Jun 27, 2004, 8:59:11 PM6/27/04

to

Thanks for the info and for 2 great websites that I had not yet stumbled
upon.
The print in question is by Ando Hiroshige and is one of the "53 Stations of
the Tokaido" series. My main concern is whether this print is an original or
a forgery (or legitimate reprint). I thought that someone who has handled
an original Edo era print could tell the difference. There may be
differences
in the paper or other indications which may determine authenticity. Someone
more familiar with these prints than I would be more likely to know if there
are known forgeries in existence and would possibly be aware of any
reprints, legitimate or otherwise. All of the correct markings are in place
on the image side but these could have been reproduced as well. I can't
see most of the reverse side since the print is "stuck" to a heavy cardboard
mat. There is nice "bleed-through" and the image is very crisp. The colors
are very nice and not faded. I have seen the same print for sale,
represented
as an "original" wood cut, censor mark and all. The description of the print
indicated it was a "Showa era" print but did not give a year of production.
Also
the asking price of these prints was not in line with an original Hiroshige
print.
This is what got me wondering about my print. I may offer it for sale in the
future
and I don't want to misrepresent it.

The other two prints I have are also woodcuts. One is from the "53
Stations..."
series and the other is from the "100 Views of Edo" series. Both are on
paper
that is quite different from the other print. Also the colors have a "washed
out",
faded look. They have full margins but the images have been cropped (about
1/4")
leaving an image area with square corners rather than the "reverse radius"
corners typical of these prints. I think this may have been done
intentionally
to avoid an appearance of a forgery. I understand that the original
publisher of
Hiroshige's prints re-issued the two series sometime around the year1900.
I don't know if these 2 prints are from that reissue or not.

Thanks again, and sorry for the long post,
Tony

"John Yamamoto-Wilson" <johndel...@rarebooksinjapan.com> wrote in
message news:2k8qegF...@uni-berlin.de...

John Yamamoto-Wilson

unread,

Jun 28, 2004, 9:32:43 AM6/28/04

to

muff528 wrote:

> I have seen the same print for sale, represented as an "original"
> wood cut, censor mark and all. The description of the print
> indicated it was a "Showa era" print but did not give a year
> of production. Also the asking price of these prints was not in
> line with an original Hiroshige print.

The question is, what does "original" mean? Nothing, really, in the case of
a "Showa era" Hiroshige print with a censor mark. The Showa period did not
begin until 1926 (see http://www.meijigakuin.ac.jp/~watson/ref/mtsh.html for
details), and the period of censorship ended in 1876. Hiroshige himself died
in 1858. You are quite right to be wary of such misleading descriptions,
which stop short of being actually false, since of course the print did
originate from a woodblock, The fact that the price is not in line with a
"true" original should alert any experienced buyer to the reality, though a
novice buyer might be fooled.

As for your own piece, yes, there probably are signs which would give it
away as a reproduction copy if it were such. Some of those signs might not
show up in an online image, but others might, and of those that might I may
perhaps be able to identify a percentage. Worth a try, perhaps, and I'm
happy to take a look if you can post a link to an image. I should say I'm no
expert in ukiyo-e prints, but it can't harm to let me have a dekker. We
might both learn something, not least if someone with superior knowledge
chips in with a couple of bobs'-worth.

> The other two prints I have are also woodcuts. One is from the
>"53 Stations..."　series and the other is from the "100 Views of
> Edo" series. Both are on paper that is quite different from the
> other print. Also the colors have a "washed out", faded look.
> They have full margins but the images have been cropped (about
> 1/4") leaving an image area with square corners rather than
> the "reverse radius" corners typical of these prints.

OK. The description suggests a later printing (though I don't understand how
the images can have been cropped and still leave full margins) but, again,
it's a toss-up whether these can be identified one way or the other from an
online picture, and another toss-up whether I can do the job anyway, but you
might as well give it a shot.

--
John
http://rarebooksinjapan.com

muff528

unread,

Jun 28, 2004, 9:58:56 PM6/28/04

to

Thanks, John

I'm sure you'll recognize the print as
Night Snow at Kambara (Kanbara ?) 1st State

Here are some photos---
http://mysite.verizon.net/res0f19c/pics/hiro1.JPG
http://mysite.verizon.net/res0f19c/pics/hiro2.JPG
the first one is with a flash.
http://mysite.verizon.net/res0f19c/pics/hiro3.JPG
http://mysite.verizon.net/res0f19c/pics/hiro4.JPG
http://mysite.verizon.net/res0f19c/pics/hiro5.JPG
http://mysite.verizon.net/res0f19c/pics/hiro6.JPG
http://mysite.verizon.net/res0f19c/pics/hiro7.JPG
this one (hiro7.jpg) shows the reverse. The print
has been peeled up about 2.5" on the left side.
http://mysite.verizon.net/res0f19c/pics/hiro8.JPG
this one (hiro8.jpg) shows the front side, backlit.
Notice the light lines running horizontally through
the paper. They are about 1.25" apart from top
to bottom. I think these lines may be an artifact
of the papermaking process. Maybe not!?
http://mysite.verizon.net/res0f19c/pics/hiro9.JPG
http://mysite.verizon.net/res0f19c/pics/morestuff.JPG
this one is just showing off some more of my collection.
Top left is Paul Jacoulet woodcut. Top right is Sanzo Wada.
lower left is a painting on silk. Lower right is a reproduction
of something(?).

