Who painted Davis Gallery Leeteg paintings? - Collecting Tiki

H HopeChest Member East Bay, CA Joined: Oct 19, 2015 Posts: 508	H HopeChest Posted posted on Wed, Mar 1, 2017 12:56 PM On 2017-02-27 17:46, Otto wrote: See the image of my label which has the same text but the price has been raised to $2000 (note it is in a different typeface than the rest of the label)... On 2017-02-28 08:35, ukutiki wrote: Otto, Thanks for your information. I agree that the $info on the label is a different typeface although they did a pretty good job on the insertion. Actually, I disagree with this. The zeros on Otto's label for the "$2,000" are typographically consistent with the other zeros in the 3rd and 4th paragraphs. Furthermore, these are obviously entirely different labels. The main difference is that ukutiki's label is missing the "Copyrighted. No copying permitted." legend above the painting number that Otto's has. The other differences are in the 4th paragraph of the bio - the beginning of the first sentence is different and ukutiki's label has one additional sentence at the end of the paragraph. The numbers of the paintings are interesting, as part of them corresponds to common old serial dating techniques. For example Otto's begins with "4196-" and ukutiki's with "195-". I have seen similar things in the past where this would indicate that Otto's was created sometime in the 1960s and ukutiki's sometime in the 1950s, with the rest of the numbering scheme used to specify whatever else was needed for the records. However, it's very possible that those aren't date indicative because this brochure: ...shows that it's possible that the 196 and 195 were actually painting number indicative. Sorry it's so hard to see but I've underlined in red the numbers for two paintings, No. 194 and No. 198. It would fit the numbering scheme perfectly. And just to keep the confusion intact, here's the only other label with serial number that I've seen (because everyone takes photos of the front!): ...which could certainly be a good argument for the beginning being date-centric, with "64" being the year of production. An example of how to read 64-12151-8-L given the parameters I described above could be: 64- = 1964 121 = Painting Number 51 = Reproduction Number (i.e. this is the 51st copy made) 8 = Month L = Artist I wish there were more photos of labels to help suss this out.

On 2017-02-27 17:46, Otto wrote:

See the image of my label which has the same text but the price has been raised to $2000 (note it is in a different typeface than the rest of the label)...

On 2017-02-28 08:35, ukutiki wrote:

Otto, Thanks for your information. I agree that the $info on the label is a different typeface although they did a pretty good job on the insertion.

Actually, I disagree with this. The zeros on Otto's label for the "$2,000" are typographically consistent with the other zeros in the 3rd and 4th paragraphs. Furthermore, these are obviously entirely different labels. The main difference is that ukutiki's label is missing the "Copyrighted. No copying permitted." legend above the painting number that Otto's has. The other differences are in the 4th paragraph of the bio - the beginning of the first sentence is different and ukutiki's label has one additional sentence at the end of the paragraph.

The numbers of the paintings are interesting, as part of them corresponds to common old serial dating techniques. For example Otto's begins with "4196-" and ukutiki's with "195-". I have seen similar things in the past where this would indicate that Otto's was created sometime in the 1960s and ukutiki's sometime in the 1950s, with the rest of the numbering scheme used to specify whatever else was needed for the records. However, it's very possible that those aren't date indicative because this brochure:

...shows that it's possible that the 196 and 195 were actually painting number indicative. Sorry it's so hard to see but I've underlined in red the numbers for two paintings, No. 194 and No. 198. It would fit the numbering scheme perfectly.

And just to keep the confusion intact, here's the only other label with serial number that I've seen (because everyone takes photos of the front!):

...which could certainly be a good argument for the beginning being date-centric, with "64" being the year of production. An example of how to read 64-12151-8-L given the parameters I described above could be:

64- = 1964
121 = Painting Number
51 = Reproduction Number (i.e. this is the 51st copy made)
8 = Month
L = Artist

I wish there were more photos of labels to help suss this out.

Post #773514 by HopeChest on Wed, Mar 1, 2017 12:56 PM