🔎 UNIDENTIFIED C. Innes oil paintings. Signed , set of two. How much are they worth. Not a print, has tons of paint texture.

[Tylerpope13]

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Upgraded Night Vision Monocular Digital Infrared Monocular Telescope for 100% Darkness with 8X Zoom - Grab it through Amazon!

[Red-Coat]

Welcome to Tnet. I'm afraid that the value will be minimal as "collector art" and confined to what someone is prepared to pay for it as wall decoration if they happen to like it.

Some information on the thread linked below:

C. Inness paint?

Sorry about the bad english, does anyone one something about this painting and how much is worth?

www.treasurenet.com

 

[traveller777]

Welcome to Tnet. I'm afraid that the value will be minimal as "collector art" and confined to what someone is prepared to pay for it as wall decoration if they happen to like it.

Some information on the thread linked below:

C. Inness paint?

Sorry about the bad english, does anyone one something about this painting and how much is worth?

www.treasurenet.com

Nice post.

 

[GoldieLocks]

The brushwork is nothing like Clara Inness'.
It is more like Bob Ross style.
No one else in the time periods up to about 1970 when he taught on public TV, painted this way. They are fakes. I hold a BA in studio art.

 

[Red-Coat]

“Fake” isn’t really the right term here. These are genuine paintings, but mass-produced by artists employed in commercial studios. Usually the artists were (and in some cases still are) working in Asian countries and some of the more recent ones may be over-painted by hand on machine-printed canvas-bonded groundwork, with the heavy brushwork and paint texture serving to disguise the under-print.

Internet sellers using “google-research” have wrongly concluded that the numerous “C. Inness” (note that it’s a double S which some people read as a single) pictures are not by Clara Innes, who had a very limited output not in these styles, didn’t sign her work like this, and in any case spelled her name with a single S. She just happened to have the ‘same’ surname and initial that the studio chose as the pseudonym for their “invented” artist.

There are lots of such completely fictitious artist names that have been used by the originators of these paintings and in some cases they have acquired a “back-story” or biography which is equally fictitious. That’s the case for “C. Inness” too, and none of the speculative attributions touted on sites like Ebay are correct. The artist never existed as such and is purely a marketing pseudonym that almost certainly relates to multiple commercial artists in the same studio.

 

[Chriscole1]

Welcome to Tnet. I'm afraid that the value will be minimal as "collector art" and confined to what someone is prepared to pay for it as wall decoration if they happen to like it.

Some information on the thread linked below:

C. Inness paint?

Sorry about the bad english, does anyone one something about this painting and how much is worth?

www.treasurenet.com

 

[Chriscole1]

Wrong about clara inness. She has been classified with the likes of Whitman, Sullivan the great impressionest of the late 19th century in America and her art has been steadily climbing.

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

Wrong about clara inness. She has been classified with the likes of Whitman, Sullivan the great impressionest of the late 19th century in America and her art has been steadily climbing.

Not climbing very high yet.

 

[Red-Coat]

Wrong about clara inness. She has been classified with the likes of Whitman, Sullivan the great impressionest of the late 19th century in America and her art has been steadily climbing.

Not wrong. You have missed the point.

The posted 'painting' is not by the Clara Innes to whom you are referring. It's commercial studio art that happens to have a 'C.Inness' signature which many commercial art-sites are confusing with Clara (and that confusion may not be accidental).