Thanks again for your offer to have a look,
Tony

PS - I checked out your interesting website!

Andy Dingley

unread,

Jun 29, 2004, 4:53:47 PM6/29/04

to

On Mon, 28 Jun 2004 00:59:11 GMT, "muff528"
<tony.pat...@verizon.net> wrote:

>They have full margins but the images have been cropped (about 1/4")
>leaving an image area with square corners rather than the "reverse radius"
>corners typical of these prints.

What do those inverse rounded corners _really_ mean ? Are they a
guarantee (as I understand it) of a reprint at much later date ? Were
they only used / most popularly used around a particular period ?
How relatively common are cornered reprints vs. uncornered reprints ?

As a separate issue, how was it done ? I'd always supposed that it
was done by cutting the original block (hence non-reversible), but how
are the borders then printed ?

--
Smert' spamionam

muff528

unread,

Jun 29, 2004, 6:58:27 PM6/29/04

to

Here are some photos of the two prints I mentioned.
http://mysite.verizon.net/res0f19c/pics/othertwo1.JPG
http://mysite.verizon.net/res0f19c/pics/othertwo2.JPG
http://mysite.verizon.net/res0f19c/pics/othertwo3.JPG
http://mysite.verizon.net/res0f19c/pics/othertwo4.JPG
By comparing these prints with others with the same image you can see that
all four edges of the printed area are missing some of the picture. Best way
to tell is to look at the red areas with the signatures and the other
characters. They are much closer to the edge than in an originals. Both
original versions had the reversed radius corners. I guess that was just the
artist's preference. I've seen other artist's using different corner
treatments.
These prints do not have a black border at all. I'd guess that the easiest
way to do this from original blocks is to simply remove the ink at each edge
of the block before printing. Or maybe by somehow masking the blocks when
ink is applied and then removing the mask prior to printing. Maybe these are
from re-carved blocks. Just speculating.
,Tony

"Andy Dingley" <din...@codesmiths.com> wrote in message
news:lil3e0hmcdptkh40p...@4ax.com...

muff528

unread,

Jun 29, 2004, 7:21:21 PM6/29/04

to

>
> What do those inverse rounded corners _really_ mean ? Are they a
> guarantee (as I understand it) of a reprint at much later date ?

I think it's the other way around.(?) Almost all of the images of the
Tokaido series and the View of Edo series I've seen, either on the
internet or in resource books, show them with the cutout corners
and I'd assumed that was the original feature. If that's the case then
a reprint could be done either way without hurting the blocks. That
could easily explain why the square-cornered prints I have are "cropped".
, Tony

John R. Yamamoto-Wilson

unread,

Jun 30, 2004, 4:11:01 AM6/30/04

to

Tony wrote:

> Thanks again for your offer to have a look

I'd *like* to have a look, but I can't get the links to work. I
thought it might be a glitch in the server, but Andy seems to be able
to see them all right.

> PS - I checked out your interesting website!

Did you find the page on woodblock prints
(http://rarebooksinjapan.com/Kotouhin/ukiyoe.htm)? Even if you did, I
uploaded several more sections less than 24 hours ago, so you may not
have seen the latest version. They're not hugely valuable or anything,
but then that's not why I got them.

--
John
http://rarebooksinjapan.com

muff528

unread,

Jun 30, 2004, 6:55:50 PM6/30/04

to

John,

> I'd *like* to have a look, but I can't get the links to work. I
> thought it might be a glitch in the server, but Andy seems to be able
> to see them all right.

Try these links. If they also don't work maybe try copying and pasting the
link to your browser address window. I had a little trouble opening them
from the newsgroup initially. I had to click the link a couple of times to
get it to open. Now, no problems. Let me know. I could email the files
to you if all else fails.

> Did you find the page on woodblock prints
> (http://rarebooksinjapan.com/Kotouhin/ukiyoe.htm)? Even if you did, I
> uploaded several more sections less than 24 hours ago, so you may not
> have seen the latest version. They're not hugely valuable or anything,
> but then that's not why I got them.

