Asianart.com | Associations | Articles | Exhibitions | Galleries

This disk has some signs on it , such as
1) Light green water color gaze could be seen from the condensation zone round its edge of mouth
2) Dark blue color engraved slightly into the body with Tin reflective light are the signs of Soleimani blue (means the its I.D. card)
3) The ancient stencil mark 永楽年製 means it was made in Ming (Wing Lok Empire) dynasty and was used by the king family only.

Procelian with stencil mark made in Ming (Wing Lok Empire) Dynasty is very very rare. For Auction, it worths at least ten millions US dallors.

Unfortunately, the auction company will not take risk for those item that has not previous auction record, to go auction.

This is not from the YongLe period. It is modern. Factory made. Possibly Japanese. Probably still warm from the kiln.

The mark is either stencil or stamp, not hand written.

Here are two GENUINE YongLe pieces from an authoritative book on Ming dynasty porcelains. Notice - no stamped mark.

Just rely on the picture of book is not sufficient. Ming Yuenlok (永楽)Dyansty using the Sumra Blue in painting the procelain. The dark marks will penertrate into the body to create an engraving look. After Ming Shing Fa (成化) Dynasty up to this moment, blue color stuff will not have such effect. Such color stuff mineral was running out many years ago and the mine in Iran was closed.

See.. the book showing stencil marks samples. Read more books and tough more real stuff may enrich your knowledge. Try to go to the Great Britain Museum, they may allow you to book some genius piece to have a close look in the room under their staff 's supervision. Free of charge. Guy. Ancient China is so big and so great . We cannot learn every thing.

I cannot see any clear representation of the Lingzi fungus alluded to in the title. Please show clearer pictures.

Lingzi fungus is shown in above photo with engraving look like painting. That's mean that you know nothing to the traditional Chinese procelain. We all know that Lingzi fungus without leaf but sometimes the ancient designer (a procelain smith) just combine other ivy or leaf to form a soft pattern. The ancient Chinese designer just write the idea not the real thing. You cannot use your nowaday knowledge and western thinking to appreciate the ancient design. Most professsional Chinese ware collectors may know that it is a lingzi fungus style painting just like the Chinese dragon is not equivalent to a western dinosaur but the wording is same [ 龍 ].

I just posted this in another one of this HK Boy's message which was posted by him using another name:

http://www.asianart.com/phpforum/index.php?method=detailAll&Id=75752

"I normally would have stayed out of any personal opinions that were expressed by any forum members because each one of them is certainly entitled to their opinions. In this case, I feel that I cannot stay out of this because this person, onnalanno is the same person, HKBoy, who had recently posted some of the most egotistical and arrogant messages in this forum using the IP addresses of 219.77.0.138 and 218.103.236.138 both originated from Hong Kong:

In this most recent message of him:
http://www.asianart.com/phpforum/index.php?method=detailAll&Id=75950
he said,
"Five supporting pin spots are under its bottom. Scales shape aging glace cracks like the snow can be seen. Most first class Chinese ware museum would like to have one piece in thier collection portfolio.

Lovely."

Such narcissism almost gags me.

Then in his other message:
http://www.asianart.com/phpforum/index.php?method=detailAll&Id=75687

he again proudly proclaimed:
"Procelian with stencil mark made in Ming (Wing Lok Empire) Dynasty is very very rare. For Auction, it worths at least ten millions US dallors.

Unfortunately, the auction company will not take risk for those item that has not previous auction record, to go auction."

Then when another forum member commented,
"This is not from the YongLe period. It is modern. Factory made. Possibly Japanese. Probably still warm from the kiln."

He got really mad and posted the picture from a cheaply printed Chinese porcelain book (tons of these in Hong Kong) and rebuked:
"See.. the book showing stencil marks samples. Read more books and tough more real stuff may enrich your knowledge. Try to go to the Great Britain Museum, they may allow you to book some genius piece to have a close look in the room under their staff 's supervision. Free of charge. Guy. Ancient China is so big and so great . We cannot learn every thing."

I surely would want to see and "tough" some "genius" pieces myself since he appears to be quite an egotistical know-it-all genius himself.

Then when the other member replied:
"I cannot see any clear representation of the Lingzi fungus alluded to in the title. Please show clearer pictures."

It really got him going because he countered:

"Lingzi fungus is shown in above photo with engraving look like painting. That's mean that you know nothing to the traditional Chinese procelain. We all know that Lingzi fungus without leaf but sometimes the ancient designer (a procelain smith) just combine other ivy or leaf to form a soft pattern. The ancient Chinese designer just write the idea not the real thing. You cannot use your nowaday knowledge and western thinking to appreciate the ancient design. Most professsional Chinese ware collectors may know that it is a lingzi fungus style painting just like the Chinese dragon is not equivalent to a western dinosaur but the wording is same [ 龍 ]. "

That is nothing wrong to disagree with each other, especially during some heated discussions. I know, been there, done it. However, to belittle others to show off our superiority on any fields, IMHO, is simply a cover for one's inadequacy. Many real experts in any fields are the most humble people I had ever met. They understand that no matter how much they may know, there are always something they do not know or there are somebody who know more than them.

