as light meets matter under scrutiny
Spectrotech
Simpkins (claims genuine)
shows that the paint used in previous piece of art is also used in this piece of art, paint was made in the same room at the same time
uses fluorescence data to back his arguement, saying that the UV data of Pruschy may be not true because the artist would often revisit his works of art
the green used in this painting is very similar to a previous painting
Montoya (claims genuine)
pigments were used between pigments used during the period 1839-1906, he was alive in that period of time
absence of titanium, cadmium, barium, and manganese lines
Andersen (claims fake)
Cezzane was known NOT to have underdrawings, this painting had an underdrawing
Binder used is animal glue, which was also used widely after the death of Cezzane
Cadmium Yellow Lithopone was used in the painting which was not discovered until After Cezzane died
Pruschy (claims fake)
used UV spectrometry to determine the absorbtion of polyenes, which shows that it is not 100 years old
Wandless argues that polyenes residue may have been added after the painting was drawn
french curator
in 1995 concluded that there is likely to be no more works by Cézanne
Marden (claims genuine)
uses microscope to determine a smilarity in style with Cezanne
Does not use science, rather uses history, artistic analysis and visual analysis of painting to conclude that it is a genuine piece of art
ways to falsify a painting
Visually
not scietifically accurate as style could be imitated
IR spectroscopy
tests for anomalies beneath the paint
X-ray
examines composition of pigments
UV a. spectroscopy
dates pigments
Dr. Wandless
resorted to science in order to falsify painting
Dimitri
doubtfull initially
Colins
initially"feels" that it is infact the work of Cézanne
collector of art