Yes! I did. Beginnings of a nice collection. I haven't seen one of these
prints that I didn't like. I don't think this type of artwork has yet become
generally popular enough to drive the prices out of sight although their
popularity is increasing. Some examples are quite expensive but others
are easy enough to find at reasonable prices. Living in Florida, they seem
to be curiously abundant. I think that's because a lot of people who served
in the armed services in the Far East after WWII have retired in Florida
and are now dying off. My prints, as well as other items, were picked up
at estate sales and flea markets.
Also, Some of the books on your site look interesting. Even if there are no
illustrations the calligraphy in some of those old texts is artwork on it's
own
merit.

, Tony

John Yamamoto-Wilson

unread,

Jul 1, 2004, 10:44:35 AM7/1/04

to

Tony wrote:

> Try these links. If they also don't work maybe try copying and pasting the
> link to your browser address window.

No, I did all that. I even Googled around for other verizon sites, and they
won't work either. Then I tried switching from Internet Explorer to Netscape
Navigator. Nothing works.

Just out of interest, does anyone have any idea *why* these links won't work
for me?

--
John
http://rarebooksinjapan.com

John Yamamoto-Wilson

unread,

Jul 9, 2004, 5:47:49 PM7/9/04

to

Tony wrote:

Have you got any further with these? I've only just had a bit of time to sit
down and take a look at the pictures you sent. The one you think may be
original has the kiwame seal on the left-hand border. This seal was used
from 1790-1845. The way it bleeds through onto the reverse makes it clear
that it is an actual seal imprint. This implies that if we were dealing with
a later copy it would not simply be a reproduction, but a fake (i.e., the
presence of a separately-applied but anchronistic seal is evidence of an
intent to deceive).

http://spectacle.berkeley.edu/~fiorillo/texts/topictexts/faq/faq_original.ht
ml gives a fairly good run-down of what to look for when trying to identify
a fake. Apart from seals and signatures, etc., a close comparison of the
print with a known original is vital.

I found a reasonably good online image of this particular print (Evening
Snow at Kambara) here: http://tinyurl.com/2s2cj (from the Harmsworth
collection), and used Adobe Photoshop to blow up details. The quality isn't
as good as your pictures, so the details are a bit hazy, but it does appear
that if yours is a fake it is a very well-done fake (for example, the number
and length of the folds on the half-opened umbrella match those of the
Harmsworth copy), and the differences between the two appear to be
compatible with what one might expect from the same woodblock over the
course of time.

My feeling is that it is not a fake. To produce a fake to this standard
would have been a most laborious task, scarcely worth anyone's while even
given the prices Hiroshige's prints command today. I'm not an authority on
the subject, by any means, and I haven't actually held the print in my
hands, but I'd say it's probably genuine. If you learn otherwise (or,
indeed, if a second opinion confirms my view) do let me know!

I just took a quick look at the other prints, and don't have much to say,
except that, for myself, I tend to pass up prints which don't bear the
artist's seal and a date. Even after centsorship ended, and it was no longer
mandatory, most original prints had a date and other identifying marks.
Again, I'm talking about things which are pretty obviously of a certain
vintage, and it just wouldn't be worth anyone's while to forge a seal and
artificially age the paper, etc., just for a print which, even if genuine,
is worth less (sometimes considerably less) than $100. If there isn't a
date, though, the print really could be pretty much anything (not least, it
could be taken from a book, something I'd be opposed to on principle).

Hope this helps.

--
John
http://rarebooksinjapan.com

muff528

unread,

Jul 11, 2004, 10:18:26 PM7/11/04

to

Thanks John,

I've been comparing elements of the image you referred me to with the same
elements on my print. I have to say that there are some differences.
However,
I've also compared the print to an image of another "original" from a
collection
in the UK and found the same "type" of differences between the two "known
originals". I understand that for some popular prints there may have been
more
than one or two different sets of blocks that were used during the
publication
of the prints because of deterioration of the wood by the printing process.
I've
also found a reference to a fire at the publisher's shop which destroyed
some
of the blocks making it necessary to recut them. I don't know if the fire
affected
this particular edition. To complicate things this print was issued in two
"states",
one with the shading at the top and one with the shading behind the
mountains
but I think the same blocks could have been used for both.
I think I've reached the point where someone who has experience with these
beauties will have to see it in person to tell any more than we have already
found.

The other images I sent were just for curiosity's sake. I am reasonably
sure that
the two shin hanga prints on the "wall photo" are genuine. They came from
the
estate of a woman who was a US government official in the Far East during
the
occupation period. She made a notation on the reverse of the Paul Jacoulet
frame stating that she purchased it from the artist at his home in 1949. The
print
dates to 1938 and it is stunning. I picked up some other Asian items from
her
estate including a couple of nice Korean lacquerware items and various other
"knick-knacks".

Thanks again for all your help,
Tony

"John Yamamoto-Wilson" <johndel...@rarebooksinjapan.com> wrote in

message news:2l8is2F...@uni-berlin.de...