I know because at one time, there is an OB doctor/jade expert/jade writer in this forum who posted jades from his own jade collection in order to promote them, only exposed the fact that he was a fraud when he show his ignorance on many topics regarding jade.

First of all, I am not here to discuss the authenticity of the piece posted here by MINGBLUE because the pictures of all the pieces posted by him in this forum were so bad that it is not even worth the time to have any real discussions. Secondly, he is entitled to his opinion. However, if he is really serious about letting other jade collectors to truly enjoy his collection, he should buy a better digital camera and take/post better photos here. I am not truly impressed by the material of his posted pieces. However, with better pictures, they may appear to be different. A picture, some time, does speak 1,000 words.

Now the problem is what was being said by this HK boy aka onnalanno. I almost thought he was Anita Mui reborn again but even Anita is simply too knowledgeable in making such a statement:

"They just able to use string and sand as a saw to cut stone. How dare the hole so smooth and the precision seems so regular. Sung ware (more than 1000 years ago) are all irregular in sharp because 100% hand made and they had no angle ruler. "

I absolutely have no ideas where he got his idea from?

On p. 94 of the jade book,
"Chinese Jade Carving"
Chapter V, PROGRESS OF THE CRAFT IN CHINA, Section 2. Drilling The Holes,
written by one of the most renown jade expert/author in recent history,
Prof. S. Howard Hansford:

"Chapman and others draw attention to the great difficulty experienced by Maoris in drilling neat holes in their tools and ornaments of nephrite and other stones. By comparison, the holes in most Chinese stone tools are beautiful neat and circular. It may be thought that this could only have been achieved with metal drills. In the case of the smallest holes this may be true, but for the making of drills down to three or four millimetres in diameter, nature had provided the Chinese with an almost perfect material - the bamboo."

"I myself have no doubt that the bamboo,imported to North China from regions further south, furnished drills for making perforations of all sizes, including the large ones in ritual objects. I have recently drilled neat conical holes in small pieces of nephrite, using a short length of bamboo and ordinary builder's sand. The holes have the same appearance as those found in many ancient Chinese jades."

"The beautiful pendant in the shape of an owl, Pls. XVa and XVb, shows no evidence of the use of metal tools. Two suspension holes are drilled horizontally,from left and right....Each is a neat cone,4mm in diameter at the mouth.....The holes are typical of those produced in nephrite by the application of the bamboo drill."

"However, clumsiness in the drilling of holes is not, as we have seen, invariably an indication of primitive workmanship, nor neatness that of an otherwise advance technique. The result would depend on the skill of the craftsman who performed the drilling. This would, as a rule, be the last operation apart from the polishing,and would not be necessarily be performed by the man or men who carried out the early processes. PL. XVIe and XVIg are, each in its own way, accomplished carvings,especially the latter, and both were executed with metal tools. Yet both are poorly drilled."

Prof. S Hansford explained this better than I can.

My advice, to HK Boy, is really his own advice:

"Read more books and TOUCH/study more real stuff may enrich your knowledge."

Not just any books, but books written by renown and respectable authors in your collecting fields, whether it is jade or ceramic, not just from Chinese books that are a dime a dozen that could be cheaply bought in any Hong Kong stores. I know because my best friend had quite a few of these books he treated like jade bibles with which be building up a half million US dollar jade collection (according to his appraisal) pieces of which were bought from eBay for around US$20,000. Pretty similar to your 10M ceramic piece that no auction houses want?

Please understand that the sole purpose of my message is not trying to make fun of you because at one time I might be as arrogant or more arrogant than you, only after further studies, I found out how little I knew. I do hope you will have a change in your attitude because after all if you truly love what you collect, you should want to learn more and respect others' opinions because there is no way you can know everything. Cheers.

Super"

I believe he owes mikeoz an apology. mikeoz is one the most respected member in this forum, who had selflessly assisted others in translating many Chinese art works and his expertise and knowledge on seal scripts are better than most Chinese. He Chinese calligraphy, IMHO, is better than most Chinese. Therefore for HKBoy to show such disrespect, toward him or any other members, IMHO, is totally uncalled for.

I apologize for speaking up.

Super

Dear Super

You are right of course.

After a bit of experience seeing such profoundly misguided collectors, I think it is very true that some people simply lack the "eye" to see how their fakes are just NOT the same as the real thing! To say nothing of lacking the humility to take others' much better advice.

But he's still better than that dude before who was giving false positive appraisals. I mean, get a life, fella!

Rgds
JLim

Asianart.com | Associations | Articles | Exhibitions | Galleries |